Jump to content

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

Recent Blogs

Photo

Article: The Darvish Contingency Plan

yu darvish chris archer alex cobb lance lynn jake odorizzi
  • Please log in to reply
195 replies to this topic

#81 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 10,212 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:14 PM

 

now if we could get Arrieta on 1-year 20 w/team option for 2019 and 4-60 for CobbI'd be cool with that but nevertheless dealing for Odorizzi or Archer seem like the smarter option. Or maybe reconsider a deal for Teheran or a cheap deal for Collin McHugh or Brad Peacock from Houston.

Dealing for Odorizzi wouldn't be smart.Unless we gave up Gibson...by himself.

  • notoriousgod71 and jud6312 like this

#82 NewClearHarley

NewClearHarley

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:17 PM

 

Honestly, I'm just glad it's over so we can stop hearing about it.

 

Now we just need them to not settle for someone like Tillman or Garcia on the FA or offer up someone like Kepler for someone like Odorizzi.

 

I'lltake Tillman or Garcia for 1-9 / 2-18 prove-it deals to be back of the rotation (roster fill in) types but not as the ace.


#83 NewClearHarley

NewClearHarley

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:19 PM

 

Dealing for Odorizzi wouldn't be smart.Unless we gave up Gibson...by himself.

I don't think Gibby would be dealt - TB wants Kepler (with their large quotient of LHB I don't know why) - for him - Kepler is the key piece.

 


#84 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 10,212 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:21 PM

 

I don't think Gibby would be dealt - TB wants Kepler (with their large quotient of LHB I don't know why) - for him - Kepler is the key piece.

yeah, you missed my point.  

 

In any event,I wouldn't trade Kepler for Odorizzi. 

  • Blake, Twins33, notoriousgod71 and 2 others like this

#85 speedlimitdriver

speedlimitdriver

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:21 PM

If they really do want Kepler, I'd trade him + any prospect for Chris Archer.

  • jimmer likes this

#86 Danchat

Danchat

    Pro Bowl Armchair QB

  • Members
  • 4,140 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:22 PM

 

It was reported the Twins offered 5 years and a little over $100 million fwiw

But still didn’t match the cubs or really come that close.

Just a token effort to say “hey we tried! Ps enjoy the new 3 bars at target field and increased ticket prices to boot!”

I recall the report was "over" $100M. 

 

 

Their offer to Darvish was for at least five years and $100MM, according to Heyman.

 

You may assume it was a "little" over $100M but we don't have any way of confirming it. It could have been in the $120M range just as much as around $102M.

  • Twins33, nicksaviking and howieramone2 like this

#87 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 10,212 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:25 PM

 

If they really do want Kepler, I'd trade him + any prospect for Chris Archer.

Anyone but Lewis, yeah.

  • Oldgoat_MN, Franz and NewClearHarley like this

#88 Twodogs

Twodogs

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 838 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:51 PM

I saw the Darvish deal was 6 for 126 on the MLB channel. I think the twins missed an opportunity, they should have gone for it. Hey he held out and got what he wanted. Yeah I guess the twins didn't blink, but they are also left empty handed.

I'd prefer not to trade for anyone, I'd like to see the twins hang on to their prospects so they can possibly use them at the trade deadline. Go get Lynn, Cobb, Garcia, someone to stick in the rotation that will make them aveage and hope that these young pitchers develop and can become a factor next year. Until then we need to sit around and hope they can get in to the wild card game that they can lose, but hopefully at that point we are talking about these young guys and how they will be ready for 2019??

You cannot succeed without hate for your enemy


#89 speedlimitdriver

speedlimitdriver

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:52 PM

 

Anyone but Lewis, yeah.

 

I'd even do Lewis. This, right here, is their window. You don't get much of a window if you're the Twins.


#90 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 14,822 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 09:55 PM

Lots of factors going on here than simply money. The Cubs have shown the initiative to go out and make deals at the deadline to put their team over the edge; the Twins have not.


This is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, no? I'd guess Darvish would have had more respect for our commitment to winning if we actually bothered to offer him a market rate contract in the first place.

Heck, maybe if we demonstrate the ability to land a Darvish, the next Verlander type trade candidate might be more willing to waive their no-trade clause to come here.

