Jump to content

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

Outside the box Idea: Trade for Giancarlo Stanton

  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#61 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,448 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 07:46 AM

What I found he has progressively worse years for the next 3. Not bad years, just progressively worse... do you think he will turn down the 6/218 left on his contract?

So....

Option a) he continues to play great and opts out after 3 years. Most any team would be happy with that

Option B) he does what I described above and you have $36M per year locked into a declining DH

Option A might be more likely but option B scares of about 90% of MLB franchises.


Why would he be a DH? Stanton is a solid defensive outfielder.

#62 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,107 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:31 AM

 

Why would he be a DH? Stanton is a solid defensive outfielder.

 

Do we expect him to be in 4 years?


#63 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,256 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:36 AM

 

No, I understand perfectly. You will make a case against signing or trading for any free agent (almost always 30+) or trading for any veteran player.

 

The key here is to get a player on a long contract that includes his age 28-32 seasons (your selection of players back this up) since that will likely give you substantial excess value. Even if you consider Stanton only to be a 5+ WAR/yr player then he is worth 40+M/yr. I think he definitely has 3-4 seasons of 5+ WAR left and that is why I choose this deal.

 

I find it convenient that you left out Miguel Cabrera's 2008 contract. Mauer's 2009 and ARod's 2008 contract were included.

 

For some reason you consider Ryan Howard and Ellsbury comparable which they are not even remotely close to. Howard average 1.3WAR for the two seasons before signing his ridiculous contract. Ellsbury's value was based on his defensive. I wouldn't even consider using Hamilton as an argument against signing any kind of FA due to his past. 

 

Let's throw out those 3 comparisons out and you are left with

Tex - the early part of his contract has justified the later part even if he sucks now

Mauer - he was great until he suffered a concussion and even then his contract has not prevented the Twins from signing anyone or retaining anyone. It is not the reason that the Twins were bad for so long.

Pujols - He signed his contract at age 32. Your data certainly suggests that this is a bad idea. Getting Stanton at age 28 to enjoy the 4 peak years before Pujols signed his contract is a great idea. Signing Stanton after he could opt out is a poor idea.

Cabrera - fantastic deal (2008) despite many people at the time expecting it to be awful long term. Stanton isn't quite MCab but this is the upside of the deal. MCab's new contract = LOL

ARod - fantastic deal

 

Analyzing this the exact same way as you but getting rid of players that either sucked (Howard), had disproportionate defensive WAR (Ellsbury) or were recovering drug addicts (Hamilton) shows that this could be a huge win for the team that acquires him. I am not even sure that I would include a catcher as a comparable due to the wear and tear and increased chance of an injury. FWIW - I don't even regret Mauer's deal. It hasn't prevented the Twins from signing or retaining players.

The absolutely most important part of making this deal is finding players that will be at or near their peak for the time that the Twins have their young core under guaranteed team control. And increasing payroll substantially to add pitching. It certainly doesn't make any sense to add Stanton if you are rolling out last year's staff.

If a team has a chance to acquire an elite player that is 28 yrs old then they have to jump at that chance because they aren't available often.

 

There are a coupe things you fail to acknowledge. One, all of these players mentioned had equivalent or higher WARs in their prime.They all fell off dramatically by age 32 or 33.If Stanton follows the statistical mode, he will have 5 seasons at replacement level or slightly better.Carrying 36M of dead weight on the books for a modest revenue team almost assures mediocrity or worse for several years.Even Cabrera was slightly below replacement level last year at 34. 

 

Stanton’s deal goes through age 38.No, of course these situations are not identical but they don’t need to be to demonstrate that even these great players tend to decline rapidly.Therefore, the risk is quite certain and the key to assessing these contracts is how many years is the team likely to pay a premium for a player playing at roughly replacement level.Stanton is LIKELY to have 4-5 such seasons.  Let’s call it $150M for replacement level play.There are a couple of teams that can afford to take that risk but the MN Twins are a long way from that level of revenue.

