PDA

View Full Version : Article: Ron Gardenhire talks September roster



Parker Hageman
08-20-2013, 12:49 PM
You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=2246-Ron-Gardenhire-talks-September-roster

mike wants wins
08-20-2013, 01:20 PM
So, Gardy confirms it is about Ryan not being willing to eat salary.....can we put that part to bed yet, and just admit it? What conclusions you draw to the bigger picture about Ryan and money is a different discussion....

IdahoPilgrim
08-20-2013, 01:31 PM
I think my question (and it is meant as an honest question) is how much value is there actually in a September callup. Yes, players are getting major league experience, but I wonder if it is not a somewhat diluted experience nonetheless. Other clubs will also be bringing up prospects, so that all the rosters will be somewhat diluted after Sept. 1. Doesn't that make it a little different than facing the "top 25" before 9/1? It kind of reminds me of spring training, where veterans and prospects often play at the same time. That also is valuable experience, but we've all learned to distrust ST numbers because of it.

Yes, these games will in some cases have playoff implications, so the intensity will be higher than in spring training, and that also is worthwhile experiencing, and you will face some top-notch hitters/pitchers that you won't see in Triple-A. But has there actually been any studies done on players called up post-9/1 and those not and how it has actually affected their development (or failed to affect it)?

For me, the value of these callups is for fans to get a glimpse of the future.

mike wants wins
08-20-2013, 01:44 PM
IP, that's what most people like KLAW say....but I'd guess Hendriks pitching here would be a bigger challenge than in AAA, wouldn't it? It might not "prove" anything, but I'd think it would have some useful data.

jokin
08-20-2013, 01:47 PM
I think my question (and it is meant as an honest question) is how much value is there actually in a September callup. Yes, players are getting major league experience, but I wonder if it is not a somewhat diluted experience nonetheless. Other clubs will also be bringing up prospects, so that all the rosters will be somewhat diluted after Sept. 1. Doesn't that make it a little different than facing the "top 25" before 9/1? It kind of reminds me of spring training, where veterans and prospects often play at the same time. That also is valuable experience, but we've all learned to distrust ST numbers because of it.

Yes, these games will in some cases have playoff implications, so the intensity will be higher than in spring training, and that also is worthwhile experiencing, and you will face some top-notch hitters/pitchers that you won't see in Triple-A. But has there actually been any studies done on players called up post-9/1 and those not and how it has actually affected their development (or failed to affect it)?

For me, the value of these callups is for fans to get a glimpse of the future.

The converse of your argument would be that a team would be just as well-served by NOT calling anyone up.

Besides the chance to raise fiscal revenue by a few percent by selling more tickets after Labor Day (always a tough sell for a non-contender), what does it hurt for possible 2014 rookies to get a glimpse at big-league life- and all that that entails?

The answer? Nothing.

What does it help for individual development? Possibly something.

"Somethings" like: familiarization to a tougher environment, added motivation to reach the pinnacle of your sport and, when you're 20-25 years old, every rep helps your development, even watered-down reps.

IdahoPilgrim
08-20-2013, 01:52 PM
The converse of your argument would be that a team would be just as well-served by NOT calling anyone up.

Besides the chance to raise fiscal revenue by a few percent by selling more tickets after Labor Day (always a tough sell for a non-contender), what does it hurt for possible 2014 rookies to get a glimpse at big-league life- and all that that entails?

The answer? Nothing.

What does it help for individual development? Possibly something.

"Somethings" like: familiarization to a tougher environment, added motivation to reach the pinnacle of your sport and, when you're 20-25 years old, every rep helps your development, even watered-down reps.

Fair enough. Good points. Especially for the Twins who have nothing else to play for. But if you're in a pennant race, does this still hold? I would want to play my best 25, at least until I've clinched.

Kwak
08-20-2013, 01:55 PM
Ryan is just affirming a "tough posture". It may seem to be wrong, but remember when the Twins were winning--and looking for upgrades--no one was cutting the Twins a break! So nuts to them. If they want Morneau, pay up, else finish your season with what they have and wonder "what if?" come November--just like we did!

September callups are just what is implied--auditions. The Twins have many open jobs for 2014 so let people show what they have--or don't have!

Auditions. I watched much of the Rock Cats game last night--brutal! It was clear to me why this team has a losing record. Lazy, half-ass play; situational baseball--unheard by this bunch! Sano apparently only wants to hit fastballs and he can be baited by FBs out-of-zone. Yeah, he needs more experience. A repeat at AA for a spell next year should do him some good--maybe shake his sweet smell of entitlement.

Shane Wahl
08-20-2013, 02:00 PM
It is completely asinine that they don't want to just eat the rest of Morneau's salary for the rest of the season. They better plan on bringing him back then, instead of doing nothing and getting nothing.

A September callup is going to mean a lot more for someone like Hendriks than Sano right now.

drjim
08-20-2013, 02:04 PM
So, Gardy confirms it is about Ryan not being willing to eat salary.....can we put that part to bed yet, and just admit it? What conclusions you draw to the bigger picture about Ryan and money is a different discussion....

That's not exactly what he said.

TheLeviathan
08-20-2013, 02:21 PM
That's not exactly what he said.

No, but it's hard to swallow the idea that money is the driving reason why he wasn't dealt. I would hope the manager on the team has a reasonable idea of what is going on, but at the very least you can conclude that within the organization the rumor is that he was kept because of a lack of trade interest due to salary.

That's.....unsettling.

stringer bell
08-20-2013, 02:22 PM
It is completely asinine that they don't want to just eat the rest of Morneau's salary for the rest of the season. They better plan on bringing him back then, instead of doing nothing and getting nothing.

A September callup is going to mean a lot more for someone like Hendriks than Sano right now.While other teams seem much more willing to eat salary, I can't recall the Twins ever doing it, at least on the scale of $3M. My guess is that the return offered for eating salary isn't much anyway. While Morneau has said he wants to return, if he gets a similar offer to what the Twins offer from a team with a chance next year, it won't surprise me at all to see him in another uniform next year.

jay
08-20-2013, 02:24 PM
I guess I'm reading that a bit differently also. It's not about the money, it's about actually getting something back of any value. Why pay $3M to not have Morneau on the team and get some no-chance A-level scrub in return?

big dog
08-20-2013, 02:25 PM
This is Gardy talking about second-hand reports to a reporter. Hopefully there's more going on behind the scenes. Saying that teams don't want to take on the money might be leaving out the fact that teams haven't been willing to part with anyone interesting even if the Twins pay the money. Morneau hasn't exactly been tearing it up, you might have noticed. He's also been pretty public about wanting to stay- that may not hurt his trade value much, but it sure isn't helping it.

Not saying that's what is happening, just saying there is a lot of assertion here about motivation based on a small scrap of perhaps partially-correct information.

drjim
08-20-2013, 02:38 PM
No, but it's hard to swallow the idea that money is the driving reason why he wasn't dealt. I would hope the manager on the team has a reasonable idea of what is going on, but at the very least you can conclude that within the organization the rumor is that he was kept because of a lack of trade interest due to salary.

That's.....unsettling.

Could you instead swallow the reality that Morneau has no value? That seems to me to be the relevant point.

The Twins aren't going to give him away for nothing.

mike wants wins
08-20-2013, 02:41 PM
That's not what Gardy said......he said it's about money.

"but everything I’ve heard is that there is money involved and all that and other teams are not wanting to touch money and stuff like that.”

Can someone explain how that sentence is not about money?

As for the Sano thing, no surprise he's not coming up this year, is there?

ThePuck
08-20-2013, 02:44 PM
Fair enough. Good points. Especially for the Twins who have nothing else to play for. But if you're in a pennant race, does this still hold? I would want to play my best 25, at least until I've clinched.

Exactly, and with more teams in the playoff hunt than ever before (with the 2nd wild card), more teams will be playing all out, not using their expanded roster that much. A team like ours could have players benefit playing against those kind of teams

jay
08-20-2013, 02:50 PM
That's not what Gardy said......he said it's about money.

"but everything I’ve heard is that there is money involved and all that and other teams are not wanting to touch money and stuff like that.”

Can someone explain how that sentence is not about money?


He said it's about money for other teams. That's inferring that the Twins will have to eat Morneau's salary in order to trade him, but it doesn't say anywhere they aren't willing to do that.

The problem is likely that other teams aren't offering anything of value in return for that, not that the Twins won't do it... but that's not for certain either.

drjim
08-20-2013, 02:51 PM
That's not what Gardy said......he said it's about money.

"but everything I’ve heard is that there is money involved and all that and other teams are not wanting to touch money and stuff like that.”

Can someone explain how that sentence is not about money?

As for the Sano thing, no surprise he's not coming up this year, is there?

I would consider the next paragraph for a more accurate assessment of why Morneau hasn't been traded.

Mr. Brooks
08-20-2013, 02:51 PM
I think my question (and it is meant as an honest question) is how much value is there actually in a September callup. Yes, players are getting major league experience, but I wonder if it is not a somewhat diluted experience nonetheless. Other clubs will also be bringing up prospects, so that all the rosters will be somewhat diluted after Sept. 1. Doesn't that make it a little different than facing the "top 25" before 9/1? It kind of reminds me of spring training, where veterans and prospects often play at the same time. That also is valuable experience, but we've all learned to distrust ST numbers because of it.

Yes, these games will in some cases have playoff implications, so the intensity will be higher than in spring training, and that also is worthwhile experiencing, and you will face some top-notch hitters/pitchers that you won't see in Triple-A. But has there actually been any studies done on players called up post-9/1 and those not and how it has actually affected their development (or failed to affect it)?

For me, the value of these callups is for fans to get a glimpse of the future.

Very true, which is what I used to try to caution against getting too excited over Parmelee during his scorching Sept. a couple of years ago.
It should be more about getting them some MLB experience, IMO, not necessarily drawing any conclusions from the results.

ashburyjohn
08-20-2013, 02:59 PM
Exactly, and with more teams in the playoff hunt than ever before (with the 2nd wild card), more teams will be playing all out, not using their expanded roster that much. A team like ours could have players benefit playing against those kind of teams

Conversely, long baseball tradition is that the non-contenders must field at least a representative lineup when facing contenders. Nobody wants to lose a close pennant (er, wild card) race because your rival played the Twins and swept them while facing no-names. This then limits the number of September call-ups you can usefully put into games.

ThePuck
08-20-2013, 03:02 PM
Conversely, long baseball tradition is that the non-contenders must field at least a representative lineup when facing contenders. Nobody wants to lose a close pennant (er, wild card) race because your rival played the Twins and swept them while facing no-names. This then limits the number of September call-ups you can usefully put into games.

yeah, that's a play it by ear type of thing. I'm not suggesting tanking games or anything but if we have people we want to get experience for next year, our first priority should be towards that.

LaBombo
08-20-2013, 04:28 PM
Ryan is just affirming a "tough posture". It may seem to be wrong, but remember when the Twins were winning--and looking for upgrades--no one was cutting the Twins a break! So nuts to them. If they want Morneau, pay up, else finish your season with what they have and wonder "what if?" come November--just like we did!

Revenge! It's simultaneously the most ridiculous motive I can think of for the Twins not trading veterans for prospects, and yet the most plausible. Well done, and not the facetious kind.

orangevening
08-20-2013, 06:28 PM
I brought this up in another thread, but what is wrong with bringing Sano and/or Rosario (or even Pinto) up (besides the 40 man issue) in September and sitting them on the bench 80% of the time just to soak up the experince and bring a few more people to the ballpark.? A pinch-hit there, a late game substitute here and at most a spot start once a week.

