Article: Trade Glen Perkins

[tobi0040]

You forgot:

Matt Capps 2011-2012 Minnesota Twins: 11.6 million.

 

I purposefully blocked that one out!

 

Thinking more about this, to have him take a home town discount, then trading him with a selling point of a team friendly contract is very low in my book. I had a neighbor who gave another neighbor clothes her son grew out of (for the other neighbors kid to wear). A few weeks later the neighbor was having a garage sale and was selling the clothes. This kind of feels like that.

[chopper0080]

I can see we obviously don't see eye to eye on a lot of things. I suppose for your fandom trading Perkins for a prospect would be appeasing you? I'll argue any business works its best to appease their customers, which in baseball is the fans either paying to watch games on TV, in person, buying merchandise etc. so while I'm not going to bluntly just say you're wrong, we obviously disagree. I think when it comes down to it, all successful MLB teams appease their fans in one way or another. Do they make awful decisions to do so? Hopefully not. Winning appeases fans, I think we can agree on this. So is keeping Perkins helping them win more? Yes, you even said it they will only lose 90 with him and 100 without? Doesn't make a difference? Well what if next year Perkins is the difference between going .500 or losing another 90? (note, I don't think perkins is worth 10 wins by himself)

 

When does it end? Is it playoffs or bust? I guess I don't have the answer. I suppose for the future if you ain't first you're last (shake and bake) might be the best philosophy so you get higher draft picks, etc. But if we go .500 next year and we show that we treat our players well then maybe, just maybe, a top free agent chooses us over another team for the same salary. As you pointed out, winning attracts free agents so maybe Perkins and Dozier are the guys that get us to a more respectable place next year or maybe even this year to some extent.

 

Lot's of ifs buts and maybes in all scenarios. At some point a team needs to start retaining it's talented players especially those with multiple years of control at an affordable rate. Perkins and Dozier are both debatable guys (obviously). They could both bring a lot in a trade or they could be two of the veterans that lead this team back to respectability along with the young prospects and a few free agents to finish it out.

 

1. I want the Twins to win, but they have lost 90 games the past 3 and soon to be 4 seasons with Perkins. He is obviously not the difference in relation to winning and losing.

 

2. How many sellouts are happening when the Twins are losing 90 games AND they have Glen Perkins? How many jersey's are being sold BECAUSE of Glen Perkins? Hwo many fans are watching games BECAUSE Glen Perkins might close it out. The answer is a very minute fraction. The Twins drive ticket and jersey sales by winning but they survive on shared revenue and corporate sponserships, not you the tempermental fan. (royal you, not you you)

 

3. The model for success the Twins are commited to following is predicated on developing their farm system. Trading a veteran piece for multiple prospects is how they keep that system running. I may not love it as a fan, but I understand that is how they are going to compete. Glen Perkins is a nice player, but his usefulness to this club going forward is being turned into multiple prospects to develop at more vital positions. What is going to change next year that will allow Glen Perkins to save more games? We will be losing Willingham. Mauer will be older. We aren't going to sign a big name free agent. The chips are all in waiting for the farm system to produce it's stocked talent and we will not be competitive until it does. Because that timeframe is uncertain, why hold onto a stock that will only hold it's current value at best?

[nicksaviking]

Additionally in his 4 blown saves (and 1 loss that wasn't a BS) Kimbrel has given up exactly 4 ER, what does that tell us? That blown save number is probably more a cause of bad luck then anything else.

 

Yes, it does tell us it's a case of bad luck. It also tells us that that the ER is a poor indicator of whether the save will be converted. If the number of games you are going to lose with Kimbrel, Cishek, Perkins, Nathan, Rauch or whoever is only going to very between 1-5 and all indicators show that the counting stats are poor predictors for this number of blown stats, than the fancy numbers are barely better than window dressing. If blowing saves comes down to degrees of luck, the closer should naturally be expendable.

[John Bonnes]

There is some good discussion here. Please keep it civil, especially with opening or parting shots, which can be inflammatory or insulting.

[Beezer07]

You buy low, you sell high, you develop your talent and flood your farm system because most prospects will fail. You don't hold onto depreciating assets that are at their high value point when you are losing 90 games for a fourth season in a row.

 

Re: What I think TT was getting at...the perception has to do with what the players and future free agents will think. IIRC, the Marlins players who got fire-sale'd in 2012(?) to the Blue Jays were royally POed because they had just signed FA deals with the Marlins only to be traded immediately. I think it looks twice as bad when you sign a guy who takes a discount to stay near home and then trade him ASAP.

