Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 201

Thread: Mystery teams in on Drew

  1. #121
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,656
    Like
    3
    Liked 329 Times in 207 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
    As for D-Backs owner Ken Kendrick and if he's a bonehead. I've never met him. I wasn't in the room when he got frustrated with Stephen Drew.

    Here's the Diamondbacks owner quotes about Drew:


    On Drew: "I'm going to be real direct about Stephen. I think Stephen should have been out there playing before now, frankly. I, for one, am disappointed. I'm going to be real candid and say Stephen and his representatives are more focused on where Stephen is going to be a year from now than on going out and supporting the team that's paying his salary."
    What can you do?: "All you can do is hope that the player is treating the situation with integrity. Frankly, we have our concerns."
    Have you talked to Drew?: "I have not, really, I don't think it's my place to do so, but others have."
    How did Drew respond?: "I think he (long pause) was not very direct. He needs more time to get ready. I'm speaking from his perspective."


    Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diam...#ixzz2tsEBOysj

    Seems pretty weak to hold that against the player. Especially when the same owner, and same front office and field staff, has talked of multiple other players (i.e. Justin Upton) in almost the same way. If anything, this tells me more about the Diamondbacks org than it does any particular player.

  2. These 3 users like spycake's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    cmathewson (02-20-2014), jokin (02-21-2014), Willihammer (02-20-2014)

  3. #122
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,147
    Like
    101
    Liked 273 Times in 197 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    Here's the Diamondbacks owner quotes about Drew:


    On Drew: "I'm going to be real direct about Stephen. I think Stephen should have been out there playing before now, frankly. I, for one, am disappointed. I'm going to be real candid and say Stephen and his representatives are more focused on where Stephen is going to be a year from now than on going out and supporting the team that's paying his salary."
    What can you do?: "All you can do is hope that the player is treating the situation with integrity. Frankly, we have our concerns."
    Have you talked to Drew?: "I have not, really, I don't think it's my place to do so, but others have."
    How did Drew respond?: "I think he (long pause) was not very direct. He needs more time to get ready. I'm speaking from his perspective."


    Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diam...#ixzz2tsEBOysj

    Seems pretty weak to hold that against the player. Especially when the same owner, and same front office and field staff, has talked of multiple other players (i.e. Justin Upton) in almost the same way. If anything, this tells me more about the Diamondbacks org than it does any particular player.

    Remember when Gardy was on Scott Baker about not coming back soon enough.....when he had a strained flexor tendon, then the doctor went in and found a strained UCL?

  4. These 3 users like tobi0040's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (02-21-2014), mike wants wins (02-20-2014), USAFChief (02-20-2014)

  5. #123
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,656
    Like
    3
    Liked 329 Times in 207 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Also, while Drew was dumped at the low point of his recovery by the D-Backs, and his option declined by perpetually cash strapped Oakland, he signed for basically the exact same amount to take a starting job with a big media market contending team. (Drew actually made MORE money in 2013, with the buyout + his Boston salary, than if Arizona or Oakland had picked up his option.)

    I think that might be better evidence of Drew's regard in baseball, and his baseball playing abilities, than some fairly empty comments about his rehab by a mouthy owner.

  6. #124
    Senior Member All-Star Willihammer's Avatar
    Posts
    2,782
    Like
    665
    Liked 384 Times in 214 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    "The doctor said it was going to be a year process, and now I'm at month seven," he said after taking some grounders during practice at the team's Salt River Field complex. "Flexibility is back to normal. Now I just have to get the strength back."
    Asked if there was any chance he might be ready for the season opener on April 6 against the Giants at Chase Field, Drew demurred.
    "I don't know. Like I told you, the doctors said a year," Drew said. "The coaching staff has been really good. The training staff is really good. We're taking it one day at a time and we'll see where it goes from there."
    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?...s_ari&c_id=ari

    That was March 1, 2012. The owner made his off the cuff medical comments in June. So his timeline wasn't the doctor's timeline.

