How Overpaid is Joe Mauer?

[jokin]

---I think we have a bit of a vocabulary problem here.

 

1) "Melodramatic and silly" is a perfectly apt description of your claim that Mauer's contract "paralyzes" the Twins ability to compete for 8 years. "Hamper" might be a reasonable characterization. But "paralyzes" is over the top ridiculous. The Twins payroll was $112 mil in 2011 and $94 mil entering this year. So they've been spending between $70 and $90 million on payroll outside of Mauer. There are teams in the league that have managed to compete on payolls in that range alone, or even less in Tampa's case. So the exact thing you're saying the Twins are "paralyzed" from doing until 2018 has already been done. If Tampa can compete in the AL East with a $64 million payroll, then there is absolutely no reason at all the Twins can't compete in the AL Central with a payroll of $71 million plus Mauer.

 

2) For all of your lofty talk about "facts", much of your argument is based on Mauer's assumed production for the remainder of his contract. It is not a fact that he will be no more productive in the coming years than he is this season. It is an assumption or projection, but it is not a fact.

 

 

I think we have a bit of a "inability to comprehend the situation" problem here. I also note you failed to acknowledge or refute certain parts of my refutation of your counterpoints, I am reluctantly forced to assume that you therefore agree that they were largely irrefutable. For the record on your point #2, I have made no assumptions or projections about how Mauer's contract will play out, I don't know- and more importantly- the Twins don't know- but no one denies things have gone from bad- to worse- to uncertain-...and that is where the paralysis kicks in. I think most commenters agree though, that the physical demands at his position strongly suggest that we have likely seen his most productive seasons behind him (see Nick Nelson's latest blog post for further evidence). I haven't seen or heard anyone argue that Joe Mauer will be having a Carlton Fisk- or Ivan Rodriguez-type career ahead of him- his numerous past injuries suggest exactly the opposite.

 

1) You calling my remarks "melodramatic and silly" does not make them such and you fail to demonstrate that they were. Tampa Bay has done things right because their market dictates this is what they must do to survive (see Highabove's post, because the Twins haven't duplicated this model, as HA says: "payroll will matter"). The Twins, their 3 million plus attendance, and in a new ballpark, were transitioning from the mid-size market small-payroll model to the "big-time" and had done a horrible job in the interim in terms of drafting, trading, signing and developing talent, while overpaying to retain current talent (Mauer obviously, but many others, all the way down to Blackburn and Casilla)

 

Here's a demonstrable scenario that shows the Twins are paralyzed by Mauer's contract:

 

2): You acknowledge that the Twins payroll was $112 mil in 2011 and $94 mil this year. This is strong evidence that the Twins recognized they would not be able to compete in 2012 (what with nearly 25% of their payroll holding a no-trade contract for a $23 million roster spot and a huge cloud of uncertainty about Mauer's ability to resume previous production numbers). If the Twins were confident that he would come roaring back, they could have gone in full "win-now" mode, to which, it is highly arguable that the Twins could have gone all-in in the free agent market and gone from $94 mil to a $120 mil payroll. Let's say they were even conservative with how much money they wanted to spend, they still could have signed 3 very good-to-decent FA starters who all inked 1-Year deals in the off-season- Edwin Jackson ($10.96 mil), Eric Bedard ($4.5 mil) and Paul Maholm ($4.25 mil). Their combined salaries come to $19.71 million. Even if the Twins "overpaid" this group to a combined $21 million, that still would have put the payroll at $115 million. Now, subtract the horrible contract to Jason Marquis ($3 mil) and the Twins would now be back to the exact payroll they had in 2011!!!($115 mil-$3mil= $112 mil). But wait, that still leaves the Twins with Pavano, Baker, Blackburn and Liriano. It has been obvious that Liriano should have been properly showcased and dealt previously to this year and he would have been traded in the offseason, regardless. That takes Liriano's contract off the books ($5.5 mil). The Twins should have known about Baker's arm problems and didn't, but let's say they would have kept the other three, designated Baker and Pavano as starters and put Blackburn in the bullpen. That still reduces the payroll to $106.5 mil. I get the PR disaster delayed and the long-term plan in mind for the reasons for re-signing Capps at $4.5 mil. I would have sent him on his way, reducing the payroll to $102 mil. If the Twins were certain of Mauer bouncing back, Joe Nathan is retained, moving the payroll up to $109 mil. This would leave more than enough room to re-sign either Cuddyer or Kubel (the logical choice for me is Kubel, but retaining Cuddyer would still bring the payroll in under $120 mil), AND, remember, we already made room to sign Willingham, Carroll and Doumit under the $120 mil cap and/or fill at least one of the holes at 3B and 2B by trading Liriano/Valencia/Casilla/1 excess SP/prospect(s).

