Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Jake Odorizzi, What's going on w/ him?

jake odorizzi
  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#41 tony&rodney

tony&rodney

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 27 December 2020 - 02:05 PM

 

Forbes valued the Twins at $1.3b earlier this year.

.... and that is on their investment of $5 million .... so a pretty decent return. But absolutely none of us could have purchased the Twins, even for cash. As John Prine says, That's The Way The World Goes Round.

Thus, we dream of Hendriks, Realmuto, and sugar plums; it's all good and keeps me content.


#42 Doctor Gast

Doctor Gast

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Member
  • 766 posts
  • LocationBelo Horizonte, Brazil

Posted 27 December 2020 - 03:25 PM

 

.... and that is on their investment of $5 million .... so a pretty decent return. But absolutely none of us could have purchased the Twins, even for cash. As John Prine says, That's The Way The World Goes Round.

Thus, we dream of Hendriks, Realmuto, and sugar plums; it's all good and keeps me content.

Just to be fair the $5M is their initial investment. I'm sure they've invested much more during their run. But I'd dare to say that they've probably still came out like bandits 


#43 Danchat

Danchat

    Pro Bowl Armchair QB

  • Member
  • 5,904 posts

Posted 06 January 2021 - 09:43 AM

 

 

Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic hears from a team in contact with Jake Odorizzi that the free agent starter "expects to land a three-year contract in the $36 million to $42 million range."
That might seem like a lofty expectation for a guy who threw just 13 2/3 innings last year due to injuries and who wasn't particularly effective when healthy, but the free agent market for starting pitchers is quite thin beyond top dog Trevor Bauer. Odorizzi isn't tied to draft pick compensation either after accepting the Twins' qualifying offer last winter, so that may widen his appeal a bit.

 


#44 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Offseason Hawt Taek Enthusiast

  • Member
  • 13,932 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 06 January 2021 - 10:09 AM

Those aren’t unreasonable expectations for a new contract. I’m ambivalent about Odorizzi. We’ve probably seen the peak of his MLB performance, and it’s good. 95 accurate pitches and getting a couple of outs into the 6th inning. Maybe completing 7 innings if his pitch count is down. I shouldn’t downplay that because it wasn’t long ago we were clamoring for anyone who could throw 4 good innings in a row.

But... I also can’t help thinking about being more risky with the money and shoot for more upside. Like Corey Kluber, or making a trade for a pitcher like Sonny Gray.
  • Danchat, LA VIkes Fan, cmoss84 and 1 other like this

#45 LA VIkes Fan

LA VIkes Fan

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • 1,876 posts

Posted 06 January 2021 - 02:16 PM

 

Those aren’t unreasonable expectations for a new contract. I’m ambivalent about Odorizzi. We’ve probably seen the peak of his MLB performance, and it’s good. 95 accurate pitches and getting a couple of outs into the 6th inning. Maybe completing 7 innings if his pitch count is down. I shouldn’t downplay that because it wasn’t long ago we were clamoring for anyone who could throw 4 good innings in a row.

But... I also can’t help thinking about being more risky with the money and shoot for more upside. Like Corey Kluber, or making a trade for a pitcher like Sonny Gray.

This is the conundrum of Odorizzi. He's pretty good, gives you 6 good innings at about 100 pitches, and is pretty consistent. He's just not any better than that and it looks like he never will be. 3 years at 36-42m? Sounds about right for that level of performance. Solid #3, strong #4, but not the #1 or #2 starter on a contending team. 

 

I think he's worth signing with reduced expectations. With Maeda around, maybe we don't need a #1 or #2 performance from him. Odo and Pineda can be the 3/4 guys and its a big improvement from even 2 years ago. 

 

Still.... not very exciting. I'd love to see them trade for Sonny Gray, who I think can be better. Or sign Odo AND Kluber. 

  • wabene likes this

#46 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    A Little Teapot

  • Owner
  • 24,074 posts

Posted 07 January 2021 - 11:31 AM

 

Those aren’t unreasonable expectations for a new contract. I’m ambivalent about Odorizzi. We’ve probably seen the peak of his MLB performance, and it’s good. 95 accurate pitches and getting a couple of outs into the 6th inning. Maybe completing 7 innings if his pitch count is down. I shouldn’t downplay that because it wasn’t long ago we were clamoring for anyone who could throw 4 good innings in a row.

But... I also can’t help thinking about being more risky with the money and shoot for more upside. Like Corey Kluber, or making a trade for a pitcher like Sonny Gray.

It's not an easy decision. Personally, I'd prefer to see the Twins aim higher and go for more of a sure thing but I'm also okay with bringing back Jake.


