Go get Verlander

[nicksaviking]

It sounds like folks aren't upset about not getting Verlander so much as they're upset about not getting anyone.

 

Is there someone specific people had in mind? Because it seems like the discontent is based on hypotheticals and avatars. Unless people wanted awful Mike Leake and Mike Leake's awful contract or were OK giving up Gordon, Gonsalves and another good prospect for Verlander (which would only matter in the unlikely event that he was willing to come here) no other pitchers of note got moved.

 

Why are we assuming a good one was available?

[Major League Ready]

 

It sounds like folks aren't upset about not getting Verlander so much as they're upset about not getting anyone.

Is there someone specific people had in mind? Because it seems like the discontent is based on hypotheticals and avatars. Unless people wanted awful Mike Leake and Mike Leake's awful contract or were OK giving up Gordon, Gonsalves and another good prospect for Verlander (which would only matter in the unlikely event that he was willing to come here) no other pitchers of note got moved.

Why are we assuming a good one was available?

 

So true.  Genius is much easier to construct in a hypothetical world.  They may have inquired about Verlander and found the cost in prospects was prohibitive.  There is a very good possibility he is simply not willing to come here.

[Squirrel]

 

Considering what actually moved this month, a RP of consequence wasn't possible. Probably could have gotten a bat.

That's why I used the word 'or' ...

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

It sounds like folks aren't upset about not getting Verlander so much as they're upset about not getting anyone.

Is there someone specific people had in mind? Because it seems like the discontent is based on hypotheticals and avatars. Unless people wanted awful Mike Leake and Mike Leake's awful contract or were OK giving up Gordon, Gonsalves and another good prospect for Verlander (which would only matter in the unlikely event that he was willing to come here) no other pitchers of note got moved.

Why are we assuming a good one was available?

Sonny Gray

[Mike Sixel]

I have no idea if one was available. Houston, NYY, Seattle, LAA all made moves to, in their mind, get better in the last week. That doesn't count earlier moves. MN did not make a move. Four AL teams made moves. Why should we assume it wasn't possible a 5th could? They could all find ways to get better, but MN just couldn't?

[jorgenswest]

Isn't is awesome to be debating whether the Twins should have added a piece to piece in their push for the playoffs?

 

Last summer the debate was whether to see off Dozier or Santana since it was inconceivable a team could go from 100 losses to contender in one season.

 

This debate is much more enjoyable.

[nicksaviking]

I have no idea if one was available. Houston, NYY, Seattle, LAA all made moves to, in their mind, get better in the last week. That doesn't count earlier moves. MN did not make a move. Four AL teams made moves. Why should we assume it wasn't possible a 5th could? They could all find ways to get better, but MN just couldn't?

You was it you wanted?

[drjim]

I have no idea if one was available. Houston, NYY, Seattle, LAA all made moves to, in their mind, get better in the last week. That doesn't count earlier moves. MN did not make a move. Four AL teams made moves. Why should we assume it wasn't possible a 5th could? They could all find ways to get better, but MN just couldn't?

Twins really missed out by not adding Mike Leake, Brandon Phillips and a catcher worse than Recker.

 

I'll grant Upton would be nice, but it is also a massive risk if he doesn't opt out.

 

And Verlander has been discussed.

 

With no pitchers moving, really the only clear upgrade was a bat better than Vargas.

[adorduan]

 

1. Detroit is an outlier because they spend silly money.

 

2. That's why we should use revenue, not market size. Under those numbers, Houston is an upper mid-market team.

Detroit had a great owner

[USAFChief]

You was it you wanted?

That's too easy, Nick.

 

If you ignore all the deals in the last 45 days, you can make the argument nobody was available.

 

But that's pretty much the only way, IMO.

 

But even then, it's not Mike's (or my) job to come up with names. That's Falvine's job.

 

I dont want to see the Twins run like they have been. I was hoping they'd start acting like a team that wants to win, and everything else is secondary. I'm not seeing it.

