Jump to content

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

Go get Verlander

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
816 replies to this topic

#21 Pardon My Dinger

Pardon My Dinger

    Cat Evangelist

  • Members
  • 2,818 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:51 PM

The Tigers will be less interested in sending Verlander to an AL Central team, no? 

  • DocBauer likes this

Rap name: LL Cool Bean.


#22 whydidnt

whydidnt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 564 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:52 PM

I do agree with previous posters that Verlander isn't likely to waive his NT to come to the Twins. However, if we can move past that, he would be a massive upgrade on what we have. However, for me I would only agree to take on all the salary if the return in prospects wasn't too great. I'm not dealing 2-3 of our top prospects and taking on $28M/year. If the Pohlads are willing to spend that king of change on a P, let's go get a FA in the off-season and keep the prospects. 

I chuckled as I wrote this though. The thought of the Pohlads signing off on $28M for 2 more years just makes me laugh.

  • DocBauer and SF Twins Fan like this

#23 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,882 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:56 PM

 

Matt Moore hasn't been an above average pitcher since 2014.

I don't think 3 years is a small sample size.

Looks risky to me.

In 2016, he threw ~ 200 ip, 99 ERA+, 2.0 WAR that's about as average as you can get.

This year has been a disaster.

2015 he only had 12 starts coming back from injury so I'm not sure there's a lot to gain from it. If the Twins think they can get the 2016 or better version, he's an upgrade. If not, he's not.


#24 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 25,324 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:58 PM

 

I would give them Kohl Stewart, Lamonte Wade, and Alex Kiriloff for him? Maybe throw blankenhorn. Would that be enough?

 

More than enough. There is almost no excess value in his contract right now.

 

I was thinking a similar deal, only Jorge and Kiriloff and Jay.

One of the best opening day rosters in years. Now go get 'em.


#25 Oldgoat_MN

Oldgoat_MN

    Any chance we'll extend a player? Anyone?

  • Members
  • 1,852 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:59 PM

 

In 2016, he threw ~ 200 ip, 99 ERA+, 2.0 WAR that's about as average as you can get.

This year has been a disaster.

2015 he only had 12 starts coming back from injury so I'm not sure there's a lot to gain from it. If the Twins think they can get the 2016 or better version, he's an upgrade. If not, he's not.

I agree:  if they get the 2016 version then it is good for the money he's owed.

Don't believe everything you read on the Internet just because it has a name or a photo you recognize.

- Abraham Lincoln


#26 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 25,324 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 01:59 PM

 

Bingo.It's short-sighted.Why on earth would you take on the last years of this type of contract and give up prospects.If you are going to spend the money associated with this type of SP, go get one next year that is 3-5 years younger and hold on to our prospects to boot.Don't spend $28M/yr and only get the years that they are very likely to decline.Go get someone still in their prime and keep the prospects.

 

Plus, Nicksavings is likely right about his willingness to waive his NT clause.

 

And who is as good as Verlander that is available? Oh, and you have to oubid 29 other teams too.

  • USAFChief, Otwins, Sconnie and 3 others like this

One of the best opening day rosters in years. Now go get 'em.


#27 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,949 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:08 PM

 

46th in xFIP

31st in FIP

29th in ERA

 

Turning 35 before next season.  Triple the money for a similar talent??? They can spend the same amount of money over more years and get a similar talent

name(s), please.

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#28 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:13 PM

 

name(s), please.

 

Chacin, Cobb, Estrada, Lynn, Hellickson - would put these guys in a similar class to 35 year old Verlander, will command significantly less per year than $28 million.  

 

Arrietta, Darvish, Tanaka, Cueto - better than Verlander, will be expensive

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#29 Tuba

Tuba

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 154 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:14 PM

Just tell the Pohlad's that Kate Upton at games is worth at least $4m a year. You will sell a lot of Dugout Box tickets. 


#30 whydidnt

whydidnt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 564 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:34 PM

 

Chacin, Cobb, Estrada, Lynn, Hellickson - would put these guys in a similar class to 35 year old Verlander, will command significantly less per year than $28 million.  

 

Arrietta, Darvish, Tanaka, Cueto - better than Verlander, will be expensive

We'll have to disagree on assessment of guys in the same class or better. None of those guys in your top class has either the pedigree, velocity or recent results that Verlander has. Arrietta is the only of the "better" class that has performed better than Verlander this year, and his stats are trending downward.

I'm not sure how to define available, but not all of these guys are going to be FA's and I can't see their team shopping them either, especially a guy like Tanaka.

 

We are probably arguing over nothing of import though, the Twins aren't going to take on Verlander's salary, and It would be short sighted to give up a huge prospect haul to get Detroit to cover enough of it to matter. 

