Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

The Twins should sign Yu Darvish, regardless of price

yu darvish twins
  • Please log in to reply
241 replies to this topic

#201 SQUIRREL

SQUIRREL

    Rally SQUIRREL!!!!

  • Moderator
  • 24,642 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 05:07 PM

 

I agree. I just think the Twins should take the risk, even if six years (seven is too much IMO ... six years also too much but not enough of a too much for me to say no). 

 

The Twins should just do it. Offer him 6/$160 and see if that gets it done and if it doesn't, quietly reveal that information to a reporter so people know that some big offers are being made. If Yu Darvish turns down a six-year deal then he's the problem.

I already think he is the problem. I think he wants the Yankees or Dodgers to pony up and is disappointed that the market isn't bearing that out for him. He's seen some of the contracts of the recent past and wants his, too. While I believe he will be the front-end starter we need, and that he is very good, better than most, I wouldn't put him in the same elite upper echelons category of Kershaw. He seems to want a Kershaw (or closer to it) contract and he's not going to get it. There aren't many teams who can afford to give out those kinds of contracts and he's stuck in an off-season where he's getting the best of what's left. I have no real idea anymore what's fair or not with these salaries, but I do think the Twins offered what they could and what was smart and what was fair, but I think Darvish is disappointed and is still hoping something 'better' comes through. Will he sit out part of the season waiting? What will happen to all those quality players still unsigned? I think something has to fall. I think it's still a possibility Darvish will sign with the Twins ... but at what cost to us, and I'm not thinking monetary cost. I'm thinking attitude. I'm not sure I want him at this point.

 

This off-season has made me crabby.

  • glunn and Sconnie like this

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. But a skunkweed will always be a skunkweed and instantly recognizable. 


#202 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    A Little Teapot

  • Owner
  • 22,860 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:51 PM

 

Will he sit out part of the season waiting?

He'd have to be a damned fool to let that happen. If he sits out, he gets partial money for a partial season AFTER most teams have committed their budgets to other players (meaning a one year deal for Darvish would easily net him $25m+ right now and maybe a prorated $15-17m in two months, which would net Darvish maybe $10-12m for the 2018 season). Under that scenario, he literally gives away $10-15m.

 

To add to that, it means Darvish has to re-enter next offseason with a partial season under his belt at one year older age.

 

Outside of Clemens' weird retirement-not-retirement, has holding out EVER worked for a player, either in free agency or the draft?

  • glunn likes this

#203 SQUIRREL

SQUIRREL

    Rally SQUIRREL!!!!

  • Moderator
  • 24,642 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:25 PM

He'd have to be a damned fool to let that happen. If he sits out, he gets partial money for a partial season AFTER most teams have committed their budgets to other players (meaning a one year deal for Darvish would easily net him $25m+ right now and maybe a prorated $15-17m in two months, which would net Darvish maybe $10-12m for the 2018 season). Under that scenario, he literally gives away $10-15m.

To add to that, it means Darvish has to re-enter next offseason with a partial season under his belt at one year older age.

Outside of Clemens' weird retirement-not-retirement, has holding out EVER worked for a player, either in free agency or the draft?

Yeah, I wasn’t really asking a serious question. More trying to suggest ... he doesn’t really have the options he wants and he’s going to have to choose between the rock and the hard place.

And I’m still not sure I want that person on my team, the one making a sort of disgruntled choice. But we’ll see.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. But a skunkweed will always be a skunkweed and instantly recognizable. 


#204 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    A Little Teapot

  • Owner
  • 22,860 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:47 PM

 

Yeah, I wasn’t really asking a serious question. More trying to suggest ... he doesn’t really have the options he wants and he’s going to have to choose between the rock and the hard place.

And I’m still not sure I want that person on my team, the one making a sort of disgruntled choice. But we’ll see.

Eh, I don't know if it's a disgruntled choice as much as it's a preference to get the best situation possible.

 

Wouldn't we all do the same? I doubt he's going to have a real attitude problem about being paid $150m+ to play baseball.

 

From what I've seen of the guy - and it's not much - he doesn't seem to be that type of character. He just wants to get the best deal for himself in the area he most desires, just as most of us would do in the same situation. He has a ton of bargaining power and he may as well use it.