[nicksaviking]

That's too easy, Nick.

If you ignore all the deals in the last 45 days, you can make the argument nobody was available.

But that's pretty much the only way, IMO.

But even then, it's not Mike's (or my) job to come up with names. That's Falvine's job.

I dont want to see the Twins run like they have been. I was hoping they'd start acting like a team that wants to win, and everything else is secondary. I'm not seeing it.

But there weren't that many deals, there were like six yesterday and only one trade was even remotely envious when considering the prospects given up for Verlander.

 

I don't want Erik Kratz or Mike Leake or Brandon Phillips. We're talking about players who had to have a contract or production so poor that all 30 teams already said no once. It just seems so unlikely that anybody overly helpful was actually attainable.

[drjim]

That's too easy, Nick.

 

If you ignore all the deals in the last 45 days, you can make the argument nobody was available.

 

But that's pretty much the only way, IMO.

 

But even then, it's not Mike's (or my) job to come up with names. That's Falvine's job.

 

I dont want to see the Twins run like they have been. I was hoping they'd start acting like a team that wants to win, and everything else is secondary. I'm not seeing it.

They made their mistakes at the end of July. Pitchers weren't moving in August. Sucks it played out this way.

[Mr. Brooks]

Twins really missed out by not adding Mike Leake, Brandon Phillips and a catcher worse than Recker.

 

I'll grant Upton would be nice, but it is also a massive risk if he doesn't opt out.

 

And Verlander has been discussed.

 

With no pitchers moving, really the only clear upgrade was a bat better than Vargas.

Why is it a massive risk if Upton doesn't opt out?

IMO the risk is that he DOES opt out.

He's a 28 year old with a .900 OPS, has never had an OPS+ under 107 in his career, and has a stellar record of health.

That contract is a bargain, IMO.

[USAFChief]

 

Why is it a massive risk if Upton doesn't opt out?
IMO the risk is that he DOES opt out.
He's a 28 year old with a .900 OPS, has never had an OPS+ under 107 in his career, and has a stellar record of health.
That contract is a bargain, IMO.

It would cut into Adrianza's time in left and Granite's time in center.  And Vargas time at DH.

[Mike Sixel]

No risk in Dillon Gee though.....

[DJSim22]

 

But there weren't that many deals, there were like six yesterday and only one trade was even remotely envious when considering the prospects given up for Verlander.

I don't want Erik Kratz or Mike Leake or Brandon Phillips. We're talking about players who had to have a contract or production so poor that all 30 teams already said no once. It just seems so unlikely that anybody overly helpful was actually attainable.

 

I tend to agree with you, but the same things could have been said about Colon earlier this year. 

[nicksaviking]

It would cut into Adrianza's time in left and Granite's time in center. And Vargas time at DH.

I would have loved to get Upton and I'd even hope he DIDN'T opt out if he was a Twin. But he had a 20 team no trade list and Detroit gave him up for a pittance. Upton had all the leverage, I don't think it's fair to assume that's on the Twins front office.

[PseudoSABR]

 

they're starting from a big hole.

I guess if you limit your evaluation to making marque trades regardless of what was actually obtainable and ignore that they did acquire Garcia (before trading him shortly after), I guess that's a big hole.   But again, you're ignoring quite a bit that the new FO has a hand in: the team is winning, they rebuilt a coaching staff that has made huge strides with a number of players, they drafted well, promoted those players aggressively, seem to have a plan in general with all of the prospects, have overhauled the analytical department, and seemingly have been applying analytics in-game and through coaching.  But they didn't go out and get Verlander, so no more benefit of the doubt.  Talk about near-unreachable expectations.    (And I was all about trying to get Verlander, I believe it wasn't possible, and that the other available players aren't probably any better than Meija or Santiago down the stretch).

[drjim]

Why is it a massive risk if Upton doesn't opt out?

IMO the risk is that he DOES opt out.