Mr. Brooks
08-20-2013, 06:31 PM
I brought this up in another thread, but what is wrong with bringing Sano and/or Rosario (or even Pinto) up (besides the 40 man issue) in September and sitting them on the bench 80% of the time just to soak up the experince and bring a few more people to the ballpark.? A pinch-hit there, a late game substitute here and at most a spot start once a week.

If you are going to bring up Sano, why would you put him on the bench? He'd be our 2nd best hitter immediately.

TheLeviathan
08-20-2013, 07:27 PM
Could you instead swallow the reality that Morneau has no value? That seems to me to be the relevant point.

The Twins aren't going to give him away for nothing.

If Gardy had said: "I heard we didn't have strong suitors". Sure.

You are stretching to make this about value when Gardy specifically cites money. YOu could say its too second hand....but you are trying to read into it your opinion, not taking the quote as is.

birdwatcher
08-20-2013, 07:29 PM
I guess I'm reading that a bit differently also. It's not about the money, it's about actually getting something back of any value. Why pay $3M to not have Morneau on the team and get some no-chance A-level scrub in return?

That's my read on it too, and that's in line with the comments Jim Pohlad made, which is that it's all about getting an equitable return. He said they have no interest in making moves simply to unload a player or a salary. Now, it could be that Ryan is squeezing a nickel again, but I don't thin it's fair to draw that conclusion based on what's been said. And especially something awkwardly said by Gardy.

birdwatcher
08-20-2013, 07:43 PM
I brought this up in another thread, but what is wrong with bringing Sano and/or Rosario (or even Pinto) up (besides the 40 man issue) in September and sitting them on the bench 80% of the time just to soak up the experince and bring a few more people to the ballpark.? A pinch-hit there, a late game substitute here and at most a spot start once a week.

I believe Ryan has said he's inclined to send Sano home to rest up and be ready to go come spring training. He said Sano has played alot of baseball this summer and that the time off would probably be he best thing for him.

RodneyKline
08-20-2013, 07:48 PM
Sano is not ready yet. He can't hit .250 at AA but he is ready for the majors? I don't think so. Hicks hit .280 at AA last season. Prediction: Byron Buxton is the next Rookie of the Year for the Twins.

Mr. Brooks
08-20-2013, 08:00 PM
Sano is not ready yet. He can't hit .250 at AA but he is ready for the majors? I don't think so. Hicks hit .280 at AA last season. Prediction: Byron Buxton is the next Rookie of the Year for the Twins.

I'm sure Sano's unlucky 70 point (from his career) drop in babip has a little bit to do with that AVG. His K/rate and BB/rate are right in line with the rest of his career so far, and he's Slugging .561. What was Hicks slg% in AA?

He may or may not be ready defensively. If he's not ready offensively, he's pretty damn close. Don't let the AVG fool you, he is destroying AA pitching.

Even with that supressed AVG, he's 3rd in the Eastern League in OPS.

clutterheart
08-20-2013, 08:20 PM
Sano is not ready yet. He can't hit .250 at AA but he is ready for the majors? I don't think so. Hicks hit .280 at AA last season. Prediction: Byron Buxton is the next Rookie of the Year for the Twins.

Don't forget to look and see that slugging %. Its pretty good

He's not a contact hitter. He is a power hitter and his BA will be off - especiall in the early years.

We will see some Strike Outs, ground outs and he will look bad sometimes. But when he connects it will go a long way. If he was on the team today he would hit .200 with 15 HR

But when he refines his approach Im hoping for 260 with 35 HR. Its going to be a lot of fun!

Kwak
08-20-2013, 08:28 PM
If he was on the team today he would hit .200 with 15 HR

But when he refines his approach Im hoping for 260 with 35 HR. Its going to be a lot of fun!

The Twins don't needanother .200 hitter with 15 HR! Let him "refine" for at least another year. His game vs Trenton didn't impress me that "he's ready" at all.

Mr. Brooks
08-20-2013, 08:30 PM
The Twins don't needanother .200 hitter with 15 HR! Let him "refine" for at least another year. His game vs Trenton didn't impress me that "he's ready" at all.

Now we are using ONE GAME sample sizes?

jorgenswest
08-20-2013, 09:10 PM
If the Twins are going to pay his salary, they need to get a reasonable prospect.

I doubt there is much interest. It really isn't a lot of money to a team if they thought he would make a significant difference. For Gardy, it may not be completely straight forward, but it is more respectful to Morneau to talk about money rather than talk about the fact that there is little interest in him.

orangevening
08-20-2013, 10:08 PM
I believe Ryan has said he's inclined to send Sano home to rest up and be ready to go come spring training. He said Sano has played alot of baseball this summer and that the time off would probably be he best thing for him.

Yes, I read that too. That's why I didn't say "bring them up and play them everyday".

mike wants wins
08-21-2013, 08:19 AM
Funny, when I suggested they'd probably have Buxton take the winter off, everyone said I was crazy....now it makes sense for an older guy, who is used to the long grind, take time off?

I do agree, Sano and Buxton could probably use some time off. Makes sense to me, frankly.

Major Leauge Ready
08-21-2013, 08:27 AM
If Gardy had said: "I heard we didn't have strong suitors". Sure.

You are stretching to make this about value when Gardy specifically cites money. YOu could say its too second hand....but you are trying to read into it your opinion, not taking the quote as is.

Actually, there is not enough information provided to make intelligent commentary on either side of this debate. Reminds me of politics. Democrats and both blame each other for everything they possibly can. In this case, the management haters take a crum of information and spin it into incompetance or that Ryan is cheap. If it was all about money, he would just dump Morneau for a guy that will never make it above high-A. There has to be a team that would take him and his salary if they did not have to give up a prospects with a chance to play at the ML level.

Mr. Brooks
08-21-2013, 08:43 AM
Actually, there is not enough information provided to make intelligent commentary on either side of this debate. Reminds me of politics. Democrats and both blame each other for everything they possibly can. In this case, the management haters take a crum of information and spin it into incompetance or that Ryan is cheap. If it was all about money, he would just dump Morneau for a guy that will never make it above high-A. There has to be a team that would take him and his salary if they did not have to give up a prospects with a chance to play at the ML level.

Nobody is willing to do that, hence him clearing waivers.

ThePuck
08-21-2013, 09:33 AM
Funny, when I suggested they'd probably have Buxton take the winter off, everyone said I was crazy....now it makes sense for an older guy, who is used to the long grind, take time off?

I do agree, Sano and Buxton could probably use some time off. Makes sense to me, frankly.

There's like a 7 month difference in ages between Sano and Buxton :-)

mike wants wins
08-21-2013, 09:36 AM
My point was more about the grind of baseball, but ya, oooops.

ThePuck
08-21-2013, 09:44 AM
My point was more about the grind of baseball, but ya, oooops.

just joking with you, buddy...I got your point :-)

TheLeviathan
08-21-2013, 09:47 AM
Actually, there is not enough information provided to make intelligent commentary on either side of this debate. Reminds me of politics. Democrats and both blame each other for everything they possibly can. In this case, the management haters take a crum of information and spin it into incompetance or that Ryan is cheap. If it was all about money, he would just dump Morneau for a guy that will never make it above high-A. There has to be a team that would take him and his salary if they did not have to give up a prospects with a chance to play at the ML level.

As has been pointed out, he cleared waivers so the entire premise of your counter argument is false.

If Gardy had said the reverse and people were reading into this about money...the same people defending this would have a conniption. As I said earlier....it's unsettling that a major figure in the organization thinks money is the reason he wasn't dealt. Doesn't prove anything, but it's unsettling.

drjim
08-21-2013, 10:23 AM
As has been pointed out, he cleared waivers so the entire premise of your counter argument is false.

If Gardy had said the reverse and people were reading into this about money...the same people defending this would have a conniption. As I said earlier....it's unsettling that a major figure in the organization thinks money is the reason he wasn't dealt. Doesn't prove anything, but it's unsettling.

And I still assert it is about lack of value/return. There really is nothing said here that can prove it either way.

But by all means remain unsettled.

TheLeviathan
08-21-2013, 10:52 AM
And I still assert it is about lack of value/return. There really is nothing said here that can prove it either way.

But by all means remain unsettled.

Im unsettled by what was actually said, what you are doing is pretending the quote means something unsaid. You'd be upset if someone did the reverse. And you'd be right to be upset. Gardy said money, anything else is an interpretation.

nicksaviking
08-21-2013, 11:08 AM
I can understand (barely) the quibble about how it might not ALL be about eating Morenau's money, but what about the player compensation justification? Gardy said they want a young ballplayer who can help them next year.

Unless they actually think they can get near MLB ready top prospect from AA or AAA that means they are likely willing to accept more AAAA filler like Hernandez and Escobar. Why?

Regardless if they are hung up on money or prospects, unless on the unlikely chance they get an actual top prospect from the upper minor leagues, they are going about this whole situation the wrong way.

mike wants wins
08-21-2013, 11:22 AM
No wonder they can't make a trade, if they are worried about a prospect helping them next year......

drjim
08-21-2013, 11:25 AM
Im unsettled by what was actually said, what you are doing is pretending the quote means something unsaid. You'd be upset if someone did the reverse. And you'd be right to be upset. Gardy said money, anything else is an interpretation.

As a general rule I don't become unsettled by Gardy's vague ramblings about things he doesn't control. It is still a return issue first and foremost.

drjim
08-21-2013, 11:26 AM
I can understand (barely) the quibble about how it might not ALL be about eating Morenau's money, but what about the player compensation justification? Gardy said they want a young ballplayer who can help them next year.

Unless they actually think they can get near MLB ready top prospect from AA or AAA that means they are likely willing to accept more AAAA filler like Hernandez and Escobar. Why?

Regardless if they are hung up on money or prospects, unless on the unlikely chance they get an actual top prospect from the upper minor leagues, they are going about this whole situation the wrong way.

This I can agree with. There might be a significant difference of opinion on what a "fair" return would be.

beckmt
08-21-2013, 12:30 PM
I do not see the difference. Morneau is saying the correct things, but I wonder if the bridges have already been burnt when the Twins refused to meet on an extension. Morneau may decide to play for less money on a team that is a contender and the Twins will have nothing in return for him. I know if I was treated that way, I would certainly consider it.

TheLeviathan
08-21-2013, 12:40 PM
As a general rule I don't become unsettled by Gardy's vague ramblings about things he doesn't control. It is still a return issue first and foremost.

With that...I have no problems. Gardy certainly seems like he's clueless about the workings of the FO most of the time.

stringer bell
08-21-2013, 12:50 PM
Morneau wasn't claimed on waivers because no one (NO ONE) wanted to take on $3.5M for 1+ month for a player who is, at best, a marginal upgrade from what their team was using at first base. History says the Twins will not eat salary to make a trade, so IMHO the issue is money. I have been of the opinion that the Twins should trade Morneau for a 40-man roster spot and the trade partner taking on his salary. I don't know if any team has offered even that much.

drjim
08-21-2013, 01:05 PM
Morneau wasn't claimed on waivers because no one (NO ONE) wanted to take on $3.5M for 1+ month for a player who is, at best, a marginal upgrade from what their team was using at first base. History says the Twins will not eat salary to make a trade, so IMHO the issue is money. I have been of the opinion that the Twins should trade Morneau for a 40-man roster spot and the trade partner taking on his salary. I don't know if any team has offered even that much.

