Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

MinnCentric Forums


Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Mackey: How to Fix the Twins? (Part 3)

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 DaveW

DaveW

    <3 Mark Derosa <3

  • Members
  • 6,330 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:14 PM

I don't see why people undervalue Span so much here. He's a 2-4 win player at a minimum. If you include his option he's slated to make $20 million in the next 3 years. Angel Pagan is going to cost around 5 years, $60 million. Which player/contract would you choose? .

What a terrible example.

I'd also prefer that contract over Vernon Wells, Werth etc etc

#22 JP3700

JP3700

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 294 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:42 PM

I don't see why people undervalue Span so much here. He's a 2-4 win player at a minimum. If you include his option he's slated to make $20 million in the next 3 years. Angel Pagan is going to cost around 5 years, $60 million. Which player/contract would you choose? .

What a terrible example.

I'd also prefer that contract over Vernon Wells, Werth etc etc


I was comparing two center fielders with similar skill sets and value. One is a free agent and the other is available via trade.

Then you venture off to two corner outfielders that have nothing to do with Span's value in a trade. Yet you call my example terrible?

#23 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:06 PM

just that it makes a lot of sense for both sides because of the things TB is looking to address...


There are plenty of ways they could address things. They could put Jennings in CF and look for another OF to bat leadoff. There are a multitude of ways any team could do things.

You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day. Span is a player with concussion issues who is very solid, but unspectacular. You're not going to get anyone's prime trade bait with him alone. If Ryan pulls that off, great, but attacking anyone that questions that kind of speculation has plenty of flaws too.

#24 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:10 PM

just that it makes a lot of sense for both sides because of the things TB is looking to address...


There are plenty of ways they could address things. They could put Jennings in CF and look for another OF to bat leadoff. There are a multitude of ways any team could do things.

You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day. Span is a player with concussion issues who is very solid, but unspectacular. You're not going to get anyone's prime trade bait with him alone. If Ryan pulls that off, great, but attacking anyone that questions that kind of speculation has plenty of flaws too.


Ah, I see...since you and I disagree on his value/abilities, it must be that I'M getting caught over-valuing a player I watch daily. Fantastic fact based argument. You couldn't possibly be wrong and undervaluing a player you watch daily. Are the people who do the Fielding Bible award over-valuing his defense based on watching him daily as well when they rated him the 3rd best defensive CF in baseball this year? Fangraphs saying he's 2nd in range, 2nd in UZR and 2nd in defensive runs saved, are they bias too? What about the people at Baseball-reference who have his WAR at 28th AL players (23 for Fangraphs)? Them too?

#25 johnnydakota

johnnydakota

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 1,498 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:55 PM

Okay...so...let's say they don't want to use Jennings in CF, which FA CF is gonna be cheaper than Span over the next two years who is also younger and fits their leadoff needs?

BTW, I also mentioned Revere at the beginning of all this...


So first to back up your point you make an assumption that is extremely favorable to your viewpoint? Cmon. The Rays have never acted in a way that is restricted by such limited, conventional thinking. They won't be taken to the woodshed in a Span deal because of some perceived "need" for a certain type of player at one position. Leadoff hitters don't have to play CF - they can address their OBP needs in other ways without Span. Your entire premise in this thread is built on the idea that we have Tampa right where we want them. That's hardly the case. The deal makes some sense for both sides and is worth exploring, but it is a bit far fetched to think you'll land Shields for Span. Just as it is that you'll land a top SP prospect for him.


with tampa looking to shed payroll and fill needs from excess same as the twins it looks like a good fit , we may have to throw in some non factors prospects like hernandez or hermsen but they aint going to help us so trade em

#26 glunn

glunn

    Head Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 6,147 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:32 PM

[quote name='johnnydakota'][quote name='TheLeviathan'][quote name='ThePuck']Okay...so...let's say they don't want to use Jennings in CF, which FA CF is gonna be cheaper than Span over the next two years who is also younger and fits their leadoff needs?

BTW, I also mentioned Revere at the beginning of all this...[/QUOTE]

So first to back up your point you make an assumption that is extremely favorable to your viewpoint? Cmon. The Rays have never acted in a way that is restricted by such limited, conventional thinking. They won't be taken to the woodshed in a Span deal because of some perceived "need" for a certain type of player at one position. Leadoff hitters don't have to play CF - they can address their OBP needs in other ways without Span. Your entire premise in this thread is built on the idea that we have Tampa right where we want them. That's hardly the case. The deal makes some sense for both sides and is worth exploring, but it is a bit far fetched to think you'll land Shields for Span. Just as it is that you'll land a top SP prospect for him.[/QUOTE]

with tampa looking to shed payroll and fill needs from excess same as the twins it looks like a good fit , we may have to throw in some non factors prospects like hernandez or hermsen but they aint going to help us so trade em[/QUOTE]

Obviously, some GMs will value Span more than others. But the idea of trading Span for a solid starter who is affordable seems appealing, even if it's necessary to throw in a prospect or two to make the deal happen.