He's a 28 year old with a .900 OPS, has never had an OPS+ under 107 in his career, and has a stellar record of health.

That contract is a bargain, IMO.

A 107 OPS+ for a mediocre defensive corner of starting his decline years at over $20 mil is not a bargain.

 

If he maintains his current production it is probably barely worth it. And that forces a trade of Kepler or Rosario, and eliminates any money they might spend on pitching.

[howeda7]

I'd have like to see them get in a on Rajai Davis. They could really use a RH bat to platoon with Kepler instead of Adrianza. Not huge but would have been something. 

[The Wise One]

 

Sonny Gray

What do the Twins have to offer that was better than what the Yankees gave up? That would be why Gray is a Yankee and not a Twin.

[The Wise One]

 

That's too easy, Nick.

If you ignore all the deals in the last 45 days, you can make the argument nobody was available.

But that's pretty much the only way, IMO.

But even then, it's not Mike's (or my) job to come up with names. That's Falvine's job.

I dont want to see the Twins run like they have been. I was hoping they'd start acting like a team that wants to win, and everything else is secondary. I'm not seeing it.

If you are going to be critical of them for not making moves the easy way out is to say  all you have to do is criticize.  30 some days ago when Gray was traded the Yankees out bis everyone else. The easy way out is to say the Twins should have out bid them and not come up with the what the Twins could have had that was realistically better.  

[drjim]

I'd have like to see them get in a on Rajai Davis. They could really use a RH bat to platoon with Kepler instead of Adrianza. Not huge but would have been something.

He would have been a great addition. Snatched up 10 days ago by Boston.

[Major League Ready]

We now understand the cost in prospects.  Franklin Perez won’t be 20 until December and he is pitching well in AA.  We don’t even have a SP prospect as good as him so we would have likely needed to give up better prospects than the other two Houston gave up..  Having said this…. Rogers is a better prospect than any catcher we have in the system, especially defensively.  Cameron is not a high ceiling prospect but has good tools and likely has a floor of a 4th outfielder..  The Twins equivalent offer is something like Romero and 2 other top 15 prospects.  Perhaps Blankenhorn and Graterol.

 

Perhaps the greater impact to our future would be in would negate our ability to pursue meaningful free agents at a minimum until Mauer and Santana are gone..  Between Verlander’s 28M and arbitration increases in 2018 and 2019 the Twins simply do not have the revenue to support any significant free agents beyond Verlander.

 

Getting Verlander would have been absolute incompetence in my opinion.  Let’s say they have a 40% chance of getting a wildcard spot today.  That means they have a 20% shot of making it to a playoff series against Houston.  Add to this that their odds of winning that series even with Verlander are at best 40% and that’s generous.  Therefore, their odds of getting past the first round are 8% even with the generation assumptions I used.

 

Giving up 3 prospects with a very good chance of being meaningful players for 6+ years each at a controlled cost and is a bad baseball decision in itself.  When you add to it that they or we could have used the $28M/yr to sign a younger free agent and it becomes something considerably worse..  Verlander is 34 so we are talking about age 35 and 36 seasons.  By far the most probable result is that Verlander’s performance continue’s to decline just as it did this year.  His ERA plus fell from 137 to 117 and FIP from 3.48 to 4.04.

 

I would certainly hope if the FO was willing and able to spend $28m/yr they would invest it in Darvish.  I would actually prefer signing Alex Cobb and keeping the prospects.  He had an ERA plus of 130 and 139 the two years prior to injury and he was solid this year with an ERA + of 112 and a FIP of 4.26.  Cobb will be 30 next year so its pretty reasonable to expect him to get back to his pre-injury performance where I would expect Verlander to continue to fall off.  I am not sure what Cobb will cost but the difference would surely cover a good bullpen arm that could be traded if enough of our prospects reach their potential.

[Mr. Brooks]

A 107 OPS+ for a mediocre defensive corner of starting his decline years at over $20 mil is not a bargain.

