Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

All's quiet on the Garza front

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#1 TKGuy

TKGuy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 346 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 08:47 AM

It's been very quiet on the Garza front. With all the crazy news, I have hardly seen him mentioned. Would it be out of the realm of possibility that the Twins sign Garza? They have plenty of $$ to work with this year. I am guessing it will take around $15 million a season to get him. After this year, the Twins have Willingham, Correia and Doumit, and maybe Duensing off the books and will be replaced by relatively cheap talent. The team got added TV revenue to more than offset this investment. If we aren't getting another catcher, why not go after him? He just turned 30 years old. It sounded like Gardy didn't want to trade Garza in the first place when Bill Smith made that boneheaded move.

Having Garza, Hughes, Nolasco, Meyer as the top four in the rotation for the next three years will be very formidable.

Hey, why not, I never thought we'd make a big splash anyways, so why not go all in?

#2 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,091 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:05 AM

I doubt the Twins will pay what it takes for Garza and I'm not sure they are ready to give up on Worley and/or Gibson as a longterm starter.

#3 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,167 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:07 AM

I'm for it but I think the Twins spent the money needed to sign Garza on Nolasco and Hughes. Yes, they still have more money available but I have a hard time believing that they are going to commit all of that money to FA's in one offseason.

it would also be nice to save some of the payroll flexibility in case it makes sense to go after Bailey (next year) or Price (in two years) or some other FA who would be closer to his prime while the prospects are hopefully peaking.

#4 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,234 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:08 AM

I wouldn't go all-in because it's going to take five years to get Garza.

If the Twins had signed Garza instead of Nolasco, that would have been fine but I don't like the idea of signing two 30 year olds to four and five year contracts in the same offseason. At that point, you're locking up $30m of salary in two guys who will probably be lock-step in the same decline phase.

If the Twins need a Garza-type guy after the 2014 season, then go get that guy. Spend this offseason patching other roster holes with short-term pick-ups.

#5 twinscowboysbulls

twinscowboysbulls

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:21 AM

Is there any chance Garza could go for less than predicted?

The market has started to shake out. Almost every contract that has been handed out has been for less than I and most of you have predicted it would be. Now that quite a few pitchers are off the board for fairly decent contracts, it's possible that Garza will have to lower his demands.

Trade market has started to heat up too. If Cubs trade Jeff Samardzija, I could see them re-signing Garza. If the Twins were able to get Garza for 4 years and money similar perhaps a little more than Nolasco, I'd jump all over it. If we are going to go 5 years guaranteed, I'm not sure I would like it at all.

Garza, Nolasco, Hughes sure sounds appetizing at the top of the rotation for the next three years though.

#6 twinscowboysbulls

twinscowboysbulls

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:21 AM

I wouldn't go all-in because it's going to take five years to get Garza.

If the Twins had signed Garza instead of Nolasco, that would have been fine but I don't like the idea of signing two 30 year olds to four and five year contracts in the same offseason. At that point, you're locking up $30m of salary in two guys who will probably be lock-step in the same decline phase.

If the Twins need a Garza-type guy after the 2014 season, then go get that guy. Spend this offseason patching other roster holes with short-term pick-ups.


RP, what happens if there isn't a Garza type next offseason? Who is supposed to be available?

#7 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,234 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:23 AM

RP, what happens if there isn't a Garza type next offseason? Who is supposed to be available?


Homer Bailey, for one.

There are always Matt Garza types in free agency. He's not an elite pitcher.

#8 twinscowboysbulls

twinscowboysbulls

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:27 AM

Homer Bailey, for one.

There are always Matt Garza types in free agency. He's not an elite pitcher.


What would you classify Garza as? Ace, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?

I think this is what I'm struggling with, I see the Twins are spending big bucks this year and it's very new to us. I'm worried that we are signing these guys and we will win 75 games and the FO will still have the 25 million to spend next off-season but we will pocket it and be satisfied with the 75 wins and up and coming prospects. Is it wrong of me to feel that way? Maybe. I just can foresee the Twins in the mindset of "use it or lose it" this off-season.

I think Bailey is going to be traded and extended. Hopefully to us, that'd be fantastic.

#9 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,234 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:37 AM

What would you classify Garza as? Ace, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?

I think this is what I'm struggling with, I see the Twins are spending big bucks this year and it's very new to us. I'm worried that we are signing these guys and we will win 75 games and the FO will still have the 25 million to spend next off-season but we will pocket it and be satisfied with the 75 wins and up and coming prospects. Is it wrong of me to feel that way? Maybe. I just can foresee the Twins in the mindset of "use it or lose it" this off-season.

I think Bailey is going to be traded and extended. Hopefully to us, that'd be fantastic.