  • Doomtints likes this

#205 AlwaysinModeration

AlwaysinModeration

    Minnesota Twins

  • Member
  • 2,625 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 07:06 AM

Question for spycake, who I agree is killing it on these threads:

Why are you using 0.8 decline per year? I thought that the typical figure to use when calculating decline was 0.5 per year?

For ewen21, you argue that the Twins shouldn’t sign Darvish because he will decline in years 32-36 (which is really 31-35, but whatever). That decline is always factored in to free agent contracts.

If Darvish is a 4WAR pitcher now, he is assumed to produce 4+3.5+3+2.5+2 over the next five years, or 15 WAR. I guess the current value per WAR is 10/per, meaning 5/150 would be the going rate for a contract for a player of Darvish’ caliber.

It’s fine to say you don’t think the Twins should sign a top free agent, but it’s widely acknowledged and accepted that they will decline during their contract.

He’s be an upgrade for the Twins rotation, though, during their window of competitiveness, so I’m in favor of them signing him. I’m still sticking with 5/125.

Oh, and by the way, Ervin Santana’s posted an ERA+ of 127 in his years 32-34 with the Twins, while his career average is 103. In the last three years, the Twins have had three Sp seasons over 2WAR; Gibson in 2015 and Ervin the last two years. If Yu even posts 3WAR for next 2-3 years, which he clearly has the potential to top, he represents a significant upgrade to the rotation.

Edited by AlwaysinModeration, 04 February 2018 - 07:25 AM.

  • USAFChief, glunn and Twins33 like this

#206 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 07:25 AM

Question for spycake, who I agree is killing it on these threads:

Why are you using 0.8 decline per year? I thought that the typical figure to use when calculating decline was 0.5 per year?

For ewen21, you argue that the Twins shouldn’t sign Darvish because he will decline in years 32-36 (which is really 31-35, but whatever). That decline is always factored in to free agent contracts.

If Darvish is a 4WAR pitcher now, he is assumed to produce 4+3.5+3+2.5+2 over the next five years, or 15 WAR. I guess the current value per WAR is 10/per, meaning 5/150 would be the going rate for a contract for a player of Darvish’ caliber.

It’s fine to say you don’t think the Twins should sign a top free agent, but it’s widely acknowledged and accepted that they will decline during their contract.

He’s be an upgrade for the Twins rotation, though, during their window of competitiveness, so I’m in favor of them signing him. I’m still sticking with 5/125.

Oh, and by the way, Ervin Santana’s posted an ERA+ of 127 in his years 32-34 with the Twins, while his career average is 103.


Spycake previously posted that he adjusted it to 0.8, because pitchers tend to decline more severely than position players.

#207 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 08:29 AM

Question for spycake, who I agree is killing it on these threads:

Why are you using 0.8 decline per year? I thought that the typical figure to use when calculating decline was 0.5 per year?


I read another analyst who used 0.8 for pitchers:

https://www.si.com/m...th-max-scherzer

Although the same analyst now uses WARcel, based on Marcel, which only assumes 0.4:

https://www.si.com/m...ee-agency-value

#208 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,764 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 11:58 AM

 

Question for spycake, who I agree is killing it on these threads:

Why are you using 0.8 decline per year? I thought that the typical figure to use when calculating decline was 0.5 per year?

For ewen21, you argue that the Twins shouldn’t sign Darvish because he will decline in years 32-36 (which is really 31-35, but whatever). That decline is always factored in to free agent contracts.

If Darvish is a 4WAR pitcher now, he is assumed to produce 4+3.5+3+2.5+2 over the next five years, or 15 WAR. I guess the current value per WAR is 10/per, meaning 5/150 would be the going rate for a contract for a player of Darvish’ caliber.

It’s fine to say you don’t think the Twins should sign a top free agent, but it’s widely acknowledged and accepted that they will decline during their contract.

He’s be an upgrade for the Twins rotation, though, during their window of competitiveness, so I’m in favor of them signing him. I’m still sticking with 5/125.