I think "marginal upgrade" is the bigger problem. The Twins, rightly or wrongly, want a legitimate return for Morneau and teams aren't going to give that up for six weeks of a marginal upgrade regardless of money.

old nurse
08-21-2013, 01:35 PM
What contending team other than the Yankees or Pittsburg would Morneau be an upgrade on? Any other team he would be a pinch hitter. If you were going to give up a prospect for a rental the teans could lowball the Twins because Morales with similar numbers would also be available.

diehardtwinsfan
08-21-2013, 01:44 PM
Sano is not ready yet. He can't hit .250 at AA but he is ready for the majors? I don't think so. Hicks hit .280 at AA last season. Prediction: Byron Buxton is the next Rookie of the Year for the Twins.

There's a tale of two Sano's here with the first few weeks in the league being starkly worse than the last couple. I think that average will be climbing up as the season progresses, though I don't think he's "ready" by any means. I agree that he'd instantly be one of the better hitters on this team, but that doesn't make him ready. He still has things to learn. I'm guessing if he continues to progress, he opens up 2014 in Rochester for a month or two before being called up here after destroying the league. Wouldn't be surprised at all if Buxton was on a similar path starting in NB and making it up to Rochester in fairly short order.

Beemo
08-21-2013, 04:27 PM
I do not see the difference. Morneau is saying the correct things, but I wonder if the bridges have already been burnt when the Twins refused to meet on an extension. Morneau may decide to play for less money on a team that is a contender and the Twins will have nothing in return for him. I know if I was treated that way, I would certainly consider it.

I get why Morneau wanted an extension but I don't know why he'd expect the Twins to actually consider it. Sure, he would've gladly accepted $11+ million the Twins would've had to pay him for next season and even another $9+ million for 2015 but he shouldn't be upset that the Twins didn't even want to talk about it.

golfboy1
08-21-2013, 05:37 PM
Morneau wasn't claimed on waivers because no one (NO ONE) wanted to take on $3.5M for 1+ month for a player who is, at best, a marginal upgrade from what their team was using at first base. History says the Twins will not eat salary to make a trade, so IMHO the issue is money. I have been of the opinion that the Twins should trade Morneau for a 40-man roster spot and the trade partner taking on his salary. I don't know if any team has offered even that much.

I think your view is correct. Morneau is...at best, a marginal upgrade for a few teams & since nobody wanted to take the chance they would get stuck with him he cleared waivers.

Chicago had to send money to Texas to take Alex Rios & they received a marginal prospect in return. I think most contenders would rather have Rios over Morneau. The market for Morneau is probably very small.

I believe the Twins would rather keep Morneau than pay money to receive a marginal prospect back. I don't entirely disagree with that approach. He's been a Twins favorite for a long time & just dumping him for a nobody isn't the right thing to do(IMHO).

Some posters seem to think the Twins are being cheap by taking this approach but I don't think that is true. If they don't trade him they STILL have to pay him his salary so how is that being cheap? If it was just about money they could probably pay 70/80% of his salary & someone would take him.

Thrylos
08-21-2013, 05:51 PM
I think my question (and it is meant as an honest question) is how much value is there actually in a September callup. Yes, players are getting major league experience, but I wonder if it is not a somewhat diluted experience nonetheless. .

A September call up means that a player can double his income. A month of an MLB paycheck is about a season's worth of a AAA paycheck and more for a AA. And this can mean a lot to the players. So it is a form of a reward...

diehardtwinsfan
08-22-2013, 09:00 AM
I do not see the difference. Morneau is saying the correct things, but I wonder if the bridges have already been burnt when the Twins refused to meet on an extension. Morneau may decide to play for less money on a team that is a contender and the Twins will have nothing in return for him. I know if I was treated that way, I would certainly consider it.

Keep in mind that if the Twins extended him prior to him hitting FA, they could at most give him a 20% paycut. That means they'd be paying him about 11M/year. If those bridges are burned, bit's b/c Morneau has no idea what he's actually worth.

Mr. Brooks
08-22-2013, 09:15 AM
Keep in mind that if the Twins extended him prior to him hitting FA, they could at most give him a 20% paycut. That means they'd be paying him about 11M/year. If those bridges are burned, bit's b/c Morneau has no idea what he's actually worth.

I might be wrong, but I thought the 20% rule was for pre ARB players, i.e. renewable contract guys.

Shane Wahl
08-22-2013, 09:28 AM
While it may be true that Morneau is a marginal improvement over some current first baseman for teams looking at the playoffs, A: that's what teams are often looking for as they head into the playoffs, and B: perhaps Morneau is more than a marginal improvement over the last two guys on the bench for one or more of these teams (maybe true of all of them?). Someone would take him and the some 50%+ of the salary for either a decent prospect at the lower levels or a lower prospect at the higher levels.

IdahoPilgrim
08-22-2013, 10:00 AM
A September call up means that a player can double his income. A month of an MLB paycheck is about a season's worth of a AAA paycheck and more for a AA. And this can mean a lot to the players. So it is a form of a reward...

Good point. I hadn't thought of it from that angle.

drjim
08-22-2013, 10:14 AM
While it may be true that Morneau is a marginal improvement over some current first baseman for teams looking at the playoffs, A: that's what teams are often looking for as they head into the playoffs, and B: perhaps Morneau is more than a marginal improvement over the last two guys on the bench for one or more of these teams (maybe true of all of them?). Someone would take him and the some 50%+ of the salary for either a decent prospect at the lower levels or a lower prospect at the higher levels.

You state that like it's obvious, but I suppose it depends on your definition of "decent". Other teams would surely take Morneau, I just highly doubt a team would give up anything of significance no matter how much money the Twins pick up.

An argument can be made to move him to clear space but there needs to be a little more than whining about the Twins being cheap to convince they are leaving a prospect on the table.

Oxtung
08-22-2013, 10:37 AM
Jon Morosi at FOX Sports has another article (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/justin-morneau-minnesota-twins-clears-waivers-does-not-expect-trade-082013) up stating money is the sticking point.


One source told FOXSports.com that the money owed to Morneau — more than $3 million over the remainder of this season — has been the biggest barrier to interest in him.

I'm not sure why this is such a hard thing to see. If there was demand and money wasn't an issue than he would have been claimed. Since he made it through waivers than we know teams don't want to pay the $3M.

ThePuck
08-22-2013, 11:12 AM
Jon Morosi at FOX Sports has another article (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/justin-morneau-minnesota-twins-clears-waivers-does-not-expect-trade-082013) up stating money is the sticking point.



I'm not sure why this is such a hard thing to see. If there was demand and money wasn't an issue than he would have been claimed. Since he made it through waivers than we know teams don't want to pay the $3M.

If they had a quote from Ryan himself saying it, it still wouldn't matter.

drjim
08-22-2013, 11:26 AM
I still want to know what they are getting back.

Money could be the problem in the sense that if no one is offering anything substantial then Ryan is probably insisting a team pick up most (or all) of the contract. As he should.

ashburyjohn
08-22-2013, 11:31 AM
Other teams would surely take Morneau, I just highly doubt a team would give up anything of significance no matter how much money the Twins pick up.

I think this is true; if the Twins picked up all his remaining salary, the other team gets Morneau at no cost, so what is that worth to them? We're down to a month of the season left. Suppose the Twins were in the playoff hunt. What would you give up for a month of, say, Mike Napoli for no salary? Adam Walker? Dalton Hicks? Mason Melotakis? I hope not. And if not, then a move like that is just noise, in terms of the trading team's long term plans.

IdahoPilgrim
08-22-2013, 11:31 AM
Just saying "money is the sticking point" might be misleading. I concur that's part of the story, but perhaps not all of the story.

I can easily imagine Ryan getting a call like such: "Say, we'd like to talk about Morneau, but we know he'll only be a rental for a couple of months, and to be honest he's had a tough year even if the last few weeks have been good, so we don't want to give up much for him - how about a couple of low-level C prospects? Oh, and we're going to ask you to eat a lot of his salary too."

If I were Ryan, I'd say "NO" as well. Money may well be an issue, but my guess is it is also about what they are being offered in return.

nicksaviking
08-22-2013, 11:47 AM
I think this is true; if the Twins picked up all his remaining salary, the other team gets Morneau at no cost, so what is that worth to them? We're down to a month of the season left. Suppose the Twins were in the playoff hunt. What would you give up for a month of, say, Mike Napoli for no salary? Adam Walker? Dalton Hicks? Mason Melotakis? I hope not. And if not, then a move like that is just noise, in terms of the trading team's long term plans.

I wouldn't be happy if the Twins gave up a player like that if they were in the playoff hunt, but that's only because I would rather have the prospect than get to watch the Twins lose an additional three games to the Yankees.

However if I were a team that has eyes on winning playoff games...

drjim
08-22-2013, 11:58 AM
Here are some other thoughts on this:

-my sense are the Twins are trying to do right by Morneau by trading him to a contender
-however, the are balking at picking up most of the money while also getting nothing of significance in return
-other teams won't change their offers and Ryan will blink before Aug. 31
-no chance Morneau is back next year

LaBombo
08-22-2013, 12:14 PM
Here are some other thoughts on this:

-my sense are the Twins are trying to do right by Morneau by trading him to a contender
-however, the are balking at picking up most of the money while also getting nothing of significance in return

They got something of significance for a lesser player in Drew Butera. Gardenhire and now a reporter have identified money as the key issue in a potential Morneau deal.

It's difficult to see where you're coming by your opinion anywhere else but reverse-engineering it from the starting point that the front office must be doing the right thing because they're the front office.

jokin
08-22-2013, 12:18 PM
They got something of significance for a lesser player in Drew Butera. Gardenhire and now a reporter have identified money as the key issue in a potential Morneau deal.

It's difficult to see where you're coming by your opinion anywhere else but reverse-engineering it from the starting point that the front office must be doing the right thing because they're the front office.

+1!

Oxtung
08-22-2013, 12:23 PM
Just saying "money is the sticking point" might be misleading. I concur that's part of the story, but perhaps not all of the story.

I can easily imagine Ryan getting a call like such: "Say, we'd like to talk about Morneau, but we know he'll only be a rental for a couple of months, and to be honest he's had a tough year even if the last few weeks have been good, so we don't want to give up much for him - how about a couple of low-level C prospects? Oh, and we're going to ask you to eat a lot of his salary too."

If I were Ryan, I'd say "NO" as well. Money may well be an issue, but my guess is it is also about what they are being offered in return.

So you think that 37 games of Morneau is better than a chance to help the team in 2015+? I guess that is where I disagree. I'll take whatever has a chance to help this team become competitive. That isn't Morneau at this point.

drjim
08-22-2013, 12:36 PM
They got something of significance for a lesser player in Drew Butera. Gardenhire and now a reporter have identified money as the key issue in a potential Morneau deal.

It's difficult to see where you're coming by your opinion anywhere else but reverse-engineering it from the starting point that the front office must be doing the right thing because they're the front office.

Fair enough. I do assume a reasonably competent front office. Seems a more reasonable assumption than getting angry or unsettled about the failure to make a trade that doesn't actually exist.

jay
08-23-2013, 09:28 AM
I think this is true; if the Twins picked up all his remaining salary, the other team gets Morneau at no cost, so what is that worth to them? We're down to a month of the season left.