 

This is what a team would do if it wasn't paralyzed.....

[Riverbrian]

The Twins are not paralyzed by Joe's contract. They were punched in the head by it.

 

The value of the contract is pretty much set by what other people would pay. Coming off 2009 others would have paid.

 

Its a perfect storm... The state of Minnesota just built a brand new stadium for the Pohlads to pull revenue from. Hometown hero has a year for the ages and looked like he became what the scouts projected he could be. A hitter with power.

 

Another year like that in 2010... The wolves would be knocking at the door promising Joe and Shapiro all kinds of things not just tempting our boy away but ripping him from our arms like an F5 tornado.

 

The Twins promised Minnesotans that they would INVEST... Letting hometown guy walk after year one would be a PR nightmare. Extension a month before the doors opened to Target Field was a conclusion that both Einstein and Lennie Small and most everyone in between would have come to. Signing Mauer just before the turnstiles turn is BIG MO.

 

I blame Bill Smith for a lot of things... Or at least blame Bill Smith and the people surrounding Bill Smith for the current state of the franchise. They made a boatload of mistakes. The Joe Mauer contract is not something I blame them for.

 

It was a punch in the head... Not a broken spine. "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry".

 

Allow me to quote Mike Tyson who said. "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth". Some of the truest words ever spoken. As Twins fans we get to see what happens with the plan now. I hope to God that Jason Marquis was not the plan.

[Alex]

@Jokin,

 

Blaming decisions in free agency and direction of the team on Mauer's contract, or the uncertainty of his performance, is, frankly, absurd. Any front office that sets their goals for an entire season around one player would be labeled as idiotic.

 

It's true that Mauer's contract is going to limit future FA and that how well Mauer would bounce back was/is questionable. However, he was one of many question marks and has been more positive than some. Here they are:

 

1. Morneau: Coming off multiple injuries, what form could he return to? So far, the answer has not been good.

2. Valencia: Could he regain 2010 form or even just be better than last year? So far, he's been worse, and hopefully he'll be back up and perform better sometime soon, but I doubt it.

3. The Entire Starting Pitching Staff: Nick Nelson again does a great job of breaking this down, but as he mentioned, they've all come up "tails." (http://www.twinsdaily.com/entry.php?41-Dangerous-Gambles-in-the-Rotation)

 

 

If you want to argue that the Twins cut payroll due to all these question marks and didn't plan to win-it-all based on that I'd be fine with that, but hypothesizing that their lack of aggressiveness in FA was simply due to questions about Mauer is ridiculous, and lacks evidence. I'd further argue, though, that the Twins track record of FA shows that they have never been aggressive, especially with starting pitching. Maybe that will change, but I don't think it will under the current leadership, and I think it has less to do with Mauer that with the organizational philosophy.

[Shane Wahl]

I haven't read everything in this thread, but has anyone mentioned that the true paralyzing situation for the Twins is Justin Morneau and his contract? A healthy Justin Morneau causes a chain reaction beyond what he alone brings in WAR. The Twins have had to alter everything the past two years and this year it contributed (with Willingham's unwillingness to make a simple corner OF switch) to a total roster FARCE. The 1B/DH/RF situation outside of the past two weeks of Ryan Doumit has been an absurdity. Not Monty Python ha-ha absurdity, but painful absurdity . . . Clete Thomas signing and making a regular out of player who had not a single plate appearance in AAA. And more.

 

Furthermore, aside from the big two contracts, the Twins have a problem with paying smallish to medium sized contracts to players that suck. This is historical true, but historically it was more like 4-5 $2-3 million contracts for a total of $8-15 million (still a lot, and still money to be spent on a combination of replacement players and a star). Now it is Pavano, Baker, Liriano, Blackburn, and Capps (to a lesser extent). That's something like $30 million. That is a much greater problem than Joe Mauer. They could (and slowly are) replace each of those 4 starters with replacement players from the minors for probably the same or more wins (Diamond, Walters, Hendriks, DeVries).

[Alex]

@ shanewahl, I agree and I did mention it, but those are great points about the chain reaction in the roster. He obviously doesn't get the boos and vitriol because his contract is smaller and for whatever reason people think Mauer missing playtime last year was less legitimate than Morneau's.

 

One other point: Vernon Wells contract did not paralyze the Angels...., though they could be looking at two horrid contracts...

[Klochner]

Well said. It's worth pointing out to all the OPS hounds that getting on base at a .400 clip is significantly more valuable than slugging .400. Mauer hasn't been top tier this season, but it's not like he hasn't been productive. To be fair, 4.5 WAR is pretty awesome. It'd almost surely place him among the top three or four catchers in baseball.

