Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Article: Hardball, the Twins, and Byron Buxton

minnesota twins byron buxton
  • Please log in to reply
311 replies to this topic

#261 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,337 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:39 PM

 

You seemed very concerned about losing him so that's why Chief listed the date.

 

I'm not concerned at all about losing him.

 

I pointed out the following:

 

1) If he is good, the Twins want that extra year so they won't have to pay him.Then he leaves because they will claim they can't afford him.

2) If he is bad, they can cut him without having to pay him.

 

I made the (rather clear, if you read everything I wrote instead of reacting to a snippet), that the Twins argument is bunk because the result is the same either way. Buxton won't be a career Twin.

 

Since the Twins don't want to pay him, the only thing they gain by sending him home is slowing down his development, and thus slowing down the Twins playoff chances. Basing a decision now on a money issue that won't actually exist in five years is daft.

 

Twins Manifesto: Build for .500, hope for more.


#262 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,820 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 04 September 2018 - 07:22 PM

I'm not concerned at all about losing him.
 
I pointed out the following:
 
1) If he is good, the Twins want that extra year so they won't have to pay him.Then he leaves because they will claim they can't afford him.
2) If he is bad, they can cut him without having to pay him.
 
I made the (rather clear, if you read everything I wrote instead of reacting to a snippet), that the Twins argument is bunk because the result is the same either way. Buxton won't be a career Twin.
 
Since the Twins don't want to pay him, the only thing they gain by sending him home is slowing down his development, and thus slowing down the Twins playoff chances. Basing a decision now on a money issue that won't actually exist in five years is daft.


The extra year isn’t about money. It’s about how long they own his rights.

Once again...if they had brought him up Sep 1st, and he never returned to the minors, he could have been a free agent following the 2021 season.

Now, he cant be until after the 2022 season.

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#263 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,293 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 08:01 PM

The extra year isn’t about money. It’s about how long they own his rights.


I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.

#264 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,820 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 04 September 2018 - 08:18 PM

I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.


Possibly, although that’s an odd way to make that point.

In any case, This way there is no need to buy it...and hasn’t it been reported Buxton turned down an extension anyway?

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#265 Don Walcott

Don Walcott

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,283 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, NM

Posted 04 September 2018 - 08:20 PM

I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.


And with the way they are treating him, unless they make “amends” quickly, there is no chance they have Buxton beyond four years (or three if they lose his grievance).
  • Kelly Vance likes this

#266 Kelly Vance

Kelly Vance

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 597 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 08:58 PM

 

Honestly Carole... I want that world as well. But it ain't coming. 

 

Every single 25 and 40 man decision should be based on who the best players are period. But it ain't coming.

 

I get the ethics part of the discussion and I consider myself a pretty ethical guy but please keep in mind that those very same players are going to have their agents shoving bamboo under the fingernails of front offices in order to get the best deal they can for their client. 

 

The Angels have to pay Pujols 30 Million a Year as a free agent and Buxton is going to lose a year. It happens on both sides. 

 

I'm not going to hold my team to some ethical standard that no other team is holding themselves to. 

Nobody is shoving bamboo and saying you appreciate ethics while approving an ethical violation ....? Really?  And if you want to be as unethical as every other team,, then you don't get it.  What Ted and Me and Hoskem and a couple others have been saying is, if you want to attract stud players, don't act like you are going to treat  them like cattle. 


#267 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 16,753 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 09:27 PM

The best way to attract talent is with money.Dave St. Peter said it himself - the vast majority of the time the dollars do the talking.This will have zero impact on FA or any other contract negotiation outside of Buxton.

 

And with Buxton it only matters if he becomes a functional starting baseball player beyond his defensive game.

  • adorduan likes this

#268 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,515 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 September 2018 - 10:38 PM

 

Nobody is shoving bamboo and saying you appreciate ethics while approving an ethical violation ....? Really?  And if you want to be as unethical as every other team,, then you don't get it.  What Ted and Me and Hoskem and a couple others have been saying is, if you want to attract stud players, don't act like you are going to treat  them like cattle. 

 

Is this an ethics lesson that I'm receiving?

 

Give me an example of a team that doesn't treat them like cattle. Cattle being your definition not mine. 

 

 

 

 

 

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!!!


#269 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,820 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 04 September 2018 - 10:51 PM

The best way to attract talent is with money.Dave St. Peter said it himself - the vast majority of the time the dollars do the talking.This will have zero impact on FA or any other contract negotiation outside of Buxton.
 
And with Buxton it only matters if he becomes a functional starting baseball player beyond his defensive game.


Maybe not zero impact. Some, maybe. When you have options, wouldn’t you give some weight to picking an employer with a good reputation for employee relations?

