Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 85

Thread: Article: Glen Perkins Signs Extension With Twins

  1. #21
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    407
    Like
    68
    Liked 69 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by alarp33 View Post
    Does everyone here realize that Perkins was already under team control through 2016? Am I missing something? Why in the world would the team do this? Closers have short shelf life's, Perkins will be what, 35 in 2017? Why not wait 2 or 3 years and see if he is worth an extension. This is a head scratcher to say the least
    My thinking is he is currently grossly under paid for what he does and this is a way to garauntee him more money and give him more security in case his arm does fail him down the line. Both sides take some risk here. Perkins likely could have made more not giving his team a hometown discount and the Twins risk he may be injured beyond repair sometime later in the contract. If both sides agree to those risks it is a win, win.

    Forget about trading him now. It won't happen because if he is pitching well the Twins have a great deal and won't want to give that away. If he is pitching poorly no one will want him anyway. He is virtually un-tradeable until later in the contract IMO.

  2. #22
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,834
    Like
    176
    Liked 663 Times in 374 Posts
    Good deal for both sides. Perkins is an easy guy to root for.

    And, sure, it takes a nice trade chip off the block but at some point you have to keep some guys around for stability too. So good move by the Twins.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by twinsnorth49 View Post
    He was under team control through 2015 with a team option for 2016. Not every closer has a short shelf life and Perkins has been very durable. The Twins get an all-star closer for an extra two years, during which part of they might be competitive team, for a reasonable price. It also makes it easier for them to turn down his option in 2018 as opposed to 2016.
    Team option for 2016 = under team control for 2016. They control what they do with him in 2016. Perkins has been durable, he also will be 34 years old in 2017.

    "It makes it easier for them to turn down his option in 2018 as opposed to 2016?" Huh?? The 2016 option was for a very reasonable price, the 2018 he will be 35, unknown if he will still be healthy and/or effective, and it has a buyout attached to it.

    Again, why would the team pay for his 2017 season pre-2014, not to mention give him raises the next 3 years

  4. #24
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    292
    Like
    4
    Liked 45 Times in 31 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    I like Perkins a lot, but I'm not a huge fan of the extension.

    The Twins already had him under control through the 2016 season for about $12.5M. Roughly $4M for the next two seasons and a $4.5M club option for the 2016 season.

    So they essentially just added close to $10M in new money for a reliever and his age 34 season.

    The 2018 club option is nice, but I just don't see much upside in this move. If everything works out they get him for about $16M+ for those two additional seasons.

    So best case scenario, they paid market value. Guess we just hope for best case scenario.

  5. #25
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,834
    Like
    176
    Liked 663 Times in 374 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sandbun View Post
    Teams don't do x until suddenly one does, gains a competitive advantage, and then the rest of the teams play catch up. Besides, I'm not sure that one home town guy wanting to make sure he plays his entire career for his favorite team and willing to take less money than he'd probably get if he was to play out his contract to make sure it happens sets a huge precedent.
    Teams don't do it because players don't want to/have agreed as a union not to. That goes for front-loaded deals and hometown discounts. Lots of discussion on this in the past, probably not worth rehashing - just look up the threads.

  6. #26
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,325
    Like
    1,303
    Liked 1,283 Times in 742 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by alarp33 View Post
    Again, why would the team pay for his 2017 season pre-2014, not to mention give him raises the next 3 years
    Maybe because they believe in him and think that they just paid $22.175 M for Glen Perkins for 4 years whereas Detroit paid $20M for 2 years of Joe Nathan ($19M plus $1M buyout).

    While Nathan's pedigree may be better, Perkins is 8 1/2 years younger than Nathan. Obviously the Twins have had a chance to compare both.

    Apparently Perkins approached the team about re-working an extension. Overall years and dollars seem pretty reasonable. Of course there is risk to the team. But if Perkins performs well, he has also accepted risk because he undoubtedly could have gotten more money down the road.