[Dilligaf69]

For me the Joe Mauer argument has little bearing on our situation. The Twins had to sign him...HAD to. It was market value coming off an MVP season while moving into a new ballpark. it had to happen and it did. I agree with shanewahl that Justin's contract which only has on yr left and all the smaller contract to below avg players hurts more. Now the Puljos contract will be an albatross for the LAA but that's a different story.

[StormJH1]

I agree, and this was the point. It should be much easier to sign/develop even average hitters at these positions, but the Twins haven't done a good job of that. You shouldn't need to spend big money to get average players at these positions and they are still excellent hitters. The difference between them and spending a ton of money at those positions is of smaller gain than at a position like catcher...

 

Additionally, there are two further problems with your argument. One, we should have at least 1B filled with an excellent hitter, but that's easily a worse contract than the one discussed here. (Note: I'm not bashing Morneau, here, but the point seems obvious).

 

The other problem is the simple premise that Mauer's not valuable in terms of positional scarcity due to the fact that he doesn't have players around him. As mentioned, that's up to the Twins, not Mauer. The fact that they have haven't been able to produce/draft/accquire another even average hitter at RF is an organizational issue. The fact that they cut $15 from their payroll is an organizational issue. You cannot blame Mauer's contract for their inability or unwillingness to produce other even average talent or spend some more money in FA. It just isn't true.

We're sort of arguing two different things, so I'm not saying you're wrong. But I absolutely did not say that Mauer's positional scarcity couldn't have value to other teams in the right situation. Of course it could.

 

But it doesn't for the Twins, and that's the entire point. It's safe assume that the Twins can afford only one contract in the $20-25 million range, another one or two contracts in the $10-15 million range (Morneau is one of them, we had Nathan last year but axed him...and Cuddy/Kubel to get down to the $100 million level). You're going to tell me that if you had one player to spend that much money on, you'd rather spend that same amount of money on Mauer instead of Fielder, Cabrera, Pujols, Texiera, Braun, etc. etc....simply because Mauer happens to play catcher (sometimes)? That makes no sense. If you can only have one guy at that price, it had better be an impact bat in the middle of the lineup. Otherwise, you need your $10 million guy (or some $5 million guy or prospect) to suddenly become the 30 HR/100 RBI guy, and that's hard to do.

 

The real kicker, of course, is that Mauer was a better producer when we paid him less money. This was predictable, of course, but it doesn't change the reality that keeping Mauer meant that we had to increase the overall budget by about 15 million dollars, without any type of "upgrade" to the team.

 

[TABLE=class: stats_table, width: 1]

2004

21

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$300,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text]4/7/04 AP[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2005

22

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$325,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TR=class: hl, bgcolor: #FFFFAA !important]

2006

23

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$400,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[/TR]

2007

24

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$3,750,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2008

25

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$6,250,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2009

26

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$10,500,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2010

27

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$12,500,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2011

28

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TR=class: partial_table blank_table, bgcolor: #DADCDE]

[/TD]

[/TR]

2012

29

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2013

30

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2014

31

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2015

32

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2016

33

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2017

34

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000[/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

[TD=class: small_text][/TD]

2018

35

Minnesota Twins

[TD=align: right]$23,000,000

 

[/TD]

[/TABLE]

[StormJH1]

For me the Joe Mauer argument has little bearing on our situation. The Twins had to sign him...HAD to. It was market value coming off an MVP season while moving into a new ballpark. it had to happen and it did. I agree with shanewahl that Justin's contract which only has on yr left and all the smaller contract to below avg players hurts more. Now the Puljos contract will be an albatross for the LAA but that's a different story.

Right, but that's the "non-baseball" argument for why Mauer is valuable. Mauer has intrinsic value to the Twins as a "business" because he has single-handedly changed the way this team is perceived. This team routinely drew 20,000 to 25,000 fans a game during season where they were, frankly, pretty mediocre, and before 2010, they did it in one of the crappiest baseball facilities in MLB. A HUGE part of this was the local celebrity appeal of a good-looking, likable hometown product with star potential. Mauer was the archetype for a team identity that was scrappy, mostly white, and non-threatening. If this team put up the exact numbers and wins each season, but with no Mauer, a Cuban shortstop, and a bunch of guys who smile less often (but do their jobs), you lose about 5,000 to 10,000 casual fans wearing pink J-shirts and fake sideburns every night. I'm not exaggerating.

 

That's the business part of it, and as something more than a casual fan, I accept it (whether I like it or not). Which is why I also "accepted" the Mauer deal in 2010, even though the baseball part of me knew it couldn't be a good idea.

