Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Bourn a fit in Minnesota?

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 Top Gun

Top Gun

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:54 PM

Terry Ryan said Darin Mastroianni, Joe Benson and Aaron Hicks will all get chances to compete for #MNTwins' CF job.

#22 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,524 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:57 PM

He's a Boras client. Never gonna happen


Especially considering the Twins just screwed Boras and Bourn out of his two biggest suitors by flooding the market with cheaper options. Boras has been on a rampage ripping everyone lately, can't wait to hear what he says about this situation!

#23 James

James

    Sideburns Specialist

  • Members
  • 1,913 posts
  • LocationThe dive bars of NE Minneapolis

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:00 PM

No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.


Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?

Trading Revere actually doesn't free up any money. We still have to pay Worley, who actually made $2,500 more than Revere last year. So, it's basically a wash as far as payroll goes.

As for the Bourn question... not a chance.

You can come up with statistics to prove anything. Forty percent of all people know that.


#24 Craig in MN

Craig in MN

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 124 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:01 PM

Rick Ankiel could make sense, if no one else offers him a guaranteed a starting job. He could plausibly win a starting job, platoon with Mastroianni, or be a bench player/pinch hitter.

#25 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 4,267 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:38 PM

I think it could happen, if the Twins first thinned out remaining buyers by dealing Mastro, Willingham, and possibly Hicks.

NYY: want to stay under the cap by 2014 = no big multiyear deals to Bourn or Hamilton
TX: Full outfield if dealt Willingham.
LA: Full outfield
LAD: Full outfield

There were three or 4 teams in on Revere, according to Lavelle. The Phils have invested in Revere so they are out on Bourn. Of the remaining teams, possibly one could be sold on Mastroianni. After that, Willingham should be able to deal to TX, as they seem less than thrilled with the prospect of 4 more years of Josh Hamilton.

It would be risky. It would leave the Twins with no outfielders, but it would make them the big fish, in arguably the best spot to make offers to Bourn and/or Hamilton.

#26 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,790 posts
  • LocationGrand Rapids Michigan

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:48 PM

If it was my call... I'm not doing it... One thing has changed for me tho... Before... I wasn't very interested in Middle Infield. I'm now much more interested in middle infield...

Go overpay for Sanchez... Or Jackson or whoever you like Mr.Terry Ryan... Sign a cheap OF'er for a year if you want to delay Hicks a little and jump into the Middle Infield pool if you like. We got the money for all of that.

Umm... Not Escobar or Drew. I still don't want attitude problem guys no matter what they OPS.

#27 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,266 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:53 PM

One word, why?

#28 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,049 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:38 PM

Trading Revere actually doesn't free up any money. We still have to pay Worley, who actually made $2,500 more than Revere last year. So, it's basically a wash as far as payroll goes.

As for the Bourn question... not a chance.


You obviously didn't read my previous post and answer to his question. You are right that Revere for Worley is a wash but you neglect to consider that the Twins needed to add multiple starters this offseason. Now they don't need to spend 6-8M/yr on a Blanton type and that money can instead go towards a better starter.

#29 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:13 AM

No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.


Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?


Probably cause it allowed us to fill a spot in this year's rotation for almost nothing (difference between Revere's and Worley's contract) so now the available money doesn't have to be spread out so much, allowing the quality of pitchers to, hypothetically, go up

#30 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,790 posts
  • LocationGrand Rapids Michigan

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:30 AM

[quote name='ThePuck'][quote name='ashburyjohn'][quote name='kab21']No, the Revere deal allows the Twins to spend more on the top starter that they target. That's still priority #1, #2, and #3 this offseason.[/QUOTE]

Trading Revere frees up less than a million, to be replaced presumably by someone at half a million - how does this allow the Twins to spend what it takes to get a top starter?[/QUOTE]

Probably cause it allowed us to fill a spot in this year's rotation for almost nothing (difference between Revere's and Worley's contract) so now the available money doesn't have to be spread out so much, allowing the quality of pitchers to, hypothetically, go up[/QUOTE]

Exactly... We need one less now and that in itself... Frees up money.

#31 mbents

mbents

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:49 AM

I don't think it's a terrible idea, assuming it's the right kind of contract. Of course, the right kind of contract would be a 1-year, team-friendly-ish deal with the assumption that we flip him at the trade deadline. I get the feeling that's what Theo Epstein is doing with Scott Baker and Nate Schierholtz: sign player to a 1-year deal; hope player performs pretty well the first half of the season; trade player for some kind of prospect. With the market seemingly shrinking for Michael Bourn, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he settles for a 1-year deal this winter.

#32 Steve Penz

Steve Penz

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 258 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:57 AM

For one year only and only if the Twins trade Mourneau or Willingham.

#33 Miles

Miles

    Member

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

Can't see it. Even for one year, Bourn's price wouldn't drop so low the Twins would be interested.

#34 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

Isn't Revere just a younger version of Bourn? Decent BA, low OBP, fast, above average defender (overall, yes Revere's arm stinks) very little power. Bourn doesn't seem to be much better than Revere and Span is better.

#35 minn55441

minn55441

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 12:05 PM

I don't think it's a terrible idea, assuming it's the right kind of contract. Of course, the right kind of contract would be a 1-year, team-friendly-ish deal with the assumption that we flip him at the trade deadline. I get the feeling that's what Theo Epstein is doing with Scott Baker and Nate Schierholtz: sign player to a 1-year deal; hope player performs pretty well the first half of the season; trade player for some kind of prospect. With the market seemingly shrinking for Michael Bourn, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he settles for a 1-year deal this winter.


Correct. This is the one and only way it makes sense. Take advantage of the market. If the center fielder market bubble has now burst and we can sign him for next to nothing and then have the option of trading him away at the trade deadline for more pieces, ok I'm a buyer.

But this is not going to happen with Boras as the agent. Buy low, sell high! Works in the stock market, it is difficult in the FA market and I think our money could be better spent (invested) in other areas.

#36 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,686 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 07 December 2012 - 12:18 PM

10+ mill a year and give up a draft pick for a guy that's not much better than Span or Revere? Makes perfect sense!

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#37 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 4,267 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:08 PM

Span and Revere aren't on the team anymore.

If the Twins can deal Willingham for pitching, then they may find Bourn or Hamilton would provide as great, or a greater upgrade over their replacement, than Marcum, Jackson, or Sanchez would be to the rotation, for the money.

But, almost certainly, Bourn or Hamilton would be a greater upgrade, for the money, than would those pitcher in the 3rd tier who are essentially replacement level guys already - Correia, Myers, Saudners. The Twins have plenty of replacement or near-replacement starting pitchers already

#38 Top Gun

Top Gun

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 02:01 PM

Why would Bourn & Hamilton want to come to mn? So you can trade them? Get real, that is why they got agents!

#39 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Fan

  • Twins Mods
  • 8,446 posts
  • LocationIt's complicated.

Posted 07 December 2012 - 02:04 PM

10+ mill a year and give up a draft pick


Which pick is lost, the elite first-rounder? Or would it be a lower one? I never can remember the rules concerning this. No way I'd sign him and lose a tippy-top draft pick. I'm less jealous about conserving a sandwich-first-rounder and below, but I don't think Bourn is the guy I'd give up such a pick for either.

#40 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,686 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 07 December 2012 - 02:32 PM

I think the top 12 or so are protected. They would give up their second pick as I understand it which would be around #40.

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.