[Boom Boom]

I get the point that it's good business to shop Perkins. It sure seems to me like the goal posts have been moved back at least another season, considering Sano and Buxton have lost an entire year of development each and it would appear that neither Meyer nor May is in a position to pitch any meaningful major league innings this year.

 

Perkins says all the right things about wanting to stay here, but it doesn't look like 2015 will be the Twins' year either now. He's looking at at least one more season of being the closer of an irrelevant team. Maybe he'd like to win now.

[Dr. Evil]

We have one of the most loaded farm systems in the league. Why give up your core major league guys for more maybe's? The goal is to try and get to a solid to above average starting 9 and back it with solid pitching.

 

Our bullpen is 3rd or 4th in the league. Our starting rotation has a couple keepers on board with some good prospects getting close to moving up and rounding things out.

 

Where we are lacking is in the core starting 9. Right now you could say we have quality in Dozier, Mauer(when healthy), Morales, Suzuki, Plouffe(maybe), and a good utility guy in Escobar.

 

How does tearing down the little bit of top 9 talent we currently have make us better? We should be keeping the guys that are major league caliber and trying to build towards a solid top 9. This team has 4-5 major holes in just fielding a competitive top 9.

 

I get it with Willingham, I really do. But the rest of these guys plus a free agent and maybe one or two guys that develop in the minors gets us pretty close to being competitive. Or, maybe an Arcia or a Parmalee gets it together and figures it out.

 

I can't see tearing that down and starting at ground zero again.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Here is a quick list of the last 8 closers to sign free agent deals. Glen's $5.5M deal is below market, big time.

 

Benoit $7.75M a year

Balfour $6M a year

Nathan $10M a year

Wilson $10M a year

Broxton $7M a year

League $7M a year

Rivera $10M a year

Soriano $14M a year (8th inning guy, but signed to a closer deal)

 

The guy took less money to play here. We should not be trading him unless he approaches us and wants out.

 

FWIW, my post and your post I was responding to, that Perkins was a top 5 closer, made no mention of salary.

[tobi0040]

And regarding loyalty, are you kidding me? Perkins is getting paid millions of dollars to pitch. If the Twins believe it is best for the team for him to do so elsewhere, then they do what is best for the team. Loyalty gets you nowhere is a salary cap league other than in the cellar. As for free agents, they don't care either. Free agents care about winning, money and location. Period. It is business, plain and simple.

 

Seems like quite the generalization. He does make millions, but he would earn closer to $8-$10M as a free agent. He didn't hire Scott Boras and hit free agency because he is from here (I think his wife is too), lives here, enjoys it here, has a family here. Most players don't care...but not all.

 

And having a guy take a home-town discount, then shopping him around the league and getting a nice haul because he is under contract to such a great contract.....that seems immoral to me. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

[tobi0040]

FWIW, my post and your post I was responding to, that Perkins was a top 5 closer, made no mention of salary.

 

I just wanted to highlight, even if he was 8th or 9th best....You can find 15 closers that make more money than him.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Thinking more about this, to have him take a home town discount, then trading him with a selling point of a team friendly contract is very low in my book.

 

I'm not sure "home town discount" or "took less money to stay here" are the best descriptors for Perkins' contracts. His career MLB earnings were about $2 mil total, spread over 6 years, at the time he signed his first long-term deal, and he was 2 full seasons away from being eligible for free agency. I suspect his decision to sign for a $10 million guarantee at that point had a lot more to do with his own financial security than any favor to the Twins (although his local home certainly made the decision easier for him).

 

Then he signed his second long-term deal when he was 3 years away from free agency, and increased his guaranteed future income by nearly $15 million. Either time, I suspect Perkins could have reduced his guaranteed salary for greater no-trade protections. Again, the hometown influence is evident, but Perkins had a major financial incentive to sign that deal.

 

I don't think he's going anywhere, and I wouldn't solicit offers for him, but for the right offer I would certainly consider it (although I doubt such an offer will be made, given his non-elite standing and the lower value applied to relief pitchers or any trade targets in present-day MLB).

[old nurse]

There are those that have not so fond memories of Ron Davis. I mean, when Matt Capps drove you nuts, all you had to remember RD.

 

If the pieces back are significantly better than Perkins, like an AJ trade of a few years ago, then you have to do the deal and fix the new hole.

