Jump to content

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

Article: Why I Believe The Twins Are Going To Sign Yu Darvish

yu darvish
  • Please log in to reply
210 replies to this topic

#21 bobs

bobs

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 143 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:06 AM

I'm not a typical Minnesota Debbie Downer.I believe this FO is smart and will put this organization on a winning track for years to come.However, is anyone else concerned about committing the kind of money Darvish is reportedly asking for?The TJ surgery aside, he has become a 6-inning pitcher, albeit a good one.I'm not saying, I'm just asking if anyone else questions whether that type of pitcher is worth that kind of money.  

  • terrydactyls1947, jrod23 and Original Whizzinator like this

#22 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 3,347 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:10 AM

 

It's been widely reported that Darvish was tipping his pitches.I'm confident he'll do just fine if the Twins make it to the series.

He was also pitching against the best offense in baseball, at the tail of a season where he logged 197 total innings -- his most since 2013. Proclaiming that Darvish is a choke artist on the big stage is pretty flimsy, especially considering how brilliantly he pitched in the NLDS and NLCS. 

  • Steve Lein, luckylager, glunn and 15 others like this

#23 laloesch

laloesch

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,580 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:11 AM

 

4/120 - yes
5/140 - yes
5/150 - reasonable, but I’m getting uneasy.
6/155 - yes
6/165 - I could talk myself into it.
6/175 - pass, but I’ll be sad
6/200 - run!

 

I would say hard pass if he gets higher than 6/165.Anything more than that is just absurd.I would much rather go after two lower level guys like Lynn and Cobb who are going to produce good results but be one hell of a lot cheaper. 

 

My fear is that Darvish is going to cost much closer to 6/200 and may even demand a seventh year depending on how badly the Astros, Yankees and Cubs want him, which would be utterly ludicrous.That is WAY out of the Twins price range IMO and i'd say pass and not think twice about it.Let them nuke it out for him and max themselves out in the process. If the Twins are going to spend that kind of money go after Kershaw in 2019.He's already getting paid 33 million a year.

 

Question about Darvish's world series troubles.Didn't the Astros figure out he was tipping pitches which is part of the reason he was hit so hard?Not making excuses just asking the question.  


#24 bunsen82

bunsen82

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:13 AM

I think the twins best offer will be 5 years 145-150.In my projections for the year I said I didn't think the twins would make a big signing, but the longer this plays out, in my mind the higher percentage that the Twins may be able to pull it off. The twins have made it very clear they don't want to go to 6 years, so we are left with a 5 year offer, I just don't see any of the other teams willing to really spend this year, seem to be saving their money for next years FA class.The Yankees if they become interested would be the only possibility that could try overpay to get him, but I think Cashman will be very selective in who he is willing to spend big money on. 

 

That leaves the Twins, hoping they can pull off a reasonable deal to get a middle to low end #1 starter. This is one of the few years in the last 5 or so that I think the rates will be much more reasonable and give more middle market teams a chance to make a big move, that won't completely hamper future moves. 

 

My questions are I think he will have the stuff that can last into later years, but can he go back to a normal windup and also the stretch, rather than his current set up which is a blend of the two, and also make sure he is not tipping pitches.In the WS it was obvious he didn't have his best stuff, but when hitters know what it coming they are more likely to knock him around.  

  • Don Walcott likes this

#25 bobs

bobs

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 143 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:26 AM

One thing you didn't mention Nick is that the Twins wouldn't have to give up draft capital to get Darvish, as opposed to some of the other top FA starters.Just another reason why they may be willing to pony up more for Darvish than we might be used to seeing from a Twins FO.

  • Steve Lein, glunn, Twins33 and 6 others like this

#26 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,802 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 09:43 AM

I think the Twins are going to get lucky and snag him on a reasonable deal while most of the big clubs shed payroll and bid their time for the 2019 class. The Twins know they can't participate with the crazy money that 2019 will throw around and at that time plenty of teams are going to look back just 12 months and think about how free agents in 2018 went for peanuts despite what the perception was at the time.

 

But I bet the Twins hook him with an opt out after year two or three, so they better not get too self satisfied, there's still plenty of work to do if they want to win a title in that window, Darvish alone doesn't make this club one of the favorites in the AL.