Exactly. I don't know why the expectation should be to pay out the $3M, but only get a marginal return. I fully understand the talent acquisition concerns, but is it worth $3M to get a Pedro Hernandez type? These aren't franchise changing moves we're talking about.

Also, what message does a deal like that send to other players that you're looking to sign in the future? Most players sign a contract with hopes of never getting traded. They understand it happens, but moves for the sake of moves might not exactly benefit a club in the long run.


They got something of significance for a lesser player in Drew Butera.

If anything, this would seem to prove they are willing to make the move if something of significance is offered...

mike wants wins
08-23-2013, 09:33 AM
jay, they've already spent the $3MM.....would you rather have Morneau leave, and get nothing, or get a lottery ticket minor leaguer? Is it worth $3MM to keep Morneau, and not have a possible Twins' prospect play the rest of the year?

Sunk cost.

jay
08-23-2013, 09:55 AM
Sunk cost.

Sunk costs are generally past tense. They get you in trouble when you can't detach yourself from it because you've already spent $xx on it -- ie the signing bonus of a top pick . Morneau's salary is a prospective cost in that it's committed... only whatever part of it they'd have to cover for a team to take him with no return at all is sunk.

I'm a 100% Myers-Briggs 'T', but I still can see some soft side benefits of not dumping him. I wouldn't mind the playing time for a Colabello/Parmelee platoon, but waivers has already proven they're going to pay something for that.

In reality... I'm fine with whichever direction happens here, but I'm not going to play up either side of it into some sort of a huge affair. I'll save that energy for SPs in the offseason. :cry:

Major Leauge Ready
08-23-2013, 10:26 AM
jay, they've already spent the $3MM.....would you rather have Morneau leave, and get nothing, or get a lottery ticket minor leaguer? Is it worth $3MM to keep Morneau, and not have a possible Twins' prospect play the rest of the year?

Sunk cost.

A few people keep referring to Morneau's salary as a sunk cost. It is an obligation. A sunk cost would suggest that the expense has already been incurred and thus cannot be recovered. Obviously, this is not true. Morneau has yet to earn and/or be paid. Part of the negotiations center around who will pay all or part of Morneau's salary. His salary would not be approriately defined as a sunk cost until the tradeline passes unless there is absolutely no chance another team would take him and his salary and no player in returrn.

A likely scenario is that a portion of his salary is a sunk cost because another team would likely take him if the Twins ate part of his salary and did not recieve a player in return. It is just an educated guess but I would think a couple team would be very happy to take Justin if the Twins recieved no player compensation and paid one-third of the salary obligation. By waiting other teams are increasing the portion of that obligation paid by the twins.

I find it interesting that the Twins are cheap SOBs because they won't pay his salary while another team gets the benefit of his services but those teams are not cheap because they won't pay for his services.

mike wants wins
08-23-2013, 10:44 AM
No, Sunk Cost get you in trouble when you make a decision about the future based on either costs you have already incurred, or are currently obligated to incur. Keeping Morneau because you owe him money is a perfect example of sunk cost thinking. Same with not just cutting Doumit and eating his salary.

Doesn't really matter, if we want to argue if it is a sunk cost or not.....the point is, they owe him $3MM. They can either pay him that for the rest of the year, and then watch him walk, or they can pay him that, and get a prospect. So, what is the best use of that $3MM?

mike wants wins
08-23-2013, 10:44 AM
A few people keep referring to Morneau's salary as a sunk cost. It is an obligation. A sunk cost would suggest that the expense has already been incurred and thus cannot be recovered. Obviously, this is not true. Morneau has yet to earn and/or be paid. Part of the negotiations center around who will pay all or part of Morneau's salary. His salary would not be approriately defined as a sunk cost until the tradeline passes unless there is absolutely no chance another team would take him and his salary and no player in returrn.

A likely scenario is that a portion of his salary is a sunk cost because another team would likely take him if the Twins ate part of his salary and did not recieve a player in return. It is just an educated guess but I would think a couple team would be very happy to take Justin if the Twins recieved no player compensation and paid one-third of the salary obligation. By waiting other teams are increasing the portion of that obligation paid by the twins.

I find it interesting that the Twins are cheap SOBs because they won't pay his salary while another team gets the benefit of his services but those teams are not cheap because they won't pay for his services.


Who said those other teams are not cheap? I haven't read that anyplace on this thread.

Oxtung
08-23-2013, 10:46 AM
By waiting other teams are increasing the portion of [the payroll] obligation paid by the twins.
But their return in production is decreasing at the same rate. So in the end it is a wash. Waiting until close to the deadline does not change the ROI in a trade. At this point the only change will be an external one. Injury, odds of contention, etc...


I find it interesting that the Twins are cheap SOBs because they won't pay his salary while another team gets the benefit of his services but those teams are not cheap because they won't pay for his services.

Other teams spend most if not all of their budget to sign players to begin the season. Perhaps a small portion is withheld for a deadline trade but the vast majority is spent.

That said, the Twins aren't really cheap in this instance. If they were cheap the Twins would pay the absolute minimum and move Morneau for the salary relief. I do think the Twins are overvaluing Morneau's, well I don't know what they're overvaluing but something, otherwise he would be moved for the best package available. It's clear they believe there is a benefit derived by having Morneau on this team for another 35ish games. I'll be damned if I can figure out what that is though.

drjim
08-23-2013, 10:50 AM
No, Sunk Cost get you in trouble when you make a decision about the future based on either costs you have already incurred, or are currently obligated to incur. Keeping Morneau because you owe him money is a perfect example of sunk cost thinking. Same with not just cutting Doumit and eating his salary.

Doesn't really matter, if we want to argue if it is a sunk cost or not.....the point is, they owe him $3MM. They can either pay him that for the rest of the year, and then watch him walk, or they can pay him that, and get a prospect. So, what is the best use of that $3MM?

But this analysis also ignores the benefit he provides the team by staying on the roster.

You keep mentioning some hypothetical lottery ticket prospect, but I think that is the wrong way to look at the return because that would imply a live arm A ball guy or something. I don't think Morneau gets that. The return would be 40 man roster filler that would otherwise be DFAed or a lower level non-prospect organizational filler. Or maybe cash.

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 10:52 AM
If anything, this would seem to prove they are willing to make the move if something of significance is offered...
Must have missed the part where the Twins' self-acknowledged desire not to part ways with several million dollars was a potential stumbling block in the Butera deal.

drjim
08-23-2013, 10:55 AM
That said, the Twins aren't really cheap in this instance. If they were cheap the Twins would pay the absolute minimum and move Morneau for the salary relief. I do think the Twins are overvaluing Morneau's, well I don't know what they're overvaluing but something, otherwise he would be moved for the best package available. It's clear they believe there is a benefit derived by having Morneau on this team for another 35ish games. I'll be damned if I can figure out what that is though.

This is a good point, the Twins are certainly not cheap in this situation.

I still think you are overrating the possible return. My sense is they just aren't going to get anything of substance so they are demanding more salary relief than is being offered. That is why "money" is the big sticking point right now.

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 10:56 AM
You keep mentioning some hypothetical lottery ticket prospect, but I think that is the wrong way to look at the return because that would imply a live arm A ball guy or something. I don't think Morneau gets that. The return would be 40 man roster filler that would otherwise be DFAed or a lower level non-prospect organizational filler. Or maybe cash.

Will you ever tell us why? Or is it a trade secret, like the Twins use of cybermetrics?

And if you're able, can you respond without the lame snippy remarks this time?

big dog
08-23-2013, 11:04 AM
I'd like the Twins to bring up anyone they thought was deserving, and give them multiple chances to play. We have 10 games with zero playoff implications for anyone; sit Willingham, Doumit, Morneau if he's around, and maybe Mauer plays half of them. Our last 7 games are with the Tigers and the Indians; by then, the Indians may have fallen out, so let the kids play there too. At this point, I don't see any as those three as all that much of an asset anyway. If a contender cries because their competition has to face Willingham, with no outfield ability and a .200 average, I don't really care.

It's time to start sorting them out. I think there are a number of guys we don't need to keep around- let's test it now rather than later.

jay
08-23-2013, 11:14 AM
Or is it a trade secret, like the Twins use of cybermetrics?


I did chuckle at that, but you should probably remove the next sentence of your post.

What is a realistic return for the guys that are heavily advocating the move? Pay all of the salary and get xx? Pay some and get xx? I'd be curious to hear some examples.

ThePuck
08-23-2013, 11:20 AM
I did chuckle at that, but you should probably remove the next sentence of your post.



I think he might be frustrated that some people consistently get away with making snide comment after snide comment (ironically by supposed 'positive' people) while others gets warnings right away (either by email or chastised right on the thread itself) for posts that are nowhere near as rude or even disrespectful.

jay
08-23-2013, 11:26 AM
I think he might be frustrated that some people consistently get away with making snide comment after snide comment while other gets warnings right away for posts that are nowhere near as rude or even disrespectful.

Maybe so and neither are okay, but I'm sensing a pretty consistent trend in posts from that user today... and more use of the ignore function might be a better approach. Just my take.

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 11:29 AM
I did chuckle at that, but you should probably remove the next sentence of your post.

What is a realistic return for the guys that are heavily advocating the move? Pay all of the salary and get xx? Pay some and get xx? I'd be curious to hear some examples.
The 'doctor' has referred to all who dare disagree with him as "angry", "unsettled"(?) 'whiners'. So that sentence stays until he or a mod sorts it out.

As for the rest, the money is already spent. The Twins are looking to profit from the trade of Morneau, not avoid losing the money. The money. Is. Gone.

My example was the pitcher the Twins got for Butera, who the Dodgers were so excited to get that they shipped him off to either the Albuquerque Isotopes, or maybe the Springfield nuclear plant Isotopes that Homer played for, I forget which.

If Ryan was able to dazzle us with a deal like that, then how is a more valuable player not bringing at least as much in return?

So far, the only thing we're hearing is a single word, "money". And that's making some people very defensive, with the vocabulary to match.

ThePuck
08-23-2013, 11:33 AM
Maybe so and neither are okay, but I'm sensing a pretty consistent trend in posts from that user today... and more use of the ignore function might be a better approach. Just my take.

Your take is probably better.

jay
08-23-2013, 11:34 AM
My example was the pitcher the Twins got for Butera, who the Dodgers were so excited to get that they shipped him off to either the Albuquerque Isotopes, or maybe the Springfield nuclear plant Isotopes that Homer played for, I forget which.

If Ryan was able to dazzle us with a deal like that, then how is a more valuable player not bringing at least as much in return?

So far, the only thing we're hearing is a single word, "money". And that's making some people very defensive, with the vocabulary to match.

Does that include the Twins covering the $3M? So, you think they can pay the $3M and get a Sulbaran Low-A decent arm-type in return?

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 11:44 AM
Maybe so and neither are okay, but I'm sensing a pretty consistent trend in posts from that user today... and more use of the ignore function might be a better approach. Just my take.
jay, if I'm your Friday buzzkill, I apologize. Not my intention. C'mon, don't put me on the ignore list, it's the crazy people who say the most interesting things...

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 11:49 AM
Does that include the Twins covering the $3M? So, you think they can pay the $3M and get a Sulbaran Low-A decent arm-type in return?
Yes. And maybe they could, maybe not.

