Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Law: "The White Sox got a steal in Liriano"

  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#1 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,564 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:21 AM

The whole article is here and requires subscription, but here is what he has to say about the deal:

The Chicago White Sox got a steal in Francisco Liriano by agreeing to pay his salary, sending the Twins two fringe prospects in utility infielder Eduardo Escobar and middle reliever Pedro Hernandez.


So the only people who like the deal so far are people who think Ryan can do no wrong...
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#2 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,183 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:23 AM

So the only people who like the deal so far are people who think Ryan can do no wrong...


Because Law said it? Wow. Good reasoning.

#3 DPJ

DPJ

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 636 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:23 AM

Keith Law hates the insert your favorite team, ofcourse he would say that.

#4 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,309 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:24 AM

So the only people who like the deal so far are people who think Ryan can do no wrong...


There are people who like the deal? Where? I haven't seen any.

I've seen a lot of "mehs" and "damn, that's all they could get?" but very few statements of positivity about the trade.

#5 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,930 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:28 AM

There are people who like the deal? Where? I haven't seen any.

I've seen a lot of "mehs" and "damn, that's all they could get?" but very few statements of positivity about the trade.


C'mon RP, while there haven't been necessarily positive things said, the excuse factory is working overtime.

#6 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,079 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:29 AM

Ah yes, the kool aid people. -sigh- You know, for the number of factual mistakes you post, you probably should take a break for a while. Sickels on the trade- "This may not seem like a great haul for Liriano, but given his very erratic track record, this package or something like it is probably the best the Twins could hope for." Baseball America: "A free agent after the season, Liriano's wildly-fluctuating results made it unlikely that the Twins would have made him the qualifying contract offer necessary to receive draft pick compensation. So while neither Hernandez nor Escobar project to be future impact players, each possesses at least one plus tool and can help the Twins in their organizational rebuild. That's certainly better than nothing." Liriano has the ability to rip off 7 good starts out of his next ten. It's a worth while gamble and a couple C prospects aren't that high of a price to make if you're wrong. That's why the trade is good from the White Sox side. If he implodes, they don't have any future obligation to him. I'm pretty sure that's Klaw's point. He isn't saying the Twins should've gotten more for Liriano, he's suggesting that it's a worthy gamble by Chicago.

#7 twinswon1991

twinswon1991

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 256 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:29 AM

I wish Terry Ryan in my fantasy league. It is always nice having the clueless manager you can fleece at any time. I'm sure that is how other MLB execs view TR.

#8 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,309 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:33 AM

C'mon RP, while there haven't been necessarily positive things said, the excuse factory is working overtime.


You mean excuses like "Liriano hasn't been very good for a very long time and that marginalized his value?"

No team in their right mind was going to loot the farm for a player like Francisco. The only thing I didn't understand about the trade was why JR accepted that deal when Francisco could have made another start. Of course, his value could have dropped even lower after that start so there's a gamble there, too.

This was just a crappy situation. I don't fault JR for not bringing home the farm when there were better pitching options out there to be had. I only question whether he should have waited two days and I doubt that would have made much of a difference overall.

#9 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,930 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:34 AM

Ah yes, the kool aid people. -sigh- You know, for the number of factual mistakes you post, you probably should take a break for a while.

Sickels on the trade- "This may not seem like a great haul for Liriano, but given his very erratic track record, this package or something like it is probably the best the Twins could hope for."

Baseball America: "A free agent after the season, Liriano's wildly-fluctuating results made it unlikely that the Twins would have made him the qualifying contract offer necessary to receive draft pick compensation. So while neither Hernandez nor Escobar project to be future impact players, each possesses at least one plus tool and can help the Twins in their organizational rebuild. That's certainly better than nothing."

Liriano has the ability to rip off 7 good starts out of his next ten. It's a worth while gamble and a couple C prospects aren't that high of a price to make if you're wrong. That's why the trade is good from the White Sox side. If he implodes, they don't have any future obligation to him. I'm pretty sure that's Klaw's point. He isn't saying the Twins should've gotten more for Liriano, he's suggesting that it's a worthy gamble by Chicago.


Is trading deadline day a holiday? They're apparently working on double-time rates today.

#10 greenland on the map

greenland on the map

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 12:02 PM

I guess after trading away Santana, Garza, Hardy, and Delmon, it is hard to realize that it is possible to end up on the better side of a deal. Sickels, BA, and other fellows on this board rationalizing that this trade was not the Challenger disaster does not make me feel any better.