[Guest USAFChief]

I think its doubtful at best that Mauer is singlehandedly responsible for 5000 to 10000 fans per night.

[Shane Wahl]

We're sort of arguing two different things, so I'm not saying you're wrong. But I absolutely did not say that Mauer's positional scarcity couldn't have value to other teams in the right situation. Of course it could.

 

But it doesn't for the Twins, and that's the entire point. It's safe assume that the Twins can afford only one contract in the $20-25 million range, another one or two contracts in the $10-15 million range (Morneau is one of them, we had Nathan last year but axed him...and Cuddy/Kubel to get down to the $100 million level). You're going to tell me that if you had one player to spend that much money on, you'd rather spend that same amount of money on Mauer instead of Fielder, Cabrera, Pujols, Texiera, Braun, etc. etc....simply because Mauer happens to play catcher (sometimes)? That makes no sense. If you can only have one guy at that price, it had better be an impact bat in the middle of the lineup. Otherwise, you need your $10 million guy (or some $5 million guy or prospect) to suddenly become the 30 HR/100 RBI guy, and that's hard to do.

 

First, they can afford 2 $20 million players even at $100 million after this year, and especially after Morneau's contract is gone.

Second, yeah I would choose those guys you mention before Mauer, but Fielder and Butera is not that much greater than Mauer and Jim Thome, or some good DH/1B option. The positional scarcity thing is abstract until you actually start putting players in. Yeah, a Fielder-Butera duo compared to a Mauer-Parmelee duo favors the first pair, but Mauer and a healthy Morneau? Without crunching numbers, I am guessing the latter pair.

[TwinsDohK]

http://stobblog.com/2012/05/mlb-mega-deals-mauer-not-alone-in-slagging-production-post-contract/

 

Good info here, showing at least Mauer isn't the only guy who has struggled or produced less after their big contract...issue is that he seems to have dropped off more than any of the other top 10 earners in the MLB.

[Shane Wahl]

He dropped off for one injury-plagued year and 6 weeks into the following season while probably playing a few too many games. Perspective is needed.

[Alex]

You're going to tell me that if you had one player to spend that much money on, you'd rather spend that same amount of money on Mauer instead of Fielder, Cabrera, Pujols, Texiera, Braun, etc. etc....simply because Mauer happens to play catcher (sometimes)? That makes no sense. If you can only have one guy at that price, it had better be an impact bat in the middle of the lineup. Otherwise, you need your $10 million guy (or some $5 million guy or prospect) to suddenly become the 30 HR/100 RBI guy, and that's hard to do.

This is the essence of value. My answer is likely a yes, assuming that you're getting a closer to ideal Mauer, who is catching more than he is now and hitting more like expected when his contract was signed.

 

Hopefully, the difference in hitting production between a top hitting C and average C is > the difference in hitting production between a top hitting 1B and an average one. You don't need to hope a $5M-$10M player hits 30HR/100 RBI (if those are the only numbers that concern you) because the net gain overall should be better.

 

A player like Willingham is an excellent example of this. He plays a corner outfield position, hit 4 fewer HR than Braun and had 14 fewer RBI on a much worse team. Willingham is getting $7M this year. Braun signed an extension that averages over $21M a year (which I think includes the bonus). Now, Braun did a lot of other things better, too, but I chose to use HR and RBI since those are the stats you quoted. I'm not saying I'd rather have Willingham than Braun, but you can see the difference is much smaller there than between a top hitting catcher last year, Napoli, and an average hitting catcher like Lucroy.

 

So, if I took Willingham and Napoli and you took Braun and Lucroy, I think I come out ahead.

 

I should note that by themselves HR and RBI just don't matter all that much to me. There are so many things a hitter can do besides hitting a HR that add value (or take it away) while RBI tend to be a lot about chance and the hitters ahead in the order.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

I think the more interesting topic is whether we are at the beginning of the end of the long term high dollar contract. Mauer and Pujols might be exhibits 1 and 2 of why long term, high dollar contracts may quickly become a thing of the past. It will also be interesting to watch Fielder's performance over the life of his deal. While Fielder has been fine - you have to wonder about what his performance will look like in the later years. His dad, who as we all recall had a similar physical traits as Prince only had about 8 productive years total in his career. If at the end of the year we look at these three deals and see what the performance has been and then look at Josh Hamilton - it will be interesting to see if he gets a deal that approaches that of these 3 guys.

[twinsnorth49]

I think the more interesting topic is whether we are at the beginning of the end of the long term high dollar contract. Mauer and Pujols might be exhibits 1 and 2 of why long term, high dollar contracts may quickly become a thing of the past. It will also be interesting to watch Fielder's performance over the life of his deal. While Fielder has been fine - you have to wonder about what his performance will look like in the later years. His dad, who as we all recall had a similar physical traits as Prince only had about 8 productive years total in his career. If at the end of the year we look at these three deals and see what the performance has been and then look at Josh Hamilton - it will be interesting to see if he gets a deal that approaches that of these 3 guys.