I also like the idea of bidding high for Anibal Sanchez -- he seems like a solid #2 -- and taking him would might weaken the Tigers.

#27 Top Gun

Top Gun

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:30 AM

You can't trade with yourself.

#28 sorney

sorney

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 176 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:48 AM

Well, if rumors are true and Span has been shopped around, the rest of the league doesn't value Span as highly as the Twins do. My guess is if they could/can get starting pitching for him they will pull the trigger. I personally agree with PseudoSABR, that that kind of player is a major reach for Span.


Or the Twins are doing what they always do WAY overvaluing their trade chips...


Unfortunately that always *seems* to be the case that they over value their trade chips....
Well, except for Ramos :)

#29 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:53 AM

Unfortunately that always *seems* to be the case that they over value their trade chips....
Well, except for Ramos :)


Yeah, there have been some blatant exceptions, haven't there. My bad. :-)

#30 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,906 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:59 AM



Unfortunately that always *seems* to be the case that they over value their trade chips....
Well, except for Ramos :)


Yeah, there have been some blatant exceptions, haven't there. My bad. :-)


What trade chips has Ryan overvalued? Please don't use Bill Smith trades.

#31 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,421 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:06 AM

He's got Dozier starting at 2B and getting 450 PAs and Florimon starting at SS and getting 340 PAs... but no new middle infielders.


I don't have them doing anything there either this offseason as I believe their goal of solid defense is in place and will suffice for now. Once they know what they have for pitching next year and see how Arcia, Hicks, and Parmalee develop I can see one of them being traded either in July next year or next offseason for a SS.


If the idea is to trade for a shortstop, there's no reason not to do it now before investing a stack of cash in starting pitchers.

What's weird about Mackey's blueprint is that he's got Dozier playing half the time and Florimon less than that, and yet that's his optimal lineup. They're in the lineup but he's projecting them to be terrible. He also says this:

"• The Twins scored 701 runs offensively last season, which ranked mid-pack. That figure likely would have been closer to 750 had 15% of the team's plate appearances not been swallowed up by black holes (Brian Dozier, Pedro Florimon, Danny Valencia, Alexi Casilla)."

What I'd like to know is, how did Dozier and Florimon's stock rise to the point that we're ready to hand the keys to the car over to them?

#32 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:51 PM

Ah, I see...since you and I disagree on his value/abilities, it must be that I'M getting caught over-valuing a player I watch daily. Fantastic fact based argument. You couldn't possibly be wrong and undervaluing a player you watch daily. Are the people who do the Fielding Bible award over-valuing his defense based on watching him daily as well when they rated him the 3rd best defensive CF in baseball this year? Fangraphs saying he's 2nd in range, 2nd in UZR and 2nd in defensive runs saved, are they bias too? What about the people at Baseball-reference who have his WAR at 28th AL players (23 for Fangraphs)? Them too?


Heh. Well at least we got to the crux of it. I'm not saying you are necessarily over-valuing him. My point is that trade value is a very hard thing to pin down because it is built on perception and a number of contingent variables that we don't always have access to. It's not as simple as saying Player X has a WAR of Y, therefore his trade value is Z. It doesn't work like that.

Span is a very solid player but I don't believe his value as a player is going to be fetched in the trade market. Some players fetch more than their value, some don't. But that is merely my opinion, one I'm entitled to without being drummed over the head with statistics that only matter tangentially. In simpler terms for you - there is no fact-based argument about player trade value.

It's nice that we think Tampa is in the market for CF, it makes it an option worth exploring, but to assert that anyone's doubts about Span's ability to fetch a particular player (Minor or Shields) is really something based more on a gut feeling. The numbers you post exist, but Tampa doesn't have to care about them. Tampa could also care greatly about them, but still more about his concussions. We, on a message board, don't know that. Getting high and mighty about someone else's gut feeling about trade value is trying to punch air. It won't work and you look stupid doing it.

#33 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:49 PM

Heh. Well at least we got to the crux of it. I'm not saying you are necessarily over-valuing him.


You're not? You wrote in your last post to me: 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day'

You also wrote to me: 'Getting high and mighty about someone else's gut feeling about trade value is trying to punch air. It won't work and you look stupid doing it. '

Which is exactly what YOU did and have done. ' You're not going to get anyone's prime trade bait with him alone'.

And when I responded to Willihammer's post to me, I wasn't acting high and mighty. I originally suggested a situation that I thought would make for a good trade and since he disagreed, I asked him for one he thought would be beneficial to TB

I did say to the guy, who never responded BTW:

'Okay...so...let's say they don't want to use Jennings in CF, which FA CF is gonna be cheaper than Span over the next two years who is also younger and fits their leadoff needs? BTW, I also mentioned Revere at the beginning of all this..'

Asking him what he thinks might be a better alternative isn't acting all high and mighty, it's asking for his opinion as to what he sees out there that might be better since he didn't think my scenario worked. If that's acting high and mighty, then we have different views as to what that means. I thought that was asking him what he thought might be better for the Rays...what they might do to address their needs.