Oh, and by the way, Ervin Santana’s posted an ERA+ of 127 in his years 32-34 with the Twins, while his career average is 103. In the last three years, the Twins have had three Sp seasons over 2WAR; Gibson in 2015 and Ervin the last two years. If Yu even posts 3WAR for next 2-3 years, which he clearly has the potential to top, he represents a significant upgrade to the rotation.

Thanks for your response and question.

 

Let me first say that I do not like the practice of signing free agent starting pitching in almost every single case.Seems to me you pay for what the guy has done and not for what he is going to do.Very counter-intuitive mindset, but not the right mindset.One of the only times I can justify the outrageous terms pitchers have gotten is if it is to obtain someone that is a final piece to the puzzle on a team in serious contention.Also, if we are going to consider Darvish as being a guy who will get us over the hump we must consider his post-season meltdown.A "get us over the hump" guy is the kind of guy with some post-season/big game pedigree.Tell me it is a small sample size, but can we not glean ANYTHING from that?Was he not uncomfortable to watch?Given the extra motivation of putting it to the Astros and Guerriel the guy really retreated horribly.He did not look like he wanted to be there.We can talk of "tipping pitches" and that being "fixable", but under those circumstances, and on that stage, I want better than that.Tipping pitches in that situation really isn't an acceptable excuse.He is a veteran pitcher in a big game and that is not a valid explanation.It shows a lack of professionalism and a lack of poise, in my opinion.  

 

As far as his age is concerned, a decline is inevitable.That isn't a claim or an opinion.That is a fact.Given where he has been these last four seasons and how little he has pitched, the kind of decline is even harder to predict.I see WAR projections being pasted up here and I shake my head.It is not like he is a Verlander, Wainwright or a Sabathia.All of these guys were workhorse pitchers and showed a decline from 32 to 33. Darvish is not projectable, in my opinion.Many pitchers are way too hard to project and a guy with Darvish's track record isn't even worth projecting.Take a look at the horses before him:Verlander hit a deep valley and now he has come back, which is an anomaly.Adam Wainwright had TJ like Darvish has and the timeline is very similar.He had strong seasons at 31 and 32 and has been middle of the road since.Sabathia cratered at 32.John Lackey had TJ and is still going at 38, but he has not been a number one starter in almost ten years.And finally....and sadly....Johan Santana.Gone at 32.I am not making stuff up and I am not trying to be a naysayer.I am just sticking with the facts history presents. Since all this Darvish talk began I have been scanning my mind to find guys who came to a team as a free agent (at age 31) and assumed the role of ace after not pitching 200 innings for a number of years.I can't find one.

 

In short, I cannot understand why we should take a "let's get THIS PLAYER at any cost" mentality.What is so exceptional about him that makes him any different from other guys before him?With that performance during the World Series and this performance during the off season he is starting to remind me more of Daisuke Matsuzaka than Verlander, Wainwright, or Grienke.Darvish to me seems like a guy who wants to make a killing and then get out.I don't trust him at all.Personal biases I might have aside, as a practice, I do not throw money at FA starting pitching unless my team is a world series contender. This team is not that.

 

Not sure what is so radical about what I have said.  

  • glunn and Riverbrian like this

#209 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,764 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:04 PM

 

Eh, I don't know if it's a disgruntled choice as much as it's a preference to get the best situation possible.

 

Wouldn't we all do the same? I doubt he's going to have a real attitude problem about being paid $150m+ to play baseball.

 

From what I've seen of the guy - and it's not much - he doesn't seem to be that type of character. He just wants to get the best deal for himself in the area he most desires, just as most of us would do in the same situation. He has a ton of bargaining power and he may as well use it.

 

Why would we all do the same?Not everyone has an unrealistic view of their worth.It was reported by Yankee reporter Michael Kay that Darvish received a 7 year 160 offer after Darvish said he got no offer.Then Darvish took to Twitter to say he got an offer, but those terms were not right.

 

There is a lot of weirdness around this guy.Tough to reach, tough to communicate with effectively and I am unsure he is being truthful as far as the Yankees offer.If the offer was anything close to what Kay reported then Darvish is delusional.


#210 Sconnie

Sconnie

    Touch ‘em all!