 

Long term, high dollar deals rarely, if ever, pay for themselves with on field performance. I've said many times that these contracts are based on past performance and are usually never repeated, especially over the length of time any of them are for. The contacts for these type of players keep fans in the seats and sometimes provide the edge to win in the short-term, which if the team does the contract will be well worth it from all of the residual benefits winning provides.

 

Like it or not, it's the buying public that provides the motivation for these types of contracts but are the first to blame ownership when they, quite expectedly don't live up to the hype.

[one_eyed_jack]

I think we have a bit of a "inability to comprehend the situation" problem here. I also note you failed to acknowledge or refute certain parts of my refutation of your counterpoints, I am reluctantly forced to assume that you therefore agree that they were largely irrefutable. For the record on your point #2, I have made no assumptions or projections about how Mauer's contract will play out, I don't know- and more importantly- the Twins don't know- but no one denies things have gone from bad- to worse- to uncertain-...and that is where the paralysis kicks in. I think most commenters agree though, that the physical demands at his position strongly suggest that we have likely seen his most productive seasons behind him (see Nick Nelson's latest blog post for further evidence). I haven't seen or heard anyone argue that Joe Mauer will be having a Carlton Fisk- or Ivan Rodriguez-type career ahead of him- his numerous past injuries suggest exactly the opposite.

 

1) You calling my remarks "melodramatic and silly" does not make them such and you fail to demonstrate that they were. Tampa Bay has done things right because their market dictates this is what they must do to survive (see Highabove's post, because the Twins haven't duplicated this model, as HA says: "payroll will matter"). The Twins, their 3 million plus attendance, and in a new ballpark, were transitioning from the mid-size market small-payroll model to the "big-time" and had done a horrible job in the interim in terms of drafting, trading, signing and developing talent, while overpaying to retain current talent (Mauer obviously, but many others, all the way down to Blackburn and Casilla)

 

Here's a demonstrable scenario that shows the Twins are paralyzed by Mauer's contract:

 

2): You acknowledge that the Twins payroll was $112 mil in 2011 and $94 mil this year. This is strong evidence that the Twins recognized they would not be able to compete in 2012 (what with nearly 25% of their payroll holding a no-trade contract for a $23 million roster spot and a huge cloud of uncertainty about Mauer's ability to resume previous production numbers). If the Twins were confident that he would come roaring back, they could have gone in full "win-now" mode, to which, it is highly arguable that the Twins could have gone all-in in the free agent market and gone from $94 mil to a $120 mil payroll. Let's say they were even conservative with how much money they wanted to spend, they still could have signed 3 very good-to-decent FA starters who all inked 1-Year deals in the off-season- Edwin Jackson ($10.96 mil), Eric Bedard ($4.5 mil) and Paul Maholm ($4.25 mil). Their combined salaries come to $19.71 million. Even if the Twins "overpaid" this group to a combined $21 million, that still would have put the payroll at $115 million. Now, subtract the horrible contract to Jason Marquis ($3 mil) and the Twins would now be back to the exact payroll they had in 2011!!!($115 mil-$3mil= $112 mil). But wait, that still leaves the Twins with Pavano, Baker, Blackburn and Liriano. It has been obvious that Liriano should have been properly showcased and dealt previously to this year and he would have been traded in the offseason, regardless. That takes Liriano's contract off the books ($5.5 mil). The Twins should have known about Baker's arm problems and didn't, but let's say they would have kept the other three, designated Baker and Pavano as starters and put Blackburn in the bullpen. That still reduces the payroll to $106.5 mil. I get the PR disaster delayed and the long-term plan in mind for the reasons for re-signing Capps at $4.5 mil. I would have sent him on his way, reducing the payroll to $102 mil. If the Twins were certain of Mauer bouncing back, Joe Nathan is retained, moving the payroll up to $109 mil. This would leave more than enough room to re-sign either Cuddyer or Kubel (the logical choice for me is Kubel, but retaining Cuddyer would still bring the payroll in under $120 mil), AND, remember, we already made room to sign Willingham, Carroll and Doumit under the $120 mil cap and/or fill at least one of the holes at 3B and 2B by trading Liriano/Valencia/Casilla/1 excess SP/prospect(s).

 

This is what a team would do if it wasn't paralyzed.....

