Thread: Should The Twins Bring Back Scott Baker?

Im all for bringing him back on a decent yearly salary (2m) with a huge incentive base (additional $8).
If Scot's healthy & gives ya 33 starts & 200+ innings, Im good for giving him 10m.....that's what we're looking for in FA anyways.
Scot's never been able to stay healthy as he's always got at least 1 stint on DL missing a couple starts.
Id also include an option yr (or 2) that kicks in (10m??) if he reaches maybe 75% of incentives.
I like Scot Baker (when healthy & big IF) better than the majority of any FA pitchers/pitchers that would be available in trades. He was a near All Star last yr & looked to be fullfilling his promise before MN missed his injury. He is a solid 2/3 type starter & that is what MN is missing.

Originally Posted by sbknudson

Ignoring the shift of topic from Baker to site participation standards (and ignoring hyperlinks as I always do), I think you absolutely bring Baker back, with a one-year deal low on base salary but with substantial incentives, and with a sizable team option for 2014. My guess is that's all Baker could expect anyway given his recent injury and, to be blunt, Baker at 80% is still better than most of the people who started for the Twins this year.

Agreed. Baker has always put up strong numbers, but injuries have kept him down. I would think a base salary of $2 mil with decent incentives based on innings pitched would be enough to get him. I would also think that a team option year of $5-6 mil that would auto kick in at 150 innings would be good too.

Of course all of this is dependant on Baker actually being ready for the season.

Yes bring him back. He's had the best arm in the organization since we traded Santana. You won't be able to afford to bring in anyone better next year unless you pay twice as much as it would cost to pick up that option.

Originally Posted by Twins Fan From Afar

Wow. I have to say that this thread seems unnecessarily nasty.
Plenty of people here with independent blogs, such as myself, do link to their work from time to time. Not sure what the harm is. It's just like anything else in life: you have a choice -- either click on the link, or don't.

There is no harm in a reasonably well thought out and researched blog like you regularly provide. There is no harm in an overlong opinion piece with no factual data. Nor is there any harm encouraging a higher bar for writing..