Everything I've heard about Bailey suggests that he's going to explore free agency come hell or high water, which is why I used him as an example free agent.

It's possible the Twins will pocket next year's money... But it was also possible they were going to pocket this year's money and they didn't do it. I'm not going to fret over next offseason quite yet.

I'd classify Garza as a solid #2 that borders on a #3 some seasons.

#10 twinscowboysbulls

twinscowboysbulls

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:39 AM

Everything I've heard about Bailey suggests that he's going to explore free agency come hell or high water, which is why I used him as an example free agent.

It's possible the Twins will pocket next year's money... But it was also possible they were going to pocket this year's money and they didn't do it. I'm not going to fret over next offseason quite yet.

I'd classify Garza as a solid #2 that borders on a #3 some seasons.


Fair enough. Are you saying it's "Too Early" to judge next off-season? I was just going to start a new thread about that...

#11 Marta Shearing

Marta Shearing

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 417 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 10:35 AM

They should offer him the same contract they gave Nolasco.

#12 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:30 AM

They could get someone like Arroyo to fill in for a couple of years. But Garza is a long-term investment. So, to answer this question, you need to ask another question: What does the rotation look like in three years? If we start this year with what we have right now, this is what it looks like:

2014:
Nolasco
Hughes
Correia
Deduno
Gibson/Diamond

2015:
Nolasco
Myers
Hughes
Gibson
Deduno/May

2016:
Myers
Nolasco
Stewart
Hughes
Gibson

2017:
Myers
Nolasco
Stewart
Gonsalves
Thorp

And that does not take into account several other prospects like Wimmers, Summers, Melotakis, etc. who could easily develop into major league starters. Upshot: I could see a two-year deal for Arroyo here, but Garza will be blocking better talent as early as 2017.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#13 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,234 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:34 AM

I see a startling lack of Berrios on that list. Do you not believe he'll make it as a starter?

It's a legit concern, just wondering if it was intentional or not.

#14 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 5,344 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:42 AM

2017:
Myers
Nolasco
Stewart
Gonsalves
ThorpE


Hold on to your horses with the last 3, especially the last one, at least until they can go out and buy a six pack...
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#15 minn55441

minn55441

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:55 AM

Having Garza, Hughes, Nolasco, Meyer as the top four in the rotation for the next three years will be very formidable.

Hey, why not, I never thought we'd make a big splash anyways, so why not go all in?


I think Nolasco, Hughes and Garza will look good leading our staff this year, but three years from now I have a feeling we will have a different view. If we are truly going to raise our expectations to complete for a spot in the post season, we will need better starting pitching than this. Either through additional FA signings or getting some help from our existing minor leaguers.

I like the flexibility of being able to go out and sign a big name starter as we get closer to where we want to be. Spending all of our money now seems foolish. One of those three will not turn out to be a productive starting pitcher in year two three or four. No inside knowledge, just the law of averages.

#16 Brandon

Brandon

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,097 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:01 PM

We can always trade a pitcher in a salary dump like Fister...so sign him for now and trade one later when the need arises... Money or rotation spot for someone younger and better.

#17 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,234 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:05 PM

We can always trade a pitcher in a salary dump like Fister...so sign him for now and trade one later when the need arises... Money or rotation spot for someone younger and better.


Doug Fister was not a salary dump. He's a guy who has posted an ERA+ over 110 in each of the past two seasons and is 29 years old.

Detroit needed salary relief and that played into why they traded him, sure... But it was not a dump.

#18 ericchri

ericchri

    Generally Clueless

  • Members
  • 417 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:09 PM

I'd prefer they take a rest from adding more starters at this point, at least of the veteran FA variety. If there's a youngish starter available in trade, I'd be OK with that, if the price was right. If we'd signed Garza instead of Nolasco that would have been great, but I don't want him in addition at this point.

I think Brock is advocating most strongly the plan I believe in. We've hopefully stabilized our rotation for the year, but we still have a lot of evaluating to do with younger guys moving up. Why tie up so much of your rotation with aging guys now when there should be somebody similar available in a couple years if you decide you still need something. Shore up the other weaknesses on the team if you feel it necessary, but another 30+ year old pitcher on a 5 year deal doesn't feel like the right move to me at this point.

#19 Lonestar

Lonestar

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 211 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:13 PM

I would be surprised if Garza signs before the Tanaka outcome is known. IMO he's better value than Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jiminez, especially when you figure draft pick compensation. I would be surprised if he gets 5 years. I would not be surprised he gets $17 AAV.

#20 twinscowboysbulls

twinscowboysbulls

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:19 PM

Maybe he knows something we don't...Trade?