Jump to content

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

Recent Blogs

Photo

Article: Twins Sign 2B Jonathan Schoop

jonathan schoop.
  • Please log in to reply
182 replies to this topic

#101 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,220 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 07 December 2018 - 10:33 AM

Then don't sign him. This does not fix anything meaningful. Or sign him, but trade Gibson. Because they aren't doing anything meaningful.


I recognize the inherent risk based on his woeful Brewers performance last year but if you are looking a player trying to repair himself and if successful... that production for a year is meaningful.

But if you feel different that’s ok
  • luckylager and Rigby 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!!!


#102 Carole Keller

Carole Keller

    I only stalk idiots.

  • Twins Mods
  • 21,899 posts

Posted 07 December 2018 - 10:48 AM

If Schoop only wanted to sign a 1 year deal... would you say "I'm sorry only a two year deal is what we are offering"?


Yes. Unless you’ve already determined you aren’t going to compete and are looking for potential bounce-back players to sell at the deadline.

#103 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,220 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 07 December 2018 - 10:58 AM

Yes. Unless you’ve already determined you aren’t going to compete and are looking for potential bounce-back players to sell at the deadline.


I’m not sure I understand the importance.

Everything depends on a bounce back.

If he bounces back and the team is in contention. Thumbs up.

If he bounces back and the team isn’t in contention you trade him for prospects and stock the shelves. Thumbs Up.

If he doesn’t bounce back... you are happy it is just a one year deal. Thumbs Up.

What is the downside I’m missing?
  • kab21, Monkeypaws, Sconnie and 3 others 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!!!


#104 Carole Keller

Carole Keller

    I only stalk idiots.

  • Twins Mods
  • 21,899 posts

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:07 AM

I’m not sure I understand the importance.
Everything depends on a bounce back.
If he bounces back and the team is in contention. Thumbs up.
If he bounces back and the team isn’t in contention you trade him for prospects and stock the shelves. Thumbs Up.
If he doesn’t bounce back... you are happy it is just a one year deal. Thumbs Up.
What is the downside I’m missing?


They aren’t planning for the future. They aren’t getting the best out there. Didn’t the FO themselves say that last year was a mistake having too many one year contracts on the team, that it made for a very noncohesive clubhouse? It’s a ‘We’re standing pat’ kind of move. This is not improvement. When there are better options out there, that we could have for more than a year, and we’re not making those moves, speaks volumes to me. It’s half-assed, imo.
  • darin617, Dr. Evil and KirbyDome89 like this

#105 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,966 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:14 AM

 

I thought I read that the FO felt that the one year veterans were not good for the team and team chemistry. One foot out the door as the season starts.....

 

I think a lot of that had to do with players being unhappy when they wanted a long term deal and signed for 1 year due to an abnormally slow FA market...

 

In this case, the player wanted a 1 year deal and seems pretty incentivized to setup his FA pay day. I don't think this concern applies here. 

  • ashbury, Twins33, Monkeypaws and 3 others like this

#106 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,966 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:26 AM

I actually like this signing. Given the org depth in the MI, the only long term signing I would have gotten behind is a positional flexibility guy like Marwin. This is a low risk, decent sized reward type signing. Plus, if they content, they can pick up a draft pick when he leaves if he's part of that contention... The guy posted some of the worst numbers of his career last year, and even with that, his career has been pretty decent for a 2B. I think a bounce back is a pretty realistic gamble. 

 

Now that said, this is a fine move in a vacuum. We needed help here and filled it... what happens next is what I'm more curious about. What will they to to improve pitching? I think they have to do something there.

  • Sconnie likes this

#107 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 346 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:29 AM

I was getting really nervous that these would be our only moves of the off-season...

 

...but then I heard that the off-season had barely began and will extend through it's normal time period! What a relief! Maybe relief pitchers will be coming soon! More relief! 

 

Breathe people. Long off-season. Be critical and judgmental AFTER we sign (or don't sign) free agents.  

 

*To me, Cron and Schoop are nice pieces to the puzzle. Are there more to follow? I'd bet on it! Just how big they will be, we will find out!

Edited by cmoss84, 07 December 2018 - 11:31 AM.