[tobi0040]

I'm not sure "home town discount" or "took less money to stay here" are the best descriptors for Perkins' contracts. His career MLB earnings were about $2 mil total, spread over 6 years, at the time he signed his first long-term deal, and he was 2 full seasons away from being eligible for free agency. I suspect his decision to sign for a $10 million guarantee at that point had a lot more to do with his own financial security than any favor to the Twins (although his local home certainly made the decision easier for him).

 

Then he signed his second long-term deal when he was 3 years away from free agency, and increased his guaranteed future income by nearly $15 million. Either time, I suspect Perkins could have reduced his guaranteed salary for greater no-trade protections. Again, the hometown influence is evident, but Perkins had a major financial incentive to sign that deal.

 

I don't think he's going anywhere, and I wouldn't solicit offers for him, but for the right offer I would certainly consider it (although I doubt such an offer will be made, given his non-elite standing and the lower value applied to relief pitchers or any trade targets in present-day MLB).

 

The first $2M spread accross 6 years is simply a function of MLB rookie contracts.

 

Some of the deal may reflect the fact that he was a few years from FA. I will give you that. But an elite closer that gives up 5 FA years for $27M (including the option) is leaving a ton of money on the table. All star players don't typically do that in their 3rd contract. He will make as much in 5 free agent years as Rafael Soriano made in two years (Glen actually has a better ERA as a reliever than Soriano's career ERA). I doubt he would have done that deal with any of the other teams in the league had they drafted him and he had been in the same position.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I just wanted to highlight, even if he was 8th or 9th best....You can find 15 closers that make more money than him.

 

That's true, but that doesn't say anything about his utility on this team or the likely 2015+ teams. Also, the Twins, as well as the majority of teams in MLB, do not use the FA market to get their closers.

 

Additionally, at least 3 of the guys on your list (Benoit, Wilson, and Broxton) weren't signed as closers. Also Soriano is only making $11 mil this year, with a $14 mil team option for next year.

 

And while these contracts have higher AAV than Perkins', they all have essentially equal or less guaranteed money as Perkins. (Perkins' deal is certainly better as it covers more years, but the team's financial risk in case of a career ending injury is pretty much the same as these other guys, which offsets some of the AAV advantage.)

[DaveW]

There are those that have not so fond memories of Ron Davis. I mean, when Matt Capps drove you nuts, all you had to remember RD.

 

If the pieces back are significantly better than Perkins, like an AJ trade of a few years ago, then you have to do the deal and fix the new hole.

 

The problem with the AJ trade a few years ago is that at the time it didn't exactly look like some huge no brainer obviously from the jump it was a good trade for the Twins to make since they didn't need AJ, and at the very least they got some "intriguing names back" however its important to remember at when the trade was made:

 

Liriano the centerpiece of the deal was I think the 90th rated minor leaguer the year prior to getting traded, however arm injuries basically derailed that entire season, so he wasn't exactly some high "can't miss" arm and only had reached A ball. At that point he was well outside the top 100.

 

Nathan was a 28 year old middle reliever coming off a nice year, but prior to that had very pedestrian numbers in the majors and minors. Not exactly a "can't miss guy".

 

Boof! Was a top 25 prospect two years prior to the Giants trading him, by that point though still a "solid prospect" had fallen off the top 100 map completely and his numbers/stuff projected to be a back end guy at best.

 

Luckily the Twins hit lightning in a bottle with both Liriano and Nathan, if the Twins were to entertain a package for Perkins it would have to start with at least one can't miss player. It couldn't be two guys with no track records or lightning in a bottle types.

 

Now...if we are talking about a package for Willingham/Suzuki/Morales...then a lightning in a bottle type (see: Liriano) would make more sense.

[DaveW]

Also, the Twins, as well as the majority of teams in MLB, do not use the FA market to get their closers.

 

 

No they just overpay for them on the trade market, while that doesn't make them a "lone wolf" it puts them in some undesirable company.

[Wookiee of the Year]

This is a great debate. Fun to see such strong opinions on both sides.

 

I wouldn't trade him.

 

He agreed to a very team friendly long term deal in order to stay in Minnesota. He is signed under very good terms until potentially 2018, when the Twins very much should be world series contenders by then. (I think they compete in 2015 and have a big run from 2015-2018)

 

Unless the return is insane (top flight SS or ace type pitcher) I think you absolutely hold onto him. Trading him the same year after he took a team friendly deal in order to stay in Minnesota would look really bad on the org and could hurt them on signing such deals in the future. Glen clearly likes/wants to be here, the Twins clearly like having him on the club. Just keep him. The farm system is deep enough, at some point you need talent on the major league roster as well otherwise you turn into the 1990-2012 version of the KC Royals.