The point of all of this is not that the franchise will fall further into ruin if they don't do a deal like that.

The point is that it would be nice to hear that they'd be willing to do that kind of deal if it were available. It sure sounds so far like they're not willing to.

Major Leauge Ready
08-23-2013, 11:57 AM
That said, the Twins aren't really cheap in this instance. If they were cheap the Twins would pay the absolute minimum and move Morneau for the salary relief. I do think the Twins are overvaluing Morneau's, well I don't know what they're overvaluing but something, otherwise he would be moved for the best package available. It's clear they believe there is a benefit derived by having Morneau on this team for another 35ish games. I'll be damned if I can figure out what that is though.

Like you, I see no reason to let Morneau take ABs away from any prospect even if their odds of making it at the major leauge level. I seriously doubt the FO believes there is a reason to keep him here. You have to believe Ryan just has not gotten the player in return he believes he can get. We still have a week left before the deadline. The odds are he could go back and execute a deal for the player(s) that have been offered at this point.

I commend him for holding out. Morneau looks like he is capable of going on a really nice run right now. If that happens, we likely get a nice prospect. If he does nothing, so what, if Ryan was not getting any decent offers. Plus, who knows, someone could get injured.

It looks to me like the primary motivation is to net a prospect with a real chance of playing MLB and that offer has yet to be made. If this were really about money, they would have done a pure salary dump.

Major Leauge Ready
08-23-2013, 12:06 PM
Yes. And maybe they could, maybe not.

The point of all of this is not that the franchise will fall further into ruin if they don't do a deal like that.

The point is that it would be nice to hear that they'd be willing to do that kind of deal if it were available. It sure sounds so far like they're not willing to.

I would be very disappointed if we heard the Twins were willing to take the $3M hit because that would be an indication to me that Terry Ryan is not the negotiator I believe him to be. Whoever said other teams have already spent their budget hit the nail on the head. They want an upgrade but don't have the budget. You don't concede a primary consideration like this until the end. You use it it get the other side to up the level of prospect. You want our player and us to pay is a considerable demand. Great ... come back to that request by asking for a better prospect. You never concede that negotiating point early.

jay
08-23-2013, 12:38 PM
I would be very disappointed if we heard the Twins were willing to take the $3M hit because that would be an indication to me that Terry Ryan is not the negotiator I believe him to be.

Exactly. If you need an example of a guy who would make deals to make deals and how that turns out, you don't have to look any further than ol' Billy Smith.


I seriously doubt the FO believes there is a reason to keep him here.

I agree with everything you said except this. Right or wrong, I do think the FO values keeping him here to an extent.


The point is that it would be nice to hear that they'd be willing to do that kind of deal if it were available. It sure sounds so far like they're not willing to.

I agree with your first point, but I just haven't seen enough to convince me of the second part. I do believe the Twins are asking for a bit more (but not a ton more) than a Sulbaran type if they're covering the $3M. If some team is desperate enough, great. If not, stick to your horses and play it out.

drjim
08-23-2013, 01:09 PM
Will you ever tell us why? Or is it a trade secret, like the Twins use of cybermetrics?

And if you're able, can you respond without the lame snippy remarks this time?

Is it lame and snippy to say took a look at the return for bats so far this season? It is practically nonexistent. I don't think teams give much up for bats, much less bats that are below average.

Butera was a unique example because he is a catcher. Dodgers saw the wisdom of having depth at that position.

Oxtung
08-23-2013, 02:40 PM
Is it lame and snippy to say took a look at the return for bats so far this season? It is practically nonexistent. I don't think teams give much up for bats, much less bats that are below average.

Butera was a unique example because he is a catcher. Dodgers saw the wisdom of having depth at that position.

Are you really making the argument here that drew Butera and $150k in salary is more valuable than Justin Morneau is free of charge? I can't believe that is true. At a bare minimum the twins could get back some A-ball flier. That to me is worth more than 30 days of Morneau at the end of a lost season where potential replacements are already sitting on the bench.

Major League- the problem with your theory is that every day that Ryan holds onto Morneau he loses value. At this point the only things that can change his value in a positive manner is an injury. The chances of that seem unlikely.

Look at I this way. If you were trying to acquire 60 days of Justin Morneau and offered up "Prospect A" and the Twins said no but came back to you a month later, now only 30 days of Justin remain, and said well we've reconsidered we'll take "Prospect A" now. Would you still give him up? I sure wouldn't.

Many of you also said we just hold to Morneau because the return isn't good enough. How does that help the Twins return to the top of the division?

jay
08-23-2013, 03:05 PM
I think control matters more early in the year and off-season. If you were a playoff team 30 days ago and you're still one today, your purpose for Morneau remains the same. You may in fact just as well be more determined to acquire talent now than you were before.


Many of you also said we just hold to Morneau because the return isn't good enough. How does that help the Twins return to the top of the division?

I'm starting to come around on making the move... if only to support the points I've been making about TR's strength of acquiring skill in the low minors. :eek:

terencemann
08-23-2013, 03:31 PM
I did chuckle at that, but you should probably remove the next sentence of your post.

What is a realistic return for the guys that are heavily advocating the move? Pay all of the salary and get xx? Pay some and get xx? I'd be curious to hear some examples.

If they can gain a player they can use in the future and they're not planning to bring Morneau back, then they should eat whatever they have to. It's a sunk cost on a losing season. It can only help them as sliding down in the standings could get them a better draft pick. As a Cubs fan, I know my other team is coming for the Twins' draft slot pretty hard :th_alc:

jay
08-23-2013, 03:43 PM
If they can gain a player they can use in the future and they're not planning to bring Morneau back, then they should eat whatever they have to.

Of course. I don't think anyone here has said otherwise. It just depends on how broadly you define "player" and "use".

darin617
08-23-2013, 04:10 PM
Is Gardy part of the September coaching staff should be the real discussion. Take Rick Anderson with you and start singing Happy Trails together.

LaBombo
08-23-2013, 04:27 PM
Is it lame and snippy to say took a look at the return for bats so far this season? It is practically nonexistent. I don't think teams give much up for bats, much less bats that are below average.

Butera was a unique example because he is a catcher. Dodgers saw the wisdom of having depth at that position.
No, jmo that it is to make a blanket characterization of dissenting opinions as "angry" and "whining". Not a big deal, just doesn't add much.

At any rate, your supposition that Drew Butera had markedly greater trade value than Justin Morneau is an interesting takeaway from this to enjoy for the weekend. Cheers.

Thegrin
08-23-2013, 04:36 PM
The Twins started the season with 4 major league hitters. Mauer, Morneau, Willingham and Doumit. If the Twins trade any of them before September, without getting a good prospect, they will prove that they are throwing in the towel and are more interested in a bad finish and a good prospect, than an improved season. Keeping them all means that the Twins want to play with integrity and win as many games as possible. Showing their prospects that they won't "quit" is the most valuable lesson the organizational players can learn.

Major Leauge Ready
08-23-2013, 05:05 PM
The Twins started the season with 4 major league hitters. Mauer, Morneau, Willingham and Doumit. If the Twins trade any of them before September, without getting a good prospect, they will prove that they are throwing in the towel and are more interested in a bad finish and a good prospect, than an improved season. Keeping them all means that the Twins want to play with integrity and win as many games as possible. Showing their prospects that they won't "quit" is the most valuable lesson the organizational players can learn.

This is just one man's opinion but that that type of mindset promotes persistent mediocrity. I hope the Twins FO recognizes that playing the three of them that have no part in the future of this team and taking ABs from prospects that could be part of rebuilding the pathetic state we are in today. I would be quite happy if the Twins announced before the start of the game tonight that they have traded Morneau, Willingham, and Doumit. If they got one good prospect for all three, I would say Hallelujah. Let's move on.

Oxtung
08-23-2013, 07:02 PM
I think control matters more early in the year and off-season. If you were a playoff team 30 days ago and you're still one today, your purpose for Morneau remains the same. You may in fact just as well be more determined to acquire talent now than you were before.

More determined and of equal value are separate meanings. Even if a team is more determined to trade for a player now, though I can't see why that would be the case, there is no way 30 days of a player is more or equally valuable than 60 days.

Oxtung
08-23-2013, 07:06 PM
The Twins started the season with 4 major league hitters. Mauer, Morneau, Willingham and Doumit. If the Twins trade any of them before September, without getting a good prospect, they will prove that they are throwing in the towel and are more interested in a bad finish and a good prospect, than an improved season. Keeping them all means that the Twins want to play with integrity and win as many games as possible. Showing their prospects that they won't "quit" is the most valuable lesson the organizational players can learn.

The second place team right now in the wild card has a .563 winning percentage. The Twins would have to go undefeated to surpass that. Literally 36-0. The season is over and has been for quite a while for all intents and purposes and trying to make some stand about never giving up won't change that. It also won't help this 90 loss tragedy from happening again in the future.

jay
08-23-2013, 09:54 PM
More determined and of equal value are separate meanings. Even if a team is more determined to trade for a player now, though I can't see why that would be the case, there is no way 30 days of a player is more or equally valuable than 60 days.

All other variables held the same, that'd be true. However, that's simply not the case. The time frame of control may be smaller but, for one, the pool of available talent is also much smaller now due to waivers.

I could also come up with plenty of examples and/or reasons why a team might give up just as much or more than they would have at the July 31 deadline. Lack of production, injury, changes in the standings, and more could all lead to a clearer picture of what a team needs. We might not have a perfect example to fit Morneau today, but let's not act like it isn't possible.

Oxtung
08-23-2013, 10:26 PM
All other variables held the same, that'd be true. However, that's simply not the case. The time frame of control may be smaller but, for one, the pool of available talent is also much smaller now due to waivers.

I could also come up with plenty of examples and/or reasons why a team might give up just as much or more than they would have at the July 31 deadline. Lack of production, injury, changes in the standings, and more could all lead to a clearer picture of what a team needs. We might not have a perfect example to fit Morneau today, but let's not act like it isn't possible.

My comments to this point have all been about since Aug 1. That would be ~60 days of Morneau until the end of season. If a trade happens near the end of August that is ~30 days of Morneau instead. So the waivers would have no impact since the condition would exist at both points in time. Available talent has decreased however so has available suitors when, for instance, the Yankees acquired Mark Reynolds. So in the end it seems a wash.

Lack of production would either be known at the beginning of August and a team would be looking then or it would come from a player that is isn't going to get replaced no matter how big a drop in production. A month late in the season isn't going to suddenly make a team question a player's hitting unless that player was already questionable.

I agree injury could suddenly shift the equation. I also think it is incredibly unlikely and a poor strategy to wait for it to happen to one of the handful of teams that could possibly use Morneau.

Changes in the standings is possible but still unlikely. If a team is on the fringe of playoff contention and starts winning they aren't going to acquire Morneau. If they start losing big they'll drop out of contention and still not acquire Morneau. The only way it would make sense to me is if a previously uncompetitive team goes on a big winning streak to put them back into contention and they suddenly are now looking for an upgrade. But again that team has to need a first baseman and Morneau has to be an upgrade, which is no given. So again, this is not particularly likely and not something I would like Ryan holding out for.

So yes it is possible but like I said before, I can't think of a scenario that is likely to occur where Morneau's value will increase. I do think it is likely that pretty much everyday he spends in a Twins uniform he is losing value.

jay
08-23-2013, 10:46 PM
So yes it is possible but like I said before, I can't think of a scenario that is likely to occur where Morneau's value will increase. I do think it is likely that pretty much everyday he spends in a Twins uniform he is losing value.

