Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store

Recent Blogs


Photo

Another Free Agent?

  • Please log in to reply
241 replies to this topic

#61 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,244 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:14 PM

Again, who cares, if that money is just pocketed intead? Drew for "too much money", or Floriman and the money isn't spent....those are your real options for SS right now, imo.
Lighten up Francis....

#62 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:15 PM

Again, who cares, if that money is just pocketed intead? Drew for "too much money", or Floriman and the money isn't spent....those are your real options for SS right now, imo.


That becomes a false argument in 2, 3, or 4 years if they are looking to further add payroll and he's a waste of it.

#63 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,336 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:18 PM

Re: Michael Young. Word is that he is about to announce his retirement. Maybe sign an one day contract with the Rangers and do so.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#64 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:20 PM

It also doesn't scream "come pay me 50M for the next four years"

Don't get me wrong, I'd be ok with Drew. That said, there is a little bit too much adoration for his game going on around here in my opinion.


Yeah, but nobody is saying to give him 50m over 4 years, or 4 years at all. Everyone is saying 2-3 years at 9-11 mil a year. At the very least you can assume he will be at least a 2.0 WAR player moving forward (good chance to be a 3.0 WAR player each of those three years) even at his worst he is "worth" the contract, and could actually end up being a "good" deal. Even more so considering the utter lack of any legit SS in the system ready to help anytime over the next couple seasons.

#65 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,438 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:23 PM

It also doesn't scream "come pay me 50M for the next four years"

Don't get me wrong, I'd be ok with Drew. That said, there is a little bit too much adoration for his game going on around here in my opinion.


I dont think anyone is adoring him. But we have money to spend, nobody coming up, and he is a clear 2 to 4 win upgrade at SS. Anything under 3-33 makes sense

Edited by tobi0040, 24 January 2014 - 04:25 PM.


#66 oldguy10

oldguy10

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 315 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:32 PM

There are other options for the Twins at short, namely Escobar and Bartlett who may do just fine if given the opportunity.

#67 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:38 PM

I dont think anyone is adoring him. But we have money to spend, nobody coming up, and he is a clear 2 to 4 win upgrade at SS. Anything under 3-33 makes sense


I disagree - any attempt to post his weaknesses or reasons for hesitation are immediately met with rebuke. There are positives and there are negatives with him,but only the negatives are met with challenges.

If they can get him for 2/20 - go for it. Hell I'd give him 2/30. I just don't want to commit longterm to a guy who is showing red flags of decline.

#68 JP3700

JP3700

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 294 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:40 PM

[quote name='nicksaviking']You realize you are then arguing that Drew isn't a platoon type of player simply because of the Twins incompetence at developing middle infielders?

[/QUOTE]

Considering that this is a thread about the Twins and free agents, who's players should we be comparing him to?

[QUOTE]I'd rather look at the last three years to make a judgment than I would 2010 and before. Recent trends are obviously more likely to continue than trends that happened last decade.[/QUOTE]

If you'd like to call a couple of fluke injuries a trend, that's your prerogative. I'd rather take a look at the surrounding years of good health.

Plenty of players come back from missing full seasons, to be just fine. Especially when they have the track record to support it.

[QUOTE]Why would Ryan want to be on the hook for multiple years at $10 million for that kind of player[/QUOTE]

Perhaps because in his last four full seasons he's been worth 12.9 WAR.

Including last season where he was worth 3.1 WAR. Despite all the injuries, the glaring splits and that horrible decline phase he's going through. WAR is also park adjusted, since he can apparently only hit at Fenway.

#69 JP3700

JP3700

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 294 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:14 PM

[quote name='TheLeviathan']I disagree - any attempt to post his weaknesses or reasons for hesitation are immediately met with rebuke. There are positives and there are negatives with him,but only the negatives are met with challenges.

[/QUOTE]

Everyone is going to have their stance on topics. Some more passionate than others. Frequent posters on Twins Daily often get caught in pages of discussion regarding topics that they stand behind.

There are positives and negatives about every player. I personally feel that the positives outweigh the negatives regarding Drew, when you really look at everything.

[QUOTE]It also doesn't scream "come pay me 50M for the next four years"[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]If they can get him for 2/20 - go for it. Hell I'd give him 2/30.[/QUOTE]

I agree that I wouldn't give him 4yrs, $50M. Going into the offseason, I assumed Drew wasn't even on the radar due to his projected contract.

The reason why he's become attractive is the reports that his price tag has come down. It sounds like 3yrs, $33M may be his ceiling at this point and I'm sure you'd agree that would be fair as well considering you'd give him 2/30.