#47 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Moderator
  • 15,126 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 07 January 2021 - 01:44 PM

 

It's not an easy decision. Personally, I'd prefer to see the Twins aim higher and go for more of a sure thing but I'm also okay with bringing back Jake.

not against it, but I'm probably thinking the same in what ownership thinks in that I'm not guaranteeing him multiple years... he was pretty good in 2019, but also outperformed his peripherals... Not a bad guy to do a 1 year make good pact with, but I'm guessing he's not signing at the moment because every team in baseball is thinking the same way. 


#48 howeda7

howeda7

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,206 posts

Posted 07 January 2021 - 06:40 PM

The only way I bring Odo back is if it's a one year deal for less than $10 million. I'm just not a fan and never have been. He would be our #4 starter. I'd rather aim higher or take a shot on upside with Kluber or someone else. 2nd half 2019 Odo is likely what you're getting. And that is meh.

  • cmoss84 likes this

#49 Doctor Gast

Doctor Gast

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Member
  • 766 posts
  • LocationBelo Horizonte, Brazil

Posted 08 January 2021 - 11:38 AM

Looks like the Mets are no longer interested in Odo, since they got Carrasco

#50 mnfireman

mnfireman

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 342 posts

Posted 08 January 2021 - 04:06 PM

 

The only way I bring Odo back is if it's a one year deal for less than $10 million. I'm just not a fan and never have been. He would be our #4 starter. I'd rather aim higher or take a shot on upside with Kluber or someone else. 2nd half 2019 Odo is likely what you're getting. And that is meh.

 

Odorizzi's 2nd half wasn't as bad as you might think. Take out the 4 IP, 9 ER clunker against the Yankees and he was 5-2 with a 2.98 ERA. He was actually very good in Aug/Sep, posting a 3.04 ERA with 65 K's in 50.1 innings. That being said, I don't know if he worth $13+ MM a season at this stage of his career.

 

 

  • wabene and SkyBlueWaters like this

#51 Thegrin

Thegrin

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,152 posts
  • LocationRipon, CA

Posted 09 January 2021 - 02:42 PM

Offer him 2 yr for 22 million, and settle with 3 years for 30 million and I bet he'll take it in this market.:)

  • ScrapTheNickname and wabene like this

#52 The Wise One

The Wise One

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,903 posts

Posted 09 January 2021 - 07:17 PM

 

Here's another way to look at an investment, My goal in my retirement accounts is to have my money double every seven years. That's a pretty nice return, but for the most part it has pretty much played out that way over the years. I'm sure most businesses look to have their investments pay off even better.

 

Take Pohlad's original investment of $36M and double that every 7 years. What do you get? Way more than the projected current value of the Twins at $670M.

 

 

Why do you carry so much water for billionaires that sell teams for literal multitudes more than they paid for them?

 

The Pohlads bought the Twins for roughly $40m in... 1984? Going from memory here.

 

But the Twins would sell for roughly $1b today.

 

No big deal. That's only several tens of millions gain. Per year. For 40 years.

 

No biggie. You're totally right. 

https://www.official...ks/s-p-500/1984

32 million invested in the S&P 500 would be now 1.8 billion. The money he spent years later would be more to that total. The 180 million or so they invested in Target fieldwould be a lot of money 10 yearslater.There can be no doubt that the Twins are way more valuable than what Pohlad paid for them. On the other hand, more money could have been made elsewhere


#53 tony&rodney

tony&rodney

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 09 January 2021 - 07:42 PM

Rehashed too many times ... the Pohlads initially invested $5 million in the Twins and then have made payments, improvements, contributed generously to the community, etc., etc., etc.

The comparisons are a moot point because while you could have bought Tesla stock or invested in whatever retirement fund, you could not buy a baseball team no matter your net worth without permission from MLB. The books are closed and the public knows virtually nothing about a club's financial portrait.

When the Twins were threatening to move, they turned down offers to sell the team. It's a business and these guys know how accounting works. We never need to defend the owners. We can speculate.

Whether the Twins choose to sign Jake Odorizzi is more based on the other options available to improve the team going forward than the exact monies spent. Odorizzi should get close to $45 million over 3-4 years. Do we prefer that contract or should the Twins take a shot at Kluber and Hill this year for $11 million? Remember that the team still has Dobnak, Smeltzer, Thorpe, Duran, and Balazovic around too.

 


#54 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,416 posts

Posted 10 January 2021 - 10:56 AM

 

The books are closed and the public knows virtually nothing about a club's financial portrait.

 

 

That’s not exactly an enlightened position.

 

1) We know the revenue with a high degree of accuracy. This is a very different case than many private companies and of course it’s crucial to understanding profitability.
2) We have a very accurate estimate of Player expense. This includes Salary + benefits and payroll tax, draft bonuses, etc. This expense represents 50+ percent of revenue and roughly 60% of operating cost.
3) Variable operating costs such as travel / hotel / meals / etc can also be estimated quite accurately.
4) Stadium cost is public record and stadium maintenance is another cost that can be estimated with a high degree of accuracy
5) Non-player personnel is the largest operating cost. All you would need is an employee roster with positions and you could estimate personnel cost with a fair degree of accuracy. I am not sure payroll taxes payments are probably public. This would also aid in estimating personnel costs with reasonable accuracy.
6) Equipment (training equipment / computers, etc) would be the hardest part to estimate. However, those costs are less than 1 percent of revenue.