One more important one to throw out there and get your take on... every day Morneau is in a Twins uniform, he's owed less money.

If you're the GM on a pretty certain playoff team, you wouldn't really care about getting his August production. If he fits your needs, getting him at the end of August just saved you $2M. If your first option on Aug 1 is $4M and a C prospect, you'd quite possibly consider $2M and a C+ prospect on Aug 31 to be a better deal.

diehardtwinsfan
08-24-2013, 06:50 AM
I swear I've said this 100 times on this board, but part of being a good negotiator is learning to say no. Bill Smith was a lousy trader because he went out and got the guy he wanted and didn't say no when a bad deal was offered. That's how we ended up with the Santana mess. Like it or not, if Terry Ryan doesn't get what he wants, he simply says no. I hope this isn't the case with the potential Morneau trade, but if teams are offering only org filler, and expecting the Twins to pay his salary, say no... Period. If a decent prospect is offered, then I'd put it on the table.

Brock Beauchamp
08-24-2013, 09:57 AM
I swear I've said this 100 times on this board, but part of being a good negotiator is learning to say no. Bill Smith was a lousy trader because he went out and got the guy he wanted and didn't say no when a bad deal was offered. That's how we ended up with the Santana mess. Like it or not, if Terry Ryan doesn't get what he wants, he simply says no. I hope this isn't the case with the potential Morneau trade, but if teams are offering only org filler, and expecting the Twins to pay his salary, say no... Period. If a decent prospect is offered, then I'd put it on the table.

Yep. It'd be great to get a prospect for Justin but if we're in a situation where another team won't offer anything more than org filler that might become a 40-man roster issue in a year, what's the point?

Or maybe JR is being stubborn and asking for too much. We simply don't have enough information to make an accurate assessment. I was pretty bent after the trade deadline came and passed but after seeing the end result of the Butera/Sulburan trade, I'm going to give Ryan the benefit of the doubt here. As you said, the most important skill of a negotiator is the ability to say no and if people aren't offering value, you stand pat. Ryan proved that he's willing to part with players if it's a good deal for him.

Oxtung
08-24-2013, 10:31 AM
One more important one to throw out there and get your take on... every day Morneau is in a Twins uniform, he's owed less money.

If you're the GM on a pretty certain playoff team, you wouldn't really care about getting his August production. If he fits your needs, getting him at the end of August just saved you $2M. If your first option on Aug 1 is $4M and a C prospect, you'd quite possibly consider $2M and a C+ prospect on Aug 31 to be a better deal.

I don't see how that changes the equation. Why would you pay more for 30 days less of Morneau? You're also making a big assumption that the Twins are asking the other team to take on his salary. I sure hope Ryan is willing to eat most of that to increase his return.

Also, the only team that was virtually a lock to win their division in early August was Atlanta and Freeman is mashing this year. So in reality there is nobody in that position.


I swear I've said this 100 times on this board, but part of being a good negotiator is learning to say no. Bill Smith was a lousy trader because he went out and got the guy he wanted and didn't say no when a bad deal was offered. That's how we ended up with the Santana mess. Like it or not, if Terry Ryan doesn't get what he wants, he simply says no. I hope this isn't the case with the potential Morneau trade, but if teams are offering only org filler, and expecting the Twins to pay his salary, say no... Period. If a decent prospect is offered, then I'd put it on the table.


So you're saying that if Terry Ryan makes this trade ... what?

Santana was an elite pitcher that almost every team wanted (whether they could afford him is a different matter). There were multiple offers on the table and he even could be held for another year and then let go after the season and gotten a couple draft picks. There were many alternatives.

On the other hand Morneau has no other options. It's move him or lose him and when the Twins lose him there are no draft picks waiting. These are entirely separate trades that have absolutely nothing in common.

Oxtung
08-24-2013, 10:33 AM
Yep. It'd be great to get a prospect for Justin but if we're in a situation where another team won't offer anything more than org filler that might become a 40-man roster issue in a year, what's the point?

Or maybe JR is being stubborn and asking for too much. We simply don't have enough information to make an accurate assessment. I was pretty bent after the trade deadline came and passed but after seeing the end result of the Butera/Sulburan trade, I'm going to give Ryan the benefit of the doubt here. As you said, the most important skill of a negotiator is the ability to say no and if people aren't offering value, you stand pat. Ryan proved that he's willing to part with players if it's a good deal for him.

That's a great sentiment in general, but can you explain to me the value of standing firm and holding Morneau in this case?

Brock Beauchamp
08-24-2013, 10:45 AM
That's a great sentiment in general, but can you explain to me the value of standing firm and holding Morneau in this case?

You believe that the return offer has a zero chance of becoming a productive MLB player and his future role consists of "40 man roster annoyance".

Oxtung
08-24-2013, 12:11 PM
You believe that the return offer has a zero chance of becoming a productive MLB player and his future role consists of "40 man roster annoyance".

In order for that to be true a nearly free Morneau would be worth less than Butera costing a few hundred thousand dollars. Do you think that is possible?

jay
08-24-2013, 01:01 PM
I don't see how that changes the equation. Why would you pay more for 30 days less of Morneau? You're also making a big assumption that the Twins are asking the other team to take on his salary. I sure hope Ryan is willing to eat most of that to increase his return.


It seems like you completely ignored the options. You'd give up more because he's due far less salary. Your intent for Morneau was never dependent on his contributions in August, but rather throughout the playoffs. Therefore, August didn't really matter nor provide value that you cared about, but he's now due $2M less.

Whether the Twins were going to cover some of that salary at any time isn't really the point at all because you'd assume the Twins willingness to do that hasn't changed. If the Twins were going to cover $2M on Aug 1, you'd owe Justin $2M and give up a prospect. On Aug 31, if the Twins cover that same $2M, he's now due $0 from the acquiring team... so it seems pretty reasonable that you'd give up a better prospect since you don't have to pay that $2M.

spycake
08-24-2013, 01:30 PM
The second place team right now in the wild card has a .563 winning percentage. The Twins would have to go undefeated to surpass that. Literally 36-0.

So you're saying there's a chance...

glunn
08-24-2013, 01:33 PM
Will you ever tell us why? Or is it a trade secret, like the Twins use of cybermetrics?

And if you're able, can you respond without the lame snippy remarks this time?

This type of squabbling is not going to be tolerated. I am issuing a warning to cut this out, and if it continues then we are going to start issuing infractions.

Oxtung
08-24-2013, 06:08 PM
It seems like you completely ignored the options. You'd give up more because he's due far less salary. Your intent for Morneau was never dependent on his contributions in August, but rather throughout the playoffs. Therefore, August didn't really matter nor provide value that you cared about, but he's now due $2M less.

Whether the Twins were going to cover some of that salary at any time isn't really the point at all because you'd assume the Twins willingness to do that hasn't changed. If the Twins were going to cover $2M on Aug 1, you'd owe Justin $2M and give up a prospect. On Aug 31, if the Twins cover that same $2M, he's now due $0 from the acquiring team... so it seems pretty reasonable that you'd give up a better prospect since you don't have to pay that $2M.

Look, I disagree with your premise in this scenario, but it doesn't matter. Since Morneau cleared waivers the only team in the situation your describing is the Atlanta Braves and they sure aren't going to trade for Morneau.

My points have been:
1) Morneau's value isn't likely to increase.
2) There is no benefit to the Twins tohold onto Morneau.
3) Ryan should be willing to eat as much of the contract as he needs to in order to achieve the best deal he can.
4) A Morneau whose salary is $0 is worth more than Drew Butera whose salary was ~$150k.

The Wise One
08-24-2013, 07:23 PM
Look, I disagree with your premise in this scenario, but it doesn't matter. Since Morneau cleared waivers the only team in the situation your describing is the Atlanta Braves and they sure aren't going to trade for Morneau.

My points have been:
1) Morneau's value isn't likely to increase.
2) There is no benefit to the Twins tohold onto Morneau.
3) Ryan should be willing to eat as much of the contract as he needs to in order to achieve the best deal he can.
4) A Morneau whose salary is $0 is worth more than Drew Butera whose salary was ~$150k.
There is a concept that you ought to seriously consider. The Butera trade is and always will be a separate event from a Morneau trade.
Whatever Ryan got for Butera was a bonus. Butera plays a completely different position than Morneau. The only similarity that you can have between Morneau and Butera is that they both were employees of the same organization. One player and what happened has absolutely nothing to do with the other. The market price for Morneau is not determined by a backup minor league catcher.
The second concept is there is no value in obtaining another low ceiling player.

Major Leauge Ready
08-24-2013, 10:25 PM
It seems like you completely ignored the options. You'd give up more because he's due far less salary. Your intent for Morneau was never dependent on his contributions in August, but rather throughout the playoffs. Therefore, August didn't really matter nor provide value that you cared about, but he's now due $2M less.

Whether the Twins were going to cover some of that salary at any time isn't really the point at all because you'd assume the Twins willingness to do that hasn't changed. If the Twins were going to cover $2M on Aug 1, you'd owe Justin $2M and give up a prospect. On Aug 31, if the Twins cover that same $2M, he's now due $0 from the acquiring team... so it seems pretty reasonable that you'd give up a better prospect since you don't have to pay that $2M.

I was thinking the same thing. The most important part of the acquisitions teams are making right now is the potential impact of that player in the playoffs. It also does not make sense to me that paying Morneau's salary increases his trade value but that the reduction that occurs as the season rolls on is not important. If your boss tells you that you have no budget or a very small budget for additions, 30 days + playoffs and a couple million less in salary might very well make Morneau more attractive than 60 days + playoffs and two million additional salary.

diehardtwinsfan
08-25-2013, 07:32 AM
Look, I disagree with your premise in this scenario, but it doesn't matter. Since Morneau cleared waivers the only team in the situation your describing is the Atlanta Braves and they sure aren't going to trade for Morneau.

My points have been:
1) Morneau's value isn't likely to increase.
2) There is no benefit to the Twins tohold onto Morneau.
3) Ryan should be willing to eat as much of the contract as he needs to in order to achieve the best deal he can.
4) A Morneau whose salary is $0 is worth more than Drew Butera whose salary was ~$150k.

I'm not going to disagree with you on points 1-3. Truth be told, I don't think anyone disagrees with you there (although the casual fan might disagree with you on number 2). Though to pick a nit, Drew was offered arb this year. His salary was closer to 750k than it is 150k...

That said, what I don't think you see is that it is very likely that the return being offered is crap. That's our point. The Twins don't need to dump Morneau for salary relief. They need a decent player for him. If the only thing on the table is "future utility infielder" or org filler, I'd pass. No reason to trade him and cover any salary if that's all that's being offered. There has to be a decent prospect on the table to do it.

Oxtung
08-25-2013, 01:01 PM
I'm not going to disagree with you on points 1-3. Truth be told, I don't think anyone disagrees with you there (although the casual fan might disagree with you on number 2). Though to pick a nit, Drew was offered arb this year. His salary was closer to 750k than it is 150k...

That said, what I don't think you see is that it is very likely that the return being offered is crap. That's our point. The Twins don't need to dump Morneau for salary relief. They need a decent player for him. If the only thing on the table is "future utility infielder" or org filler, I'd pass. No reason to trade him and cover any salary if that's all that's being offered. There has to be a decent prospect on the table to do it.