I think many thought twice about Garza at 5yrs, $75M, but many believe 4/52 is a fair deal, if not a steal. Drew's situation could play out the same way, and I'd like the Twins to be the team that jumps in on it.

#70 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:19 PM

There are positives and negatives about every player. I personally feel that the positives outweigh the negatives regarding Drew, when you really look at everything.


And that's a fair conclusion, but the facts are still facts: his righty/lefty splits have been bad recently. Last year his home/road splits are not encouraging. He's entered the years where decline phase is very possible and his numbers hint that he may have entered it. He's had a bad reputation in the past. His last 3/4 years have demonstrated health concerns.

The notion, and it's not necessarily being peddled by you but you're defending it, that this is a no-brainer signing just doesn't hold water to me.

#71 MileHighTwinsFan

MileHighTwinsFan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:23 PM

Has anyone done the analysis about whether players who decline qualifying offers are getting significantly better deals on the free agent market?

#72 MileHighTwinsFan

MileHighTwinsFan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:28 PM

Has anyone done the analysis about whether players who decline qualifying offers are getting significantly better deals on the free agent market?


OK, it was a dumb question. Last year everyone got better deals.

http://www.fangraphs...line-a-rundown/

But you have to wonder if Morales, Drew and Cruz will make out better.

#73 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:44 PM

I disagree - any attempt to post his weaknesses or reasons for hesitation are immediately met with rebuke. There are positives and there are negatives with him,but only the negatives are met with challenges.

If they can get him for 2/20 - go for it. Hell I'd give him 2/30. I just don't want to commit longterm to a guy who is showing red flags of decline.


I don't understand one bit why people would give him 2/30 and not 3/33. It really boggles my mind.

#74 CRArko

CRArko

    Master of all I survey.

  • Members
  • 1,598 posts
  • LocationThe Pandorica.
  • Twitter: crarko

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:58 PM

Maybe instead they are looking into making a trade. Maybe with the A's.

Maybe for Nick Punto.

#75 JP3700

JP3700

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 294 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:03 PM

And that's a fair conclusion, but the facts are still facts: his righty/lefty splits have been bad recently. Last year his home/road splits are not encouraging. He's entered the years where decline phase is very possible and his numbers hint that he may have entered it. He's had a bad reputation in the past. His last 3/4 years have demonstrated health concerns.


And despite all that he was still a 3.1 win player last year. Which is in line with his previous three full seasons where on average he was a 3.2 win player. He was also on his way to a 3+ win season in 2011 when he got hurt.

His bad or good reputation is all hearsay. Neither you or I know who he is or what he brings to the team in that regard, so I'd think it's fair to leave that out.

The health concerns are based on one injury that he seems to have recovered from. Considering how good he was in 2013 and that he showed no lingering effects from it.

The notion, and it's not necessarily being peddled by you but you're defending it, that this is a no-brainer signing just doesn't hold water to me.


No signing is a no-brainer. You have to weigh everything and put a proper valuation on the player. I have him being well worth $33M over the next three years, so anything at or below that price is something I'd jump at. I'm not sure how you can disagree considering you mentioned you'd sign him for 2/30.

#76 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:21 PM

And despite all that he was still a 3.1 win player last year.


If that's what matters to you to project him - great. But again, it's perfectly valid for nick or the Twins to look at those other stats and project a declining player who is overpriced.

The health concerns are based on one injury that he seems to have recovered from. Considering how good he was in 2013 and that he showed no lingering effects from it.


That's every bit as speculative as his personality. Neither of us know what that ankle looks like and whether or not it's going to be a lingering issue as he gets older. It was an injury that cost him over a year of playing - it's worthy of concern.

With Drew, I don't care about the per year amount. I care about how long we're tethered to a guy who I don't trust to maintain a level of play worth half of what he's asking for.

#77 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,236 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:32 PM

And despite all that he was still a 3.1 win player last year. Which is in line with his previous three full seasons where on average he was a 3.2 win player. He was also on his way to a 3+ win season in 2011 when he got hurt.

His bad or good reputation is all hearsay. Neither you or I know who he is or what he brings to the team in that regard, so I'd think it's fair to leave that out.

The health concerns are based on one injury that he seems to have recovered from. Considering how good he was in 2013 and that he showed no lingering effects from it.



No signing is a no-brainer. You have to weigh everything and put a proper valuation on the player. I have him being well worth $33M over the next three years, so anything at or below that price is something I'd jump at. I'm not sure how you can disagree considering you mentioned you'd sign him for 2/30.


A grievous ankle injury in an awkward slide at home and a concussion due to a beaning are not "health concerns".....unless you don't bounce back from those said-injuries. Drew has come through with flying colors.