    I think its possible, maybe even likely, that Drew was caught in the crosshairs between his owner and his agent, while he was just following doctor's orders.

  7. #125
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,656
    Like
    3
    Liked 329 Times in 207 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    If you're investing money, you want to understand the risks and benefits. The risk here is that a large percentage of middle infielders decline precipitously from age 30 to age 32. That isn't an opinion, it's a statistical fact. Drew could be an outlier. But if you're a betting man, you don't bet on outliers.
    I know the "second baseman cliff" seems like gospel now, but I've seen some more recent data that suggests it is exaggerated based on a few high profile cases:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/how-w...ase-utley-age/

    Here's a 2005 look at the issue:
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=4464

    If there is an effect, it's not as large as you suggest. Some middle infielders can't shift to a corner as their skills decline, I guess, but otherwise, I don't think middle infielders actually fall off cliffs more than other players. If you can link a study otherwise, we can discuss that tangent further.

    And we're not talking a Barry Zito type forever commitment here -- the absolute max I've seen suggested here is 3 years (through age 33) at $10 mil annually. For this team, with this payroll and future obligations, that is quite easily an affordable bet if you like the player now. Certainly very far from "pass because of Bill James study".

    Another discussion of aging curves:
    http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/inde...ical_position/
    Last edited by spycake; 02-20-2014 at 09:18 AM.

  8. This user likes spycake's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (02-21-2014)

  9. #126
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    anyone that questions a professional athletes willingness to play "because he's soft" or whatever....I don't respect that person much. These guys go through an awful lot of pain and suffering.
    Lighten up Francis....

  10. This user likes mike wants wins's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (02-21-2014)

  11. #127
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    I know the "second baseman cliff" seems like gospel now, but I've seen some more recent data that suggests it is exaggerated based on a few high profile cases:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/how-w...ase-utley-age/

    Here's a 2005 look at the issue:
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=4464

    If there is an effect, it's not as large as you suggest. Some middle infielders can't shift to a corner as their skills decline, I guess, but otherwise, I don't think middle infielders actually fall off cliffs more than other players. If you can link a study otherwise, we can discuss that tangent further.

    And we're not talking a Barry Zito type forever commitment here -- the absolute max I've seen suggested here is 3 years (through age 33) at $10 mil annually. For this team, with this payroll and future obligations, that is quite easily an affordable bet if you like the player now. Certainly very far from "pass because of Bill James study".

    Another discussion of aging curves:
    http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/inde...ical_position/
    There is this study, which is more generalized, but, as a critique of James' theory, does correct the certitude of the MI claims I have made: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=9933

    The most relevant quote from it for our purposes is this one from James' famous study:

    Good hitters stay around, weak hitters don't. Most players are declining by age 30; all players are declining by age 33. There are difference in rates of decline, but those differences are far less significant for the assessment of future value than are the differing levels of ability (James, 1982, p. 205).
    Looking at Drew, who is not that good of a hitter to begin with, I can say he is much more likely to regress from his 2013 season than to hold steady. When you add the Fenway factor, the odds go up even further.

    So you are paying for past production, not for future production. Whether it is worth overpaying for a guy who will be practically useless by the end of the contract is a matter of opinion. I can say with some confidence that it is not the kind of investment this front office tends to make, nor would I in their shoes. I understand the argument that this team of all teams should make the investment, considering free cash flow and relative dearth of shortstop talent. But I don't agree with it.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  12. This user likes cmathewson's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    thetank (02-20-2014)

  13. #128
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    236
    Like
    3
    Liked 24 Times in 12 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    anyone that questions a professional athletes willingness to play "because he's soft" or whatever....I don't respect that person much. These guys go through an awful lot of pain and suffering.
    Just like anything else some guys are more willing to play through things then others. I don't care if it's in the players head or he just isn't physically put together much like I don't care if lack of production is more mental or based on ability. Be as tough as you can, and then be a little tougher. I understand you are worried about your body at 50, if thats what drives you sign for less money and be honest about it.

