Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

How high would you go for Brandon McCarthy?

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,518 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 01:53 PM

Off subject , but can anyone tell me why Salcedo is rated higher as a prospect then Berrois is?


Way off subject. Look at who did the rankings. After you say "who?" you will have your answer. Or Thyrloss is messing with people again.

#22 DaveW

DaveW

    <3 Mark Derosa <3

  • Members
  • 10,578 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 01:56 PM

Giving McCarthy anything more then 1 year is a recipe for disaster, the guy can't be counted on to stay healthy.

With that said, I would give him a 1 year 6-7 mil deal and a team option if he would take it.

#23 Rosterman

Rosterman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,307 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 01:57 PM

I would go 2-year $22 million...$10, $12 with a third year option of $14-15 million with a $2 million buyout to sign him. But not sure if I would make a similar offer to, say, Dempster, or someone else first.

Joel Thingvall
www.joelthingvall.com
rosterman at www.twinscards.com


#24 LaBombo

LaBombo

    3 TD warning points and the death sentence in 12 systems.

  • Members
  • 5,937 posts
  • Location...in a galaxy far, far away...

Posted 04 December 2012 - 02:58 PM

Hard to consider any signing in a vacuum while ignoring the team's goal for 2013. If it's just to inch back to respectability while building for 2014 and beyond by adding cheap 1-year FA's, then McCarthy isn't a good fit. He's too expensive and risky for that.

But if the goal is to gamble on a guy who could be a very good 3rd starter in '14 and '15, then he may be the kind of guy the Twins have to roll the dice on. McCarthy has been less durable than Scott Baker and is coming off a potentially life-threatening head injury. It seems plausible to expect that McCarthy could sign a three year deal worth around 25-30 million, but back-loaded with incentives and buyouts. The Twins should have at least some interest.

It may depend as much (or more) on McCarthy's career and financial goals than it does how much the Twins will pony up. He may be determined to gamble on himself with a one year deal that frees him to follow the big money after a strong 2013. Or he may be determined to play for a contender (like Marcum) and not even consider the Twins.

Edited by LaBombo, 04 December 2012 - 04:35 PM.


#25 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Cooperstown

  • Twins Mods
  • 8,418 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:18 PM

I would ask McCarthy to pay the Twins $5 million for the right to pitch in Minnesota. I have zero interest in pitchers who suddenly become useful in Oakland, 90% of the time it's a mirage. Besides, are we really looking to keep the status quo on the Twins already league worst K/9? If this team is going to gamble on an injury prone pitcher, they should have gone after Dan Haren who actually isn't injury prone, but just has bad PR guys at his agents firm.

#26 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,274 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:28 PM

Hard to consider any signing in a vacuum while ignoring the team's goal for 2013. If it's just to inch back to respectability while building for 2014 and beyond by adding cheap 1-year FA's, then McCarthy isn't a good fit. He's too expensive and risky for that.

But if the goal is to gamble on a guy who could be a very good 3rd starter in '14 and '15, then he may be the kind of guy the Twins have to roll the dice on. McCarthy has been less durable than Scott Baker and is coming off a potentially life-threatening head injury. It seems plausible to expect that McCarthy could sign a three year deal worth around 25-30 million, but back-loaded with incentives and buyouts. The Twins should have at least some interest.

It depends more on McCarthy's career and financial goals than it does how much the Twins will pony up. He may be determined to gamble on himself with a one year deal that frees him to follow the big money after a strong 2013. Or he may be determined to play for a contender (like Marcum) and not even consider the Twins.


I absolutely agree with this. I don't think signing him to multiple years is a recipe for disaster unless you know for a fact that he'll get injured. It's absolutely a gamble with his health history, and it may very well not pan out, but the Twins are a position right now that they have to roll the dice. They have no real choice in the matter.

I would guess that something like 2 years at $8m and $10m with a (vesting?) option for a 3rd at $12 would get him. It's on the high side, but in this free agent market, what isn't?

#27 twinsfaninsaudi

twinsfaninsaudi

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 176 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 05:53 PM

In the Twins situation of currently not being a contender and therefore not being an attractive landing spot, I would go as high as the deal Haren just got from the Nats - 1 year $13 million. However, I would NOT go over one year.

#28 AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 399 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 06:01 PM

In the Twins situation of currently not being a contender and therefore not being an attractive landing spot, I would go as high as the deal Haren just got from the Nats - 1 year $13 million. However, I would NOT go over one year.