#11 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,546 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 31 July 2012 - 02:58 PM

I guess after trading away Santana, Garza, Hardy, and Delmon, it is hard to realize that it is possible to end up on the better side of a deal. Sickels, BA, and other fellows on this board rationalizing that this trade was not the Challenger disaster does not make me feel any better.


Luckily you didn't mention one trade that Terry Ryan made.

Even Bill Smith made some trades that worked out - Pavano, Rauch, Diamond to name three.
Papers...business papers.

#12 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,546 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:01 PM

It is possible to agree with Law and still not be critical of Terry Ryan. Though that might cause some serious disruptions to your worldview. The one argument I can hear is that they should have let Liriano make one more start instead of accepting that package. But if he goes 7 ip, 2 r, 8 ks, I really don't think it would have made a difference in his value. The downside was much greater (injury for one).
Papers...business papers.

#13 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,051 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:19 PM

I wish Terry Ryan in my fantasy league. It is always nice having the clueless manager you can fleece at any time. I'm sure that is how other MLB execs view TR.


Before stepping down the last time, Ryan had quite the reputation for being a shrewed trader. Brian Sabean certainly won't be calling him again.

#14 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,259 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:28 PM

Ryan did have that reputation, but outside of the one really big one, I think most had impacts for a season or so. While good trades, it is hard to think of ones that really brought in a long term asset. As for this trade, meh. Liriano could help the Sox, but the Twins were not going to re-sign him, so they got something for him. Just like Young last year. While none of the 4 prospects excite me, it is better than nothing, imo. So I give this one a B-.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :)


#15 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,255 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:37 PM

Of course it is a good trade for the White Sox, they didn't give up any premium prospects and in return got a guy who could bolster their rotation.

Just like the Rangers trade, they got a guy who helps the rotation without giving up anyone they will miss. Though the Cubs didn't "lose" the trade since they got a couple decent prospects back.

That doesn't mean Ryan got fleeced or anything, it just means that the White Sox made a nice trade for themselves. You think the Indians are crying years later about the Pavano trade? Do we really think we "fleeced" them good when we gave up Pino for Pavano?

#16 Fire Dan Gladden

Fire Dan Gladden

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 382 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:48 PM

I also read the Klaw article. My takeaway was more that it was worth the gamble for the Sox to take. Costing them some money and and few low level prospects for the possibility of some good starts down the stretch. Klaw was wrong about one thing though. He mentioned that, if anything, Liriano would help them to manage innings down the stretch. I wonder if he realizes that even at his best, Liriano only typically gives you six innings due to high pitch counts...

#17 one_eyed_jack

one_eyed_jack

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 617 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 03:53 PM

So the only people who like the deal so far are people who think Ryan can do no wrong...



---Actually, it's more the case that the only people still complaining about this deal are the ones who think Ryan can do no right.

The rest of us were at worst mildly disappointed but not terribly surprised that we didn't get more and have moved on from talking about the trade, because it really isn't that big a deal.

#18 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,274 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 04:06 PM

thrylos, you just can't help yourself, can you? You'll never be honest enough with yourself to see the reality, which is that most of us can in fact find both positive AND negative things. It's called fairness. Try it some time. Just once.

#19 fatbeer

fatbeer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 147 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 04:36 PM

Liriano is like an NBA player who scores a lot of points but doesn't play defense, he looks like a lot of the all-star types but in reality isn't as valuable as a kyle Loshe. If he gets you to the 7th inning giving up 1 run and making batters look silly you can have no more confidence he won't give up at least 3 as you would going into the game. Wins might have more to do with your offense then anything else, but losses tend to reflect a pitcher.

#20 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,255 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 04:50 PM

Liriano is like an NBA player who scores a lot of points but doesn't play defense, he looks like a lot of the all-star types but in reality isn't as valuable as a kyle Loshe. If he gets you to the 7th inning giving up 1 run and making batters look silly you can have no more confidence he won't give up at least 3 as you would going into the game. Wins might have more to do with your offense then anything else, but losses tend to reflect a pitcher.