 

1) This was good for chuckles. Most of your "refutations" were either tangential if not wholly irrelevant the claim at hand or simply non-sequiturs (e.g. when I cited the Giants and Zito's contract as a counterexample and your "refutation" was basically "yeah, well, that's different because Zito is a starting pitcher"), and thus did not merit further response or discussion. So no, it wasn't because I agreed with them.

 

2) The rest of your incoherent rant about what would, could and should have happened if Mauer had performed differently is pure speculation, the liberal use of bolding and underlining notwithstanding.

 

3) You have not even attempted to explain the part of your claim most worthy of the "melodramatic and silly" label, which is that Mauer's contract "paralyzes" the Twins until 2018. There is no reason a single contract, no matter how bad, paralyze for 6 years. Such a claim simply has no basis in facts or logic. It reflects the mentality of a child who fails in his first attempt at something and starts whining about how he'll never be able to do it.

[twinzgrl]

No one has the guts to say it so I will: Mauer built a career year in the HR category 100% via HGH/Roids just like Brady Anderson and many others before him. Joe is no dummy so he quit the stuff right after signing the contract to preserve his body and to have a nice life after baseball.

 

Now our favorite team is left with a 23 million dollar Casey Kotchman for the next 8 years. Yipeee!!

 

Bad for us........Great for Joe.

SERIOUSLY? Where did you get this information? Doesn't MLB have pretty tight drug testing? I don't believe for one second that Joe did drugs.

[Mike Sixel]

I think its doubtful at best that Mauer is singlehandedly responsible for 5000 to 10000 fans per night.

THIS for sure.

[one_eyed_jack]

Nope, I live in a place called Reality.....You should visit some time!

---Please tell me you didn't just classify your "Mauer took steroids" claim as "reality".

[jokin]

1) This was good for chuckles. Most of your "refutations" were either tangential if not wholly irrelevant the claim at hand or simply non-sequiturs (e.g. when I cited the Giants and Zito's contract as a counterexample and your "refutation" was basically "yeah, well, that's different because Zito is a starting pitcher"), and thus did not merit further response or discussion. So no, it wasn't because I agreed with them.

 

2) The rest of your incoherent rant about what would, could and should have happened if Mauer had performed differently is pure speculation, the liberal use of bolding and underlining notwithstanding.

 

3) You have not even attempted to explain the part of your claim most worthy of the "melodramatic and silly" label, which is that Mauer's contract "paralyzes" the Twins until 2018. There is no reason a single contract, no matter how bad, paralyze for 6 years. Such a claim simply has no basis in facts or logic. It reflects the mentality of a child who fails in his first attempt at something and starts whining about how he'll never be able to do it.

 

1) Again, you are the master of talking right past the facts with arguments that are nearly entirely "tangential" (ie "erratic"). Case in point, your summation about my Zito comments is nothing short of other-world absurdity. As I stated, Zito's case is entirely different, as:

A) he is a starting pitcher who plays in 20% of his team's games AND

the Giants had a contingency plan with extra arms in the farm system to take up the slack if Zito(as it turned out) ended up underperforming.

You are evidently completely unable to read and understand a simple use of the English language in a string of coherent sentences. (And you obviously relish in playing the role of the Bully-Boy of the Keyboard.)

C) Mauer was signed as- The Face of the Franchise- an everyday player at a physically demanding, key position who already had a demonstrable injury history- who inked the big contract while playing with a knee injury that would later require subsequent-season-debilitating surgery. The 2011 mystery and murky atmosphere surrounding Mauer and his "condition" was so palpable you could cut it with a knife, as the club's official party line on the matter seemed to change every week. To suggest that this situation wasn't The key concern of the Twins organization throughout 2011 is pure fantasy.

 

2) Your use of "incoherence" is directly related to your inability to comprehend the written language, not "rantings". Given my hypothesis that: Mauer's health and the self-inflicted damage that the club ("bilateral leg weakness") and Mauer (his Wet-Rag public persona led to wild speculation about what exotic disease-of-the-week was afflicting him) combined for, coupled with a collapse of personnel performance virtually across the board, led to the Twins becoming paralyzed at what direction to take; it is demonstrable by the Twin's actions subsequently, that they really floundered for direction (are we a "seller" or a "buyer" in July? became "dump salary at any price" going into August, September and the post-season). This is not speculation, this is what happened until they finally made public their intention to cut payroll to $94 million. I am further applying deductive logic (not "pure speculation") that the Twins master plan to build the new "big market" Twins around the "Face of the Franchise" came crashing down to Earth amidst the once-unthinkable choruses of boos for Mauer upon his return in 2011 and led to panic and inertia within the franchise, which had apparently made no contingency plans about what steps were needed to swiftly remedy the situation.

