Thread: Bourn a fit in Minnesota?

Terry Ryan said Darin Mastroianni, Joe Benson and Aaron Hicks will all get chances to compete for #MNTwins' CF job.

Originally Posted by spideyo

He's a Boras client. Never gonna happen

Especially considering the Twins just screwed Boras and Bourn out of his two biggest suitors by flooding the market with cheaper options. Boras has been on a rampage ripping everyone lately, can't wait to hear what he says about this situation!

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

Originally Posted by kab21

No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.

Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?

Trading Revere actually doesn't free up any money. We still have to pay Worley, who actually made $2,500 more than Revere last year. So, it's basically a wash as far as payroll goes.

As for the Bourn question... not a chance.

Rick Ankiel could make sense, if no one else offers him a guaranteed a starting job. He could plausibly win a starting job, platoon with Mastroianni, or be a bench player/pinch hitter.

I think it could happen, if the Twins first thinned out remaining buyers by dealing Mastro, Willingham, and possibly Hicks.

NYY: want to stay under the cap by 2014 = no big multiyear deals to Bourn or Hamilton
TX: Full outfield if dealt Willingham.
LA: Full outfield
LAD: Full outfield

There were three or 4 teams in on Revere, according to Lavelle. The Phils have invested in Revere so they are out on Bourn. Of the remaining teams, possibly one could be sold on Mastroianni. After that, Willingham should be able to deal to TX, as they seem less than thrilled with the prospect of 4 more years of Josh Hamilton.

It would be risky. It would leave the Twins with no outfielders, but it would make them the big fish, in arguably the best spot to make offers to Bourn and/or Hamilton.

If it was my call... I'm not doing it... One thing has changed for me tho... Before... I wasn't very interested in Middle Infield. I'm now much more interested in middle infield...

Go overpay for Sanchez... Or Jackson or whoever you like Mr.Terry Ryan... Sign a cheap OF'er for a year if you want to delay Hicks a little and jump into the Middle Infield pool if you like. We got the money for all of that.

Umm... Not Escobar or Drew. I still don't want attitude problem guys no matter what they OPS.

One word, why?

Originally Posted by James

Trading Revere actually doesn't free up any money. We still have to pay Worley, who actually made $2,500 more than Revere last year. So, it's basically a wash as far as payroll goes.

As for the Bourn question... not a chance.

You obviously didn't read my previous post and answer to his question. You are right that Revere for Worley is a wash but you neglect to consider that the Twins needed to add multiple starters this offseason. Now they don't need to spend 6-8M/yr on a Blanton type and that money can instead go towards a better starter.

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

Originally Posted by kab21

No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.

Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?

Probably cause it allowed us to fill a spot in this year's rotation for almost nothing (difference between Revere's and Worley's contract) so now the available money doesn't have to be spread out so much, allowing the quality of pitchers to, hypothetically, go up

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

Originally Posted by kab21

No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.

Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?

Probably cause it allowed us to fill a spot in this year's rotation for almost nothing (difference between Revere's and Worley's contract) so now the available money doesn't have to be spread out so much, allowing the quality of pitchers to, hypothetically, go up

Exactly... We need one less now and that in itself... Frees up money.

I don't think it's a terrible idea, assuming it's the right kind of contract. Of course, the right kind of contract would be a 1-year, team-friendly-ish deal with the assumption that we flip him at the trade deadline. I get the feeling that's what Theo Epstein is doing with Scott Baker and Nate Schierholtz: sign player to a 1-year deal; hope player performs pretty well the first half of the season; trade player for some kind of prospect. With the market seemingly shrinking for Michael Bourn, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he settles for a 1-year deal this winter.

For one year only and only if the Twins trade Mourneau or Willingham.

Can't see it. Even for one year, Bourn's price wouldn't drop so low the Twins would be interested.

Isn't Revere just a younger version of Bourn? Decent BA, low OBP, fast, above average defender (overall, yes Revere's arm stinks) very little power. Bourn doesn't seem to be much better than Revere and Span is better.

Originally Posted by mbents

I don't think it's a terrible idea, assuming it's the right kind of contract. Of course, the right kind of contract would be a 1-year, team-friendly-ish deal with the assumption that we flip him at the trade deadline. I get the feeling that's what Theo Epstein is doing with Scott Baker and Nate Schierholtz: sign player to a 1-year deal; hope player performs pretty well the first half of the season; trade player for some kind of prospect. With the market seemingly shrinking for Michael Bourn, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he settles for a 1-year deal this winter.

Correct. This is the one and only way it makes sense. Take advantage of the market. If the center fielder market bubble has now burst and we can sign him for next to nothing and then have the option of trading him away at the trade deadline for more pieces, ok I'm a buyer.

But this is not going to happen with Boras as the agent. Buy low, sell high! Works in the stock market, it is difficult in the FA market and I think our money could be better spent (invested) in other areas.

10+ mill a year and give up a draft pick for a guy that's not much better than Span or Revere? Makes perfect sense!

Span and Revere aren't on the team anymore.

If the Twins can deal Willingham for pitching, then they may find Bourn or Hamilton would provide as great, or a greater upgrade over their replacement, than Marcum, Jackson, or Sanchez would be to the rotation, for the money.

But, almost certainly, Bourn or Hamilton would be a greater upgrade, for the money, than would those pitcher in the 3rd tier who are essentially replacement level guys already - Correia, Myers, Saudners. The Twins have plenty of replacement or near-replacement starting pitchers already

Why would Bourn & Hamilton want to come to mn? So you can trade them? Get real, that is why they got agents!

Originally Posted by Winston Smith

10+ mill a year and give up a draft pick

Which pick is lost, the elite first-rounder? Or would it be a lower one? I never can remember the rules concerning this. No way I'd sign him and lose a tippy-top draft pick. I'm less jealous about conserving a sandwich-first-rounder and below, but I don't think Bourn is the guy I'd give up such a pick for either.

I think the top 12 or so are protected. They would give up their second pick as I understand it which would be around #40.