Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Michael Bourn

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 Saul Goodman

Saul Goodman

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 11:55 PM

Spring training is fast approaching and our friend Michael Bourne is still unemployed. Sounds like he's looking for 5/75M. Chances are he's going to have to take a one year deal somewhere and try again for a long term contract next year.

I'd love to see the Twins way overpay for Bourne on a one year deal. 2013's first round pick is protected, so they'd only be forfeiting the number 41 or so pick. If he's having a decent year, chances they can flip him at the deadline for better prospect than that pick, especially considering that this year's draft class is down. If by some stretch of the imagination they end up competing, offer him arbitration after 2013 and recoup the pick.

Offer him 1 year 20M and see what happens.

Makes sense to me.

Edit: It would also allow Hicks to stay down in AAA til at least June, saving an arbitration year.

#2 glunn

glunn

    Head Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 7,050 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:12 AM

What if he gets injured or has a bad first half? Your strategy is intriguing, but also seems fairly risky.

#3 Saul Goodman

Saul Goodman

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:19 AM

What if he gets injured or has a bad first half? Your strategy is intriguing, but also seems fairly risky.


There's inherent risk in every single contract. They thing is, only so much can go wrong with a one year deal. The only risk is the 20-25M it would take to sign him and the second round pick. That second round pick would almost certainly be recouped the following season by offering him arbitration. Which unless, he's run over and crippled in some type of TC Bear 4-wheeler accident, he'd decline.

#4 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 3,043 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:35 AM

But this risk comes with not only the price of the contract, but also that second round pick, which is worth more than straight cash. Things have to go perfectly for the team to get something better than a high* second round pick, imo.

*the supplemental round is smaller than years past, so second round picks might have more value than we are used to

#5 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,457 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:49 AM

Luke Bard was number 42 last year.
If Bourn is signed for the 20-25 million then traded you are essentially paying 15 million in salary to a player you don't want for the chance to maybe get a decent prospect. Why not just buy the prospect?

#6 Top Gun

Top Gun

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,253 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:06 AM

If you can't afford the money on a pitcher you do need, how can you afford the money on a ofer you don't need?

#7 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 845 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:14 AM

To sign Bourne, especially at the outrageous price of 20 mil! for the year comletely misses the point of this offseason. And that was to clear space on the roster to allow Bensen, Hicks, et al to prove themselves at the MLB level. Brining in an overpriced CF is the absolute last thing the Twins should do at this point.

#8 wagwan

wagwan

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:36 AM

I now. The future is ours if with old nurse. No way the Twins should give up #41 for a one year guy. Play Hicks and leave him in the outfield for ten years

#9 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 15,410 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:38 AM

*the supplemental round is smaller than years past, so second round picks might have more value than we are used to


Second round picks have more value now. That's pretty much undeniable, as the Twins' second round pick this coming June is #41, #42, somewhere around there. That's 15-20 slots higher than was typical with the old CBA.

#10 Gernzy

Gernzy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 478 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:38 AM

I now. The future is ours if with old nurse. No way the Twins should give up #41 for a one year guy. Play Hicks and leave him in the outfield for ten years


This. Same reason we're not going after Lohse. This team will never give up a draft pick for who they think is a rental player.
I bent my wookie...

#11 spideyo

spideyo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 603 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 08:06 AM

Especially when this guy is a Scott Boras client.

#12 nmoline

nmoline

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 08:58 AM

I'd rather give him 5 year 75m. But who are we kidding, we are fans of the Minnesota Twins, they refuse to spend money on big name free agents.

#13 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 15,410 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:08 AM

I'd rather give him 5 year 75m.


The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.

#14 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,507 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:24 AM

There are players to give those kind of years and money to, Bourn isn't one of them.

#15 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:32 AM

There are players to give those kind of years and money to, Bourn isn't one of them.

Particularly when he plays the one position your system is truly deep in.

#16 GCTF

GCTF

    so very tired

  • Members
  • 2,377 posts
  • LocationCanada City

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:13 AM

The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.


71 million and that priceless smile.

Dressed in black, tossin' back a shot of rye.


#17 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 15,410 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:49 AM

Particularly when he plays the one position your system is truly deep in.


There are a half dozen reasons not to sign Bourn and not a single good reason to give him a multi-year deal. He probably won't age well, the Twins need pitching more than anything, he's a Boras client, the Twins need pitching more than anything, and the Twins also happen to have no less than three good-to-excellent CF prospects (and a smattering of marginal ones) in the wings, one of which is going to be with the big league club in 2013.

Signing Bourn to a multi-year deal requires the kind of stupidity I generally reserve for the New York Mets.

#18 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,252 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:03 AM

While I'm not really on board with bringing Bourn on board, I have to say that the original poster never said anything about a multi-year deal.

My thoughts are that a one-year deal would carry a certain amount of risk, would definitely lose us a pretty good draft pick, and isn't likely to help us more than marginally in 2013. That said, everyone has a price. I think $20 million for a year of Bourn (even if the plan is to flip him) is outrageous, and I wouldn't consider it for a second. Now, if we're talking $1 million, I think we have a deal.

Obviously neither $20 million nor $1 million is realistic, so where's the happy medium? At what max one-year salary would take the risk of injury/regression and loss of a draft pick to have the upside of protecting Aaron Hicks for a few months and the possibility of some marginal-to-good prospects at the trade deadline?

Can't say as though I know, but I'd be curious to hear what those with more information would think.

#19 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,507 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:13 AM

I have to say that the original poster never said anything about a multi-year deal.


I have to say that no one said he did.

#20 Willihammer

Willihammer

    Nostrombolimus

  • Members
  • 5,986 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:37 AM

A sign and trade to the Mets could be profitable, if MLB isn't willing to let them keep their 11th pick.

edit: Bourne would also allow you to hold off on starting Hicks' arb clock till June or whatever. At that point, Gibson would be nearly ready to shut down.

It might be a risk worth taking, on a 1 year deal. Trade him before the deadline for a starting pitcher to replace Gibson, and pocket the extra year of service time for Hicks and Gibson. Maybe the Mets would give us Marcum.

Edited by Willihammer, 06 February 2013 - 11:44 AM.