The argument in this thread against Drew started with the strong objection against the deal by Drew supposedly commanding 4/$52- I haven't seen that figure bandied about at all recently- I thought their starting point in negotiations was always a 3-year deal? The Mets were balking at a smaller number with only a 2 year commitment. The Red Sox public stance is they need him for one year. Boras has already blinked, by letting it be known that Drew has positional flexibility. The price for Drew is obviously coming closer to a place where Drew could fall to the Twins- and warts and all- he would be a major upgrade at a position with no obvious help on the horizon, and represent a cost that won't cripple the franchise should it not work out perfectly.

#78 Monkeypaws

Monkeypaws

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 718 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:35 PM

I'd prefer to roll with Florimon-Escobar and keep the second. Drew ain't worth it.

I believe there is still some upside to be gained with these guys.

#79 JP3700

JP3700

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 294 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:41 PM

[quote name='TheLeviathan']If that's what matters to you to project him - great. But again, it's perfectly valid for nick or the Twins to look at those other stats and project a declining player who is overpriced.

[/QUOTE]

Well, WAR is the best single metric/stat to use when evaluating a player and his total contributions to a team that season. Is it flawed? Sure. But so is every other statistic that's been used to evaluate him, whether by me or anyone else. WAR at least gives me an idea of the total value he brings, weighting all those stats and factors. Considering he's been consistently at the 3+ win level for years, gives me a pretty good idea of the value he brings.

[QUOTE]That's every bit as speculative as his personality. Neither of us know what that ankle looks like and whether or not it's going to be a lingering issue as he gets older. It was an injury that cost him over a year of playing - it's worthy of concern. [/QUOTE]

Of course it's a concern. That's what the physical is for. I'd trust that the Twins medical staff would be able to identify any possible lingering issues that may present itself (add snark here).

The season he just had just tells me that it's likely that he has recovered. If the physical says otherwise, void the contract and move on.

[QUOTE]With Drew, I don't care about the per year amount. I care about how long we're tethered to a guy who I don't trust to maintain a level of play worth half of what he's asking for.[/QUOTE]

So he's worth 2/30, but not 3/33?

Edited by JP3700, 24 January 2014 - 06:44 PM.


#80 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:43 PM

The price for Drew is obviously coming closer to a place where Drew could fall to the Twins- and warts and all- he would be a major upgrade at a position with no obvious help on the horizon, and represent a cost that won't cripple the franchise should it not work out perfectly.


If the price comes to that - then sure. I had read his initial demands were 4/48 and that he's still sticking to a minimum of 3 years.

There is an awful lot of speculation about what he can be had for. I'm only on board for less than 3 years with him unless the third year is an option.

#81 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,167 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:46 PM

Considering he's been consistently at the 3+ win level for years, gives me a pretty good idea of the value he brings.


It gives you an idea of the value he's brought. I don't, however, use it for projecting future results. Mostly because a composite of stats eliminates the nuance that I believe is far more valuable in analyzing trends and how likely they are to continue. So for projection - no -I don't think it serves any value in that regard.

So he's worth 2/30, but not 3/33?


The years are the concern to me, not the total dollars. I do see some concerning signs of decline and I doubt his personality/makeup. Losing cash in the short term if he flops is no big deal. Continuing to lose that money as we start to have our young players more established on the roster does concern me.

#82 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:51 PM

He hasn't had a .681 OPS against lefties since 2010. He's declining and fast. His production vs lefties has fallen off the cliff the last two years, he can't stay healthy and his K% has jumped from the teens to 23% and 24% the last two years.

If this wasn't a well known SS, which the Twins desperately need, I think almost all of us would be yelling to stay away. He's not at the beginning of his decline phase, he's well on his way to the bottom. His vs. RHP production at Fenway Park is masking huge indicators that this guy is almost through in this league. I'd bet good money this will be the last MLB contract offered to Drew, it's over.

For his career, Joe Mauer's OPS is .172 points lower vs LH pitching. Should the Twins be looking for a platoon partner for him too?

Virtually every hitter hits poorer against same handed pitching. What's important is what a hitter puts up overall, not what he hits against 30 percent of the opposing pitchers. I don't know why we have to keep having this discussion about platooning. It's very difficult to do, which is why you don't see much of it anymore.

Drew will outhit Florimon, RH, LH, cross handed, one handed, blindfolded. That's what should matter.

#83 ScottyB

ScottyB

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 604 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:03 PM

Personally, rather than Drew, I'd prefer to buy low on a shortstop who had an off year from a team that has another shortstop on the doorstep. I can think of two off the top of my head. The Indians have Lindor ready to step in, so Asdrubal Cabrera might be available. Or better yet, the Cubs have Javier Baez on the doorstep, so how about Starlin Castro who is signed long-term (with option until 2020) at a reasonable rate.

