Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Are the Twins buyers again?

  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#81 Shaitan

Shaitan

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 543 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:57 AM

 

It would create interesting discussions around the league, I'd think, and elsewhere, about their decisiveness. 

Maybe it's not indecisiveness. Maybe it's a different mindset completely, viewing a 162-game roster as a more fluid thing? Dunno. I would be interesting if the bought/sold/bought and made it to the post-season, just to see if other GMs would copy the idea. 

 

I kind of hate the all-or-nothingness of the current Trading Deadline. It makes baseball hard to watch in 2/3s of baseball cities after August 2.


#82 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,810 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:13 AM

 

I don't think you never deal in your division but I think there are players that you hold off on. For example, the Twins would be unlikely to deal Sano but even then, they'd be way less likely to deal him in division. The same probably does not hold true for Eduardo Escobar.

 

I think Verlander is a guy the Tigers wouldn't want to deal to a rival. Maybe I'm wrong.

I don't see it that way. If you're selling someone like Sano, you don't plan to compete in the next two seasons. And if you're not competing in the next two seasons, then the opposing team has to pay Sano huge money to retain him during your competition window, something they could do anyway if Sano hit free agency.

 

Very rarely do you see significant trades between teams that have overlapping windows of contention because those teams are essentially doing the same thing, which makes them mostly incompatible as trade partners. So you just make the trade that gives your team the best chance of winning given your timeline, division be damned.

  • brvama likes this

#83 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,910 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 12 August 2017 - 10:56 AM

I highly doubt we're at that point quite yet. At season's end, Verlander will likely have accumulated ~11 fWAR over his past three seasons.

Yeah, he's overpaid. Yeah, he's aging. But he's still a good pitcher and Detroit won't let that go for nothing (though I wouldn't pay much more than nothing for the rest of that contract).

I suspect Detroit isn't quite ready to give away Verlander, though that point is probably coming soon if Verlander ages in a typical fashion. But if he keeps performing, his value will actually rise as the contract expires.

Verlander would be their best starter now, probably next yr, and possibly the year after that.

Take on the money. It's only a couple years, how bad could it hurt? They're not signing a better FA, and if they do it will be 5 years, maybe 6.

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#84 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,810 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 11:15 AM

Verlander would be their best starter now, probably next yr, and possibly the year after that.

Take on the money. It's only a couple years, how bad could it hurt? They're not signing a better FA, and if they do it will be 5 years, maybe 6.

Because if the Twins are going to spend that kind of money, I want it spent on someone like Darvish. Instead of getting ages 34-36 at $25m per season, you're getting ages 31-36 seasons at $25m per season.

And it costs you zero prospects to do it. If I was the Tigers, my starting asking price for Verlander would be "you pay 100% of his contract and give us Fernando Romero". I'd back down from that to maybe Jorge + Diaz and 100% of Verlander's contract but that's not a price I'd pay if I was the Twins. If the Tigers pay part of the contract, the price goes back up, maybe even Romero+.

Verlander is still performing at a high enough level that the Tigers have no reason to trade him right now unless the offer is good.

I'm not against trading some nice prospects for pitching but I'd pursue someone with legit upside under 30, not Justin Verlander. And I'd be willing to pay steeply for it to get that real upside. Verlander is simply too big a risk of sudden decline to hamstring payroll and the farm system in trade, IMO.

#85 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,910 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 12 August 2017 - 12:27 PM

Because if the Twins are going to spend that kind of money, I want it spent on someone like Darvish. Instead of getting ages 34-36 at $25m per season, you're getting ages 31-36 seasons at $25m per season.
And it costs you zero prospects to do it. If I was the Tigers, my starting asking price for Verlander would be "you pay 100% of his contract and give us Fernando Romero". I'd back down from that to maybe Jorge + Diaz and 100% of Verlander's contract but that's not a price I'd pay if I was the Twins. If the Tigers pay part of the contract, the price goes back up, maybe even Romero+.
Verlander is still performing at a high enough level that the Tigers have no reason to trade him right now unless the offer is good.
I'm not against trading some nice prospects for pitching but I'd pursue someone with legit upside under 30, not Justin Verlander. And I'd be willing to pay steeply for it to get that real upside. Verlander is simply too big a risk of sudden decline to hamstring payroll and the farm system in trade, IMO.

I doubt you're getting Darvish at $25. In any case, "that kind of money" for Darvish is at least $150m. $50-something for Verlander. It's the same reason they should have been all over a Hamels trade...you can't get that level of pitcher on a short contract, signed at prices in effect 3-4 years ago.

I doubt the Twins are even in on the bidding. Bully for them if they are, though.

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#86 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,810 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 12:34 PM

 

I doubt you're getting Darvish at $25. In any case, "that kind of money" for Darvish is at least $150m. $50-something for Verlander. It's the same reason they should have been all over a Hamels trade...you can't get that level of pitcher on a short contract, signed at prices in effect 3-4 years ago.

I doubt the Twins are even in on the bidding. Bully for them if they are, though.

I don't think Darvish will come in much higher than $25m. He's a stutter-step below guys like Scherzer and Price, who are $30m a year pitchers.

 

In any case, I believe there are better targets than Verlander unless the Tigers are eager to move him, which I doubt they are. I don't trust Verlander to be a very good pitcher in 2018-19. He's entering his age 35 season. If you can lowball the Tigers in prospects and take the contract, sure, but the Tigers don't seem to operate that way.