  • rdehring likes this

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#108 ashbury

ashbury

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,776 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:30 AM

They aren’t planning for the future.

That doesn't seem plausible. It seems to me instead that their plan for the future doesn't involve being very competitive in 2019. That disappoints me greatly, as I was hoping to take a step forward toward serious contention this coming year while not mortgaging the future. The rebuild (never termed as such by the team) began in earnest after the 2012 season; it's been a long time, with 2017 being mostly a dead-cat bounce.

 

As I stated probably a month ago, I was one of those who wouldn't be filing an off-season plan - the reason being that I could not construct one that I was confident in moving the needle for 2019. But I was hoping our front office, armed with better analytics than the back-of-the-envelope ones I can muster, would see a way. Apparently they reached the same conclusion I did. To repeat, disappointing.

 

Schoop's an OK signing. The "plan" for contention in 2019 seems to be that several rolls of the dice might coincide.

  • Carole Keller and DannySD like this

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into. -- Jonathan Swift


#109 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 11,453 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:30 AM

I was getting really nervous that these would be our only moves of the off-season...

...but then I heard that the off-season had barely began and will extend through it's normal time period! What a relief! Maybe relief pitchers will be coming soon! More relief!

Breathe people. Long off-season. Be critical and judgmental AFTER we sign (or don't sign) free agents.


Well that would take away the Daily aspect of Twins Daily, no? Let's shut down all comments until March 1.

#110 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,340 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:44 AM

 

That doesn't seem plausible. It seems to me instead that their plan for the future doesn't involve being very competitive in 2019. That disappoints me greatly, as I was hoping to take a step forward toward serious contention this coming year while not mortgaging the future. The rebuild (never termed as such by the team) began in earnest after the 2012 season; it's been a long time, with 2017 being mostly a dead-cat bounce.

 

As I stated probably a month ago, I was one of those who wouldn't be filing an off-season plan - the reason being that I could not construct one that I was confident in moving the needle for 2019. But I was hoping our front office, armed with better analytics than the back-of-the-envelope ones I can muster, would see a way. Apparently they reached the same conclusion I did. To repeat, disappointing.

 

Schoop's an OK signing. The "plan" for contention in 2019 seems to be that several rolls of the dice might coincide.

If the plan for 2019 doesn't involve being competitive, why sign Schoop?Just give the job to Gordon.

 

 

  • Carole Keller likes this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#111 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 346 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:46 AM

 

Well that would take away the Daily aspect of Twins Daily, no? Let's shut down all comments until March 1.

Sorry-should have been more specific...I love all the individual discussions about the individual transactions. What gets me is when people say we have failed this off-season...when there is still much more to come!

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#112 ashbury

ashbury

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,776 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:46 AM

If the plan for 2019 doesn't involve being competitive, why sign Schoop?Just give the job to Gordon.

I saw all I care to see of Gordon in one game in Pawtucket. :) Let him prove his glove and bat, both, at AAA before handing him anything.

  • darin617, Riverbrian, Original Whizzinator and 1 other like this

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into. -- Jonathan Swift


#113 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,340 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:52 AM

 

I saw all I care to see of Gordon in one game in Pawtucket. :) Let him prove his glove and bat, both, at AAA before handing him anything.

I have no faith in Gordon either. None.

 

But that's not the point. If the plan isn't to compete, why sign Schoop?

 

I don't think that's the plan.

  • darin617 and Sconnie like this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#114 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,220 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:55 AM

They aren’t planning for the future. They aren’t getting the best out there. Didn’t the FO themselves say that last year was a mistake having too many one year contracts on the team, that it made for a very noncohesive clubhouse? It’s a ‘We’re standing pat’ kind of move. This is not improvement. When there are better options out there, that we could have for more than a year, and we’re not making those moves, speaks volumes to me. It’s half-assed, imo.


Myself... I basically ignored the one year contract comment because people come in all shapes and sizes. Over the history of this game plenty of one year contracts have worked great. Yes some were bad but it isn’t locked down certain either way.

Closing the door on them because it didn’t work out with one or two of them would be a freightening over reaction and end up being a self imposed speed bump to keeping all avenues open.

It's not the contract Its the individual players themselves that determine if it was a good acquisition.

