Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

MinnCentric Forums


Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

From MinnCentric


Photo

And then there were two.

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
99 replies to this topic

#1 ppearson50

ppearson50

    Member

  • Members
  • 50 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:49 AM

Ervin Santana signs with the Braves for one year. Twins apparently tried to come in late and get him at a bargain (3 years $33 million) but failed. Still two major free agents left with qualifying offers. Stephen Drew, SS, and Kendry Morales, 1b or DH.
Our presumed starting shortstop Pedro Florimon has no at bats this spring after getting his appendix removed. Our presumed DH, Jason Kubel, is 2 for 17 with one home run this spring after hitting .216 last year.

#2 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:10 AM

The Twins handled the Santana and Garza situation correctly, IMO. Lowball them late in the offseason and if one bites, great. If not, that's fine. I think they should be focusing on offense at this point anyway.

Hopefully they feel the same way.

#3 Trautmann13

Trautmann13

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:16 AM

At this point it is not worth bringing in either of these guys and loose that mystical draft pick. If one was to be signed, I would rather it be Drew because I have lost all faith in Florimon's bat. Get Drew on a 3 year deal, give the job to Danny Santana from there after.

#4 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,571 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:18 AM

I don't understand that. If you think the player can help your club why do you have to low ball the guy? They have plenty of money if you want a guy do what it takes.

He does nothing to help the club if you don't sign him and the money does nothing to help the club in Pohlads bank unspent.

I'm not sure I would want the guy but if you do a few extra million isn't going to kill the team.

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#5 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:25 AM

I don't understand that. If you think the player can help your club why do you have to low ball the guy? They have plenty of money if you want a guy do what it takes.

He does nothing to help the club if you don't sign him and the money does nothing to help the club in Pohlads bank unspent.

I'm not sure I would want the guy but if you do a few extra million isn't going to kill the team.


I don't know how much of a low ball this was. In both cases, it was more about years than dollars. Garza wanted four or more years. The Twins were only comfortable with three, for health reasons as much as anything. Santana ended up wanting a one-year deal. That is tough to swallow. It's tough giving up a draft pick for a rental in a rebuilding year.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#6 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 8,105 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:45 AM

Well, I'd guess that means they are done. I don't see them signing Drew and giving up a guy that is unlikely to ever have more than 3-5 total WAR in his life. They aren't winning anything this year, not with question marks at LF, CF, 3B, SS, DH, C, maybe even 2B and RF.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :) Also, I am NOT trying to convince anyone I am correct, I'm just talking here, not arguing.


#7 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:47 AM

I don't understand that. If you think the player can help your club why do you have to low ball the guy?


Because you don't like the guy that much.

Santana is coming off what could easily be a career year for him. Just two years ago, he was a pretty awful pitcher.

I don't see a reason to give that guy four years. There will be pitchers available next offseason should you need the help (and let's hope the Twins do not need the help).

Lowball the guy, be happy if he accepts, don't look back if he doesn't. Take advantage of market inefficiencies, don't spend money just for the sake of spending money.

#8 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 8,105 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:51 AM

Better to pocket the money than to make the team better.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :) Also, I am NOT trying to convince anyone I am correct, I'm just talking here, not arguing.


#9 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 770 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 07:58 AM

I don't know how much of a low ball this was. In both cases, it was more about years than dollars. Garza wanted four or more years. The Twins were only comfortable with three, for health reasons as much as anything. Santana ended up wanting a one-year deal. That is tough to swallow. It's tough giving up a draft pick for a rental in a rebuilding year.


Agreed, Garza's offer was certainly not a low ball. Santana on a 1 year makes no sense for the Twins (though it does in the moment for the Brew Crew). If it was 2 years from now I'd have easily given Santana that contract to play in MN, but not now.

Edit: I am still uncertain about Drew. Would it be smarter to run with Flori until Santana is ready? Should we try to move Dozier back when Rosario comes in? Hard to make a savvy decision when there are so many unknowns. On the other hand, I was counting on Sano's bat in the lineup by the ASB...so an offensive upgrade should probably move up the priority list some. Just a difficult call.

Edited by Joe A. Preusser, 12 March 2014 - 08:03 AM.


#10 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 770 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:06 AM

Better to pocket the money than to make the team better.


Better to make savvy decisions than throw money at the wall and see what sticks. But hey, it's not our money, so why should we care right?

#11 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:07 AM

Better to pocket the money than to make the team better.


That's not my argument and you know it. I'm all for taking a flyer on Drew, though I won't scream if the organization doesn't agree.

Santana is a question mark. Sure, he had a good season. He's also had his fair share of clunkers. He's not a guy I'd give four years, particularly with Gibson and Meyer on the way.

There's a reason why no other team wanted to give him a four year deal. On a three year deal, sure, you try to grab that guy in a soft market. If he wants a one year make-good deal instead, well, nothing you can do about that.

#12 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Let The Winning Continue!

  • Members
  • 4,794 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:07 AM

I don't recall seeing anyone campaign for Santana to the Twins on a one-year deal. It wouldn't have made sense for this club -- to suggest that many (if any) were pushing for Santana on a one-year deal is an unfair characterization of the discussion that did take place.

The discussion centered around whether Santana would take a 1-year deal vs. a 3 year deal and on how much the Twins should offer/would need to offer to sign Santana to a 3-year deal.

I'm okay with what happened because I wasn't convinced they should sign Santana anyway but I still believe that if the Twins really wanted Santana (rather than just trying to steal a bargain), their offer should have been more in the $39m/3 year range.