I do thank you for the condescended words:' In simpler terms for you - there is no fact-based argument about player trade value.' As if you think you're somehow so far above my intelligence that you need to break things down to me as if I'm an idiot. Must be nice to be as smart as you......think you are.

Edited by ThePuck, 02 November 2012 - 04:07 PM.


#34 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:43 PM

You're not? You wrote in your last post to me: 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day'


Nope, was suggesting a plausible scenario in which your aggressive attitude about Span's value was false. You've gone out of your way to go after anyone that suggests Span isn't as attractive a commodity as some are suggesting.

I've shared my opinion, you're welcome to yours as well. I hope yours is right, because then we'll turn Span into better value than I believe we will. But citing stats does not lead to a factual conclusion of trade value and it's silly to assert that.

#35 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 5,335 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 02 November 2012 - 05:05 PM

You're not? You wrote in your last post to me: 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day'


Nope, was suggesting a plausible scenario in which your aggressive attitude about Span's value was false. You've gone out of your way to go after anyone that suggests Span isn't as attractive a commodity as some are suggesting.

I've shared my opinion, you're welcome to yours as well. I hope yours is right, because then we'll turn Span into better value than I believe we will. But citing stats does not lead to a factual conclusion of trade value and it's silly to assert that.


that.

and there is another issue or two in play here: There are at least 3 CFs at the FA market who are better than Span (Bourn, Victorino, Pagan, Hunter maybe) but they cost more. Also, teams know that the Twins have to trade one of Span or Revere so that cuts down the expectations.

As far as Span goes, his lack of concentration sometimes really bothers me. At the batter's box, on the bases, on the field. He has spurs that he seems to be in his own world. And I suspect that I am not the only one who has seen that.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#36 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,166 posts
  • LocationGrand Rapids Michigan

Posted 02 November 2012 - 05:12 PM

I'm Guessing that every team would love to have Span including the Twins. However, there will differences in opinion on how highly they value Span and differences in how much they need Span.

I don't think it's far fetched to think that GM's differ in opinions on players much like we differ in opinions. Some might lock into Metrics and Some might lock into measureables and some may lock into potential and most probably use a combination of but they all have differences in valuation of every player ranging from big differences to small.

This Trading stuff is tuff for that reason. It takes a lot of phone calls I guess.

I'm hopeful that some GM values Denard Span highly and needs and wants him and I'm hopeful that whoever that GM is... I'm hopeful that he has a decent spare pitcher to make the deal.

#37 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:13 PM

You're not? You wrote in your last post to me: 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day'


Nope, was suggesting a plausible scenario in which your aggressive attitude about Span's value was false. You've gone out of your way to go after anyone that suggests Span isn't as attractive a commodity as some are suggesting.

I've shared my opinion, you're welcome to yours as well. I hope yours is right, because then we'll turn Span into better value than I believe we will. But citing stats does not lead to a factual conclusion of trade value and it's silly to assert that.


No, first you said, 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day' Then you said, 'I'm not saying you are necessarily over-valuing him' Exact opposites.

#38 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:17 PM

that.

and there is another issue or two in play here: There are at least 3 CFs at the FA market who are better than Span (Bourn, Victorino, Pagan, Hunter maybe) but they cost more. Also, teams know that the Twins have to trade one of Span or Revere so that cuts down the expectations.

As far as Span goes, his lack of concentration sometimes really bothers me. At the batter's box, on the bases, on the field. He has spurs that he seems to be in his own world. And I suspect that I am not the only one who has seen that.


I've mentioned the price of the other available guys...which makes Span's value even better. Also, I'm not sure why the Twins HAVE to trade Span or Revere. They certainly should consider it based on needing pitching combined with their OF depth. But need to? I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

#39 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:24 PM

I'm Guessing that every team would love to have Span including the Twins. However, there will differences in opinion on how highly they value Span and differences in how much they need Span.

I don't think it's far fetched to think that GM's differ in opinions on players much like we differ in opinions. Some might lock into Metrics and Some might lock into measureables and some may lock into potential and most probably use a combination of but they all have differences in valuation of every player ranging from big differences to small.

This Trading stuff is tuff for that reason. It takes a lot of phone calls I guess.

I'm hopeful that some GM values Denard Span highly and needs and wants him and I'm hopeful that whoever that GM is... I'm hopeful that he has a decent spare pitcher to make the deal.


IMO, that's a very truthful post. Additionally, TB is a team that, due to payroll constraints, embraces advanced Metrics.

For me, it was just about this: The Rays seem to need a leadoff guy, they lost their CF, they are pitching rich (including Shields who they won't be able to afford in 2014 so they'll likely trade him) and they have a low payroll. Span will likely be cheaper the next two years than any comparable FA CF and he's proven. Revere could also be a choice if they like his potential and the fact he's even cheaper.

#40 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:49 PM

No, first you said, 'You're getting caught over-valuing a player you watch every day' Then you said, 'I'm not saying you are necessarily over-valuing him' Exact opposites.


Try and keep up - my opinion is that you are over-valuing him. Necessarily so? No, you could be right in the end.