The Twins held Butera for most of the season therefore they would have paid most of his salary. My $150k was just a guess of what was still owed by the dodgers.

There are two reasons that i can see that the return for Morneau would be org filler. First the Twins are asking the other team to pay his salary. I would be very irked if this was true. However, if the Twins are picking up his salary and the return is still org filler than his value is less than drew Butera playing in AAA. Does anyone believe that is actually the case? I certainly don't.

Thegrin
08-25-2013, 01:58 PM
The Twins should bring up Parmalee once the AAA playoffs are done. Then we could see if a Parmalee/Colabello platoon at 1B would work. Morneau's plate appearances can afford to be reduced if the Twins don't trade him in the last week of August.

stringer bell
08-25-2013, 02:12 PM
For one thing, I'd rather see Parmelee at first or in the outfield. Colabello is pretty brutal at either position.

golfboy1
08-26-2013, 11:23 AM
The Twins held Butera for most of the season therefore they would have paid most of his salary. My $150k was just a guess of what was still owed by the dodgers.

There are two reasons that i can see that the return for Morneau would be org filler. First the Twins are asking the other team to pay his salary. I would be very irked if this was true. However, if the Twins are picking up his salary and the return is still org filler than his value is less than drew Butera playing in AAA. Does anyone believe that is actually the case? I certainly don't.

I believe you are overvaluing Morneau. Nobody claimed him off waivers because they didn't want to take the chance they would get stuck with him.

Let's say a team told the Twins they would do a trade if the Twins payed 90% of Morneau's salary. If the Twins said no the Twins are still paying 100% of his salary so it seems likely that nobody is offering anything better than a filler prospect.

Texas acquired Rios from Chicago for practically nothing AND the White Sox had to throw in money. Texas had a big need for a RF after Cruz was suspended, Rios is better than Morneau & Texas still got him cheap.

There are a lot of players besides Morneau available. Rumors have Dunn, Ibanez, Morales ,Lind & plenty of other players available.

On the surface, it seems crazy that the Twins could get more for Butera than Morneau but they are separate issues. I can't believe the Twins got anything worthwhile for Butera but just because the Dodgers are stupid doesn't mean everyone else will be.

I still hope they trade Morneau but just moving him for a nobody isn't good business... like some have said...saying no is part of being a good negotiator.

We are all working off limited info but I'll give TR the benefit of the doubt & assume he would have traded Morneau if the right situation/player had arisen.

IdahoPilgrim
08-26-2013, 12:42 PM
However, if the Twins are picking up his salary and the return is still org filler than his value is less than drew Butera playing in AAA. Does anyone believe that is actually the case? I certainly don't.

Your argument seems to be:

1) Butera commanded a decent prospect in a trade.
2) Morneau is a better value than Butera, especially if the Twins pay most of his remaining salary.
3) Therefore, Morneau should also return a decent prospect as good or better than the one received for Butera.

Problem is, logically, 3 does not automatically follow from 1 & 2.

There are other factors not included (which teams we are dealing with and their GMs philosophies, what positions they play, etc) which make any connection between the Butera deal and a possible Morneau trade tenuous at best.

I know it's frustrating to believe that Morneau doesn't have the value we like him to have, but that seems to be the case. I wanted to get more money for my mother's home when I sold it last year, but the market is what the market is.

Oxtung
08-26-2013, 01:14 PM
I believe you are overvaluing Morneau. Nobody claimed him off waivers because they didn't want to take the chance they would get stuck with him.

Let's say a team told the Twins they would do a trade if the Twins payed 90% of Morneau's salary. If the Twins said no the Twins are still paying 100% of his salary so it seems likely that nobody is offering anything better than a filler prospect.

Texas acquired Rios from Chicago for practically nothing AND the White Sox had to throw in money. Texas had a big need for a RF after Cruz was suspended, Rios is better than Morneau & Texas still got him cheap.

There are a lot of players besides Morneau available. Rumors have Dunn, Ibanez, Morales ,Lind & plenty of other players available.

On the surface, it seems crazy that the Twins could get more for Butera than Morneau but they are separate issues. I can't believe the Twins got anything worthwhile for Butera but just because the Dodgers are stupid doesn't mean everyone else will be.

I still hope they trade Morneau but just moving him for a nobody isn't good business... like some have said...saying no is part of being a good negotiator.

We are all working off limited info but I'll give TR the benefit of the doubt & assume he would have traded Morneau if the right situation/player had arisen.


Your argument seems to be:

1) Butera commanded a decent prospect in a trade.
2) Morneau is a better value than Butera, especially if the Twins pay most of his remaining salary.
3) Therefore, Morneau should also return a decent prospect as good or better than the one received for Butera.

Problem is, logically, 3 does not automatically follow from 1 & 2.

There are other factors not included (which teams we are dealing with and their GMs philosophies, what positions they play, etc) which make any connection between the Butera deal and a possible Morneau trade tenuous at best.

I know it's frustrating to believe that Morneau doesn't have the value we like him to have, but that seems to be the case. I wanted to get more money for my mother's home when I sold it last year, but the market is what the market is.


You two seem to be arguing the same point so I'll respond to you both the same.

You are absolutely right that they are different players and different situations. That said, Morneau is a major league baseball player, even if he isn't a star anymore, where as Butera was signed for nothing other than AAA roster filler with the outside chance of being an injury replacement. And he cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I can not believe, no matter how far Morneau has slipped, that he is worth less Butera. Especially if the Twins are picking up his salary. The logic of my mind says that is impossible.

That said, even if they are offering a return similar to Liriano's the deal should still be done. There is no advantage to holding on to Morneau. At least with "prospects" there is a chance they will help us out in future seasons.

People came saying the Twins should just say no, why? What advantage does that bring the Twins in this particular case?

LaBombo
08-26-2013, 01:29 PM
I know it's frustrating to believe that Morneau doesn't have the value we like him to have, but that seems to be the case.
No. What's frustrating is that based on the available information, the Twins are limiting Morneau's trade value by refusing to pay his remaining salary.

mike wants wins
08-26-2013, 01:51 PM
The Twins should bring up Parmalee once the AAA playoffs are done. Then we could see if a Parmalee/Colabello platoon at 1B would work. Morneau's plate appearances can afford to be reduced if the Twins don't trade him in the last week of August.

Platoon? This is Gardenhire we are talking about....

S.
08-26-2013, 02:00 PM
Platoon? Yeah, that movie has one hell of a superstar cast. Wait, what were we talking about? Did someone say Golden Corral?

drjim
08-26-2013, 02:45 PM
Platoon? This is Gardenhire we are talking about....

3 bench guys doesn't exactly open up the possibility of a platoon even if Joe Maddon or Connie Mack is the manager.

jokin
08-26-2013, 03:21 PM
3 bench guys doesn't exactly open up the possibility of a platoon even if Joe Maddon or Connie Mack is the manager.

Of course, Maddon would never get caught in the position of only having 3 bench guys and 3 catchers on a roster in the first place, but that's more on Ryan for the failure to bolster the Rotation. In point of fact, Maddon currently has 7 guys on his roster listed as "Outfielders" and that's not counting the Eighth OF, Ben Zobrist, who has spent about 1/3rd of his time in the OF this year, quite an athletic bunch overall, versatile and leaving room for lots of in-game strategic options. By contrast, after the All Star break during the periods of time when Hicks was in Rochester, for a significant stretch of time until the DL guys got back, Gardy and Ryan felt comfortable listing and "officially" carrying only 2 outfielders on the roster. Thus, the opportunity for continued use of the Twins concept of athleticism and versatility with the magic 3-catcher starting alignment.

IdahoPilgrim
08-26-2013, 03:28 PM
I can not believe, no matter how far Morneau has slipped, that he is worth less Butera. Especially if the Twins are picking up his salary. The logic of my mind says that is impossible.



And yet that's seems to be exactly the case.

Oxtung
08-26-2013, 04:00 PM
And yet that's seems to be exactly the case.

Of course no where has anyone actually presented any evidence that is the case. On the other hand many sources have mentioned money being the issue....

drjim
08-26-2013, 04:28 PM
Of course no where has anyone actually presented any evidence that is the case. On the other hand many sources have mentioned money being the issue....

Problem we have is that no one knows what caliber of prospect the "money issues" are preventing the Twins from acquiring. There is no evidence other than speculation based upon an unrelated transaction.

golfboy1
08-26-2013, 05:03 PM
You two seem to be arguing the same point so I'll respond to you both the same.

You are absolutely right that they are different players and different situations. That said, Morneau is a major league baseball player, even if he isn't a star anymore, where as Butera was signed for nothing other than AAA roster filler with the outside chance of being an injury replacement. And he cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I can not believe, no matter how far Morneau has slipped, that he is worth less Butera. Especially if the Twins are picking up his salary. The logic of my mind says that is impossible.

That said, even if they are offering a return similar to Liriano's the deal should still be done. There is no advantage to holding on to Morneau. At least with "prospects" there is a chance they will help us out in future seasons.

People came saying the Twins should just say no, why? What advantage does that bring the Twins in this particular case?

The problem is we don't know who or what is being offered so we are left to speculate & make our own guesses.

If they could get a return similar to Liriano I hope they would do it. It seems like they can't even get that much based on what is known.

#1. Morneau cleared waivers so nobody thought he was worth his salary or was even worried another team might grab him. This seems to indicate he doesn't have great value.

#2. Texas got Rios PLUS money for a package that is less than Liriano(IMHO)

#3. The Cubs let DeJesus go for nothing just to get rid of his salary & he isn't that bad of a player. Morneau's stats are slightly better but Dejesus is a very good OF & would give a team a PR while Morneau's value is all bat.

My "guess" is that very few teams are interested in Morneau...& they want the Twins to pay his salary & send back a very marginal prospect. I understand why Ryan would say no to that.

I haven't read every post here but has anyone named who even wants Morneau? I can see Baltimore having some interest but I also read that they didn't actually want Morneau. If they aren't interested..who else is?

jokin
08-26-2013, 06:47 PM
The problem is we don't know who or what is being offered so we are left to speculate & make our own guesses.

If they could get a return similar to Liriano I hope they would do it. It seems like they can't even get that much based on what is known.

#1. Morneau cleared waivers so nobody thought he was worth his salary or was even worried another team might grab him. This seems to indicate he doesn't have great value.

#2. Texas got Rios PLUS money for a package that is less than Liriano(IMHO)

#3. The Cubs let DeJesus go for nothing just to get rid of his salary & he isn't that bad of a player. Morneau's stats are slightly better but Dejesus is a very good OF & would give a team a PR while Morneau's value is all bat.

My "guess" is that very few teams are interested in Morneau...& they want the Twins to pay his salary & send back a very marginal prospect. I understand why Ryan would say no to that.

I haven't read every post here but has anyone named who even wants Morneau? I can see Baltimore having some interest but I also read that they didn't actually want Morneau. If they aren't interested..who else is?

Take it FWIW, Pittsburgh and the Yankees, were also in the rumor mill. Not holding my breath, but, Morneau's career slash at Yankee stadium might still move the Yankees to pull the trigger:

.296/.367/.558/.922

Oxtung
08-26-2013, 09:23 PM
Take it FWIW, Pittsburgh and the Yankees, were also in the rumor mill. Not holding my breath, but, Morneau's career slash at Yankee stadium might still move the Yankees to pull the trigger:

.296/.367/.558/.922

The Yanks signed Mark Reynolds and while he isn't great I have a hard time imagining them signing another corner infielder. I would guess that door is closed at this point.