 

The other basic premise I believe to be severely flawed is that 1 WAR/$8M is good.It would take a $400M payroll to build a 98 win team if constructed of free agents producing 1 WAR/$8M.That measure is the average and should not be construed as a target, especially for teams who’s revenue demands they are far more efficient per dollar of payroll than the largest markets.In fact, illustrates a low probability of success.


#64 SF Twins Fan

SF Twins Fan

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 300 posts
  • LocationNew York City, NY

Posted 16 November 2017 - 09:45 AM

 

(I assume "here" is MN and not SF)

 

Lemme see:He is from the St Fernando Valley.He lives and works in Miami.Why would anyone in their right mind abandon all that and go to Minnesota to be shown as a dog and/or pony in the Winter Caravan in every little Podunk, ND, SD, and MN, for a month with ridiculous weather?  

 

Same $ for him.Were me, I'd rather be sipping mojitos in South Beach in January.

 

Yea sure. Stay in Miami and lose your entire career or go to a team on the rise and have a chance to play in the playoffs... seems like an easy choice to me. Since he's been in the MLB the Marlins haven't finished higher than 3rd in the NL East and they don't look like a team that will be making it anytime soon. Sure, some players are fine just collecting a paycheck but most want to play on a team that year over year has a chance at the playoffs.

 

Also, so he would be in MN during the Spring, Summer and early Fall. Hardly a terrible time to be there and then he has the entire Winter off to go do whatever he wants in South Beach. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Twins don't send the superstars on the winter caravan they send the rookies, 1st and 2nd year players along with the Kyle Gibsons of the world. They don't send Dozier (now that he's good), Mauer or Santana's on the team so that's hardly a legit reason.

Edited by SF Twins Fan, 16 November 2017 - 10:02 AM.


#65 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,256 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:01 AM

 

Again...for the 5th time, Stanton is on a 3 year effective contract since he will opt out in 3 years.

It’s not a major risk on that end of things.

 

At that point he will be entering his age 31 season with 7 remaining seasons at $29.7M/year.I would think he would have to remain perfectly healthy and maintain near the career high level of performance he had last year to have a chance to sign for more.History would suggest that scenario has less than a 50/50 shot so if that's not a major risk with $200M on the line, I am not sure what is.As fan's we address these situations as if we are playing with monopoly money.I seriously doubt you could find a single MLB GM who approach this assuming Stanton will opt out.  

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 16 November 2017 - 10:03 AM.

  • diehardtwinsfan likes this

#66 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,448 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:19 AM

Do we expect him to be in 4 years?


I would, yeah. He'll be 32, not 42. Is corner OF a spot where defense usually falls off severely in their early to mid 30's?

#67 Deduno Abides

Deduno Abides

    Rochester Plates

  • Members
  • 1,629 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:39 AM

At that point he will be entering his age 31 season with 7 remaining seasons at $29.7M/year. I would think he would have to remain perfectly healthy and maintain near the career high level of performance he had last year to have a chance to sign for more. History would suggest that scenario has less than a 50/50 shot so if that's not a major risk with $200M on the line, I am not sure what is. As fan's we address these situations as if we are playing with monopoly money. I seriously doubt you could find a single MLB GM who approach this assuming Stanton will opt out.

Agreed. To just assume a $200+M risk won’t occur can’t be serious. What happens if, oh, let’s say, he is in the middle of a fantastic season but then hits his head on a second baseman’s knee while sliding during a double play? Or he slips on a wet base trying to beat out an infield single and tears up his knee? Or he has a dirt bike accident? Or gets hurt carrying a suitcase? What if he’s a superstar at 28 and then has a big tail-off at 29? Or, if you think these things will NEVER happen, what if his WAR simply goes 5.6, 4.9, 4.3? It would be great to have a talent like Stanton on your team, but no GM can seriously be evaluating this situation as if there will only be blue skies ahead, including there being no risk that he won’t opt out.

Edited by Deduno Abides, 16 November 2017 - 10:44 AM.


#68 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,053 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:53 AM

 

I would, yeah. He'll be 32, not 42. Is corner OF a spot where defense usually falls off severely in their early to mid 30's?

