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

#21 sampleSizeOfOne

sampleSizeOfOne

    conical shame

  • Member
  • 8,415 posts

Posted 27 January 2018 - 10:30 AM

Did we win yet?
  • USAFChief, scottz and mickeymental like this

#22 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,864 posts

Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:05 PM

 

I have never understood fans worrying about the team spending efficiently. They have money. They have needs. There are 3-4 pitchers that could help. Next year, those arguing not to spend will point out all the flaws of next year's class. I guess I just don't get why people think it is better for them as fans if owners pocket money, and don't try to make the team better. We just come from different votes, I guess.

 

How do you come to the conclusion that spending on free agents is valuable but doing it efficiently is not important?It would be important if we were in a top revenue market.In our case, there are teams with 100M or 200M of incremental revenue.Please explain how we are supposed to construct a World Series while spending our already disadvantaged revenue position inefficiently.If you have listened to Falvey, he has stated on a few occasions in different ways this team needs to get the most out of their investments. Is this not the a pretty much universal premise in any business?

 

I tend to follow Brock's position ... stretch but don't go nuts.

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 27 January 2018 - 06:08 PM.

  • birdwatcher, flpmagikat and dgwills like this

#23 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 30,292 posts

Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:23 PM

How do you come to the conclusion that spending on free agents is valuable but doing it efficiently is not important? It would be important if we were in a top revenue market. In our case, there are teams with 100M or 200M of incremental revenue. Please explain how we are supposed to construct a World Series while spending our already disadvantaged revenue position inefficiently. If you have listened to Falvey, he has stated on a few occasions in different ways this team needs to get the most out of their investments. Is this not the a pretty much universal premise in any business?

I tend to follow Brock's position ... stretch but don't go nuts.


Here is where I come from. If they don't spend money, because a pitcher wants four million more than they are worth, and they pocket the money, that does not help fans at all. Not one bit. They could buy a pitcher, inefficiently, and still have budget room. Or, they can pocket the money, and the team is worse. No one is arguing spending 200 million, or tripling what a player is worth. I am arguing that I would rather they overspend sometimes, than pocket the money.

I guess I could ask you how it is better they pocket the money, than to spend it at all? As we know, many free agent contracts don't work, and are not as efficient as other contracts. Should they only pay minimum salaries, since those are more efficient? That would be the logical conclusion some here are making.
  • Riverbrian likes this

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#24 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Moderator
  • 25,086 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:39 PM

I couldn’t care less about “efficient.” About winning the “dollar spent per win” trophy.

I want to watch them win 100 plus games, and win a WS.

Sign the players that will help do that. If it means there is less theoretical money to spend 5 years from now, oh well. I fail to see how not having money to spend 5 years from now is worse than not spending today because it’s “inefficient.”
  • Mike Sixel, Riverbrian, adorduan and 2 others like this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#25 ashbury

ashbury

    Twins fan, no joke!

  • Moderator
  • 24,286 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, NV

Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:54 PM

I fail to see how not having money to spend 5 years from now is worse than not spending today because it’s “inefficient.”

This argument reminds me of the quotation attributed to Mark Twain, "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read."

  • USAFChief, Mike Sixel, Riverbrian and 5 others like this

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. -- Arthur Conan Doyle


#26 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,864 posts

Posted 27 January 2018 - 10:02 PM

 

I couldn’t care less about “efficient.” About winning the “dollar spent per win” trophy.

I want to watch them win 100 plus games, and win a WS.

Sign the players that will help do that. If it means there is less theoretical money to spend 5 years from now, oh well. I fail to see how not having money to spend 5 years from now is worse than not spending today because it’s “inefficient.”

 

That's why fans in every sport with no managerial credentials somehow think they know how to run the team better than the people who had the requisite credentials to get the job.Point being winning and spending effectively are at worst highly correlated and probably more accurately described asessential when other teams have a serious revenue advantage. 


#27 AlwaysinModeration

AlwaysinModeration

    Minnesota Twins

  • Member
  • 2,589 posts

Posted 27 January 2018 - 10:06 PM

What are the chances the Twins won’t go over 23 million a year (or 163 million total) in their offer to Darvish?

#28 Platoon

Platoon

    Cooperstown

  • Member
  • 5,083 posts
  • LocationTwinsWorld

Posted 28 January 2018 - 07:03 AM

Several posters on here, Mike and Chief come to mind, have made a valid observation if I am interpreting them correctly. And that is that their is a time to "overspend" and a time not to. This would be a time for the Twins to overspend. All professional sports teams operate in windows of opportunity. While,the length of time between those windows varies for numerous reasons, the Twins are in one. And in the Twins most recent history, that is a rarity. While I wont relitigate the pros and cons of a trade v a big FA payout, the bottom line is either you pay up now and take a shot at winning it all, or you remain simply one of many competitive teams with its most important part missing. Elite baseball pitcher sand football QB's are unique in that you can surround either with an average team and win, but you cannot do the reverse.
  • USAFChief, Mike Sixel, Twins33 and 2 others like this
TwinsWorld: Did you hear we just updated the Stadium Club?