  • glunn likes this

#27 laloesch

laloesch

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,580 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:12 AM

one thing is for certain if the big name free agents hold out for a few more weeks it's going to be a mad dash to the finish line by spring training.Darvish is holding things up.Until he moves no-one else moves.


#28 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Minnesota Twins Whine Line Host

  • Members
  • 9,221 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:35 AM

My thoughts haven't changed... Darvish just isn't that interested in the Twins. Maybe I'd change my mind if they ever got their schedules to match up for a face to face meeting.

I'm so freaking bored of this off-season talking about the same players who still haven't signed.
  • ken likes this

#29 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,848 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:39 AM

 

This is probably the first time I have ever suggested that the Twins do not spend money, but I am against signing Darvish. I don't think he is worth $200 million.

 

There are only a handful of true aces in all of baseball. Verlander, Scherzer, Bumgarner. An argument could be made for one or two others.

 

In (relative) recent history, we have had aces in 1987-1988, 1991, and 2004-2007. These horses just don't come around often. 

 

But then you have this next tier of "top of the rotation" guys --not aces, but guys that fit into the "1" slot on a staff. Darvish qualifies as that. But he is not appreciably better than the other available starters out there. All of whom, Arietta excepting, will command far less money.

 

Meaning, at the end of the day, if we get Alex Cobb for five years, we will look back at having made a sound investment if he can win 65 games in that time. No one can reasonably argue that Darvish would win any more than that. But Cobb will come cheaper.

 

This is a long way of saying that, as long as the Twins refuse to announce what their upcoming season's payroll will be - which they have never done - we can only assume that it will be modest. So it is tough to advocate for supreme top dollar unless that player is a True Ace or a generational talent.

 

So I am not on the Darvish train, for the Twins, as a free agent signing.  

I am very distrustful of low K rate pitchers like Cobb's 2017 season. If you are buying then you are expecting him to bounce back peripherally to his pre-TJ stats. That may or may not happen. The same is true of Lynn with regards to lowering his walk rates. 

Darvish on the other hand struck out 10K/9 with some upside for more. And the upside that I speak of are the 13/14 seasons where he cracked a <3.00 ERA and <3.00 xFIP. Nobody expects that to happen but I consider last year as a reasonable expectation with potential (somewhere in between) for more.

 

Unlike Darvish, Cobb/Lynn didn't have good peripherals last season (4.25ish and 4.75ish). If Cobb/Lynn don't improve and their ERA slides down to their FIP/xFIP then they are a #4/5 pitcher on a good team. I don't even see them as remotely comparable pitchers.

 

I would spend 2x on Darvish due to the separation in potential outcomes. The Twins need potential 1/2 pitchers and not 3/4 pitchers that may not even be able to stay in the rotation for the length of their contracts. With that being said I would sign either Lynn or Cobb if they drop down to the 50M range. At the 75M level, I don't consider either and look elsewhere.

I also agree with amgt about sign Darvish and then trade for Archer/Cole to really put together a top rotation.

  • Carole Keller, USAFChief, glunn and 10 others like 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


#30 spanman2

spanman2

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:39 AM

 

4/120 - yes
5/140 - yes
5/150 - reasonable, but I’m getting uneasy.
6/155 - yes
6/165 - I could talk myself into it.
6/175 - pass, but I’ll be sad
6/200 - run!

He turns 32 during the season I believe.The max I would offer in duration would be 5 years.I would be willing to go more per year on a 4 year deal.I doubt he would sign a 4 year deal.No way I would go 6 years.Have a good one.

  • LA VIkes Fan, ken and SF Twins Fan like this
I WAS TOLD I WOULD NEVER MAKE IT BECAUSE I AM TOO SHORT. WELL, I'M STILL TOO SHORT. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR HEIGHT IS. IT'S WHAT'S IN YOUR HEART.