I agree with this, along with halfchest's tobi0040's, and TheLeviathan's comments.

 

Last July/August, I was banging the drum for the Twins to trade Perkins. I believed then (and still believe) there's a good chance that by the time the Twins are in the postseason, Perkins will no longer be an MLB closer.

 

However, he signed a team-friendly contract this spring. It was billed as such at the time and the dollar figures bear that out. We're paying him at a rate that even if he's no longer closing and just a pretty decent bullpen arm, the pay is reasonable.

 

I'm continually disappointed major leaguers don't show more inclination to sign deals with teams they want to play for or in locations they want to be rather than always chasing the top paycheck. Maybe part of that is knowing they can be traded at anytime, anyway, so why take a discount if you don't actually know where you'll be playing? The salary is the only part of the contract that's guaranteed.

 

So when a player does explicitly sign a team-friendly deal, I want to reward that. Even if it doesn't make the best baseball sense in the short-term, it sends an important message about a franchise--both to MLB players and to fans.

[old nurse]

The problem with the AJ trade a few years ago is that at the time it didn't exactly look like some huge no brainer obviously from the jump it was a good trade for the Twins to make since they didn't need AJ, and at the very least they got some "intriguing names back" however its important to remember at when the trade was made:

 

Liriano the centerpiece of the deal was I think the 90th rated minor leaguer the year prior to getting traded, however arm injuries basically derailed that entire season, so he wasn't exactly some high "can't miss" arm and only had reached A ball. At that point he was well outside the top 100.

 

Nathan was a 28 year old middle reliever coming off a nice year, but prior to that had very pedestrian numbers in the majors and minors. Not exactly a "can't miss guy".

 

Boof! Was a top 25 prospect two years prior to the Giants trading him, by that point though still a "solid prospect" had fallen off the top 100 map completely and his numbers/stuff projected to be a back end guy at best.

 

Luckily the Twins hit lightning in a bottle with both Liriano and Nathan, if the Twins were to entertain a package for Perkins it would have to start with at least one can't miss player. It couldn't be two guys with no track records or lightning in a bottle types.

 

Now...if we are talking about a package for Willingham/Suzuki/Morales...then a lightning in a bottle type (see: Liriano) would make more sense.

 

I should have made it clearer that the trade should be done for the prospects who make it to the major leagues. You are correct in what anyone else should bring back is lightning in a bottle. The minors are filled with c prospects that should be available.

[Dilligaf69]

The Twins should sell from surplus to solve deficiencies. Which relief pitcher, here or in Rochester or New Britain, has Perkin's ceiling? We don't have a surplus of this caliber of reliever.

 

I agree!

[Otto von Ballpark]

The first $2M spread accross 6 years is simply a function of MLB rookie contracts.

 

Some of the deal may reflect the fact that he was a few years from FA. I will give you that. But an elite closer that gives up 5 FA years for $27M (including the option) is leaving a ton of money on the table. All star players don't typically do that in their 3rd contract. He will make as much in 5 free agent years as Rafael Soriano made in two years (Glen actually has a better ERA as a reliever than Soriano's career ERA). I doubt he would have done that deal with any of the other teams in the league had they drafted him and he had been in the same position.

 

I know why Perkins' $2 mil was spread over 6 years -- I was just trying to illustrate he had essentially made the league minimum prior to that point. He had a huge immediate financial incentive to sign for $10 million guaranteed at the time, home town team or no.

 

I also dispute the notion that Perkins is "elite". He's ranked 8 or 9 by fWAR which is very good, but his performance has been closer to relacement or average than the very best. In 2013, Perkin's fWAR (1.7) was roughly as close to leader Koji Uehara (3.3) as it was 118th ranked Josh Roenicke (-0.1), or as close to #3 ranked Nathan (2.5) as #50 ranked Jared Burton (0.9). And even if you do consider that elite, relief pitching limits the potential value of an "elite" player more than any other position. (I will say, Perkins has seemingly stepped up his game in 2014, in terms of fWAR if not yet in rank, although even if this improvement holds, it came AFTER his signed his most recent long-term deal.)