    That's what mutually agreed upon deals are all about.
    Last edited by JB_Iowa; 03-14-2014 at 02:27 PM.

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

    benchwarmerjim (03-14-2014)

  8. #27
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,325
    Like
    1,303
    Liked 1,283 Times in 742 Posts
    One more factor. Perkins is another homegrown product, good in the community and popular with fans. The Twins do have some affection for that.

    Some may think that the Twins have gotten/are getting burned by taking that into account in the Mauer contract. I suspect the Twins accountants know exactly how much Mauer and Perkins generate in jersey sales, etc.

    Sometimes it isn't solely about what the player produces on the field.

  9. #28
    Twins Moderator All-Star ChiTownTwinsFan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Twitter
    @Sheradoodles
    Like
    1,420
    Liked 1,929 Times in 1,131 Posts
    I like this. I like Perk and I think it is good for all, all around.

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

    SpiritofVodkaDave (03-14-2014)

  11. #29
    It seems to me that the annual cost of this extension is nominal. If his arm fall off next year, this contract is not going to affect the Twins' ability to compete at all. On the flip side, "proven closers" are very expensive. I'm not contending they are worth it, but the value of a closer is what the market will bear. For example, Joe Nathan's salary from 2007-2013 was: $5.25m, $6m, $11.25m, 11.25m, 7m, 7m (missing all of 2010). Perkins is only guaranteed on average $5.37m. The biggest risk is that his arm falls off, and that's not too much money to eat. But if he stays nearly as effective as he was in 2013, it's a significant bargain.

  12. #30
    Twins Moderator All-Star twinsnorth49's Avatar
    Posts
    3,632
    Like
    924
    Liked 1,282 Times in 686 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by alarp33 View Post
    Team option for 2016 = under team control for 2016. They control what they do with him in 2016. Perkins has been durable, he also will be 34 years old in 2017.

    "It makes it easier for them to turn down his option in 2018 as opposed to 2016?" Huh?? The 2016 option was for a very reasonable price, the 2018 he will be 35, unknown if he will still be healthy and/or effective, and it has a buyout attached to it.

    Again, why would the team pay for his 2017 season pre-2014, not to mention give him raises the next 3 years
    There is risk in any contract, at some point you have to just get past that, as well a show of faith in a quality player is not a bad thing. Yes he's technically under control through 2016, this just allows them to delay whether they are going to exercise the option or not, it's a good chance by 2018 they don't.

    If he performs close to the level he has been for the next two seasons the Twins will have got a great deal, that's the gamble with any player.

  13. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    Maybe because they believe in him and think that they just paid $22.175 M for Glen Perkins for 4 years whereas Detroit paid $20M for 2 years of Joe Nathan ($19M plus $1M buyout).

    While Nathan's pedigree may be better, Perkins is 8 1/2 years younger than Nathan. Obviously the Twins have had a chance to compare both.

    Apparently Perkins approached the team about re-working an extension. Overall years and dollars seem pretty reasonable. Of course there is risk to the team. But if Perkins performs well, he has also accepted risk because he undoubtedly could have gotten more money down the road.

    That's what mutually agreed upon deals are all about.
    Yes, they just paid him 22m for 4 years. They already had him signed for 3 years and 12 million! What they really did was pay him 10 million for 2017 with not knowing at all what will happen with him over the next 3 years
    Last edited by twinsnorth49; 03-14-2014 at 03:01 PM.

  14. #32
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 462 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    I don't know what there is to complain about. They're spending money for talent. What's not to like?
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  15. #33
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    740
    Like
    56
    Liked 122 Times in 77 Posts
    I'm shocked!!! Just totally shocked!

  16. #34
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    407
    Like
    68
    Liked 69 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JP3700 View Post
    I like Perkins a lot, but I'm not a huge fan of the extension.

    The Twins already had him under control through the 2016 season for about $12.5M. Roughly $4M for the next two seasons and a $4.5M club option for the 2016 season.


    So they essentially just added close to $10M in new money for a reliever and his age 34 season.