  • Moderator
  • 5,247 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:46 PM

I agree. I just think the Twins should take the risk, even if six years (seven is too much IMO ... six years also too much but not enough of a too much for me to say no).

The Twins should just do it. Offer him 6/$160 and see if that gets it done and if it doesn't, quietly reveal that information to a reporter so people know that some big offers are being made. If Yu Darvish turns down a six-year deal then he's the problem.


Seems like the TWins might currently be high offer.

https://www.mlbtrade...-a-starter.html

Looks like Darvish is holding out for a big player like the Cubs or Yankees to clear space and start a bidding war.

Why would the Twins up their own ante? Just wait it out.

#211 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,764 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:51 PM

I want to apologize for the lack of a space bar in the last two posts.Something with this new keyboard.


#212 Sconnie

Sconnie

    Touch ‘em all!

  • Moderator
  • 5,247 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:52 PM

Why would we all do the same? Not everyone has an unrealistic view of their worth. It was reported by Yankee reporter Michael Kay that Darvish received a 7 year 160 offer after Darvish said he got no offer. Then Darvish took to Twitter to say he got an offer, but those terms were not right.

There is a lot of weirdness around this guy. Tough to reach, tough to communicate with effectively and I am unsure he is being truthful as far as the Yankees offer. If the offer was anything close to what Kay reported then Darvish is delusional.

it was a miscommunication via a medium limited to 140 (or whatever number) characters. I can see why that might happen. I don’t read too much into it. Maybe the “term” missed was really “informal offer pending clearing salary”.

Nothing’s moving so the Yanks moved on.

#213 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:57 PM

Since all this Darvish talk began I have been scanning my mind to find guys who came to a team as a free agent (at age 31) and assumed the role of ace after not pitching 200 innings for a number of years. I can't find one.


Darvish was 24th in MLB in innings in 2017 (not counting postseason). That would be over 200 innings for most of MLB history, but the game is different today. Analysis has to adjust.
  • Mike Sixel likes this

#214 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,764 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:57 PM

 

Seems like the TWins might currently be high offer.

https://www.mlbtrade...-a-starter.html

Looks like Darvish is holding out for a big player like the Cubs or Yankees to clear space and start a bidding war.

Why would the Twins up their own ante? Just wait it out.

 

The Yankees are earnestly trying to stay under the luxury tax threshold.I live in NY state and heard this refrain on WFAN not long after I moved in July and it has been a theme.Then they signed Stanton.

 

I don't think the Yankees are going to go too far going for Darvish.This harkens back to the "bidding war" between the Red Sox and Yankees for Johan.There was no real bidding war.The difficulty in that case was trying to convince the Twins.Here Darvish has the veto power.I think Darvish and his people are being even more foolish than Bill Smith was during the Johan situation.

 

I think Darvish missed the boat.I think that if he is expecting/holding out for Strasburg money then he will be not only be sitting on the sidelines through the open of training camp (not a good look for him), but also losing out on money and years.

  • Sconnie likes this

#215 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,764 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:58 PM

 

Darvish was 24th in MLB in innings in 2017 (not counting postseason). That would be over 200 innings for most of MLB history, but the game is different today. Analysis has to adjust.

 

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?


#216 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 22,195 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 February 2018 - 01:31 PM

 

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?

 

I have no idea but they might be trying to adjust it and it's causing the hold up. All the GM's and Support staff are seeing what you are pointing out about the contracts and production. 

 

And as a result... the players and the agents are starting to speak up because they are sensing an adjustment. 

 

Ultimately tho... The CBA would have to be adjusted to make an adjustment. 

 

Full disclosure... I'm on the players side... they are not hurting for money so I'm not losing sleep but I am on the players side. 

 

For 6 years... Players are controllable. The players have no choice at all.

 

For the first 6 years... Lorenzo Cain was paid 21.5M. Based on his production over that time... you could say that he was very underpaid in comparison. 

 

When Cain reaches free agency he finally gets leverage. (Only for those who are good enough to survive the first 6 years). This is Lorenzo's time to use that leverage... play where he wants to play instead of what team drafted him and held him securely.  

