Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 109

Thread: Twins "kicking the tires" on Garza

  1. #61
    Senior Member All-Star SpiritofVodkaDave's Avatar
    Posts
    3,905
    Like
    75
    Liked 360 Times in 182 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Teddy View Post
    I'd be shocked if TR was looking for more than a one-year make-good deal for Garza. Remember that Garza and Gardy didn't exactly see eye-to-eye when he was coming up. I'd bet TR is offering one-year at about $15 mil with a club option for year 2 just in case nobody else makes a move on him before spring training. Any longer than two years would shock me.
    There is no way the Twins would offer him only one year, that would be the king of all insults. Additionally, Garza WILL get 4 years...at least. I'd be willing to wager a large amount of money on that.

  2. #62
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,556
    Like
    3
    Liked 311 Times in 194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnarthor View Post
    I'm not saying Garza wouldn't be nice but I think he's being overrated a bit around here.
    I actually think just the opposite -- Garza seems to be getting underrated here. Offer 3/45 or walk away? That's nuts. Garza is almost certainly a lock for a 100-120 ERA+, as much as any pitcher in baseball. He only just turned 30, a full year younger than Nolasco. And his injuries the past two years have looked relatively minor (I wouldn't be surprised if they were related -- missing the end of 2012 contributed to his strain in spring training 2013 -- and he seemed to bounce back from them just fine).

    If you're willing to give 4/49 plus a vesting 5th year to Nolasco, who looks like a 85-100 ERA+ guy, and he's easily your best pitcher currently under contract, and you've got payroll flexibility, you should absolutely be willing to go 4/60 plus a vesting 5th for Garza, I think. Probably even higher.

    The Twins rotation depth is indeed improved, but it isn't all that great yet. These guys have performances all over the map, and sadly even the better ones (Nolasco, Correia) seem to top out at 100 ERA+. And there isn't that much immediate help from the minors either -- Meyer strikes me as the only guy with Garza upside who could establish himself in MLB within the next 4 seasons.

  3. #63
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    302
    Like
    166
    Liked 30 Times in 24 Posts
    Fangraph's just ran a story about "#6" starters on MLB clubs. Essentially, saying that on average 32 starts were made by pitchers that were not supposed to be in the rotation. The Tigers were extremely healthy and the MLB-low at 6 starts and the Twins the high at 48, followed by the Rangers at 44.

    My point is if the Twins get Garza and have a rotation with: Garza, Nolasco, Hughes, Correia and Pelfrey, having more capable starters is a GREAT thing. With Gibson, Deduno and Meyer (even Diamond, Worley or Albers) available to be the fill-ins when an injury or sub-par performance gets an original starter demoted, the Twins are throwing out capable pitchers. No more DeVries earning a rotation gig, or soft-tossers like Diamond being the team ace. Now they are the fill-ins, the replacements and the backup plans. Meyer will hopefully be dominant in AAA and force his way to the bigs by June. Meyer has more upside than anyone, including Garza. When he is ready, move Correia or another struggling pitcher to the pen. This is about getting better, not about making sure every penny is at it's peak value. Having too many capable starters is not a bad thing. It would be a GREAT thing. Now if only we could acquire a veteran difference-making bat.

  4. #64
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,556
    Like
    3
    Liked 311 Times in 194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Now, I'm not saying you have to go all-in on Garza now, but if he's legitimately interested in signing here for a reasonable market contract (i.e. above Nolasco's but less than Sanchez), I don't think the Twins can pass that up. Given the Twins record on free agents, and free agents alleged opinions about coming to Minnesota, this is not the kind of team that can afford to pass up opportunities like that because of our "success cycle" position, or because our roster is already stuffed with lesser pitchers.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    204
    Like
    106
    Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Hitters. For that amount of money the Twins should sign or trade for a good position player. They need to score more runs. Garza in 4 years will likely miss 20 starts or more.

  6. #66
    If the Twins do sign Garza, is there any chance that it could be part of a trade Perkins and move Hughes to the back end of the pen plan?