 

And I certainly don't doubt that his local home made these decisions easier for Perkins, and pretty much prompted him to seek his most recent deal, but it's not as if he ever had more money on the table, or even the prospect of more money on the table in the very near future. He was 2-3 years away just from the chance at more money both times; avoiding the risk of becoming another Gregg Olson (injured/collapsed before full FA) was probably very significant to Perkins.

[tobi0040]

That's true, but that doesn't say anything about his utility on this team or the likely 2015+ teams. Also, the Twins, as well as the majority of teams in MLB, do not use the FA market to get their closers.

 

Additionally, at least 3 of the guys on your list (Benoit, Wilson, and Broxton) weren't signed as closers. Also Soriano is only making $11 mil this year, with a $14 mil team option for next year.

 

And while these contracts have higher AAV than Perkins', they all have essentially equal or less guaranteed money as Perkins. (Perkins' deal is certainly better as it covers more years, but the team's financial risk in case of a career ending injury is pretty much the same as these other guys, which offsets some of the AAV advantage.)

 

The fact that set up guys make more than Perkins, I think showcases his value more. I just think in a year or two if we need a closer we aren't going to pay the money required to get one. Last time that led to the Capps trade.

 

But the broader point that several have made is that he did leave money on the table. So it seems wrong to me to move him and getting more than we otherwise would because he is due set up type money.

[Dilligaf69]

I don't see a large value difference between Perkins today and Perkins 16 months from now, provided he stays healthy.

 

I say hold on to Perkins until more information is available. If the Twins magically compete next season (or show signs they will compete in 2016), they'll regret having traded their best reliever, a Minnesota native under a team-friendly contract.

 

I agree they would get some prospects but no real mlb players that could help them now, relievers/closers, even those of Perkins value likely won't net a starting SS/OF or starter as a previous poster suggested. He's basically costing you nothing. If he was making $12 mil per hr then yes consider trading him but he's making half that and will still have as much value a yr or two from no. Yes there is risk of injury but even then his salary risk is minimal.

[jokin]

. He's basically costing you nothing. If he was making $12 mil per hr then yes consider trading him but he's making half that and will still have as much value a yr or two from no. Yes there is risk of injury but even then his salary risk is minimal.

 

Which in turn, enhances his value to certain prospective teams with a good potential longer-term fit, when they are comparing all potential available RPs.

[tobi0040]

I know why Perkins' $2 mil was spread over 6 years -- I was just trying to illustrate he had essentially made the league minimum prior to that point. He had a huge immediate financial incentive to sign for $10 million guaranteed at the time, home town team or no.

 

I also dispute the notion that Perkins is "elite". He's ranked 8 or 9 by fWAR which is very good, but his performance has been closer to relacement or average than the very best. In 2013, Perkin's fWAR (1.7) was roughly as close to leader Koji Uehara (3.3) as it was 118th ranked Josh Roenicke (-0.1), or as close to #3 ranked Nathan (2.5) as #50 ranked Jared Burton (0.9). And even if you do consider that elite, relief pitching limits the potential value of an "elite" player more than any other position. (I will say, Perkins has seemingly stepped up his game in 2014, in terms of fWAR if not yet in rank, although even if this improvement holds, it came AFTER his signed his most recent long-term deal.)

 

And I certainly don't doubt that his local home made these decisions easier for Perkins, and pretty much prompted him to seek his most recent deal, but it's not as if he ever had more money on the table, or even the prospect of more money on the table in the very near future. He was 2-3 years away just from the chance at more money both times; avoiding the risk of becoming another Gregg Olson (injured/collapsed before full FA) was probably very significant to Perkins.

 

 

Are saves factored into the fwar calculation? It appears to me Glen could have 20-30 more saves from 2012 to 2014 on a better team.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=rel&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

[Twins Fan From Afar]

So many good, passionate comments. Thanks for reading.

A few thoughts:

 

1) There is a PR risk here with moving Perkins so close to this contract starting. Maybe it does send a negative message to free agents? That being said, the Red Sox moved Adrian Gonzalez in the infancy of his deal, and I didn't read much about that affecting their image. Also, they won the World Series the next season, and I'm sure they had to sign some guys to do that. Winning doesn't solve everything, but as long as guys are paid market rate (or a little better), I don't see that as a major issue.