  14. #129
    Senior Member All-Star Willihammer's Avatar
    Posts
    2,782
    Like
    665
    Liked 384 Times in 214 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    Another point - for whatever reason the DBacks started 2012 with Drew on the 15 day DL. So he may have caused 40 man issues. This, again, wouldn't have been Drew's fault. He should have been put on the 60 day DL since that would have been more closely aligned with the 12 month recovery timeline suggested by Drew in the above quote. In fact, he still would have been able to return ahead of schedule - he would have been eligible to play early in month 10.

  15. This user likes Willihammer's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (02-21-2014)

  16. #130
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    204
    Like
    106
    Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    His brother, JD, was always missing games except in the years he became a FA. You will likely have to have another SS playing an average of 50 games a year.

  17. #131
    Senior Member All-Star Willihammer's Avatar
    Posts
    2,782
    Like
    665
    Liked 384 Times in 214 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    anyone that questions a professional athletes willingness to play "because he's soft" or whatever....I don't respect that person much. These guys go through an awful lot of pain and suffering.
    Not to mention that Drew would have every incentive to play. It was a contract year.

    By contrast an owner who has no intention of re-signing the player would have no incentive to protect his long term health.

  18. These 3 users like Willihammer's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (02-21-2014), mike wants wins (02-20-2014), USAFChief (02-20-2014)

  19. #132
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,656
    Like
    3
    Liked 329 Times in 207 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Willihammer View Post
    Not to mention that Drew would have every incentive to play. It was a contract year.

    By contrast an owner who has no intention of re-signing the player would have no incentive to protect his long term health.
    Arizona still held an option on Drew's services for 2013, but generally your point stands.

  20. #133
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,656
    Like
    3
    Liked 329 Times in 207 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    There is this study, which is more generalized, but, as a critique of James' theory, does correct the certitude of the MI claims I have made: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=9933

    The most relevant quote from it for our purposes is this one from James' famous study:
    Well, I wasn't doubting that players in general decline with age.

    But to say that you're not going to sign a guy to a reasonable deal (~3/30 or less, plus 2nd round pick) at a position of need, because A) he's 30 years old, and B) you don't like his home/road splits for one season, seems to be taking this general concept to a bit of an extreme.

    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Looking at Drew, who is not that good of a hitter to begin with, I can say he is much more likely to regress from his 2013 season than to hold steady. When you add the Fenway factor, the odds go up even further.

    So you are paying for past production, not for future production. Whether it is worth overpaying for a guy who will be practically useless by the end of the contract is a matter of opinion.
    So if a career MLB OPS of .764 is "not that good of a hitter to begin with", what does that make a career minor league .675 OPS?

    What kind of contract would NOT constitute "overpaying" for Drew? Some folks here are talking 2/20. I don't think he goes that cheaply, but are you arguing against that? Or 3/30? What would you pay him?

    And on that note, what's your projection for Drew in 2014 and beyond? PA/OPS+/dWAR? And how about Florimon? I would like to know what kind of production you are associating with these dollar figures too.

  21. #134
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,385
    Like
    417
    Liked 817 Times in 515 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by tobi0040 View Post
    Here is the problem I get myself into. I am a die hard fan and sit here and assume that the Twins want to win. I sit here think that is the objective. I think they want to win, but the main objective is to run this team as profitable as possible. So when we sit here and debate signing Drew and how we would obviously win more games as a result......those 3 wins simply are not worth $8-9M dollars to this front office and ownership group. Signing Morales or Cruz and the wins associated is not worth $12M. That is the harsh reality. Most would love to see these moves (if short term deals).

    Consider a few things.


    Forbes pegged this team at a profit of $10M last year. This year our payroll remains the same while revenue is up nearly $40M. So this team should make $50M next year.