If we want to overcome the perception that we're not committed to winning, we actually have to commit to winning, more than we've done to date.
  • Oldgoat_MN, notoriousgod71 and Carlos Figueroa like this

#91 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 13,380 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:07 PM

https://www.twinciti...-darvish-derby/

 

Berardino's piece regarding missing on Darvish. The quote that I don't like:

 

“By definition doesn’t a player stay with you if he’s performing at a value less than what you’re paying him and he’ll walk if he’s performing at a value above it?” Levine said. “So I don’t know where the benefit is to the club. It seems to me very, very advantageous to the player and would have to take something unique in a negotiation to feel like that’s the right move.”

 

The benefit to the club is that you got the player you wanted. I was really hoping with the new regime we were over the idea that the team had to "win" every trade and free agent signing.

  • USAFChief, Mike Sixel, Twins33 and 5 others like this

#92 FormerMinnasotan

FormerMinnasotan

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 634 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:07 PM

Well to be blunt we need to sign Arrieta, Lynn, or Cobb or our free agency is a bust, and the Twins organization once again proves they aren’t “in it to win it”. We probably will sign a free agent pitcher, but he will probably be worth less than a replacement player but the Twins brass will spin the signing (like Chris Tillman or Wade Miley) as finding a “diamond in the rough” when in reality they might be gone as early as June as they will preform poorly. Trading for Chris Archer is interesting yet with our current depth issues on the rotation and the uncertain future of Archer (his win/loss mark the last 2 yrs is poor, same with his ERA, and batting average against), the thing is could we afford to trade Gonsalves, Romero, or Thorpe if Archer bombs here? Look if we get nothing for our rotation this year it speaks poorly of our front office and wanting to ever “go for it all”.

#93 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6,482 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:10 PM

Turning down the Twins 5 year off er was my first clue.


Perhaps the offer wasn't good enough.

#94 NewClearHarley

NewClearHarley

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:11 PM

 

Only way I'd trade Kepler to TB is if it's straight up for Archer. I think sending Kepler, Gordon and either Gonsalves or Romero would be ridiculous.

and in response TB would not accept just Kepler for Archer. Kepler has yet to prove he is more than a platoon-level OF'er at the MLB level. I think he will be, but SP is our position of need LHB RF is not. 

  • Oldgoat_MN likes this

#95 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 14,822 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:15 PM

https://www.twinciti...-darvish-derby/

Berardino's piece regarding missing on Darvish. The quote that I don't like:

“By definition doesn’t a player stay with you if he’s performing at a value less than what you’re paying him and he’ll walk if he’s performing at a value above it?” Levine said. “So I don’t know where the benefit is to the club. It seems to me very, very advantageous to the player and would have to take something unique in a negotiation to feel like that’s the right move.”

The benefit to the club is that you got the player you wanted. I was really hoping with the new regime we were over the idea that the team had to "win" every trade and free agent signing.


This is a troubling quote from our front office. The comparison shouldn't be, this contract vs the exact same contract with an opt out. The correct comparison is the contract with an opt out vs. a more expensive / less valuable contract offer without an opt out.
  • Twins33, TheLeviathan and KirbyDome89 like this

#96 NewClearHarley

NewClearHarley

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:21 PM

 

yeah, you missed my point.  

 

In any event,I wouldn't trade Kepler for Odorizzi. 

I got your point and know that Gibson has zero value to anyone outside this organization as anything more than a reclamation project. Odorizzi has a career 8.2 k/9 and the twins analytics team has insight to the pitching prospects from TB. In fact the team was connected to him even before last season. Is he an ace? No. Would he be a top-3 starter this season for us? Yes. With Santana out to start the season, he would probably even be our opening day starter. Would I rather have Archer? Yes, but we could do a lot worse than getting Odorizzi as part of a package. 

 

As for holding on to Kep, I'd love to keep him, but I know that he is a player that TB is interested in. If we got Archer, I'd feel better about trading him - but I'm not going to sweat a #6 hitter that struggles with LHP and who very well could be a career platoon-option. Besides in any deal to better this team, we could agree to take on Denard Span's ugly contract in lieu of dealing additional prospects. Span wouldn't be too large of a dropoff in production from Kepler next year and hopefully we could then use some of this "FA money" that we didn't throw at Darvish to sign another decent starter (Cobb/Lynn) and a potent RHB for the bench.