And make no mistake, MLBPA members are aware of this.

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#270 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 16,753 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 10:53 PM

 

Maybe not zero impact. Some, maybe. When you have options, wouldn’t you give some weight to picking an employer with a good reputation for employee relations?

And make no mistake, MLBPA members are aware of this.

 

Since every team is a bad actor in this regard, would it really matter?

 

Cubs did it with Kris Bryant, didn't seem to hurt them.Just one example of many.

Edited by TheLeviathan, 04 September 2018 - 10:57 PM.

  • Riverbrian and Tomj14 like this

#271 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,820 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 04 September 2018 - 10:56 PM

Since every team is a bad actor in this regard, would it really matter?


I’m doubtful every team would treat this situation the same.

Likewise, I’m willing to bet some organizations have better reputations than others.

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#272 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 16,753 posts

Posted 04 September 2018 - 11:03 PM

 

I’m doubtful every team would treat this situation the same.

Likewise, I’m willing to bet some organizations have better reputations than others.

 

I think the only difference here was the Twins openly citing service time.Otherwise I think this exactly what every other team would do.Sox and Jays are doing it too.

 

Cubs might have the most glaring example ever.Didn't impact them one bit in FA.

Edited by TheLeviathan, 04 September 2018 - 11:04 PM.


#273 Jham

Jham

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 1,817 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 04:17 AM

What a bizzare argument. Both sides make valid points. Neither is wrong.

I noticed a few false narratives being pushed some even in the latest Gleeman and the Geek.

1) premeditated service time manipulation. Bonnes even tried to argue that the Twins DLed him to save service time (obviously opposite effect). If you recall, Buck went to the DL initially for a migraine, not a toe. He returned and was bad. We could have optioned him then to save service since he was healthy enough to play. Instead, he went to the DL and aquired service time. In fact, this was a huge risk because of the injury lingered or he had set backs, the service time would have evaporated on the 60 day and the team would lose development and service time. He was later optioned after returning to eligibility but before his rehab was up. Of course, that type of early communication is exactly what was asked of by posters here.

2) Aaron Hicks comparison. This is an odd comp to suggest that the Twins need to bring Buck up. This should be a cautionary tale on why you don't rush players with tools but raw skills. We didn't learn. We rushed Buck, but now we have the opportunity to rectify that mistake and retake some of the time he wasted on the big league roster. Hicks blossomed later. We're trying to learn from that mistake by extending the window in which he'll be a Twin into the years where he's figured out how to hit.

3) His defense will likely never be as good as it was last year (historically good). If he's defense only, service time really isn't an issue. He'll have lost enough go get it by 2022 that an extra year likely won't matter much. So the argument should probably revolve around the hit tool. And as useful as some part time at bats against expanded rosters would be, a full year against starters is better. It has to be right?

4) Loyalty? We drafted him second over-all. Paid the slot money. Pushed his development and arrival. Marketed the heck out of him. Stuck with him and defended him through months of immense struggles while accruing service time, potentially at detriment to a winning team. We actually intended to send him down last year, but Rowson stuck up for his guy and the team relented. Loyalty? Why do we owe loyalty to Buck and not Mauer? Do we really expect Buck will show the Twins loyalty in contract negotiations? He might, but should he? Baseball is about entertainment. Easiest form is winning.

5) Gleeman started that the Twins asked Buck to play hurt. Where did that come from? What a weird thing to do if you're worried about service.

Edited by Jham, 05 September 2018 - 04:34 AM.

  • diehardtwinsfan, Riverbrian, TheLeviathan and 1 other like this

#274 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,515 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 05 September 2018 - 07:29 AM

I’m doubtful every team would treat this situation the same.

Likewise, I’m willing to bet some organizations have better reputations than others.


I’m sure you are correct and I have no idea what teams have the reputation and I’d be willing to bet that player B feels differently than Player C and D and E. Player D just might not care at all and player E might be troubled because his brother was cut by the organization in A ball.

In the end, I’m pretty sure all 30 teams are going to act on their best interest and the players will act on their best interest. Any team that acts on the players behalf first is going to have Trevor Plouffe playing 3B for them until they are 45.

I’m not worried the Twins will be able sign the next Ricky Nolasco type to an FA deal and I’ve always been worried about the Twins being able to sign a Manny Machado type and Buxton doesn’t change that.
  • nicksaviking and Tomj14 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!!!


#275 Don Walcott

Don Walcott

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,283 posts
  • LocationSanta Fe, NM

Posted 05 September 2018 - 08:32 AM

 

Is this an ethics lesson that I'm receiving?

 

Give me an example of a team that doesn't treat them like cattle. Cattle being your definition not mine. 