I would say give him a 1 year deal worth close to Harens just like you said. But I would also have a team option for a 2nd year, but im sure some team out there will be desperate enough to give him a 3 year deal.

#29 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 8,921 posts
  • LocationThe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:52 PM

Given the need for pitching long term, I'd think that going after a guy like Sanchez for a 6 year deal to anchor the rotation would be the smart move. He's 28, so we would be paying him through age 34. To me that's the safest pick. McCarthy isn't necessarily a bad option, but 3 years from now, we will still need pitching...

#30 powrwrap

powrwrap

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 462 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:06 PM

I find it hilarious that those people that criticize the Pohlads for not spending money are (sometimes) the same ones that are willing to spend all of $8M on McCarthy, BUT NO MORE!!!
[FONT=comic sans ms]"Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand." [/FONT]

#31 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,798 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:10 PM

McCarthy should get a 1 yr contract for significantly less than haren. That head injury was awful I wouldn't be surprised if he suffers from it long term. I'm surprised that so many are willing to dismiss that after the issues that Span and Morneau have had.

Imo he looked like the kind of guy that was going sign a reasonable 3/30 contract before that injury. He might be young but I really question if he was that good before the injury. Mediocre K rate and the Oakland effect.

#32 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:25 PM

2/17 with a 10 million option

#33 rogrulz30

rogrulz30

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:07 PM

This is the 1 guy I would over pay in the market, I understand the injury issues, he is young and has a great upside if he can stay healthy. Biggest chance I take overall and would offer a 3 year deal. I am in the 3/30 options, I don't know if I would want to go that far above market value on some of the other options. Like Terry Ryan said though if you want a free agent you take market value and you give it the little extra, I like 3 guys a lot Villanueva, McCarthy, and obviously Sanchez, I don't go after Sanchez unless we can have some higher expectations making playoff runs.

#34 Top Gun

Top Gun

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:16 PM

I won't touch him with a 10 foot pole!

#35 RodneyKline

RodneyKline

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:50 PM

All these pitchers are going to get $10 million plus and they are not great pitchers. Sign Grienke! Would you rather have Grienke at $20m or two of these average at best pitchers at $10 million. TR is going to give us another five #3-#5 starters and we won't gey above .500. We need an ace and that is Grienke. It would be a smart business move by Jim Pohlad. Spending $100 million for a team under .500 next year will get attendance to keep dropping every year. Spend an extra #20 million and get Grienke and Twins Nation jumps back on the bandwaggin to stay for the rest of the decade. Jim Pohlad will not say no to a smart business investment. The $120m payroll option is a much higher return gamble in my opinion. Grienke is considering KC according to rumors. He will definitely consider MN. He seems like the type that would not like the NY, Boston or LA lifestyle. Get aggressive TR! We told you that we needed an ace in 2011 and 2012 and you ignored us and signed a bunch of projects. That didn't work. What to do in 2013? Ignore the need for an ace to anchor the rotation or ??? The definition of insanity is...

#36 whydidnt

whydidnt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 497 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 05:02 PM

Can I pat myself on the back for being closest?;) He just signed with Arizona for 2 years 15.5 million. Heck if the Twins had listened to me, maybe they could have had him for the 2/16 I proposed. I think he would have been a nice addition at 8/year, when you consider we had no problem giving that, or close to it to Pavano last year.

#37 Rosterman

Rosterman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,307 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 05:06 PM

I would give him $15.5 over two years.

Joel Thingvall
www.joelthingvall.com
rosterman at www.twinscards.com


#38 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 8,921 posts
  • LocationThe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 07 December 2012 - 06:21 PM

I'm not sure what the point of going after 2 year guys is... I'd go after 1 year upside guys and go after guys who will be in the rotation for 4 or 5...

#39 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 5,454 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 07:36 PM

I'd have snapped him up for that 15.5/2-year deal in a second. I'd love to know what the Twins offered. Were they close, and the DBacks were just a better fit for him, or did they bid quite a bit less? (And frankly, I'd have loved to see them get him for 2/17 if that's what it took.)

#40 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 15,238 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 07 December 2012 - 09:09 PM

I would give him $15.5 over two years.


Well done... Right on the nose... I use the same method for my March Madness brackets.. I used to watch my final four teams drop out early. Then I came up with a better method... I now pick them after the game... I've only missed two total in the past 3 years using this method.