    The value of the Twins, pre-stadium (mostly publicly funded) was $214M. Last year, Forbes calculated the value at $560M. Bloomberg has the value now at $700M, with the increase related to the new media deal (added $110M to each franchise). So this team is up nearly half a billion dollars, or 250% in the span of 6-7 years.

    By any measure, our fans are some of the best in the game. We have gone out to the games to watch horrible baseball for 3 years in a row.

    Would it be the end of the world to throw us a bone with Drew and/or Cruz/Morales? Would that be asking too much? We would not hamper our future and this team would still be well in the green next year.

    We should not have to watch Florimon at SS or sit here and try and justify the signing. This is a conversation that should have happened at Target field in October and it should have been a relatively simple one.


    http://www.bizjournals.com/twincitie...0-million.html
    To me, it isn't that simple. It's a short term vs. long term approach. No matter what the Twins throw at Drew, they will forfeit a pick in the 40s to aquire him. That's worth something, and the question becomes exactly what. As well, the profitability thing may not be an issue right now, but it would be the reason that would prevent them from getting a real upgrade should it be available at a later time.

  22. #135
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,848
    Like
    180
    Liked 667 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by USAFChief View Post
    The World Champs didn't "cast off" Drew...they offered him a $14M one yr contract, despite having the minors' best SS prospect ready to go.
    They offered him a poison pill. Something they knew he wouldn't take, that would get them a draft pick. They killed two birds with one stone....let him leave and open up a compensation possibility. The notion that the 14m QO is a testament to his value is twisting things.

    And for the record, "Florimon is a vastly superior defender" is an opinion, not a fact, and an opinion based on little evidence at that.
    Well, yeah it's an opinion roundly shared by almost every expert who made a list you can find. There is a case to be made for Drew but it isn't Drew's D > Florimon's D. That to me just shows an unwillingness to fairly compare the two.

    I also find it odd you loudly trumpet the merits of moving Mauer and bemoan decline phases. The justifications are working off the same model of prediction - basically the concept of statistical likelihood.
    Last edited by TheLeviathan; 02-20-2014 at 11:16 AM.

  23. #136
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,606
    Like
    68
    Liked 379 Times in 233 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    But to say that you're not going to sign a guy to a reasonable deal (~3/30 or less, plus 2nd round pick) at a position of need, because A) he's 30 years old, and B) you don't like his home/road splits for one season, seems to be taking this general concept to a bit of an extreme.


    Ten million (or possibly $13 million) may be reasonable for this year, but likely not in 2015 or 2016.

    I'm not sure why you think his splits don't matter. We dwell on his home production from last year because in 2012, his production at home AND on the road was awful.

    Breaking it down:
    2012 Road-Bad
    2012 Home-Bad
    2013 Road-Bad
    2013 Home-Good

    Why would we focus on the quarter of the time he was good as opposed to the 3/4 of the time he was terrible? I also don't know why people want to continue to use his past, pre-injury data to make a point. Recent data is, and should always be a stronger consideration. His career numbers are not as useful as his recent numbers, why would you pay for them?

    Jose Valverde only got a minor league deal, so will Johan Santana. Joe Saunders still can't get a job. No one is rushing out to re-sign Manny Rameriz and he wants to still play. Yet somehow the model is different for Drew simply because he plays a position of need?
    Last edited by nicksaviking; 02-20-2014 at 11:24 AM.

  24. #137
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,285
    Like
    254
    Liked 288 Times in 150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    Also, while Drew was dumped at the low point of his recovery by the D-Backs, and his option declined by perpetually cash strapped Oakland, he signed for basically the exact same amount to take a starting job with a big media market contending team. (Drew actually made MORE money in 2013, with the buyout + his Boston salary, than if Arizona or Oakland had picked up his option.)

    I think that might be better evidence of Drew's regard in baseball, and his baseball playing abilities, than some fairly empty comments about his rehab by a mouthy owner.
    To me, the better evidence of Drew's regard in baseball is that teams are reporting without him. That worries me. A lot. I'm not a huge Florimon supporter, but I don't expect the 2014 version of Drew to be all that good. Others have posted very thoughtful arguments to the contrary, which I respect. It will be interesting to see how he does this summer, wherever he lands.