Now if you think we could have done better than Schoop. That is valid and I get the concern but one or two years doesn’t worry me. I’d prefer the one year if it’s someone who needs a bounce back.

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!!!


#115 laloesch

laloesch

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,731 posts

Posted 07 December 2018 - 11:59 AM

 

Agreed. I’m so sick of these deals. Looks like we’re riding on Buxton and Sano to have mvp years. Even if they did we don’t have enough to compete. Maybe more will happen but I’m not counting on it. We’ll just wait until Lewis and Kirilloff come up as they will be the saviors. Then we’ll wait 5 years for them to develop only to be busts. In that time we’ll have had a few more top 5 picks. Wait for them to come up only to be busts. Maybe one or two of these guys pan out but nothing that would constitute a solid core and before we know it we’re the Royals or Pirates from the 90’s to the 2000’s. Call me in 30 years when this team is good again. Jeez. When are we gonna try to go for something. I’d rather have a good year or two and then a few bad instead of waiting for these prospects. All I hear about is prospects. When are we gonna have real Mlb ball players? That’s what I want. I want to have a reason to watch a twins game. We waited for how long for the current group? How’s that going? I hope they prove me wrong. I’m taking the opinion the rest of the country has always had. That being the Twins are and always will be a joke and will not accomplish anything until they start putting Mlb players on the field instead of prospects.

 

I like the deal. I like that there is no pressure on either side to commit long term.Maybe at the end of 2019 the FO could change it's mind and meet with Schoop who will have had a full season to play his butt off in Minnesota and earn a big paycheck.Well see were we end up. 

 

On your final point i agree but we also had a bunch of players drop the ball last season. Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Dozier, Morrison all played like absolute horse **** most of the season and polanco getting suspended 80 games didn't help matters either. The young talent blew it last season along with a bad bullpen.

  • LA VIkes Fan likes this

#116 ashbury

ashbury

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,776 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 12:00 PM

I have no faith in Gordon either. None.

 

But that's not the point. If the plan isn't to compete, why sign Schoop?

 

I don't think that's the plan.

"Compete" is one of those fuzzy terms. It looks to me that the FO isn't planning on tanking, nor risking tanking by committing to kids who aren't ready.

 

I didn't wordsmith much there, but on re-reading I see hedged phrases like "very competitive", "serious contention", and "rolls of the dice" in what I said. That serves to somewhat define the muddled middle ground I view the FO as occupying this off-season.

  • USAFChief, diehardtwinsfan, kab21 and 1 other like this

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into. -- Jonathan Swift


#117 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,717 posts

Posted 07 December 2018 - 12:02 PM

They could've gone after Iglesias and improved both MI spots defensively by shifting Polanco to 2B. That would free up Gordon (not that he was off the table without Jorge at 2B) to be moved in a trade for some pitching. 

 

That's the most disappointing thing about the Schoop signing for me. They had a chance to make improvement across the infield with one signing. 

  • Carole Keller, darin617, markos and 2 others like this

#118 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 11,453 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 07 December 2018 - 12:03 PM

Can I comment as a fan... One year deals are lame because it gives me zero incentive to invest in their success. If the player bounces back, do we really think the Twins are going to win the bid again for their rights?

Since Falvey and Levine took over there have been way too many players who signed and left the organization. I can't keep up with it anymore.
  • Mike Sixel, gunnarthor and Dr. Evil like this

#119 Carole Keller

Carole Keller

    I only stalk idiots.

  • Twins Mods
  • 21,899 posts

Posted 07 December 2018 - 12:09 PM

Myself... I basically ignored the one year contract comment because people come in all shapes and sizes. Over the history of this game plenty of one year contracts have worked great. Yes some were bad but it isn’t locked down certain either way.

Closing the door on them because it didn’t work out with one or two of them would be a freightening over reaction and end up being a self imposed speed bump to keeping all avenues open.

It's not the contract Its the individual players themselves that determine if it was a good acquisition.

Now if you think we could have done better than Schoop. That is valid and I get the concern but one or two years doesn’t worry me. I’d prefer the one year if it’s someone who needs a bounce back.


I think both.

#120 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 20,220 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 07 December 2018 - 12:15 PM

I think both.


Yeah but you multi-task
  • ashbury 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!!!