 

Looking at the OF UZR leaderboard this past year there looks to be about three players 32 or over that are above average and only seven that are over 30. Meanwhile there are 19 OF with a negative UZR and 11 are over 30.


#69 snap4birds

snap4birds

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:58 AM

 

Hold on hold on hold on.....

JD Martinez isn't getting 8/200

Nope.Boras is asking for 7/210 for JD, no way he'd stoop to 8/200.Here is where I heard those numbers, about halfway through the article http://www.stltoday....3c4fb478a8.html

 

I'm just kidding here.I don't think he'll get close to those numbers.But I've been surprised by contracts before.MLBTraderumors predicted JD for 6/150 to the Red Sox.  


#70 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,107 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 11:22 AM

 

Nope.Boras is asking for 7/210 for JD, no way he'd stoop to 8/200.Here is where I heard those numbers, about halfway through the article http://www.stltoday....3c4fb478a8.html

 

I'm just kidding here.I don't think he'll get close to those numbers.But I've been surprised by contracts before.MLBTraderumors predicted JD for 6/150 to the Red Sox.  

 

Yeah, 6/150 seems like the top end of the range to me.

 

7/210 is Boras dreamland

  • snap4birds likes this

#71 Clear

Clear

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 01:01 PM

Ocean. He has said that he wants to play in a city that is near an ocean. That is one reason.

I’m sure 10,000+ lakes is better than a boring ocean.
Maybe Next Year

#72 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,448 posts

Posted 16 November 2017 - 06:16 PM

Looking at the OF UZR leaderboard this past year there looks to be about three players 32 or over that are above average and only seven that are over 30. Meanwhile there are 19 OF with a negative UZR and 11 are over 30.


Well you'd have to look at how those 11 performed at age 28 to tell me if that's an age drop off, or of they were always poor defenders.
Also, Stanton could drop to below average defensively, but still not be awful enough to be a DH only option.

#73 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,682 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 18 November 2017 - 06:49 AM

 

There are a coupe things you fail to acknowledge. One, all of these players mentioned had equivalent or higher WARs in their prime.They all fell off dramatically by age 32 or 33.If Stanton follows the statistical mode, he will have 5 seasons at replacement level or slightly better.Carrying 36M of dead weight on the books for a modest revenue team almost assures mediocrity or worse for several years.Even Cabrera was slightly below replacement level last year at 34. 

 

Stanton’s deal goes through age 38.No, of course these situations are not identical but they don’t need to be to demonstrate that even these great players tend to decline rapidly.Therefore, the risk is quite certain and the key to assessing these contracts is how many years is the team likely to pay a premium for a player playing at roughly replacement level.Stanton is LIKELY to have 4-5 such seasons.  Let’s call it $150M for replacement level play.There are a couple of teams that can afford to take that risk but the MN Twins are a long way from that level of revenue.

 

The other basic premise I believe to be severely flawed is that 1 WAR/$8M is good.It would take a $400M payroll to build a 98 win team if constructed of free agents producing 1 WAR/$8M.That measure is the average and should not be construed as a target, especially for teams who’s revenue demands they are far more efficient per dollar of payroll than the largest markets.In fact, illustrates a low probability of success.

I am not failing to take into account that the later years will be overpriced. You are completely ignoring the surplus value early in the contract. 

 

I will trust the team at fangraphs and their analysis of 1 WAR = 8M. The significant factor that you left out is the excess value that players at the MLB minimum or in arbitration produce. The key to using WAR effectively in building a team is to find a few well above average players on the same team because 1-2+ WAR players can be acquired rather cheaply (i.e. prospects or flawed veterans). 

 

In addition to that, the goal in building a baseball team isn't to win the WAR/$ spent equation. It is to spend on the correct players such that you maximize your wins. Choosing to spend on elite players that have many extremely above average seasons makes a lot more sense than spending moderately big chunks on average players (i.e. Alex Cobb or Zack Cozart).

 

The Twins are actually in a great position to add a high priced player to the payroll right now since Mauer's contract ends next season and the Twins have many players earning the MLB min or arb contracts.