KIRBY PUCKETT

#31 lukeduke1980

lukeduke1980

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:40 AM

Let's bring him in for a meeting during NFC championship week -- he can blow the big horn at the beginning of the game

  • GP830 and Original Whizzinator like this

#32 Dantes929

Dantes929

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,027 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:04 AM

 

I am very distrustful of low K rate pitchers like Cobb's 2017 season. If you are buying then you are expecting him to bounce back peripherally to his pre-TJ stats. That may or may not happen. The same is true of Lynn with regards to lowering his walk rates. 

Darvish on the other hand struck out 10K/9 with some upside for more. And the upside that I speak of are the 13/14 seasons where he cracked a <3.00 ERA and <3.00 xFIP. Nobody expects that to happen but I consider last year as a reasonable expectation with potential (somewhere in between) for more.

 

Unlike Darvish, Cobb/Lynn didn't have good peripherals last season (4.25ish and 4.75ish). If Cobb/Lynn don't improve and their ERA slides down to their FIP/xFIP then they are a #4/5 pitcher on a good team. I don't even see them as remotely comparable pitchers.

 

I would spend 2x on Darvish due to the separation in potential outcomes. The Twins need potential 1/2 pitchers and not 3/4 pitchers that may not even be able to stay in the rotation for the length of their contracts. With that being said I would sign either Lynn or Cobb if they drop down to the 50M range. At the 75M level, I don't consider either and look elsewhere.

I also agree with amgt about sign Darvish and then trade for Archer/Cole to really put together a top rotation.

Decent analysis on Cobb here. https://www.beyondth...umors-hot-stove

I saw another article about how he gave up on his best pitch which was the splitter changeup because he didn't have the same feel for it but it might come back the farther removed from surgery. No sure thing but a shorter contract for less money with possibly upside if he gets that feel back.His numbers were also in the toughest division, IMO.He was my target from the get go and if they had gone after him the same way they went after Castro last year they might have gotten him for less money than what is now considered the market. I would prefer 4 years to Cobb for less money per year vs 6 years to Darvish but time will tell.

Don't Sweat the Small Stuff ... and it's all small stuff.

#33 ToddlerHarmon

ToddlerHarmon

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:09 AM

This is an opportunity for Falvine to demonstrate big-picture thinking.

 

It is correct that in 2021, paying Darvish $30M while trying to retain Sano/Buxton/Berrios/Rosario will probably break the annual 50% revenue rule-of-thumb the Pohlads like.

 

However, I'm hoping they pitch to the Pohlads that some years are just going to cost more, and that investments have to spike to maintain a fan base, build future revenue, and remain a desirable destination for big name free agents.

 

So yes, a "market" contract for Darvish will give you tight years, and it will probably result in overpaying the last couple of years.But if it buys you deep playoff runs, sold out stadiums, a better TV deal, the loyalty of young players who want to win, and the occasional signing of ring-chasing veterans, then it more than pays off.

 

In other words, the wisdom of the contract isn't whether it pays off in one player's performance in any given year.It is how it pays off over a long stretch, from a lot of angles.

  • Steve Lein, glunn, birdwatcher and 8 others like this

#34 howieramone2

howieramone2

    Just say no to myths!

  • Members
  • 1,083 posts
  • LocationMaple Grove/Schaumburg

Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:24 AM

 

I believe Flavine can't be as lackadaisical as they appear to be, so they must be following some incomprehensible master-plan that ends in Darvish (or some other good pitcher) being a Twin.  

 

Right???

Please?

Last I saw, 31 moves have been made so far in free agency, 3 by the Twins. They took starting pitching 3,4, and 5 in the draft. At the deadline they added 4 arms. The 3 moves they have made in free agency were for pitching. Nothing is lackadasical, nor incomprehensible.

Edited by howieramone2, 09 January 2018 - 11:50 AM.

  • birdwatcher, Jerr, nytwinsfan and 4 others like this

It's official. We received more for board scapegoat John Ryan Murphy, than we did for board favorites Pinto, Arcia, and Vargas combined.


#35 howieramone2

howieramone2

    Just say no to myths!

  • Members
  • 1,083 posts
  • LocationMaple Grove/Schaumburg

Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:30 AM

 

You had me until you said "market deal". Perhaps I am jaded by years of MN sports history, but when one lists the Twins, Astros, and Cubs in the hunt, it doesn't seem a market deal will suffice.