  7. #67
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Siehbiscuit View Post
    My point is if the Twins get Garza and have a rotation with: Garza, Nolasco, Hughes, Correia and Pelfrey, having more capable starters is a GREAT thing. With Gibson, Deduno and Meyer (even Diamond, Worley or Albers) available to be the fill-ins when an injury or sub-par performance gets an original starter demoted, the Twins are throwing out capable pitchers.
    Three of those guys will likely not be available for fill-in duty because they are out of options. That's why I proposed trading Correia if they sign Garza. Perhaps they can get by with him while Deduno is on the DL. But once he is ready, he is a big upgrade over Correia, as is Gibson.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  8. #68
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    425
    Like
    0
    Liked 42 Times in 31 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Three of those guys will likely not be available for fill-in duty because they are out of options. That's why I proposed trading Correia if they sign Garza. Perhaps they can get by with him while Deduno is on the DL. But once he is ready, he is a big upgrade over Correia, as is Gibson.
    I agree with the option thing. It might be hard to keep all of Worley, Diamond and Deduno around because they are out of options. I am not so sure any of them are a big upgrade over Correia. I sure hope Gibson could be(a big upgrade over Correia). Part of the problem with the whole trade Correia thing is this, the only one of all the potential starters coming into spring training that actually pitched better than Correia in 2013, was Nolasco. With all the talk about potential and upside Correia was a pretty good pitcher 2013 and was healthy all year. Outside of Nolasco, you can't say that about Hughes, Pelfrey, Worley, Diamond, Deduno, or Gibson. I don't think you can even say that about Garza.

    So, I am not in any big hurry to see Correia traded. Until you are sure that at least some of the above guys can be healthy and capable of pitching to their "upside", I would like to see the Twins keep Correia around. There isn't likely any big market for him anyway. I think he is worth more to the Twins right now than any return is likely to be.

  9. These 2 users like Jim H's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Kwak (01-06-2014), Willihammer (01-04-2014)

  10. #69
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,270
    Like
    32
    Liked 120 Times in 78 Posts
    I really don't get all this Deduno love. He's 30, he K's 6/9IP (and BB's 4/9IP) and he is coming back from a significant injury. I understand that Corriea is boring with zero upside (other than stability) but Deduno (if healthy) seems more like a guy that you move in and out of the bottom of the rotation instead of opening a spot for him.

  11. This user likes kab21's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    USAFChief (01-05-2014)

  12. #70
    Senior Member Triple-A Paul Pleiss's Avatar
    Posts
    438
    Twitter
    @baseballpirate
    Like
    116
    Liked 97 Times in 66 Posts
    Blog Entries
    76
    Sign Matt Garza, give him lots of money and nick name him "Gravy" because everyone loves Gravy.

    I don't know how signing Garza could be a bad idea. Even if his arm blows up I like the commitment by the front office. Sign Garza. Sign Stephen Drew.

    A proven MLB commodity seems like a better bet than wishing and hoping and praying on prospects. And I love prospects. But prospects will break your heart.

  13. This user likes Paul Pleiss's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Kwak (01-06-2014)

  14. #71
    Banned Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    715
    Like
    82
    Liked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pleiss View Post
    Sign Matt Garza, give him lots of money and nick name him "Gravy" because everyone loves Gravy.

    I don't know how signing Garza could be a bad idea. Even if his arm blows up I like the commitment by the front office. Sign Garza. Sign J.D. Drew.

    A proven MLB commodity seems like a better bet than wishing and hoping and praying on prospects. And I love prospects. But prospects will break your heart.
    The loser of the Tanaka saga may well pay Garza 5 years for 75-85M. Garza, Santana, and Jimenez are not sitting around because they feel the price is going to drop. At least 2 of those 3 will probably be signing albatross contracts. I would sign Arroyo for 2 years and trade Corriea when the time is right.

  15. #72
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,625
    Like
    1,121
    Liked 535 Times in 354 Posts
    What is an albatross contract? Teams are floating in unspent money. The income will continue to go up. Contract prices will continue to go up. SF signed Zito, and won two WS after that. The only contracts that are albatross like are the ones where you sign an awful player because you are too cheap to sign good ones. Remember when the entire board said Hunter would never be worth his contract in CA, and he'd be done before that contract expried? You are good with signing Nolasco for 4 -5 years, but not Garza, who is younger by a year?
    Lighten up Francis....

  16. #73
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    287
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    It is mentioned here trade Correia when the time is right. What MLB team really needs Correia anyway and why would they trade for him - simply makes no sense.