 

So, we have a very accurate view of 100% of the revenue and over 60% of operating cost. If the other 40% can be estimated with 90% accuracy, and it can, that would mean we can estimate the Twins net profit to +/- $10M or 3% of revenue. So, it’s not an accurate portrayal to say the public knows nothing. It’s more accurate to say that the public elects to take an uniformed position.


#55 tony&rodney

tony&rodney

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 10 January 2021 - 01:04 PM

Well argued response to quite effectively state we can guess pretty good. 

The discussions about profit/ loss .... 

Your last sentence is truly unenlightened. 

My basic position is that Twins Daily does well to discuss and speculate on baseball rosters and possibilities and such. The articles on a player's attitude or the owner's profits are personally not necessary. Finally, I must say that it is true that because I'm not interested in such conversations I should not comment on other's opinions of such and will refrain from comment in the future.


#56 Brandon

Brandon

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,179 posts

Posted 11 January 2021 - 12:05 PM

back to the Odorizzi discussion.With the Players Union agreement up at the end of the year, Finding an Odorizzi replacement on a 1 year deal.Garret Richards could be had on a shorter contract.I suspect he could be had on a 1 year with mutual option contract.I bet he would be as good as Odorizzi.I like Odorizzi because he likes playing for Minnesota and is solid.But if we can find a better value or if he can get a better deal....

  • cmoss84 likes this

#57 Trov

Trov

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Member
  • 693 posts

Posted 11 January 2021 - 02:44 PM

My thoughts are every team and player are waiting for more info.They are waiting to know how likely butts will be in seats, and how much will players or other teams be willing to pay.It is odd off season.Teams will want to see what pitching is going for, and Bauer will be first to go, then others will go next.Some players may take some deals before Bauer to know what they are getting.Right now a lot of game of chicken going on. 


#58 Dodecahedron

Dodecahedron

    Cedar Rapids Kernels

  • Member
  • 95 posts

Posted 13 January 2021 - 01:10 PM

I agree that we have seen the peak of Odorizzi. My initial thoughts were that the Twins should move on, but realistically I don't think the Twins would target anyone better.

 

If he comes back, great. If not, we have to hope the Twins bring in someone comparable. In this case, it may be a #3/#4 guy.


#59 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Moderator
  • 16,029 posts

Posted 13 January 2021 - 01:42 PM

The kind of deal that Odorizzi is looking for and the kind he'll probably get, are my least favorite kinds of deals for pitchers. These 3-4 year contracts for mid-level starters tend to become a negative value immediately after the pitcher signs. The kinds of pitchers who get these deals are vets who have already hit their ceilings so you can't later move them without eating most of the remaining money, and they'd have to continue to pitch at that ceiling for the contract to be worth it for your club. These guys so often never end up pitching any better than a replacement level guy.

 

I prefer big money deals for a front end starter, or a 1 + an-option year deal for rebound pitchers. Those rebound guys seem to just as often perform as well as those mid-level guys on the 3-4 year deals, plus they also tend to have a higher ceiling. But the best part about them is that if they don't work out, it's easy to cut bait.

  • ashbury, Vanimal46 and cmoss84 like this

#60 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,416 posts

Posted 13 January 2021 - 04:46 PM

 

Rehashed too many times ... the Pohlads initially invested $5 million in the Twins and then have made payments, improvements, contributed generously to the community, etc., etc., etc.

The comparisons are a moot point because while you could have bought Tesla stock or invested in whatever retirement fund, you could not buy a baseball team no matter your net worth without permission from MLB. The books are closed and the public knows virtually nothing about a club's financial portrait.

When the Twins were threatening to move, they turned down offers to sell the team. It's a business and these guys know how accounting works. We never need to defend the owners. We can speculate.

Whether the Twins choose to sign Jake Odorizzi is more based on the other options available to improve the team going forward than the exact monies spent. Odorizzi should get close to $45 million over 3-4 years. Do we prefer that contract or should the Twins take a shot at Kluber and Hill this year for $11 million? Remember that the team still has Dobnak, Smeltzer, Thorpe, Duran, and Balazovic around too.

 

I am never exactly sure what people are trying to argue where profits are concerned. So, what exactly is the argument? The common inference is that because MLB owners are rich that they should be willing to operate at break-even or even a loss. The other inference seems to be that because increases in team valuations have been very high they should be willing to operate at b/e or a loss. I guess the overlying inference is that we could afford elite FAs if only owners were willing to forgo profits. What exactly is the point of constantly point in pointing back at owner's profit?

  • rdehring likes this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: jake odorizzi