If I wanted balls and strikes called by a robot, I would get an Xbox!

#29 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Moderator
  • 25,086 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 28 January 2018 - 08:11 AM

That's why fans in every sport with no managerial credentials somehow think they know how to run the team better than the people who had the requisite credentials to get the job.Point being winning and spending effectively are at worst highly correlated and probably more accurately described asessential when other teams have a serious revenue advantage.


We are all fans with no managerial credentials. Point being an appeal to authority argument is just that.
  • Mike Sixel and Riverbrian like this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#30 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 21,980 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 28 January 2018 - 08:16 AM

 

That's why fans in every sport with no managerial credentials somehow think they know how to run the team better than the people who had the requisite credentials to get the job. 

 

Point being winning and spending effectively are at worst highly correlated and probably more accurately described asessential when other teams have a serious revenue advantage. 

 

I've decided to not hide your post. I should hide it but I will let it stand with the hope that it can be somehow constructive. 

 

I've separated your two sentences. 

 

(Mod Note)The purpose of your first sentence is to belittle and dismiss anybody who does not have the "requisite credentials".

 

I assume that close to "None of Us" have the requisite credentials. If you are really as smart as you present yourself, you would realize, that if you disqualify us all... there would remain very little reason for the forums.

 

Start your post with a sentence like this and you are going to get a defensive response and things go immediately off the rails. 

 

You have a history of this type of post, this isn't a moderator over reaction to a first mistake. You have been PM'd in the past... you have been disciplined in the past. You choose to either not understand or not care. Consider this a final warning and this final warning is being done publicly by my choice. Do it again and I (or one of the other moderators) will give you a long vacation. 

 

(Mod Note) Your second sentence is actual discussion.

 

I'm sure you are able to recognize the difference. 

 

 

 

  • USAFChief and glunn 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!!!


#31 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 08:21 AM

I couldn’t care less about “efficient.” About winning the “dollar spent per win” trophy.

I want to watch them win 100 plus games, and win a WS.

Sign the players that will help do that. If it means there is less theoretical money to spend 5 years from now, oh well. I fail to see how not having money to spend 5 years from now is worse than not spending today because it’s “inefficient.”


Add in the fact that 5 years from now, if the Twins have had a successful 4 years, team revenue will likely have gone up more than enough to cover a 30M “thanks for the memories, Yu” year
  • USAFChief, Twins33 and snepp like this

#32 terrydactyls1947

terrydactyls1947

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Member
  • 626 posts
  • LocationCumberland Center, Maine

Posted 28 January 2018 - 08:39 AM

If now is the time to spend (as many are pointing out) and there is also a plea to do it "efficiently", how about offering Darvish a three or four year contract at a higher amount? Just as an example, instead of six years at $25M ($150M), the Twins offer four years at $35M ($140M)? They are spending but also possibly limiting the future impact of an aging expensive pitcher. From a players perspective, I would rather have the money now and make plans for my future with it, than wait five years for additional money. Just a thought.
  • USAFChief likes this

#33 ashbury

ashbury

    Twins fan, no joke!

  • Moderator
  • 24,286 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, NV

Posted 28 January 2018 - 09:21 AM

If now is the time to spend (as many are pointing out) and there is also a plea to do it "efficiently", how about offering Darvish a three or four year contract at a higher amount? Just as an example, instead of six years at $25M ($150M), the Twins offer four years at $35M ($140M)? They are spending but also possibly limiting the future impact of an aging expensive pitcher. From a players perspective, I would rather have the money now and make plans for my future with it, than wait five years for additional money. Just a thought.

For the same reason you are attracted to committing to only $140M instead of $150M, the pitcher probably would accept the latter, if different teams offered this choice of contracts. He's at a stage in his career where guaranteed totals are likely the main thing; Joe Mauer for example is not a lock to garner a total of $10M for the remainder of his career after his current contract expires.

  • Sconnie likes this

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. -- Arthur Conan Doyle


#34 ewen21

ewen21

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,720 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 09:40 AM

There seems to be a Darvish fetish amongst Twins fans and I don't get it.We will need to outbid the entire market for a guy who turns 32 this season, has had arm trouble, hasn't won more than 10 games in a season (despite playing for playoff contenders) since 2013, has pitched more than 150 innings ONCE since 2013, and curled up in the fetal position for the biggest game of his life.