The Astros have definitely become the flavor of the month, but they must be getting close to being tapped out. I would never mention them in the same breath as the Cubbies, Yankees, etc.

Edited by howieramone2, 09 January 2018 - 11:36 AM.

It's official. We received more for board scapegoat John Ryan Murphy, than we did for board favorites Pinto, Arcia, and Vargas combined.


#36 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,753 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 12:00 PM

Would much rather see the Twins get an ace via trade. Go get Archer or Cole for less money. In the next two years the club is going to see a log jam of prospects ready to graduate to the Twins in the middle infield and in the middle or at the back end of the rotation.

We all love prospects and cringe at losing players we've seen develop through the minors, but a progressive-thinking, winning organization has to see minor league development as a tool to not only supplement the big league roster, but to acquire talent outside the organization.


But, you're not going to get an ace (certainly not 4 affordable years of Archer) by dealing Gordon or Polanco plus back end rotation prospects.
  • birdwatcher, nytwinsfan, gagu and 1 other like this

#37 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,753 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 12:09 PM

Last I saw, 31 moves have been made so far in free agency, 3 by the Twins. They took starting pitching 3,4, and 5 in the draft. At the deadline they added 4 arms. The 3 moves they have made in free agency were for pitching. Nothing is lackadasical, nor incomprehensible.


The comment was about a "good pitcher" and presumably a starter, since the thread topic is Darvish. Despite the quantity of moves you reference, the Twins have not yet added a good starting pitcher for 2018. At best, it seems like they have added some backend competition, but even that so far is basically just Enns, and maybe Littell (although he has yet to appear in AAA, so he's probably not on the radar until the latter part of 2018).
  • USAFChief likes this

#38 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 243 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 12:45 PM

"market deal" will be north of 6-yrs / $200M, right?Greinke got more than that two years ago heading into his 32-yo season.He got 6/206+.And that was to a mid-market club.Seems there are sufficient players in the market to at least realize that.My guess (regardless of where anyone might fall on a technical Greinke/Darvish comparison) is that this is where Darvish's agents put the floor.

 

I see very little change of this happening for the Twins, and at that cost, I'm not sure I'd be upset if it doesn't.


#39 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,446 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 01:00 PM

 

The comment was about a "good pitcher" and presumably a starter, since the thread topic is Darvish. Despite the quantity of moves you reference, the Twins have not yet added a good starting pitcher for 2018. At best, it seems like they have added some backend competition, but even that so far is basically just Enns, and maybe Littell (although he has yet to appear in AAA, so he's probably not on the radar until the latter part of 2018).

 

 

The comment was refuting any depiction of Falvine as being lackadaisical and having an incomprehensible strategy. We don't know everything that's being done behind the scenes and we don't have a clear picture of what they're thinking. For all we know, they have a completely comprehensible strategy and are accomplishing the necessary legwork towards acquiring that "good pitcher" and it just hasn't happened yet. There's absolutely no evidence suggesting they're on holiday, as one commenter wondered, or that they are operating with a convoluted action plan. I still have a good feeling that we're going to hear news about the acquisition of a front-line starter, through FA or trade.

Edited by birdwatcher, 09 January 2018 - 01:34 PM.

  • Jerr, Deduno Abides, gagu and 1 other like this

#40 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 9,686 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 02:00 PM

There are only a handful of true aces in all of baseball. Verlander, Scherzer, Bumgarner. An argument could be made for one or two others.

um, KERSHAW? Sale? Kluber?

Also, pitcher win totals shouldnt be the stat we are looking at when determining their value. On top of that, most FA players decline at the end of their FA contracts. Saying an FA wont be worth his yearly salary in the 5th and 6th year isnt particularly an unknown factor. Question is, how much will he be worth than his salary in the early years and will he be a key factor in the team taking the next step?

Im also not sure we should sign Darvish. I worry about his health, myself. He has pitched 200 or more innings in one season. But he does give a quality 160-180 innings. I wouldn't go over 6/140 for him.

Edited by jimmer, 09 January 2018 - 02:15 PM.

  • Dantes929, h2oface and nytwinsfan like this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: yu darvish