I only follow two teams closely, the Twins and the Rockies. I'd say the Rockies treat their players better, and as a result they get more reasonable contract extensions that buy out more years for their players, leading to more continuity in their team. Charlie Blackmon is a recent example, whose stop and start injury plagued first few seasons look a lot like Buxton's. The Rockies even got Carlos Gonzales to come back after his contract expired (which was extended prior to his free agency). And they've been more successful than the Twins lately, in a way that looks more sustainable.

 

I don't recall the Rockies having fire sales like the Twins have had recently either. They tend to stick with their guys and bolster areas of need (like the bullpen in the past two years). Believe me, Rockies fans complain about the ownership being cheap just as much as Twins fans. However, they don't have to feel ashamed at how their FO treats the players they love to see on their team. Even trading Tulowitzki (whose contract had been extended), was the choice of the player.

 

I love to see Buxton on this team, and I'm ashamed at how the FO has treated him. I hope they make "amends" with him sooner than later, but I fear that won't be possible. Rather than nickel and dime him by manipulating service time, I wish they'd work on extending his contract. If he turns out to be a bust, I'll admit to being wrong about this. But I fully believe he'll be a perennial All-Star caliber player. And the way things are going, most of his prime years will likely be with another team. And either way, I'd rather the Twins act honorably towards Buxton and all of their players.

  • gunnarthor, Riverbrian, Jham and 1 other like this

#276 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,293 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 10:40 AM

 

I think the only difference here was the Twins openly citing service time.Otherwise I think this exactly what every other team would do.Sox and Jays are doing it too.

 

Cubs might have the most glaring example ever.Didn't impact them one bit in FA.

There are more differences than that. Those examples were all players who hadn't yet played in MLB, thus weren't union members, thus weren't on the 40-man roster with at least some expectation they'd be called up when rosters expanded.

 

You may not particularly care about those differences, but they exist. I don't think they will matter from an official grievance standpoint, but Buxton, fans, and the rest of the Twins clubhouse might react differently here than they would to, say, Royce Lewis getting the Kris Bryant treatment in April 2020.

  • USAFChief and Hosken Bombo Disco like this

#277 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,293 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 10:47 AM

Worth noting that in one of the more famous "veteran" service time manipulations -- JJ Hardy in 2009 -- he still got called up Sep. 1st when rosters expanded.

 

It must be pretty rare to send home a veteran, healthy enough to play, who's already on the 40-man roster in September.


#278 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 16,753 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 01:19 PM

 

There are more differences than that. Those examples were all players who hadn't yet played in MLB, thus weren't union members, thus weren't on the 40-man roster with at least some expectation they'd be called up when rosters expanded.

 

You may not particularly care about those differences, but they exist. I don't think they will matter from an official grievance standpoint, but Buxton, fans, and the rest of the Twins clubhouse might react differently here than they would to, say, Royce Lewis getting the Kris Bryant treatment in April 2020.

 

The union isn't battling things whether a guy is officially union or not.They fight based on ownership over-reaches.So I can't see how that has any significance.The Bryant grievance was still filed, whether he had played in MLB or not.This one will be filed just the same.And the result will likely be the same in both.

 

You can argue the circumstances are rare, and I'd agree with that, but service time manipulation is something all teams engage in.That is common, though it comes in many forms and with many lame excuses.  


#279 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,293 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 02:19 PM

 

The union isn't battling things whether a guy is officially union or not.They fight based on ownership over-reaches.So I can't see how that has any significance.The Bryant grievance was still filed, whether he had played in MLB or not.This one will be filed just the same.And the result will likely be the same in both.

 

You can argue the circumstances are rare, and I'd agree with that, but service time manipulation is something all teams engage in.That is common, though it comes in many forms and with many lame excuses.  

 

Well, I specifically said it wasn't so much about the official grievance (which I think Buxton would lose), but the reaction of fans and players.

 

And it's precisely my point that service time manipulation usually doesn't come in many forms -- it's almost always about delaying a rookie's debut. Every team does that. But I'd guess Chief is right, that not every team would do this to Buxton -- just based on his career results so far, the Cubs or other big spending teams probably don't value the extra year of Buxton now anywhere near that of rookie Bryant. So you're probably only looking at the more frugal teams that might do this. And then there are simple veteran/clubhouse communication issues. And a team that is more confident / has a track record of negotiating fair long-term contracts might not feel the need either.


#280 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 29,126 posts

Posted 05 September 2018 - 02:27 PM

BTW, I think they should have called him up. It's both the wrong, and right, thing to do. I'm on the right side on this one.

  • big dog likes this

It's IL now, btw, not DL.....




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: minnesota twins, byron buxton