#13 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 8,105 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:09 AM

Better to make savvy decisions than throw money at the wall and see what sticks. But hey, it's not our money, so why should we care right?


edited because I can't type this am....

As fans, I don't know why anyone does......but there is no right way to be a fan, so feel how you want to feel. Many fans want their teams to win, and don't care if the owners make zero dollars or $30-50MM per year in profits. I have no idea why anyone cares.

Edited by mike wants wins, 12 March 2014 - 08:14 AM.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :) Also, I am NOT trying to convince anyone I am correct, I'm just talking here, not arguing.


#14 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:10 AM

Edit: I am still uncertain about Drew. Would it be smarter to run with Flori until Santana is ready? Should we try to move Dozier back when Rosario comes in? Hard to make a savvy decision when there are so many unknowns. On the other hand, I was counting on Sano's bat in the lineup by the ASB...so an offensive upgrade should probably move up the priority list some. Just a difficult call.


Yep and yep. I think Drew is a pretty decent gamble at the dollars he's likely to get.

On the other hand, I won't throw a fit if the Twins don't agree. There are so many variables in the organization right now that I don't fault the Twins for playing it close to the vest and letting things play out before committing to a long-term deal.

#15 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:13 AM

As fans, I don't know anyone does......but there is no right way to be a fan, so feel how you want to feel. Many fans want their teams to win, and don't care if they owners make zero dollars or $30-50MM per year in profits. I have no idea why you care.


I don't care one bit if the Twins make money or not.

What I do care about is that one dollar spent today is one dollar that cannot be spent tomorrow.

If we were talking one year deals without draft pick compensation, sure, spend that money like a trailer park lottery winner. But when you're committing money to 2015 and beyond, you should be doing a risk analysis on every acquisition.

#16 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:28 AM

Yep and yep. I think Drew is a pretty decent gamble at the dollars he's likely to get.

On the other hand, I won't throw a fit if the Twins don't agree. There are so many variables in the organization right now that I don't fault the Twins for playing it close to the vest and letting things play out before committing to a long-term deal.


Drew on a two-year deal makes a lot of sense to me. Beyond that, I'm not so sure. I project a decline over the next two years to the point where there has to be something better than him in 2016, either internally or externally.

Personally, I couldn't care less about the money either way. I just want them to put together a winner. I don't think you put together a winner by signing every marginal free agent just because you can. You have to consider the risks. You'd hate to be saddled with an aged player on a big deal that prevents you from getting a better player at that position. Worse yet, you'd hate to prevent the next star from developing at his natural pace because you have Juan Castro in the way.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#17 gil4

gil4

    Irrational Optimist

  • Members
  • 780 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:31 AM

I don't care one bit if the Twins make money or not.

What I do care about is that one dollar today is one dollar that cannot be spent tomorrow.


That was why 2010 was so disastrous. The Twins spent and then crashed and burned, and there was no flexibility to do anything about it until this year. Now the hole is so deep it will take a couple of years to patch it up, if the process works, which is not guaranteed.

#18 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,351 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:45 AM

The Twins did the right thing, bringing in Santana on a one year deal would have made no sense (no not because of the draft pick, they would have gotten one back the following year) but because anyone they sign now should be able to help in 2015 and 2016.

I'd definitely go out and give Drew a 3 year contract at this point then trade for De Aza, then call it an off-season. I would be very satisfied if they can pull that off.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- L. Harvey Oswald

:whacky028::whacky028: :whacky028::whacky028:

#19 Marta Shearing

Marta Shearing

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:06 AM

Because you don't like the guy that much.

Santana is coming off what could easily be a career year for him. Just two years ago, he was a pretty awful pitcher.

I don't see a reason to give that guy four years. There will be pitchers available next offseason should you need the help (and let's hope the Twins do not need the help).

Lowball the guy, be happy if he accepts, don't look back if he doesn't. Take advantage of market inefficiencies, don't spend money just for the sake of spending money.


OK, fine. But at this point how can they look us in the eye and go into the season with this lineup? Its insulting. I could be wrong, but is kubel really guaranteed $8 million if he makes the team? Thats insulting. Going into the season with the current SS situation is insulting. They have the money. And a bad team in an arctic climate is gonna have to overpay, but dont they owe it to their loyal fans? Now Sano is out. Gardy is already bad mouthing Hicks. He aint making the team. They have to do something to improve this offense.

#20 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 10,121 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:12 AM

[quote name='Marta Shearing']OK, fine. But at this point how can they look us in the eye and go into the season with this lineup? Its insulting.[/quote]

The problem with the Twins lineup is that there aren't many good position players available. Really, there's Drew and that's about it (which is why I'd like to see them pursue him). I don't blame them for not pursuing a DH-type on a multi-year deal at this point.

[quote name='Marta Shearing']I could be wrong, but is kubel really guaranteed $8 million if he makes the team? Thats insulting.[/quote]

You're very wrong. Kubel will make $2m if he's on the Opening Day roster. He can earn another $1m in incentives.

[quote name='Marta Shearing']Going into the season with the current SS situation is insulting. They have the money. And a bad team in an arctic climate is gonna have to overpay, but dont they owe it to their loyal fans? Now Sano is out. Gardy is already bad mouthing Hicks. He aint making the team. They have to do something to improve this offense.[/QUOTE]

The Twins haven't had to overpay (at least, not vastly overpay) for the free agents they've acquired in recent years (though most have been bad). There's no reason to start doing so now.