 

 


#97 NewClearHarley

NewClearHarley

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:26 PM

 

I got your point and know that Gibson has zero value to anyone outside this organization as anything more than a reclamation project. Odorizzi has a career 8.2 k/9 and the twins analytics team has insight to the pitching prospects from TB. In fact the team was connected to him even before last season. Is he an ace? No. Would he be a top-3 starter this season for us? Yes. With Santana out to start the season, he would probably even be our opening day starter. Would I rather have Archer? Yes, but we could do a lot worse than getting Odorizzi as part of a package. 

 

As for holding on to Kep, I'd love to keep him, but I know that he is a player that TB is interested in. If we got Archer, I'd feel better about trading him - but I'm not going to sweat a #6 hitter that struggles with LHP and who very well could be a career platoon-option. Besides in any deal to better this team, we could agree to take on Denard Span's ugly contract in lieu of dealing additional prospects. Span wouldn't be too large of a dropoff in production from Kepler next year and hopefully we could then use some of this "FA money" that we didn't throw at Darvish to sign another decent starter (Cobb/Lynn) and a potent RHB for the bench.

 

Consider it from a replacement level argument - Would you rather have Odorizzi/Archer as our #1 or #2 option along with Span (or other replacement level individual - Maybin/CarGo in RF) or Kepler at RF most of the time (not likely full-time) and Gibson as our #2 option.


#98 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,717 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:39 PM

 

https://www.twinciti...-darvish-derby/

 

Berardino's piece regarding missing on Darvish. The quote that I don't like:

 

“By definition doesn’t a player stay with you if he’s performing at a value less than what you’re paying him and he’ll walk if he’s performing at a value above it?” Levine said. “So I don’t know where the benefit is to the club. It seems to me very, very advantageous to the player and would have to take something unique in a negotiation to feel like that’s the right move.”

 

The benefit to the club is that you got the player you wanted. I was really hoping with the new regime we were over the idea that the team had to "win" every trade and free agent signing.

Just saw this....wow....

 

Worst case scenario is he exceeds expectations and returns greater value than expected for a couple years, then leaves. It doesn't put them in a situation any worse than the one they're in now; devoid of a front end starter, trying to either swing a big trade, sign another mid/back end rotation piece, or handing out 1 year deals to cobble a rotation together.I don't see much that they had to lose by giving him the option after year 2. 

 

IMO that quote from Levine sounds like he's passing the buck while avoiding the real issue. 

Edited by KirbyDome89, 10 February 2018 - 10:50 PM.

  • USAFChief, Twins33, notoriousgod71 and 2 others like this

#99 rdehring

rdehring

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 879 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 10:40 PM

There are several players in the lower level of the organization you do not trade.First is Lewis.You do not trade a potential hall of famer.You also do not trade Javier or Graterol.Both are so far away from the big leagues you are not going to get enough value in return to offset you may be trading your next all-star shortstop or ACE.  

 

As for Darvish signing with the Cubs.Great for him.Six years at that type of money is beyond what the Twins should be giving anyone on the market this year.


#100 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 16,270 posts

Posted 10 February 2018 - 11:34 PM

 

https://www.twinciti...-darvish-derby/

 

Berardino's piece regarding missing on Darvish. The quote that I don't like:

 

“By definition doesn’t a player stay with you if he’s performing at a value less than what you’re paying him and he’ll walk if he’s performing at a value above it?” Levine said. “So I don’t know where the benefit is to the club. It seems to me very, very advantageous to the player and would have to take something unique in a negotiation to feel like that’s the right move.”

 

The benefit to the club is that you got the player you wanted. I was really hoping with the new regime we were over the idea that the team had to "win" every trade and free agent signing.

 

Doesn't this all but settle the fact that the Twins knew they were offering a lesser contract (by not offering the opt out) and did so anyway?




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: yu darvish, chris archer, alex cobb, lance lynn, jake odorizzi