 

If he maintains his current production it is probably barely worth it. And that forces a trade of Kepler or Rosario, and eliminates any money they might spend on pitching.

107 is his career low.

He's going to be a 6 bWAR player this year, and you are telling me that is "just barely" worth 20 million?

What evidence is there that he's starting his decline? He's only 28 years old.

[drjim]

107 is his career low.

He's going to be a 6 bWAR player this year, and you are telling me that is "just barely" worth 20 million?

What evidence is there that he's starting his decline? He's only 28 years old.

He's 30.

 

I'm not sure it's wise for him to opt out. Mediocre defenders on the corners are taking a risk to get more than 3/66.

 

He's had a great year at the plate, would happily take him for this month. But to think his performance would continue you would have to buy his jumps in ISO and babip are sustainable going forward. I would use my resources elsewhere personally.

 

EDIT: He has 4/88.5 left. Even worse! Even crazier to opt out.

[jimmer]

I'm just glad the Twins FO didn't get Verlander. 

[Mr. Brooks]

He's 30.

 

I'm not sure it's wise for him to opt out. Mediocre defenders on the corners are taking a risk to get more than 3/66.

 

He's had a great year at the plate, would happily take him for this month. But to think his performance would continue you would have to buy his jumps in ISO and babip are sustainable going forward. I would use my resources elsewhere personally.

 

EDIT: He has 4/88.5 left. Even worse! Even crazier to opt out.

Good catch on the age, not sure why I thought 28. Though he was only 29 yet when I last looked him up.

That does change my opinion a bit.

But I still think that's a bargain.

Only once the last 6 years has he been with less than 20 million, and even that year he was worth about 15 million.

Even if he can't quite sustain this year's numbers, he doesn't need to to be worth 22 million. He's going to be worth close to 50 million this year as is.

[drjim]

Good catch on the age, not sure why I thought 28. Though he was only 29 yet when I last looked him up.

That does change my opinion a bit.

But I still think that's a bargain.

Only once the last 6 years has he been with less than 20 million, and even that year he was worth about 15 million.

Even if he can't quite sustain this year's numbers, he doesn't need to to be worth 22 million. He's going to be worth close to 50 million this year as is.

He's been really good this year and a very worthwhile player up until now.

 

I just don't trust this skillset to age well. A medicore defender on a corner and a k rate just south of 30%. I would expect that to bump up, his babip/iso to tick down, and a potential for a pretty significant dip. Don't think he has a better year than this, and I don't expect his d to get better.

 

If he does opt out, I will be very interested to see his contract.

[USAFChief]

 

I guess if you limit your evaluation to making marque trades regardless of what was actually obtainable and ignore that they did acquire Garcia (before trading him shortly after), I guess that's a big hole.   But again, you're ignoring quite a bit that the new FO has a hand in: the team is winning, they rebuilt a coaching staff that has made huge strides with a number of players, they drafted well, promoted those players aggressively, seem to have a plan in general with all of the prospects, have overhauled the analytical department, and seemingly have been applying analytics in-game and through coaching.  But they didn't go out and get Verlander, so no more benefit of the doubt.  Talk about near-unreachable expectations.    (And I was all about trying to get Verlander, I believe it wasn't possible, and that the other available players aren't probably any better than Meija or Santiago down the stretch).

Not even trying for (and not getting) Verlander is just one data point, Pseudo.

 

I've been posting for 2 months now that I was growing less impressed with the new FO.  Not getting ANY help (and actually trading away from the pitching staff) is where I draw the line, and where they lost me.  They've been presented with a golden opportunity...they should be trying to take advantage of that, particularly in a market where the Twins have become almost an afterthought for much of the paying public.

 

And for the record, much of what you posted is either opinion (draft well, applying analytics in-game, a 'plan' with all the prospects), something that we all knew HAD to be done no matter who was hired (overhaul the analytics dept), or speculative (rebuilt coaching staff responsible for the 'huge' strides).  I want to see actual, factual, on the major league field help.