 

We are supposed to move heaven and earth to get this guy?No thanks.  


#35 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,457 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 09:46 AM

To win the World Series you first have to get there.Darvish can certainly do that,what happens when you get there can be anything including winning it.  

Darvish was tipping his pitches, that can be fixed.Go for it.


#36 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 21,980 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 28 January 2018 - 09:55 AM

I'm not an expert in Gerontology by any means. 

 

However... there seems to be concern about Darvish and the aging process. I admit that there seems to be conclusive evidence that performance level lowers as you age past the peak year of 29. (Peak Year used to be 27). 

 

However... That drop is more like the backside of a bell curve, the data is large sample size averages compiled from all major league baseball players including Ty Cobb and the peak year seems to be moving older because... make your own assumption... better training... stronger generations... PED's... More Wives inspiring Players to be their best... Too much drinking and carrying-on in the roaring 20's... I don't know. 

 

The measured statistical drop in performance is not a cliff.

 

That is an important distinction. 

 

 

 

 

  • USAFChief likes 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!!!


#37 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Baseball and thought

  • Member
  • 8,658 posts
  • LocationThe ballpark of the mind

Posted 28 January 2018 - 10:18 AM

I'm not an expert in Gerontology by any means. 
 
However... there seems to be concern about Darvish and the aging process. I admit that there seems to be conclusive evidence that performance level lowers as you age past the peak year of 29. (Peak Year used to be 27). 
 
...
 
The measured statistical drop in performance is not a cliff.
 
That is an important distinction.


Satchel Paige farts in their general direction.
  • SQUIRREL, USAFChief, lecroy24fan and 4 others like this
"Be humble for you are made of earth. Be noble for you are made of stars." - Old Serbian proverb

#38 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    A Little Teapot

  • Owner
  • 22,637 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 12:15 PM

 

There seems to be a Darvish fetish amongst Twins fans and I don't get it.We will need to outbid the entire market for a guy who turns 32 this season, has had arm trouble, hasn't won more than 10 games in a season (despite playing for playoff contenders) since 2013, has pitched more than 150 innings ONCE since 2013, and curled up in the fetal position for the biggest game of his life.

 

We are supposed to move heaven and earth to get this guy?No thanks.  

Pitcher wins? Really?

 

Darvish pitched 186 very good innings in 2017. His win total is irrelevant, as it's not his fault the offense failed to score runs while he was on the mound (8th lowest run support in baseball last season).

  • Twins33 and jimmer like this

#39 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 16,553 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 12:26 PM

There seems to be a Darvish fetish amongst Twins fans and I don't get it. We will need to outbid the entire market for a guy who turns 32 this season, has had arm trouble, hasn't won more than 10 games in a season (despite playing for playoff contenders) since 2013, has pitched more than 150 innings ONCE since 2013, and curled up in the fetal position for the biggest game of his life.

We are supposed to move heaven and earth to get this guy? No thanks.


It's hardly a "fetish" or "moving heaven and earth" to offer a market rate contract, for likely the best player available at a contending team's biggest position of need.

Also, your list of Darvish negatives is misleading or at best double-counting. Thus far, his "arm trouble" has been limited to TJ surgery (hardly disqualifying by itself), which cut short his 2014 season, wiped out his 2015, and delayed the start of his 2016 (the 3 seasons you also ding him for not exceeding 10 wins or 150 innings). His surgery recovery time was no different than that of Lynn or Cobb. Also, the Rangers were ultimately NOT contenders in 2 of those seasons (2014 and 2017).

On the positive side, Darvish has had 6 seasons in MLB. TJ surgery wiped out the first half of two of those seasons; the other 4, Darvish has been named to the all-star team, including last season. I think he's a worthy target of the Twins right now.
  • Brock Beauchamp, SQUIRREL, USAFChief and 7 others like this

#40 Darius

Darius

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,620 posts

Posted 28 January 2018 - 03:29 PM

Just because a contract may be a risk and hurt the team a little down the road, they should not avoid them all together. At some point you have to take a risk.

There are also the possible outcomes of an "ace" caliber starter through the vast majority of the contract, or a trade deadline move returning elite prospects.

How often do the Twins have an opportunity like this? A potentially explosive offense and great defense are already place, and the best free agent starter on the market is expressing some legitimate interest in joining the team.....and we're too scared of failing to capitalize on something potentially great.

Edited by Darius, 28 January 2018 - 03:34 PM.

  • USAFChief, Mike Sixel, Twins33 and 2 others like this



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