#87 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,910 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 12 August 2017 - 05:38 PM

The Twins think they're buyers:

 

http://www.twincitie...-help-our-team/

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#88 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,730 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 12 August 2017 - 06:16 PM

The Twins think they're buyers:

http://www.twincitie...-help-our-team/


Good to see. Hard to ignore what the team is doing now. Still think they can add a veteran dh bat and a reliever. Starter will much harder.
  • USAFChief likes this
Papers...business papers.

#89 crop duster

crop duster

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 07:59 PM

Is that latest article a joke? Levine threw in the towel way too fast when he unloaded Garcia and Kinsler for two powerball tickets and a bag of chips, way too late to do anything meaningful now. Don't insult my intelligence by pretending otherwise. If this team stumbles into the playoffs somehow it will be in spite on Levine not due to him.

Edited by crop duster, 12 August 2017 - 07:59 PM.

  • Highabove likes this

#90 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,810 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:00 PM

Is that latest article a joke? Levine through in the towel way too fast when he unloaded Garcia and Kinsler for two powerball tickets and a bag of chips, way too late to do anything meaningful now. Don't insult my intelligence by pretending otherwise. If this team stumbles into the playoffs somehow it will be in spite on Levine not due to him.

Given this post, you'd think the Twins traded Greg Maddux and Mariano Rivera, not Jaime Garcia and Brandon Kintzler.
  • Mike Sixel, BigSkyTwinsFan, spanman2 and 2 others like this

#91 crop duster

crop duster

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:16 PM

Given this post, you'd think the Twins traded Greg Maddux and Mariano Rivera, not Jaime Garcia and Brandon Kintzler.


Draw false comparisons much?
  • DaveW likes this

#92 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 16,077 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:18 PM

Welp, as of half an hour ago, we're sellers again. :)

So little time, so little to do.-- Oscar Levant


#93 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,810 posts

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:58 PM

 

Draw false comparisons much?

No, just pointing out that the Twins sold on a guy who made one start (and isn't very good in the first place) and a second guy who made for a decent closer but always walked a pretty fine line between decent and "OMG MAKE IT STOP".

 

I liked Kintzler and defended him quite a bit but under no circumstances will I pretend he was someone to rely on in the closer role. He did a good job with the Twins but he just as easily could have blown tonight's game.

 

Sure, the front office sold on Kintzler. Maybe that will be a mistake but given the return and the $500k in international cap space given for him, I doubt it will.

 

And it's very possible to get an equal, if not better, replacement in August for less prospect capital.

  • LA VIkes Fan likes this

#94 Willihammer

Willihammer

    Nostrombolimus

  • Members
  • 7,252 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 12 August 2017 - 08:59 PM

“On a daily basis we are active on the trade-waiver wire process,” Levine said. “We’ve placed a lot of claims on players we think can help our team now and in the future.”

"We haven’t made a trade yet, which is evidence to the fact that we may not be the only team that thinks those players would be attractive,"

 

Maybe if they're putting in claims now, they'd be blocked. But how many days ago were they they 7th team back in the WC standings. Three? 

Well, there's that.

-Dark Star, RIP


#95 Willihammer

Willihammer

    Nostrombolimus

  • Members
  • 7,252 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 12 August 2017 - 09:01 PM

Sort of a paradox I guess. Put in a claim when you're too far back and you could be squandering assets. Wait til you're in contention, and your records too good and you'll be blocked.

Well, there's that.

-Dark Star, RIP


#96 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 11,899 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 07:07 AM

No, just pointing out that the Twins sold on a guy who made one start (and isn't very good in the first place) and a second guy who made for a decent closer but always walked a pretty fine line between decent and "OMG MAKE IT STOP".

I liked Kintzler and defended him quite a bit but under no circumstances will I pretend he was someone to rely on in the closer role. He did a good job with the Twins but he just as easily could have blown tonight's game.

Sure, the front office sold on Kintzler. Maybe that will be a mistake but given the return and the $500k in international cap space given for him, I doubt it will.

And it's very possible to get an equal, if not better, replacement in August for less prospect capital.


I am not sure if you are underrating Kintzler, or overrating the August trade market, or both...
  • USAFChief likes this

#97 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,730 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 13 August 2017 - 07:15 AM

I am not sure if you are underrating Kintzler, or overrating the August trade market, or both...


Both.
  • USAFChief likes this
Papers...business papers.

#98 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,502 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 09:38 AM

Brandon Kintzler, at his current pace, will be worth about 0.55 bWAR the rest of that season.
He's very unlikely to be the difference between anything.

#99 crop duster

crop duster

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 10:29 AM

 

 

No, just pointing out that the Twins sold on a guy who made one start (and isn't very good in the first place) and a second guy who made for a decent closer but always walked a pretty fine line between decent and "OMG MAKE IT STOP".

 

I liked Kintzler and defended him quite a bit but under no circumstances will I pretend he was someone to rely on in the closer role. He did a good job with the Twins but he just as easily could have blown tonight's game.

 

Sure, the front office sold on Kintzler. Maybe that will be a mistake but given the return and the $500k in international cap space given for him, I doubt it will.

 

And it's very possible to get an equal, if not better, replacement in August for less prospect capital.

 

 

 

 

Jaime Garcia is no Greg Maddux but he was better than Turdley/Jorge/Wilk/Tepesch/and the non April '17 Santiago.Kintzler did blow his share of games but still a better option than Belisle.OTH we got another great prospect for that future team that might be in contention someday. 


#100 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,730 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 13 August 2017 - 11:14 AM

Brandon Kintzler, at his current pace, will be worth about 0.55 bWAR the rest of that season.
He's very unlikely to be the difference between anything.


I find this to be a counterproductive application of an already flawed stat.
  • USAFChief likes this
Papers...business papers.