 

2) Yes, I'm not exactly convinced the 2015 Twins are going to be a whole lot better. Sano/Buxton/Meyer/May are better prospects than Gibson/Arcia/Dozier, but it's worth noting that, when they do get promoted, it's not as if all these up-and-coming stars are going to make immediate positive impacts on the big club. I mean, Buxton (yes, still the best or second best prospect in baseball) hasn't even made the highest jump in the minors yet -- High-A to AA -- so we can't just expect immediate greatness from 5 studs next season. In fact, don't be surprised if 1 or more have to go back, even if just for a short time, for more seasoning.

 

3) There's no doubt Perkins left money on the table. How much, I'm not sure. But lots. If he wanted an absolute guarantee, he should have negotiated a more robust, or even full, trade clause. I'm positive that he tried, because a 3-team clause is basically worthless: it just means he doesn't want to work at the Trop or have to deal with New York traffic or something. I'm sure Perkins asked for a full clause, but the fact that the end number is 3 tells me that the team wanted the flexibility to move him at some point (not now, of course).

[TheLeviathan]

And then tell me: at AAA and AA, who represents a "surplus" of Perkin's caliber, and not Burton's? Who's got a shut-down ceiling? Your list includes some pretty solid prospects: Tonkin, Achter, Pressly, Ibarra, Trevor May (not a mistake here), Olivares, Salcedo, Cole Johnson, Mathhew Summers, Melotakis.... I don't see Perkins as especially fungible.

 

Here's the thing about relievers - they are easily the least predictable position for success. Guys fluctuate rapidly (in part due to how easy it is in limited innings to see swings) but also because their career arcs are the most erratic.

 

Take the man you're talking about - he was a Slowey-esque pariah who was within an eyelash of being cut to an All-Star closer. Had someone asked the same question circa 2006 you would've never put Perkins on this list and yet here we are.

 

Again I'm not an advocate of moving him, but "there is no clear cut successor" is not a good argument in regards to relievers.

[Thrylos]

The Twins should sell from surplus to solve deficiencies. Which relief pitcher, here or in Rochester or New Britain, has Perkin's ceiling? We don't have a surplus of this caliber of reliever.

 

Doesn't have to be a relief pitcher (or even with the Twins or Rochester or New Britain). If you remember, Perkins was a failed starter and a heartbeat and a grievance away to be what Diamond is today. Joe Nathan was a failed starter and was the throw in in that trade... Who knows what Kris Johnson (for example, just throwing a name) can do as a closer? I am certain that (at least) 3 AAA & AA pitchers (Meyer, May & Berrios) have higher ceilings than Perkins

[naobermiller]

Here's my one concern about Perkins (it's horribly formatted, but it's Season/Saves/4Seam Velocity/2Seam Velocity in that order

 

Season 4-seam Velocity 2Seam Velocity

2011 (2 Svs) 93.8 94.0

2012 (16) 95.2 94.4

2013 (36) 95.2 94.4

2014 (23) 93.4 93.0

 

This may be an aberration, maybe he wasn't 100% healthy coming into the year, and maybe it will pick back up. But 2 pitch relievers who rely on a Fastball/Hard Slider combo don't always fare well when they start losing velocity.

 

That being said, Perkins will have trade value next year as well, since his contract will still be team friendly (2 extra years of control plus a team option). I hope he stays in Minnesota, as I think 2015/2016 competitive dates for the Twins are very real. Just get a little concerned about looking back and saying "I wish we had traded him then" (a la Willingham)

[Thrylos]

Seems like quite the generalization. He does make millions, but he would earn closer to $8-$10M as a free agent. He didn't hire Scott Boras and hit free agency because he is from here (I think his wife is too), lives here, enjoys it here, has a family here. Most players don't care...but not all.

 

And having a guy take a home-town discount, then shopping him around the league and getting a nice haul because he is under contract to such a great contract.....that seems immoral to me. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

 

immoral?

 

More or less immoral than talking to the newspapers about how bad a player a rookie teammate of yours, who just got demoted, is, if you are the player's union representative?

 

Nothing to do with morality.

[naobermiller]

immoral?

 

More or less immoral than talking to the newspapers about how bad a player a rookie teammate of yours, who just got demoted, is, if you are the player's union representative?

 

Nothing to do with morality.

 

Perkins throwing Pinto under the bus like that was a pretty low brow move.

 

"You know, Josmil is a young guy with a lot of potential who's still learning some of the subtleties of the game at the major league level. I can't wait to see him when he puts it all together"

 

You mention the fact that he's still working on some stuff, but you still lift him up. Much simpler