 

The goal here is to win a World Series. It isn't about worrying about the 2025 team payroll.

  • Carole Keller likes this

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#74 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 16,029 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 18 November 2017 - 07:11 AM

The goal here is to win a World Series. It isn't about worrying about the 2025 team payroll.

The reason you're able to say that is because the FO in prior years paid attention to future team payroll.

My New Year's resolution: finish what I star


#75 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,682 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 18 November 2017 - 10:39 AM

 

The reason you're able to say that is because the FO in prior years paid attention to future team payroll.

Not really. Giancarlo wouldn't be any different than Joe Mauer and the previous FO did that.

You make these kind of commitments for no doubt elite/near elite players. Giancarlo is one that I add and take the long term risk on. The early production very, very likely makes the contract worth it. And it gives the Twins 3 potential 4-6 WAR offensive players at the same time.

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#76 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 16,029 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 18 November 2017 - 11:16 AM

Not really. Giancarlo wouldn't be any different than Joe Mauer and the previous FO did that.

You make these kind of commitments for no doubt elite/near elite players. Giancarlo is one that I add and take the long term risk on. The early production very, very likely makes the contract worth it. And it gives the Twins 3 potential 4-6 WAR offensive players at the same time.

Mauer is indeed the analogy for the Twins, and my point is that one or more of these opportunities comes along every year or two, really top notch guys at absolute top dollar (meaning, high yearly value at very great length). We just got done lamenting that we didn't open the purse strings for Verlander for example (even assuming the Tigers would have answered the phone, and granting that the time-risk is lower for him).

 

Each time, "this is THE guy!" The fact this discussion is even possible is due to not having landed the most recent "THE guy".

 

Back to the topic, I'd love to have a guy of that caliber, but not if it's at top dollar *plus* having to give up significant prospects. Big money does need to be allocated, though, as the contention window is now open and I don't want to see our team keep its powder dry indefinitely.

My New Year's resolution: finish what I star


#77 Lee-The-Twins-Fan

Lee-The-Twins-Fan

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 286 posts

Posted 18 November 2017 - 03:24 PM

 

Again...for the 5th time, Stanton is on a 3 year effective contract since he will opt out in 3 years.

It’s not a major risk on that end of things.

Why in the world would Stanton opt out of a back-loaded contract in his age 31 season?  Who is going to pay him those huge bucks AFTER he has already played through his prime? 

 

It is still a major, major risk.

 

I seriously doubt he will back out – unless he just doesn't want to live in Minnesota – and if that's the case, he won't be coming here in the first place.


#78 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,682 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 18 November 2017 - 06:51 PM

 

Mauer is indeed the analogy for the Twins, and my point is that one or more of these opportunities comes along every year or two, really top notch guys at absolute top dollar (meaning, high yearly value at very great length). We just got done lamenting that we didn't open the purse strings for Verlander for example (even assuming the Tigers would have answered the phone, and granting that the time-risk is lower for him).

 

Each time, "this is THE guy!" The fact this discussion is even possible is due to not having landed the most recent "THE guy".

 

Back to the topic, I'd love to have a guy of that caliber, but not if it's at top dollar *plus* having to give up significant prospects. Big money does need to be allocated, though, as the contention window is now open and I don't want to see our team keep its powder dry indefinitely.

I stayed out of that thread but Verlander is not a player of that caliber now. And only has 2/3 guaranteed seasons left on his contract. Players of this actual caliber don't become available often although Bryce Harper and Manny Machado are possibly hitting the open market soon. Even then chances to acquire these level of players are difficult to find.

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#79 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,448 posts

Posted 18 November 2017 - 07:51 PM

Why in the world would Stanton opt out of a back-loaded contract in his age 31 season? Who is going to pay him those huge bucks AFTER he has already played through his prime?

It is still a major, major risk.

I seriously doubt he will back out – unless he just doesn't want to live in Minnesota – and if that's the case, he won't be coming here in the first place.


I also think he'll opt out. His deal will look like peanuts after next year's mega deals. And, regardless of if its wise or not, history has shown that someone will not hesitate to give out a massive deal to a 31 year old.