 

I presented a careful and precise hypothetical scenario with how the Twins could commit to a $120 million payroll (with exact contractural breakdowns included) that was one way the "newly competitive Twins and their beautiful new ballpark" could fulfill their promises to the fans when they agreed to build the new stadium for them. Every one of the moves I proposed for a quick fix for 2012 was workable and had a realistic outcome for success, with very low downside risk (a series of one-year FA contracts that the athletes themselves actually signed with other teams). There were no pie-in-the-sky Darvish, Buehrle, Wilson, Pujols in my proposal, just solid, obtainable players and a move to retain some of the core cogs that were keys to past success. That the Twins didn't pursue such a reasonable course demands a case be made for their rationale, I offered one reason why that was the case. If you would choose to become active in the discussion rather than rant, you might want to propose your reasoning why the Twins did what they did and in turn, propose your own alternative solution at getting out from under the status quo.

 

3) It's amazing how many Keyboard Nazis get cheap orgiastic delight in employing anonymous perjoratives against someone else equally anonymous, it's really quite sad and pathetic. You are completely misinterpreting my posts as I've never "whined" on this topic once. Apparently unlike yourself, I attach no emotional involvement in my posts or interest in the Twins, I merely enjoy the observational exercise of studying the dynamics of professional sports teams and athletes and other non-sports related businesses and organizations, as well. Your declarative statements, because you say them, doesn't necessarily make them so, as do mine. I did, and will continue, to offer reasons why I think the Twins are paralyzed by what to do with "The Face of The Franchise". To watch the media's coverage of Mauer's troubles last year and the Twins PR disaster in handling the situation and pretend that what to do next about handling Mauer the athlete, and his 24% imprint on the payroll, in the short-, intermediate-, and long-term isn't always, or should't be a front-page concern of the Twins, shows an incredibly opaque area in one's perceptive ability. Furthermore, the Twins appear to be moving in the opposite way from which I proposed, actively demonstrating their paralysis (ie, cutting payroll w/o a "new" master plan laid out to the buying public, illogical retention of players who have repeatedly proven they are below replacement level, bargain-basement FA signing of Marquis, a succession of waiver-wire castoffs claimed and immediately placed in the starting line-up, etc), meaning that Mauer takes up a bigger chunk of the payroll as the talent pool dissipates, continuing the cycle downward. "Basis in facts and logics" is easily demonstrated and has happened to past Twins teams and other sports franchises, as well. In the Twins case, past history showed that as the product declined on the field, revenues fell, causing another cut in payroll, and so on. This finally led to shedding virtually all established players and starting all over from practically ground zero and resultantly leading to two very long stretches of ineptitude while rebuilding from the ground up. I think I can make a strong case by the Twins behavior thus far that this is likely where this franchise is headed and "The Face of the Franchise" is a front-and-center issue in why it is headed that way. Certainly, someone, or many in the braintrust of the Twins were already aware and are having sleepless nights, of what Nick Nelson just recently posted on, ie, the sharp drop-off of the career of Jason Kendall from one of the best, to one of the worst catchers in baseball after he reached 30. This tends to be the norm for catchers rather than the exception- Mauer turns 30 next April.

[glunn]

1) This was good for chuckles. Most of your "refutations" were either tangential if not wholly irrelevant the claim at hand or simply non-sequiturs (e.g. when I cited the Giants and Zito's contract as a counterexample and your "refutation" was basically "yeah, well, that's different because Zito is a starting pitcher"), and thus did not merit further response or discussion. So no, it wasn't because I agreed with them.

 

2) The rest of your incoherent rant about what would, could and should have happened if Mauer had performed differently is pure speculation, the liberal use of bolding and underlining notwithstanding.

 

3) You have not even attempted to explain the part of your claim most worthy of the "melodramatic and silly" label, which is that Mauer's contract "paralyzes" the Twins until 2018. There is no reason a single contract, no matter how bad, paralyze for 6 years. Such a claim simply has no basis in facts or logic. It reflects the mentality of a child who fails in his first attempt at something and starts whining about how he'll never be able to do it.

I think that you both make some good points, and I admire your passion. You might want to make this a bit less personal.

[jokin]

I think that you both make some good points, and I admire your passion. You might want to make this a bit less personal.

Glunn, I am in complete agreement and am trying hard not to do so. I started the post with some stats and was curious in discussing the incongruous nature of Mauer's stats in the 3-spot relative to the rest of the league and how the Twins should handle such an unusual dilemma. I will make every effort to cease and desist from any unpleasantness.

[StormJH1]

I'm mostly with jokin on this debate, though "paralysis" is probably too strong of a word. It's not that Twins are "paralyzed" from doing anything b/c of the contract. There is about $76 million dollars for the remainder of the budget that can be shifted around, and if this team could ever develop young (cheap) talent, they would still have the ability to be players in the FA market if they should so choose. But I'm sorry, for anyone to argue that we couldn't (or wouldn't) use an extra $23 million on other players that could help this team, that's just nuts. Of course we could!