 

The Problem players run into with the CBA is that they are controlled over their most productive years so once GM"s starting looking at the metrics... like you have. They start questioning the value of signing long contracts and when they refuse to offer them. We get long hold outs... we get players threatening to strike and agents starting to point fingers... because the players held up their end of the bargain... they allowed themselves to be underpaid (by industry standards) to wait for the pay day and now the teams are saying... hey wait a second... we don't want to pay you here either. 

 

You raise a very valid point... but as you can see... the system was designed for this very thing. 

 

I don't know who said it... but there is a quote that I absolutely love: 

 

"Your systems are perfectly designed to give you the results you are getting".

 

Brandon Moss was saying the same thing. http://www.nydailyne...ticle-1.3797095

 

 

 

 

  • glunn, Oxtung, AlwaysinModeration and 1 other like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate

 

I'm not a starting 9 guy!!!


#217 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 01:46 PM

As far as his age is concerned, a decline is inevitable. That isn't a claim or an opinion. That is a fact.


A future decline can be assumed to be a "fact" over a large enough sample, but 1 year of 1 pitcher is not a large enough sample. Darvish himself saw a 56% increase in WAR from age 29 to 30. Does that invalidate aging curves? No, 1 year of Darvish is just one data point among thousands. The average over all the thousands would be a decline, but a substantial number each year improved or held steady.

Even over a sample of 5 years, for 1 pitcher, just through normal statistical variation, you might see 1 year of a notable increase, 1 year of small decline, 1 year of small gain, 1 year of holding steady, and 1 year of notable decline. This isn't really dependent on pitcher quality either -- just picking a past Twins name at random, Kevin Tapani's 2nd best WAR season was age 32. Age 34 was virtually the same WAR as age 28. Age 36 was the same WAR as age 30. Age 33 was actually the 2nd best season of his career by rate, but only 13 starts. Over 5 years, you could see the decline, but he still had valuable seasons within those 5 years.
  • USAFChief and glunn like this

#218 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 01:57 PM

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?


Perhaps, teams might want to budget more for relievers. But if, say, a 10% reduction in innings meant a 10% reduction in salary, it would only take a couple years of inflation to wipe that out. And a 5/125 deal for Darvish could already be a downward adjustment from, say, 6/155 for Lester 3 years ago.

#219 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 02:13 PM

Also, if we are going to consider Darvish as being a guy who will get us over the hump we must consider his post-season meltdown. A "get us over the hump" guy is the kind of guy with some post-season/big game pedigree. Tell me it is a small sample size, but can we not glean ANYTHING from that? Was he not uncomfortable to watch? Given the extra motivation of putting it to the Astros and Guerriel the guy really retreated horribly. He did not look like he wanted to be there. We can talk of "tipping pitches" and that being "fixable", but under those circumstances, and on that stage, I want better than that. Tipping pitches in that situation really isn't an acceptable excuse. He is a veteran pitcher in a big game and that is not a valid explanation. It shows a lack of professionalism and a lack of poise, in my opinion.


How do you explain Darvish's great starts in the 2017 DS and CS rounds? Also, consider that in the WS, Darvish was pitching into November for the first time in his life, is his first full season back from TJ, no less. It was a terrible performance in the WS, and I am not making excuses for it, simply suggesting that drawing conclusions about his professionalism and his future from that tiny sample is probably not warranted.

Also worth noting that Darvish has been healthy for the first half of the MLB season 4 times, and all 4 times he has been named to the all-star team (which I believe is done by player vote?). The opinion of his peers would seem to be a better indicator of his professionalism than the results of his last 2 starts.

#220 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,758 posts

Posted 04 February 2018 - 02:25 PM

I see WAR projections being pasted up here and I shake my head. It is not like he is a Verlander, Wainwright or a Sabathia.


Honest question: do you think the Darvish projections here have anything to do with Verlander, Wainwright, or Sabathia? Because they don't. They are based on Darvish's own record, plus aging curves based on the entire sample of MLB pitchers. That means Mike Pelfrey counts just as much as Justin Verlander or any other pitcher who survived to pitch in MLB at ages 30-31.
  • Twins33 likes this



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