  17. #74
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    594
    Like
    185
    Liked 74 Times in 55 Posts
    Blog Entries
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by howieramone View Post
    The loser of the Tanaka saga may well pay Garza 5 years for 75-85M. Garza, Santana, and Jimenez are not sitting around because they feel the price is going to drop. At least 2 of those 3 will probably be signing albatross contracts. I would sign Arroyo for 2 years and trade Corriea when the time is right.
    I think this 1st part of this is absolutely true...

    Garza, Jimenez, and Santana are waiting...and in waiting, they will get that extra $2M-$5M per season as a result.

    For the Twins, I'm not particular enamored with any of the 3 for the Salary/Years and the lost Draft pick.

    I haven't looked to the 2015 Free Agency class either - maybe 1 year of patience would be prudent.

  18. #75
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,625
    Like
    1,121
    Liked 535 Times in 354 Posts
    It has been three years of patience already....and next year people will say "they only wond 75 games, why would you spend on FAs when they aren't one player away" again....
    Lighten up Francis....

  19. #76
    Senior Member All-Star SpiritofVodkaDave's Avatar
    Posts
    3,905
    Like
    75
    Liked 360 Times in 182 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    What is an albatross contract? Teams are floating in unspent money. The income will continue to go up. Contract prices will continue to go up. SF signed Zito, and won two WS after that. The only contracts that are albatross like are the ones where you sign an awful player because you are too cheap to sign good ones. Remember when the entire board said Hunter would never be worth his contract in CA, and he'd be done before that contract expried? You are good with signing Nolasco for 4 -5 years, but not Garza, who is younger by a year?
    You bring up Hunter, which ended up working out for the Angels, but they are a perfect example of having albatross contracts:

    Pujols, Wells, Hamilton are all going to prevent them from winning.

  20. #77
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,219
    Like
    100
    Liked 95 Times in 69 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by twinsfan34 View Post
    I think this 1st part of this is absolutely true...

    Garza, Jimenez, and Santana are waiting...and in waiting, they will get that extra $2M-$5M per season as a result.

    For the Twins, I'm not particular enamored with any of the 3 for the Salary/Years and the lost Draft pick.

    I haven't looked to the 2015 Free Agency class either - maybe 1 year of patience would be prudent.
    Allow me to be the 17th poster to state: "There isn't any lost draft choice if Garza is signed. His cost is simply a rotation spot and his salary. This fact improves the desirability of Garza over other free-agent pitchers because there is no draft-choice penalty associated with signing him.

    Correira. He was the most productive SP for the Twins over the entire season of 162 games. He wasn't especially good, just better than the rest. That, plus his "good health" should guarantee him a spot in the rotation come April. Trade him? If someone make a solid offer--sure--but I don't think one is forthcoming. Trade him because he's "blocking" younger pitchers? Foolish! The reason he's "blocking" people is because they aren't good enough. Consider: The Twins have signed three free-agent pitchers not because they are enamored with spending on baseball players--but because the alternative was worse.

  21. #78
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave View Post
    You bring up Hunter, which ended up working out for the Angels, but they are a perfect example of having albatross contracts:

    Pujols, Wells, Hamilton are all going to prevent them from winning.
    But they have unlimited money, so they can just sign more players!
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  22. #79
    Junior Member Rookie
    Posts
    28
    Like
    10
    Liked 23 Times in 9 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    ....
    Consider: The Twins have signed three free-agent pitchers not because they are enamored with spending on baseball players--but because the alternative was worse.
    I totally concur with Kwak on this. Somehow many of us become enamored with the players we have. That is not a bad thing until it gets in the way of making moves to improve the current team. After rational judgement of what is out there and what the Twins have, there is one question that should determine if a FA signing or trade be made -- Does the player(s) improve what we already have. If so, you get it done.

    I believe some of us have gotten away from that premise.

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

    jokin (01-06-2014), mike wants wins (01-06-2014), USAFChief (01-06-2014)

  24. #80
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,625
    Like
    1,121
    Liked 535 Times in 354 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave View Post
    You bring up Hunter, which ended up working out for the Angels, but they are a perfect example of having albatross contracts:

    Pujols, Wells, Hamilton are all going to prevent them from winning.
    We know they aren't going to win now? We know it is because of these contracts, and not because they made a bunch of other bad decisions?

    'tis better to have loved and lost, than not to have loved at all......
    Lighten up Francis....

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 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.