LaBombo
08-26-2013, 09:56 PM
#1. Morneau cleared waivers so nobody thought he was worth his salary or was even worried another team might grab him. This seems to indicate he doesn't have great value.

Nobody is arguing that he has great value. Several people have argued that he may have some trade value if the Twins pay his remaining salary. We're hearing they won't.


#2. Texas got Rios PLUS money for a package that is less than Liriano(IMHO)

Alex Rios is owed $12.5 million next year and a $1 million buyout in 2015. The Sox 'spent' a million they owed Rios anyway, cleared 13.5 million in future salary space, and acquired a shortstop prospect who may well be as good as Escobar, but is two years younger.


#3. The Cubs let DeJesus go for nothing just to get rid of his salary & he isn't that bad of a player. Morneau's stats are slightly better but Dejesus is a very good OF & would give a team a PR while Morneau's value is all bat.

The Cubs likely saved $2.5 million in salary and buyouts and will get a ptbnl who may very well turn out to be much more than "nothing" (as did Sulbaran) for a guy you acknowledge is about as good as Morneau. By the way, since NL teams need a pinch hitter nearly every game, Morneau's all bat value is that much more valuable there.

And they did it despite everyone in MLB knowing that they needed to get rid of DDJ, even by dfa'ing if necessary, to clear space for Lake, Bogusevic, and Jackson when he's healthy. DeJesus is at the very most a 4th OF on a contender, while Morneau could start 4 games a week if he platooned at one rumored destination, Pittsburgh.



My "guess" is that very few teams are interested in Morneau...& they want the Twins to pay his salary & send back a very marginal prospect. I understand why Ryan would say no to that.

Again, why should it matter to Ryan that teams want him to use the money he budgeted to pay Morneau to... pay Morneau? Because of the hit the franchise's bottom line will take when walk-up ticket sales plummet for 30 days after Morneau leaves?

The money is gone. There is no money. And it's extremely likely that soon, in either a few days or a few weeks, there will be no Morneau. All that remains to be seen is whether 30 days of Morneau farewell tour is worth trading for a prospect who may or may not turn out to be a sleeper prospect like Sulbaran.

Everyone gets that not seriously pursuing a 'cost-free Justin for some stripe of prospect' trade won't significantly diminish the future of the franchise. But to me, and maybe to others, it looks like the thought process that led them to that decision seems likely to hurt the Twins in the future.

jay
08-27-2013, 08:22 AM
Again, why should it matter to Ryan that teams want him to use the money he budgeted to pay Morneau to... pay Morneau? Because of the hit the franchise's bottom line will take when walk-up ticket sales plummet for 30 days after Morneau leaves?

This may very well be an understated concern. The vast majority of fans don't get to the levels of engagement that we do here. The casual fan would very well be displeased that the big Canadian got dumped for some low-level scrub.


Of course no where has anyone actually presented any evidence that is the case. On the other hand many sources have mentioned money being the issue....

This seems to be a recurring counterpoint lately across multiple threads. "But they used the word money somewhere in that article, so that absolutely has to mean TR won't entertain the idea of covering Morneau's salary because he's so cheap!" These insights are warping context and making assumptions just as much as anyone else.

mike wants wins
08-27-2013, 08:38 AM
This may very well be an understated concern. The vast majority of fans don't get to the levels of engagement that we do here. The casual fan would very well be displeased that the big Canadian got dumped for some low-level scrub.



This seems to be a recurring counterpoint lately across multiple threads. "But they used the word money somewhere in that article, so that absolutely has to mean TR won't entertain the idea of covering Morneau's salary because he's so cheap!" These insights are warping context and making assumptions just as much as anyone else.

Gardy explicitly stated it was about money and stuff, not sure how that is randomly mentioned in an article. Numerous national writers have mentioned that money is the hold up. Not sure what more you want?

jay
08-27-2013, 08:41 AM
Gardy explicitly stated it was about money and stuff, not sure how that is randomly mentioned in an article. Numerous national writers have mentioned that money is the hold up. Not sure what more you want?

Exactly my point. Nowhere do they say that TR won't do it, just that it's a "hold up". Of course it's a hold up... not one single team wanted him at full price. Negotiating over money becomes a requirement, not an immediate indictment on TR.

mike wants wins
08-27-2013, 08:43 AM
You expect Ryan to come out and say it? We can only go on the information we have available, information that includes the manager saying money is part of the issue.

jay
08-27-2013, 08:44 AM
There's just as many articles out there about a poor prospect return for Justin as well... but those seem to get conveniently ignored by some because other articles have the word "money" in there somewhere.

jay
08-27-2013, 08:51 AM
You expect Ryan to come out and say it? We can only go on the information we have available, information that includes the manager saying money is part of the issue.

So it's a better sourced argument to clearly make assumptions of things that aren't said? Meanwhile, it has been just as (or more) clearly said that the prospect return is poor.

My point is that both sides are using minimal information and making assumptions... either could be right, but let's not try to claim one side is "better sourced" as some have been.

ThePuck
08-27-2013, 08:52 AM
You expect Ryan to come out and say it? We can only go on the information we have available, information that includes the manager saying money is part of the issue.

Even if he did come out and say it verbatim, it wouldn't matter...

example? When he said he'd do everything possible to significantly improve this year's rotation.

jay
08-27-2013, 08:56 AM
Even if he did come out and say it verbatim, it wouldn't matter...

example? When he said he'd do everything possible to significantly improve this year's rotation.

Painfully true validation that these sources we trump up as the god-given truth are generally quite short of that.

ThePuck
08-27-2013, 09:04 AM
Painfully true validation that these sources we trump up as the god-given truth are generally quite short of that.

I'm not smart enough to understand that post...wanna dumb it down a bit maybe with less sarcasm? Are you saying Gardy, as the manager of the team, is quite short of Ryan saying it?

jay
08-27-2013, 09:10 AM
I'm not smart enough to understand that post...wanna dumb it down a bit maybe with less sarcasm? Are you saying Gardy, as the manager of the team, is quite short of Ryan saying it?

Not any sarcasm really. Many of us commonly point to an article or quote as clear proof of something when, in reality, it's quite probably not.

ThePuck
08-27-2013, 09:11 AM
Not any sarcasm really. Many of us commonly point to an article or quote as clear proof of something when, in reality, it's quite probably not.

In this case, there's been quite a few sources though. It still makes no difference.

Short of having blind faith in a person's abilities, one looks at all the info available to try and form an informed opinion as to their performance.

mike wants wins
08-27-2013, 09:15 AM
so you are saying ryan lied last year?

ThePuck
08-27-2013, 09:17 AM
so you are saying ryan lied last year?

No, that would be against TD policy. Besides, even if I was saying that, I was told before that it's okay he said that, all GMs do that.

jay
08-27-2013, 09:19 AM
No, that would be against TD policy. Besides, even if I was saying that, I was told before that it's okay he said that, all GMs do that.

I literally LOL'd.

golfboy1
08-27-2013, 11:29 AM
Nobody is arguing that he has great value. Several people have argued that he may have some trade value if the Twins pay his remaining salary. We're hearing they won't.

Alex Rios is owed $12.5 million next year and a $1 million buyout in 2015. The Sox 'spent' a million they owed Rios anyway, cleared 13.5 million in future salary space, and acquired a shortstop prospect who may well be as good as Escobar, but is two years younger.

The Cubs likely saved $2.5 million in salary and buyouts and will get a ptbnl who may very well turn out to be much more than "nothing" (as did Sulbaran) for a guy you acknowledge is about as good as Morneau. By the way, since NL teams need a pinch hitter nearly every game, Morneau's all bat value is that much more valuable there.

And they did it despite everyone in MLB knowing that they needed to get rid of DDJ, even by dfa'ing if necessary, to clear space for Lake, Bogusevic, and Jackson when he's healthy. DeJesus is at the very most a 4th OF on a contender, while Morneau could start 4 games a week if he platooned at one rumored destination, Pittsburgh.


Again, why should it matter to Ryan that teams want him to use the money he budgeted to pay Morneau to... pay Morneau? Because of the hit the franchise's bottom line will take when walk-up ticket sales plummet for 30 days after Morneau leaves?

The money is gone. There is no money. And it's extremely likely that soon, in either a few days or a few weeks, there will be no Morneau. All that remains to be seen is whether 30 days of Morneau farewell tour is worth trading for a prospect who may or may not turn out to be a sleeper prospect like Sulbaran.

Everyone gets that not seriously pursuing a 'cost-free Justin for some stripe of prospect' trade won't significantly diminish the future of the franchise. But to me, and maybe to others, it looks like the thought process that led them to that decision seems likely to hurt the Twins in the future.


I understand your POV...& agree with it to a certain extent. I'm just saying that it appears that Morneau has very little trade value & if other teams want the Twins to pay his salary & still just send a filler prospect I can see why Ryan would say no.

Regarding the others trades I mentioned. There are obvious differences but Rios is a far superior player than Morneau & they still only received a player who is probably equal to Escobar..plus the Twins also received Hernandez.

Dejesus was let go for cash considerations per BA.. ".Chicago received cash considerations from Washington, but more pertinently, they saved the remainder of DeJesus’ $4.25 million salary—an estimated $708,000 per month—plus his $1.5 million buyout for 2014."

Apparently neither of these players is as valuable as Butera since the Twins received a superior prospect in that trade (IMHO).

This argument can be flipped. Why won't the other team pay his salary if they think Morneau will help them win a playoff spot? How can a team be so blanking cheap they won't pay $3 million to help themselves win a playoff spot? My opinion is it is about more than just the money..ie.. the prospect in question is the holdup.

Another question. If it's ok to just dump Morneau for anything we can get, plus pay his salary why doesn't every team do this? Colorado could send Helton(plus money) packing. Seattle could trader off Ibanez, Morales, Morse. I'm sure I could think of a few others that fall into the same category. Teams will take these players if they get them for no money & a bag of balls.


I respect your POV but I'm willing to give the Twins/Ryan enough credit that if they could get a reasonable prospect in return, the money would not be the holdup...since it's been stated plenty that the Twins owe Morneau the money regardless

jay
08-27-2013, 02:52 PM
The Pirates just acquired Byrd and Buck. We can probably count them out on Morneau. The prospect they gave up was #10-20 range in their org, maybe Niko Goodrum-ish. The Pirates got a guy producing better than Morneau AND a solid backup C better than Butera. The Mets are also covering some of the $1.25M due to Buck.

Not sure that's positive news for what we could get for Morneau, even paying every last cent he's due.

drjim
08-27-2013, 05:30 PM
Some noise that Baltimore and Pittsburgh have interest in Morneau.

Interesting quote as it relates to our debate:


Morneau has cleared waivers, and word has been that the Twins are willing to pay some of the close to $3 million left on Morneau's $14 million salary, depending on the prospect worth returned in a trade. The Pirates showed they are willing to dig into their farm system when they sent middle-infield prospect Dilson Herrera and a player to be named to the Mets, but so far they've deemed the Twins' requests as high.

Pirates looking at Morneau after landing Marlon Byrd - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/23350191/pirates-looking-at-morneau-after-landing-marlon-byrd)

I stand by my prediction that the Twins will give in and move Morneau near Aug 31 for basically no return.