Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Big Shock (Sarcasm): Tanaka to Yankees

  • Please log in to reply
133 replies to this topic

#21 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 23,139 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:53 AM

So if the minor league system is barren, they should NOT sign free agents? I'm confused how that would make them better.....

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#22 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Cassini-Huygens

  • Members
  • 7,851 posts
  • LocationSaturn's atmosphere and on Titan

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:54 AM

"You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em,
Know when to walk away and know when to run."

#23 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 23,139 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:54 AM

To me, judging success only on Titles is off....they have been in teh playoffs A LOT. When did they last lose 90+ games three years in a row?

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#24 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 10,889 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:55 AM

This is a great move in my book. I was all for signing Tanaka but as the off-season went on and his price started rising as did reports about how much abuse his arm has taken, I became happy the Twins weren't going to be in on him.

He could work out and be servicable, but there's likely an equally decent chance his arm gives out. Let the Yankees keep cycling these bad contracts. I wouldn't be surprised if both this and the Ellsbury contract look terrible by 2016.

#25 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 23,139 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:56 AM

So what? In them meantime, they had 3 or more good years from the players. Again, why does the money matter if it does not keep them from signing players? Do people think salaries are going down over the next 3 years?

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#26 whosafraidofluigirussolo

whosafraidofluigirussolo

    Member

  • Members
  • 168 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:08 AM

FWIW, 7/$155M works out to $22M per year, not $25.
It's still a ton of money but that difference is not meaningless.

#27 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,931 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:14 AM

Why should we be upset with what the Yankees spend? Their fans spend a great deal of money to watch the Yankee BB team to be entertained and the owners invest much of that money in players so their fans can maximize (their) enjoyment. Are you advocating that Yankee owners slash their player budget and pocket as much of that cash as possible?--So other teams can win and have other fans be happy? Hmm, sounds rather short-term thinking to me.

#28 DaveW

DaveW

    Aaron Hicks update (5/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS

  • Members
  • 12,791 posts
  • LocationNYC aka Aaron Hicks Ville

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:18 AM

FWIW, 7/$155M works out to $22M per year, not $25.
It's still a ton of money but that difference is not meaningless.

+ 20 mil posting fee.

#29 halfchest

halfchest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 328 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:20 AM

Glad the Twins weren't in on this one. That's a lot of money and time for a guy who's never pitched in MLB. Not a bad signing for a team like the Yankees but I the kind of deal that could hamstring a team like the Twins in the future.

#30 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let's Keep Winning!

  • Members
  • 5,986 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:31 AM

It is just money. And taking each team as a separate business (no comments about the relative wealth of the owners), the Yankees can simply afford to take a lot bigger $$$$ risks than the Twins. So can the Dodgers, Angels, Rangers and a number of other teams.

Could the Twins have afforded to pay Tanaka? Yes.

Would it have been a smart risk? No.

It may work out for the Yankees. It may not. Even if it doesn't, a bad $155 million ($175 million investment w/posting fee) isn't back-breaking for them given their revenues. It would be awfully hard to stomach for the Twins (and their fans).

#31 B Richard

B Richard

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 530 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:35 AM

You don't have to like (or dislike) the Yankees just because they (often unwisely) spend massive amounts of money on their team. Championships are championships, but personally I have a lot more respect for teams like the Cardinals or Giants that win through making shrewd moves rather than throwing money at players and hoping for the best (Dodgers, Yankees).

#32 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 23,139 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:57 AM

Really? I have great respect for businesses that use their various assets to achieve their goals. I don't get why there is some mythical "right way" to build a baseball team.

To be clear, what you like is your right. I just don't get why you care. All of this is irrational fandom anyway.....

Edited by mike wants wins, 22 January 2014 - 11:59 AM.

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#33 B Richard

B Richard

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 530 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:06 PM

Really? I have great respect for businesses that use their various assets to achieve their goals. I don't get why there is some mythical "right way" to build a baseball team.

To be clear, what you like is your right. I just don't get why you care. All of this is irrational fandom anyway.....



I never said there was a right way. You are talking about owners, I am talking about GMs. I have more respect for a front office that creatively leverages its resources to make the most out of its means. It requires more creativity and thoughtfulness, in my opinion. There is no right way to win championships. That doesn't mean that you should be upset with the "irrationality" of someone who might appreciate the more subtle aspects of managing a professional baseball organization.

#34 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,751 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:20 PM

LOL. Do not want.

What a horrible contract. Paying a guy Zack Greinke money who hasn't pitched in MLB.

#35 COtwin

COtwin

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 276 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:25 PM

I know this will seem very conspiratorial. It feels like MLB just bought Tanaka for the Yankees. The first year is paid for already. I hate A-Rod, but I have a feeling that the Yankees are not going to have to pay the remaining 60ish million on his contract. I expect some other suspension or event will cause it to be voided. If this happens then Tanaka is basically free for the Yanks for the first 3-4 years of his contract. And the Yanks have seemed to care about money, lately at least. Teams should have to live with the bad signings they make and the Yankees have a bit of history trying to weasel out of them.

#36 Willihammer

Willihammer

    Nostrombolimus

  • Members
  • 7,252 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:28 PM

The cherry on an outstanding offseason by Cashman. Lots of smart signings IMO

#37 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 13,246 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:32 PM

The cherry on an outstanding offseason by Cashman. Lots of smart signings IMO


"Smart" is not the term I would use. Aggressive? Sure. Smart? Um, no.

#38 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Cham-Peen of the World

  • Members
  • 1,757 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:47 PM

In the MLB world of no salary cap, "smart moves" are relative to the team that makes them. This is a smarter move for the Yankees to make than the Twins.

The Yankees were smart enough not to give Cano the ridiculous money that Seattle is going to have to fork over.

The opt-out after 4 years seems like a novel idea. That doesn't typically happen with MLB contracts.

#39 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,751 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:51 PM

The opt-out after 4 years seems like a novel idea. That doesn't typically happen with MLB contracts.


They're becoming more common. The opt-out makes a bad deal even worse for the Yankees.

Tanaka is completely unproven. He could be Hideo Nomo as easily (or more easily, probably) than he could be Yu Darvish.

And if he becomes Yu Darvish? He gets to opt out after four seasons and play the field as a 28-29 year old.

Just a terrible deal all around for the Yankees.

#40 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 15,807 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:53 PM

+ 20 mil posting fee.


And if Tanaka does opt out after 4 years, the amortization of that posting fee makes the yearly cost even a bit higher. As with any "interesting" contracts, we don't actually know what the true cost will be until one or more decisions get made down the line.

/ edit - I see Brock and I were on the same wavelength.