  25. #138
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    Well, I wasn't doubting that players in general decline with age.

    But to say that you're not going to sign a guy to a reasonable deal (~3/30 or less, plus 2nd round pick) at a position of need, because A) he's 30 years old, and B) you don't like his home/road splits for one season, seems to be taking this general concept to a bit of an extreme.



    So if a career MLB OPS of .764 is "not that good of a hitter to begin with", what does that make a career minor league .675 OPS?

    What kind of contract would NOT constitute "overpaying" for Drew? Some folks here are talking 2/20. I don't think he goes that cheaply, but are you arguing against that? Or 3/30? What would you pay him?

    And on that note, what's your projection for Drew in 2014 and beyond? PA/OPS+/dWAR? And how about Florimon? I would like to know what kind of production you are associating with these dollar figures too.
    I have said one year with an option. As far as terms, I could see 2/20 total, with a sizable portion of that built into incentives and the vesting option. And make the incentives/vesting doable, based on games or PAs or something, not on performance.With these clauses, you're mostly mitigating the risks of significant injury, which is a major reason guys after 30 decline. There's always a way to mitigate risks through terms like this. But I wouldn't be enthused about a straight 2/20.

    Would he take it? No clue. The Sox are adamant on a one-year deal. So it seems the only competition for a deal like this is the Mets. It all depends on what they are willing to do. Tejada looks like a Florimon clone. And BA doesn't think much of their SS prospects above rookie ball. If I had to place a bet, I'd say the Mets get him for 3/28 or so.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  26. #139
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,147
    Like
    101
    Liked 273 Times in 197 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    To me, it isn't that simple. It's a short term vs. long term approach. No matter what the Twins throw at Drew, they will forfeit a pick in the 40s to aquire him. That's worth something, and the question becomes exactly what. As well, the profitability thing may not be an issue right now, but it would be the reason that would prevent them from getting a real upgrade should it be available at a later time.
    That may be, but I refuse to believe we could not have paid up or traded for a better SS or DH than Floriomon and Kubel/Parmalee. So upgrades were out there without a pick attached. Kubel may magically come back to 2-3 years ago levels, but I have read his bat has really slowed down. So he is a question mark.

    I think this ownership group has a profit first model, and spend enough to say we spent and keep enough people coming to the park so they can remain profitable. I have heard Dave St. Peter and Terry Ryan throw around the $90M they spent on pitchers this offseason when asked about payroll. Funny enough LEN3 repeated the quote verbatim on his chat the other day when a person asked why payroll is the same. So get used to that talking point for the next year as we watch a AA SS and a AAA DH.

  27. #140
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by tobi0040 View Post
    That may be, but I refuse to believe we could not have paid up or traded for a better SS or DH than Floriomon and Kubel/Parmalee. So upgrades were out there without a pick attached. Kubel may magically come back to 2-3 years ago levels, but I have read his bat has really slowed down. So he is a question mark.

    I think this ownership group has a profit first model, and spend enough to say we spent and keep enough people coming to the park so they can remain profitable. I have heard Dave St. Peter and Terry Ryan throw around the $90M they spent on pitchers this offseason when asked about payroll. Funny enough LEN3 repeated the quote verbatim on his chat the other day when a person asked why payroll is the same. So get used to that talking point for the next year as we watch a AA SS and a AAA DH.
    I wouldn't draw that conclusion in this case. Yes they're tight, but they are extremely interested in winning. They just take a longer view than we tend to. I wouldn't worry about stop gap signings like Kubel. The real talent is on the way from the minors.

    In the next few years, this team will be back in the playoffs. Does Drew help that cause? Probably not. If not, is it worth throwing money and a draft pick at him? Not unless the terms are more favorable than he is currently asking for.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  28. This user likes cmathewson's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    thetank (02-20-2014)

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.