#84 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,236 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:25 PM

If the price comes to that - then sure. I had read his initial demands were 4/48 and that he's still sticking to a minimum of 3 years.

There is an awful lot of speculation about what he can be had for. I'm only on board for less than 3 years with him unless the third year is an option.


Yep, that 3 year demand has been Boras's starting point for negotiations for quite some time now, and with the "position flexibility" gambit, clearly the price he can ask of the market has been dropping for a potential Non-Shortstop. And I've been all-in on overpaying for 2 years from the get-go. Structuring a deal with Performance Achievements, PAs and Games Played combined with a Team Option in Year 3 seems like the optimum way to go, but being potentially saddled with an unproductive Year 3 (2016) from Drew will not cripple the franchise's ability to operate competitively.

#85 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,236 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:31 PM

Personally, rather than Drew, I'd prefer to buy low on a shortstop who had an off year from a team that has another shortstop on the doorstep. I can think of two off the top of my head. The Indians have Lindor ready to step in, so Asdrubal Cabrera might be available. Or better yet, the Cubs have Javier Baez on the doorstep, so how about Starlin Castro who is signed long-term (with option until 2020) at a reasonable rate.


Both good options, but why give up the decent prospects that both of these players would command when you can get Drew for $$$ only? And the Twins most immediate need in the lineup is a bat, where Drew is clearly better than the other 2 options?

#86 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 3,042 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:54 PM

I am a little surprised that all of the 5-6 big names left seem to be holding out for multiyear offers. How many teams does that exclude? How many millions in 2014 salary (and beyond)?

Look at Kuroda - 4 straight one year deals. He was one of the first players to sign this offseason. $16m, done. December 7, Merry Christmas. He'll make $53m over these 4 years. How much would he have earned if he'd bargained for a multi year deal after the 2010 season? 25m? 30m?

Its risky but seems like the climate might be conducive to that strategy.

#87 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,747 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:18 PM

Well, WAR is the best single metric/stat to use when evaluating a player and his total contributions to a team that season. Is it flawed? Sure. But so is every other statistic that's been used to evaluate him, whether by me or anyone else. WAR at least gives me an idea of the total value he brings, weighting all those stats and factors. Considering he's been consistently at the 3+ win level for years, gives me a pretty good idea of the value he brings.



Of course it's a concern. That's what the physical is for. I'd trust that the Twins medical staff would be able to identify any possible lingering issues that may present itself (add snark here).

The season he just had just tells me that it's likely that he has recovered. If the physical says otherwise, void the contract and move on.



So he's worth 2/30, but not 3/33?


Drew had a 3.1 WAR last year because WAR is heavily biased to aid shortstops. You know who had a 2.1 WAR last year? Pedro Florimon. WAR may show total value, but the Twins don't need to look at total value, they need to look at offensive value as Drew would not be a defensive upgrade over Florimon.

Drew's declining offense is not worth $10 million and though none of us here care about that $10 million this year, I and many others DO care about that $10 million next year and the year after. I don't want to tie up that future money as the Twins have now shown a willingness to spend in free agency. There WILL be guys who are actually worth that kind of investment later.

#88 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,747 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:25 PM

For his career, Joe Mauer's OPS is .172 points lower vs LH pitching. Should the Twins be looking for a platoon partner for him too?

Virtually every hitter hits poorer against same handed pitching. What's important is what a hitter puts up overall, not what he hits against 30 percent of the opposing pitchers. I don't know why we have to keep having this discussion about platooning. It's very difficult to do, which is why you don't see much of it anymore.

Drew will outhit Florimon, RH, LH, cross handed, one handed, blindfolded. That's what should matter.


He is expected to hit lower against lefties, but he is virtually unplayable against them Mauer is still an above average hitter. Just because he's a better hitter than Florimon doesn't mean you pay him 2x his worth. If he settles for a one year prove-it deal I'm on board, but this kind of player shouldn't get multiple years anymore.

#89 AM.

AM.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 365 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:36 PM

If the Twins sign Drew, it would make the loss of Butera hurt less.

#90 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:44 PM

He is expected to hit lower against lefties, but he is virtually unplayable against them Mauer is still an above average hitter. Just because he's a better hitter than Florimon doesn't mean you pay him 2x his worth. If he settles for a one year prove-it deal I'm on board, but this kind of player shouldn't get multiple years anymore.

If Drew is unplayable against LHers, what did that make Florimon and his .180/.229/.230 against LH pitching last year?