Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm not necessarily against a Plouffe extension but I wouldn't fall over myself to get it done.

 

Let Sano play for a season and then reevaluate. That may mean you don't extend Plouffe because he becomes too expensive but it also means you have a better idea of what you need and you're not shuffling players out of position to keep a guy you extended but don't *really* need.

Posted

 

No, it's not.  He'll get worse. 

 

 

Post marked and tagged on April 28 for a revisit on May 28....  

 

(What's your track record for reverse jinxes, Halsey?   :) )

Posted

 

I'm not necessarily against a Plouffe extension but I wouldn't fall over myself to get it done.

 

Let Sano play for a season and then reevaluate. That may mean you don't extend Plouffe because he becomes too expensive but it also means you have a better idea of what you need and you're not shuffling players out of position to keep a guy you extended but don't *really* need.

 

The point is that if you do this, you end up signing Plouffe to a market rate deal through his age 35-36 season....

Posted

 

The point is that if you do this, you end up signing Plouffe to a market rate deal through his age 35-36 season....

Or you just let him go for a comp pick when he hits FA if he's that good. It's likely that the Twins will get the best of Plouffe by the time he hits free agency. If Sano is a third baseman, you can trade Trevor or just let him walk. He's not the type of player who will make or break the team.

Posted

If it was so easy to find 2-3 WAR players, the Twins wouldn't keep losing 90 games every season, having zero OF, and signing OLD bad RP to deals......getting rid of guys like Plouffe is not a winning strategy*

 

*assuming he's this good

Posted

 

If it was so easy to find 2-3 WAR players, the Twins wouldn't keep losing 90 games every season, having zero OF, and signing OLD bad RP to deals......getting rid of guys like Plouffe is not a winning strategy*

 

*assuming he's this good

The Twins won't lose Plouffe until November of 2017 no matter whether they extend him or not. Plouffe will be entering his age 32 season when they "lose" him.

 

I'm not saying the Twins shouldn't sign Plouffe, I'm saying they shouldn't sign him right now because if Sano pans out at third base, they will no longer need Trevor and can use that money to fill a hole at a position of need.

 

There is simply no reason to make this decision right now. In five months, we'll have a much better idea of what Sano can be and where he will play.

Posted (edited)

 

If it was so easy to find 2-3 WAR players, the Twins wouldn't keep losing 90 games every season, having zero OF, and signing OLD bad RP to deals......getting rid of guys like Plouffe is not a winning strategy*

 

*assuming he's this good

 

I only support "getting rid" of Plouffe in a trade where we are getting value back.  And we should only go down that road if we are confident Sano sticks at 3B. If waiting a year ends up costing us his age 33 season and $13M....better than making this decision too early and botching it.  We went a really, really long time between Koskie and Plouffe at 3B.  I don't want to do that again.

 

But you have wonder whether a .722 career OPS, .750 high end is a 3 WAR player in LF.  Especially when his defense could be bad.  And if we kept him, we might just be pushing a potential 4-5 WAR 3B to the OF or DH, where he will lose a few wins.

Edited by tobi0040

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...