7 Quality starts in 17 starts this season. Not good.

#21 johnnydakota

johnnydakota

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 1,498 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 04:50 PM

I wish Terry Ryan in my fantasy league. It is always nice having the clueless manager you can fleece at any time. I'm sure that is how other MLB execs view TR.



amen

#22 Rosterman

Rosterman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,192 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 05:08 PM

Either Liriano helps Chicago to the Playoffs, or he implodes and blows the Sox chances bigtime. A pretty big either/or. He could pitch for the Twins and keep us from looking at others who may/may not do just as good for a team on the downside of the division. Hell, if Liriano went 10-1 for the Twins the rest of the way, the only person he is helping is Liriano. He is not going to resign with the Twins, period. Why? The Twins have sent him to the minors and played with his service time. They sent him to the bullpen. They didn't sign him longterm (like Baker or Blackburn). Anywhere would be better than Minnesota for Liriano in 2013 unless the Twins would pay stupid money, which they never offered. We got someone to take the place of Alexi or Toshi or Carroll in 2012. We got a pitcher that might have some end-of-the-rotation upside for 3-4 years and perform as adequately as Liriano ahs the past 3-4 years. (Or he might need Tommy John, too). We see tonight if he helps the Sox or just fills a hole in their rotation. But if the Twins thought he was worth 3 years and $24 million, or $30 million or $36 million -- that time ahs come and gone. Of course, if he implodes, the Twins could pay him $8-10 a year if no one else lines up. But I wouldn't bet the house on that. If you are a bottom team, you get rid of pending free agents in July and August. You try to package 6-year minor league guys to other teams for 3-4 year prospects. You get rid of potentally high-priced arbitration players for possible prospects. That is what you do.

#23 Bojangles

Bojangles

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 05:17 PM

---Actually, it's more the case that the only people still complaining about this deal are the ones who think Ryan can do no right.

The rest of us were at worst mildly disappointed but not terribly surprised that we didn't get more and have moved on from talking about the trade, because it really isn't that big a deal.

/thread
[SIZE=1]Joe Mauer should hit more home runs. JMO.[/SIZE]

#24 by jiminy

by jiminy

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 31 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 05:35 PM

Ryan had quite the reputation for being a shrewed trader.


Actually I don't think he got shrewed THAT bad...

#25 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,859 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 31 July 2012 - 05:53 PM

... because it really isn't that big a deal.


No pun intended, I trust.

#26 Clyde

Clyde

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 06:30 PM

You think the Indians are crying years later about the Pavano trade? Do we really think we "fleeced" them good when we gave up Pino for Pavano?


Not fleeced, but Pavano's 17-10 in 2010 is far better than anything Pino has done. Unfortunately another team did not overbid for his services for 2011.

When the people on this board start saying that Liriano would be worth 12 million a year, then they can complain about the Liriano trade. If you were not going to sign him, you have to get what you can. Look at the other traded pitchers. Rodriguez, Maholm and Dempster reach eturned more for their teams than Liriano did. There is more of an upside to Liriano than those players. Is that upsiide going to show up for the playoffs? The other pitchers on as bad or worse teams were at least .500 or better pitchers. Liriano could not even do that. That is why there was little market for Liriano.

#27 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,183 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 09:45 PM

---Actually, it's more the case that the only people still complaining about this deal are the ones who think Ryan can do no right.

The rest of us were at worst mildly disappointed but not terribly surprised that we didn't get more and have moved on from talking about the trade, because it really isn't that big a deal.


Boom. Done. (Say it in Piven's voice, it makes more sense.)

But seriously, I'm okay with the Sux picking him up. Liriano is never good late in the season. He will be lucky if he's worth a single game over replacement the rest of the way...

#28 Dilligaf69

Dilligaf69

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 365 posts

Posted 31 July 2012 - 09:53 PM

How long we gonna beat this horse????? It's over get over it! Of course you would have liked to get a better haul but Cisco's inconsistency prevented the Twins from getting more. He simply wasn't worth that much.

#29 Fire Dan Gladden

Fire Dan Gladden

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 382 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 07:01 AM

How long we gonna beat this horse????? It's over get over it! Of course you would have liked to get a better haul but Cisco's inconsistency prevented the Twins from getting more. He simply wasn't worth that much.


Because otherwise people would have to discuss the Vikings. Do they really want to go there?

#30 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,859 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 05 August 2012 - 04:45 PM

How long we gonna beat this horse?????


I just wish Terry Ryan had tried a little harder to get more in return.