  • USAFChief and Sconnie like this

#31 Sconnie

Sconnie

    From the "right" side of the St Croix

  • Members
  • 3,576 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:37 PM

 

Chacin, Cobb, Estrada, Lynn, Hellickson - would put these guys in a similar class to 35 year old Verlander, will command significantly less per year than $28 million.  

 

Arrietta, Darvish, Tanaka, Cueto - better than Verlander, will be expensive

2 years 56 mil is steep, but it's only two years. If you think Helickson is taking less than 3 years 17 mil per year (51 mil) on his next contract, I'd like to se evidence. I'd take the shorter contract every time.  

  • Hosken Bombo Disco and Tomj14 like this

#32 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,971 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:39 PM

Hellickson might take less than that, because he has an ERA of 5 and a 5.5 K/9 this year...

#33 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 25,324 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 02:43 PM

 

Hellickson might take less than that, because he has an ERA of 5 and a 5.5 K/9 this year...

 

sounds like a major upgrade!

  • Sconnie, Vanimal46 and Tomj14 like this

One of the best opening day rosters in years. Now go get 'em.


#34 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 242 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:06 PM

 

The Tigers will be less interested in sending Verlander to an AL Central team, no? 

I thought about this as well-it comes down to if the Tigers want to completely tear down and start over in the off-season. If they do, I'm guessing they would trade him to whoever gives them better prospects. If they think they are only a couple pieces away, then they won't trade him...especially to us. 

  • Sconnie likes this

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#35 Siehbiscuit

Siehbiscuit

    Overweight 3rd baseman

  • Members
  • 376 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:06 PM

Keep in mind, two years for Verlanders salary is while the Buxtons, Sanos, Keplers and Rosario's are cheap. Add in Berrios, Romero, Gonsalves and they two will be pre-arb. Mauer comes off the books after next year and for the chance that Verlanders can rediscover a second life here, isn't if worth the is risk? Verlanders, Berrios and Santana followed by some combination of Gonsalves, Romero, Gibson, Slegers and others seems like the beginning of a solid rotation.

If the Twins were willing to absorb much of the salary, I think Verlanders could be had for a couple of C propspects. The Tigers are more concerned with $$$ and rebuilding than his legacy.
  • Sconnie, Hosken Bombo Disco and DocBauer like this

#36 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,003 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:17 PM

I'm not saying the Twins should go after Verlander specifically, but with Perkins, Santiago, Belisle, Breslow and surely Gibson coming off the books, the Twins are shedding 20.70M in five pitchers of which only one of whom has even been remotely useful this year. 

 

They don't have to spend it all in one place (though I'd vote they do) but they better be spending it somewhere. And I really hate the nickle and dime, quantity over quality approach to free agency.

 

They're also shedding the 4M or what-not they're paying Garcia to pitch for the Yankees. Which makes me think they are more open to any and all options. At least more open than they used to be.

 

  • USAFChief, Sconnie, Hosken Bombo Disco and 1 other like this

#37 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 19,914 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:31 PM

 

I would imagine the Tigers would want Gordon and Gonsalves as a starting point but more would be needed. Not sure how money plays into all this but Detroit isn't just going to get rid of him and they are also trying to shed payroll.So the Twins (or Astros) would have to give up real talent and take on a lot of salary. Does that sound like a Pohlad move? 

Pohlads be damned, I'd argue that sounds like an illogical move.

 

If the Tigers want a top 50 (possibly top 30) and a top 100 prospect for the honor of paying Verlander's contract, they can piss right off and go straight to hell.

 

Verlander is good. He's no longer great or anything close to it. He has one elite season out of the past four and he's not getting younger.

  • diehardtwinsfan, DJSim22, brvama and 5 others like this

#38 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,949 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:31 PM

It seems to me many of the same arguments being used against trading for Verlander were used to argue against trading for Cole Hamels.

 

And the Twins would be lucky to have Hamels right now.

 

One of the things I think the Twins HAVE to do is stop operating like they can't spend money.  They certainly can, all they need to do, is do it.

  • Twins33, Siehbiscuit, Sconnie and 3 others like this

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#39 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 19,914 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:34 PM

For the record, I might give up Gonsalves for Verlander. Anything past that, hard pass.

 

And I'd think long and hard about even giving up Gonsalves for a pitcher of Verlander's age under that contract.

  • ToddlerHarmon likes this

#40 TRex

TRex

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 687 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 03:44 PM

 

For the record, I might give up Gonsalves for Verlander. Anything past that, hard pass.

 

And I'd think long and hard about even giving up Gonsalves for a pitcher of Verlander's age under that contract.

I agree, and I think everyone is forgetting that he just passed through waivers! Someone could have had him... or been stuck with him... for nothing! Why is he all of the sudden worth 3 or 4 of our top 25 prospects?

  • ashburyjohn, SF Twins Fan and ToddlerHarmon like this