Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Is this the offseason to extend Revere?

  • Please log in to reply
171 replies to this topic

#41 The Greatest Poster Alive

The Greatest Poster Alive

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 221 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:30 PM

No chance. He needs to prove last season wasn't a fluke and his contact rate is sustainable.

#42 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 4,397 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 01 December 2012 - 02:24 PM

The Twins have two outfielders in AA who tore the cover off the ball last season. Both are younger than Revere and better hitters. That's a surplus.

Why extend Revere when he's not even arb eligible yet and you have two superior players in the minors? It's an unnecessary risk.


The Rangers are at this moment trying to nab Andrelton Simmons from the Braves in order to flip him for J Upton. They already have Andrus and Profar. A surplus is a terrific problem to have when everyone is cheap, any manager or GM will say as much. Because whatever internal logjam might occur, it says nothing about their tradeability or the supply of outfielders in other organizations

#43 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 9,724 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 02:28 PM


The Twins have two outfielders in AA who tore the cover off the ball last season. Both are younger than Revere and better hitters. That's a surplus.

Why extend Revere when he's not even arb eligible yet and you have two superior players in the minors? It's an unnecessary risk.


The Rangers are at this moment trying to nab Andrelton Simmons from the Braves in order to flip him for J Upton. They already have Andrus and Profar. A surplus is a terrific problem to have when everyone is cheap, any manager or GM will say as much. Because whatever internal logjam might occur, it says nothing about their tradeability or the supply of outfielders in other organizations


I'm in total agreement.
The only ones who don't concur are the vast sea of TD keyboard GMs who think they know better.

I travel quite a bit, who do you think is one of the most likely players brought up in conversation by the typical casual fan when the subject of the Twins comes up? Simply put, there's two kinds of value that a player can bring to the table, that which wins games (by the numbers) and that which puts fans in the seats and in front of the tube ( by the sizzle). Revere's clearly better at the latter, but that ain't all bad.

Edited by jokin, 01 December 2012 - 02:32 PM.


#44 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,470 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 02:47 PM

Here's the problem with your argument.....locking Revere into a contract doesn't add or reduce your surplus. It only adds a guaranteed monetary figure to a player with a strong chance of fluctuating production. The Twins will have your surplus either way, you just want to add unnecessary dollar signs to it.

#45 Kobs

Kobs

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 301 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 03:15 PM

The Twins need to lock up Butera and Revere for the next decade.

#46 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 03:54 PM

Here's the problem with your argument.....locking Revere into a contract doesn't add or reduce your surplus. It only adds a guaranteed monetary figure to a player with a strong chance of fluctuating production. The Twins will have your surplus either way, you just want to add unnecessary dollar signs to it.


Ding ding ding. It's not as if Revere can leave either way. Worst case scenario, Revere falls in his face and is worthless. The Twins wasted a bunch of money. Best case scenario, Revere turns into a .360 OBP speedster with great defense. Twins still control him through at least 2017.

I see a whole lot of risk there and very little reward.

#47 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,511 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:01 PM

Brock, were you for or against extending Span at the time it happened?

#48 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:23 PM

Brock, were you for or against extending Span at the time it happened?


For it. He showed plate discipline and patience that Revere doesn't have. I like speedy guys if they show a continued ability to get on base. Span had that, Revere doesn't.

#49 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:27 PM

No. Hell no. Play him for another year or two and then flip him.


After two years then, who is your outfield, with Revere and Willingham gone?


Hicks, Arcia, Benson, Rosario, Roberts, there is so many possibilities....

#50 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 6,339 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:28 PM

Brock, were you for or against extending Span at the time it happened?


For it. He showed plate discipline and patience that Revere doesn't have. I like speedy guys if they show a continued ability to get on base. Span had that, Revere doesn't.


Span also had a small amount of power.

#51 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:37 PM

[quote name='diehardtwinsfan'][quote name='Brock Beauchamp'][quote name='Jeremy Nygaard']Brock, were you for or against extending Span at the time it happened?[/QUOTE]

For it. He showed plate discipline and patience that Revere doesn't have. I like speedy guys if they show a continued ability to get on base. Span had that, Revere doesn't.[/QUOTE]

Span also had a small amount of power.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that too. He had discipline and didn't have to rely on the infield hit to get on base. That's a good indicator of continued success in the league because he was never so utterly dependent on using speed and speed alone to be a valuable player.

#52 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,511 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:40 PM

I can see both sides of the argument.

The part that would force me to consider it: Ben Revere is going to go through arbitration four times.

He is similar to Michael Bourn (great D, no power, OBP not where you want for a leadoff guy) and Bourn got almost $15.7m in three arbitration years. Going year to year with Revere is going to be more expensive than buying out those years. I think his D and speed would be valuable enough and worth getting cost certainty. For those that think he's a 4th outfielder, obviously it wouldn't be wise.