    The 2018 club option is nice, but I just don't see much upside in this move. If everything works out they get him for about $16M+ for those two additional seasons.

    So best case scenario, they paid market value. Guess we just hope for best case scenario.
    My conspiracy theory is that when the Twins first signed Perkins for the closer role they didn't know if he could cut it so the contract was workable for both the setup and closer role. At the time I don't think the Twins thought he would be an All Star closer. The extension eases some of the under payment for Perkins talent. If he remains the quality closer he is then 8 Million per year is still a hometown discount. Extending also pretty much gets Perkins away from trade talk and he wants to be in Minnesota. We should be happy he wants to be here. I think this was just the right thing to do.
    Last edited by Dman; 03-14-2014 at 06:31 PM.

  17. #35
    Senior Member All-Star SpiritofVodkaDave's Avatar
    Posts
    3,987
    Like
    103
    Liked 385 Times in 200 Posts
    Relief pitchers (especially those with no history of injury-knocks on wood...twice) age a lot better than other players. Additionally 34 for any player is hardly that old, while it is no longer their "peak" you typically don't see such severe declines in players across the board until 36,37,38,39. For RP the decline is even less and less, Rivera, Nathan, Hawkins, Hoffman, etc are some of the most recent examples of guys who pitched just fine into their late 30's and early 40's.

    Is there risk? Yeah I guess...but they are basically getting a very good (dare I say elite?) closer locked up on a deal that is pretty close to what they handed Blackburn.

    Win Win Win Win Win Win Win.

    As far as the trade chip thing goes: Now they can have another trade chip if one of the closer prospects they have in the minors is legit, just trade that guy away. Or don't, and build a truly elite bullpen from the 7th inning on.
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- L. Harvey Oswald


  18. #36
    Twins Moderator MVP ashburyjohn's Avatar
    Posts
    8,678
    Like
    2,653
    Liked 3,302 Times in 1,753 Posts
    Blog Entries
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by sandbun View Post
    Is this not a perfect chance to do exactly what some of us have been calling for them to do and frontload the deal? Give him the 12.5 million this year, and then you've only got to pay 3 mil per year the rest of the way.
    It's not on the scale you suggest, but you could view the renegotiation of 2014-16 as shifting to more front-loading than if they were to wait to negotiate 2017-18 at something more in the neighborhood of $10M a year. Well, less back-loading, let's call it.

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

    JB_Iowa (03-14-2014)

  20. #37
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,381
    Like
    415
    Liked 812 Times in 512 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    I don't get the complaints. Perkins is still a really affordable pitcher. He's been closing at an all star level for several years now, and if another team wants him, they are still going to be paying for him. Personally, I would have traded him (strictly from the business angle), but he's a classy guy who is one of the faces of the franchise. This is hardly a bad move.

  21. #38
    Senior Member Triple-A zchrz's Avatar
    Posts
    217
    Like
    41
    Liked 104 Times in 62 Posts
    I like this move, Perk is a great story and has turned into a great closer. Reading Souhan's article about him and Mauer talking about playing out their whole careers, and winning a ring, with their hometown club was pretty cool. There was a time I wanted them to just cut ties with Perkins and move on, I was very wrong.
    "Professionalism - When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - Hunter S Thompson

  22. #39
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    264
    Like
    15
    Liked 40 Times in 26 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JP3700 View Post
    So best case scenario, they paid market value. Guess we just hope for best case scenario.
    They paid 2014 market value for 2017 and get an under-market option for 2018. 2017 market value will almost certainly be higher.

    Perkins is a very effective LH reliever. He might pitch until he's 40 like Dan Plesac and Darren Oliver. Eddie Guardado was effective until age 35.

  23. #40
    Owner All-Star John Bonnes's Avatar
    Posts
    2,441
    Twitter
    @twinsgeek
    Like
    1
    Liked 161 Times in 95 Posts
    Blog Entries
    241

    Article: Glen Perkins Signs Extension With Twins


Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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.