 

Barreiro had a good take on this the other day - it isn't just about the money. This guy is supposed to be the leader and face of the organization and, by extension, a reflection of the greatness of Minnesota and what Minnesota can produce. And a lot of it is in the approach. Myself and others have talked endlessly about taking the first pitch in almost every at-bat, which puts him behind in the count much of the time and, therefore, leads to him swinging more defensively. Barreiro was talking about the thing Mauer does after every foul ball where he asks the umpire if it would have been a strike, since...heaven forbid...he might have swung at a pitch 3 inches out of the zone. He's a very good baseball player. I think he's trying this season to put on a tough face and prove he can be more reliable. But in terms of that "killer instinct" that calls for him to evolve his game, or show aggressiveness when the situation calls for it, no, I don't think he gets it. And the fact that we all wanted him to "get it" so badly was the reason that 2009 has us so badly duped.

[CDog]

Myself and others have talked endlessly about taking the first pitch in almost every at-bat, which puts him behind in the count much of the time and, therefore, leads to him swinging more defensively. Barreiro was talking about the thing Mauer does after every foul ball where he asks the umpire if it would have been a strike, since...heaven forbid...he might have swung at a pitch 3 inches out of the zone. He's a very good baseball player. I think he's trying this season to put on a tough face and prove he can be more reliable. But in terms of that "killer instinct" that calls for him to evolve his game, or show aggressiveness when the situation calls for it, no, I don't think he gets it. And the fact that we all wanted him to "get it" so badly was the reason that 2009 has us so badly duped.

As long as it gets brought up endlessly, I guess I'll endlessly keep mentioning that he gets first pitch strikes less than the overall average. Then, of course, there's the possibility that he doesn't feel as stressed out over having a strike or even two against him that many observers apparently do. And as long as we're heaven forbidding...heaven forbid that he ask for some information, likely to use that information to make himself a better hitter. Yes, everyone can always improve all the time, especially in this game, but the overwhelming thoughts from the peanut gallery that think their approach is so much better than someone who has used their own to put up the first half pace of a hall of fame career just seems so out of place that I'm just amazed by it over and over again.

 

How do you get the rant font turned off here?

[Alex]

As long as it gets brought up endlessly, I guess I'll endlessly keep mentioning that he gets first pitch strikes less than the overall average. Then, of course, there's the possibility that he doesn't feel as stressed out over having a strike or even two against him that many observers apparently do. And as long as we're heaven forbidding...heaven forbid that he ask for some information, likely to use that information to make himself a better hitter. Yes, everyone can always improve all the time, especially in this game, but the overwhelming thoughts from the peanut gallery that think their approach is so much better than someone who has used their own to put up the first half pace of a hall of fame career just seems so out of place that I'm just amazed by it over and over again.

 

How do you get the rant font turned off here?

 

I was thinking exactly the same thing when I heard Barreiro yesterday, that maybe Mauer is trying to judge the strike zone and gather information rather than the fact that he just didn't want to swing at a ball.

 

I've also never like Barreiro's take on Mauer. I think he has things, and responsibility reversed. I don't think it's really Mauer's job to change his personality and leadership because of his contract. It's up to the Twins to recognize what they have and pay what they think it's worth.

[one_eyed_jack]

I'm mostly with jokin on this debate, though "paralysis" is probably too strong of a word. It's not that Twins are "paralyzed" from doing anything b/c of the contract. There is about $76 million dollars for the remainder of the budget that can be shifted around, and if this team could ever develop young (cheap) talent, they would still have the ability to be players in the FA market if they should so choose. But I'm sorry, for anyone to argue that we couldn't (or wouldn't) use an extra $23 million on other players that could help this team, that's just nuts. Of course we could!

 

 

---I don't believe I, or anyone else, argued such a thing. My disagreement was with the claim that Mauer's contract "paralyzes" the Twins until 2018. Like I said, I think "hampers" would be fair, but "paralyzes" is dramatic, particularly when you insist it will last untl 2018.

[Shane Wahl]

Officially staying away from "Joe Mauer-hating" threads on top of the "trade Span" threads. At least the latter has some rational support.

[TwinVike61]

Officially staying away from "Joe Mauer-hating" threads on top of the "trade Span" threads. At least the latter has some rational support.

OK, I'm officially not going to respond to your post...oops...I guess I am...I just want to respond that it's not hating Joe Mauer...it's the contract.

[twinsnorth49]

If you kids don't be quiet I'm turning this thing around right now!