The other thing to think about: Hicks is looking more like a guy that would bat 6th than 1st. Buxton is a middle-of-the-order bat or not worth the bonus he signed and far enough away that Revere and Buxton will probably never play together.

#53 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:50 PM

The other thing to think about: Hicks is looking more like a guy that would bat 6th than 1st. Buxton is a middle-of-the-order bat or not worth the bonus he signed and far enough away that Revere and Buxton will probably never play together.


I'd still bat Hicks first. I'm not going to complain about leadoff homeruns while his speed and plate discipline make him a natural for leadoff.

At worst, move him to second in the lineup. I think his OBP and speed would be a waste toward the back of the order.

#54 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,097 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:06 PM

If Revere starts turning in .738, .734, .739 OPS (three out of the last 4 years for Bourn, who is really consistent) then we can start comparing him to Bourn and start worrying about his value. However, IF Revere does that and IF he deservedly sticks around (because the other OF options for Twins fall apart), then who the hell cares about paying him $14 million through his arbitration years (2.5, 4.5, 7) naturally? He will be worth it. If, however, he doesn't top .700 or even regresses in even one of those seasons, then it will have been wise not to extend his contract. The risk is bad.

#55 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,097 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:09 PM

The other thing to think about: Hicks is looking more like a guy that would bat 6th than 1st. Buxton is a middle-of-the-order bat or not worth the bonus he signed and far enough away that Revere and Buxton will probably never play together.


I'd still bat Hicks first. I'm not going to complain about leadoff homeruns while his speed and plate discipline make him a natural for leadoff.

At worst, move him to second in the lineup. I think his OBP and speed would be a waste toward the back of the order.


Hicks is definitely the leadoff man of the future.

#56 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:11 PM

I'm in total agreement.
The only ones who don't concur are the vast sea of TD keyboard GMs who think they know better.


Or Billy Beane. Or Andrew Frieman. But hey, they're just keyboard GMs.

#57 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,511 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:12 PM

I'd be really curious to see if someone could find Hicks' batting splits from different parts of the order. It really seemed to me that he struggled early in the season batting leadoff and strived when he was finally moved down in the order, the further the better.

Ok, so I guess there's another thing to consider: Is Revere only a 4th outfielder? Is Hicks a future leadoff hitter?

#58 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,155 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:17 PM

I'd be really curious to see if someone could find Hicks' batting splits from different parts of the order. It really seemed to me that he struggled early in the season batting leadoff and strived when he was finally moved down in the order, the further the better.

Ok, so I guess there's another thing to consider: Is Revere only a 4th outfielder? Is Hicks a future leadoff hitter?


I'm hesitant to call Revere a 4th outfielder. He's young and could improve significantly.

On the other hand, banking $15m on improvement that may not happen sounds pretty foolish to me, especially when the worst case scenario will pay about $20m in arbitration.

#59 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,197 posts
  • LocationGrand Rapids Michigan

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:18 PM

If Revere starts turning in .738, .734, .739 OPS (three out of the last 4 years for Bourn, who is really consistent) then we can start comparing him to Bourn and start worrying about his value. However, IF Revere does that and IF he deservedly sticks around (because the other OF options for Twins fall apart), then who the hell cares about paying him $14 million through his arbitration years (2.5, 4.5, 7) naturally? He will be worth it. If, however, he doesn't top .700 or even regresses in even one of those seasons, then it will have been wise not to extend his contract. The risk is bad.


I don't really like comparing anyone to anyone but I used Bourn as an example just to point out the potential undervalue taking place with Ben by some.

In that sense it's not too soon to compare him to Bourn since Bourn has had more seasons to become(.700 plus OPS) what he became and he didn't get there right away.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that Revere has accomplished more than Bourn did at age 24 and we are talking similiar skill sets.

I do agree with you that it is simply too soon to lock up Revere and it's exactly because of the reasons that you give. If Revere has a nice 2013... I think you can start to think about it. Just not yet... I like him but I am trying to be reasonable when it comes to future projection. Anything can happen but so far he's been good baseball.

#60 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,097 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:21 PM

I'd be really curious to see if someone could find Hicks' batting splits from different parts of the order. It really seemed to me that he struggled early in the season batting leadoff and strived when he was finally moved down in the order, the further the better.

Ok, so I guess there's another thing to consider: Is Revere only a 4th outfielder? Is Hicks a future leadoff hitter?


Um, I believe it was the opposite. I think they finally moved him to leadoff with Herrmann second and Arcia third after Arcia's promotion. I believe New Britain moved Hicks around 3-5 up until then and he was ok, but much better batting leadoff.