Go get Verlander

[jimmer]

 

No offense, but this is what makes your side look unserious in this discussion. I cannot think of a better way to spend 40 million the next two years than on a Cy Young pitcher still near his peak with something to prove.

Guys like this don't hit the trade market every day, and the Twins sat it out.

Which side am I on? I don't have a side.  I'd love to have Verlander and I've never said be frugal in spending or trading.  But money would have to be taken into account?  Or wouldn't it?

 

I just don't think it was ever really a thing that could have happened, because Verlander would have had to agree, and I can't see that happening.

 

And continuing to bemoan the Twins not getting him every time he does well is well, too much 'I told you so'.  Threads get closed for continuous I told you so posts.  See The Hicks/Murphy trade thread. 

[Danchat]

 

As I see it, this thread is a perfect synopsis of why the Twins can never seem to get over the hump.

"Too expensive." "Too old." "Save the prospects!" "He might not want to come here." Yada Yada yada.

Some teams see opportunity and seize it. Damn the costs, fortune favors the bold.

And some teams find excuses.

There was a PERFECT situation for the Twins in Verlander. Almost too good to be true. The exact thing everyone agrees is needed, at reasonable cost for not too many years.

And I doubt they even kicked the tires.

I can't understand why people are ok with that.

Maybe because they knew the Tigers weren't going to deal Verlander to a divisional rival?

[jimmer]

 

Maybe because they knew the Tigers weren't going to deal Verlander to a divisional rival?

And maybe they knew Verlander wouldn't accept a trade to the Twins?  If you're Verlander, and you know every quality team wants you and you can so no to any trade (10/5 player), do you accept a trade to fringe contender Twins, or do you only accept a trade to a team like the Astros or Cubs (and I believe those were the two big contenders for him)?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Which side am I on? I don't have a side.  I'd love to have Verlander and I've never said be frugal in spending or trading.  But money would have to be taken into account?  Or wouldn't it?

 

I just don't think it was ever really a thing that could have happened, because Verlander would have had to agree, and I can't see that happening.

 

And continuing to bemoan the Twins not getting him every time he does well is well, too much 'I told you so'.  Threads get closed for continuous I told you so posts.  See The Hicks/Murphy trade thread.

 

Lots of people said he wasn't even any good anymore, so I get energized too. Anyway it's a damn message board maybe its time i let it go.

 

Let's see what the whiz kids can do in terms of pitching this offseason. We'll be watching.

[jimmer]

 

Lots of people said he wasn't even any good anymore, so I get energized too. Anyway it's a damn message board maybe its time i let it go.

Let's see what the whiz kids can do in terms of pitching this offseason. We'll be watching.

Yeah, I wasn't one of those people saying that.

 

I've always been a huge Verlander fan and a believer of his ability.  And the guy has it all.  Money, fame, and Kate Upton.

[Squirrel]

And continuing to bemoan the Twins not getting him every time he does well is well, too much 'I told you so'. Threads get closed for continuous I told you so posts. See The Hicks/Murphy trade thread.

 

Anyway it's a damn message board maybe its time i let it go.

Let's see what the whiz kids can do in terms of pitching this offseason. We'll be watching.

There is some truth in both of these statements. It does become an issue of trolling and when/where that line is crossed is one to be cautious of. But for now I think it’s okah to express concerns and frustration. While I don’t think it was possible to get Verlander ... not for a lack of willingness on our part, but for lack of willingness on Verlander’s part ... I do think there were moves that could have been made that weren’t, specifically, getting quality RP. What the Yankees did to bolster their BP is what we should have, and felt could have, done.

[Circus Boy]

 

Setting aside the quibbling over how elite Shannon Stewart was or was not, I will grant you this one.

We all were elite back in the day.

[spinowner]

 

As I see it, this thread is a perfect synopsis of why the Twins can never seem to get over the hump.

"Too expensive." "Too old." "Save the prospects!" "He might not want to come here." Yada Yada yada.

Some teams see opportunity and seize it. Damn the costs, fortune favors the bold.

And some teams find excuses.

There was a PERFECT situation for the Twins in Verlander. Almost too good to be true. The exact thing everyone agrees is needed, at reasonable cost for not too many years.

And I doubt they even kicked the tires.

I can't understand why people are ok with that.

Reminds me of the saying: There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. But there are no old bold pilots.

Bold moves are what cost the Blue Jays and the A's. During recent years they made bold trades to try to win it all. Now their performances have trended downward with not even a World Series appearance to show for it, much less a World Championship. And those teams were in better positions to make bold moves than the Twins were this year. Perfect situation for the Twins to get Verlander? Far, far from it.
Remember the Ramos/Capps trade? Getting Verlander now would have made that trade look good. We would have seen Berrios and Buxton performing as perennial all-stars for someone else in exchange for us winning 2 postseason games this season instead of zero. Reasonable cost? Far, far from it.

 

[Rosterman]

We will now slowly watch if next season and the following the Twins have TOO MANY PROSPECTS in their system that might find playing time elsewhere. When you start adding up the numbers, they jsut can't keep everyone eligible on the 40-man. Some hard decisions have to be made, and some of these guys could've been moved for pieces.

 

 

[Blake]

 

Pretty good? I thought he was great!

I vaguely remember reading that President Trump played baseball as a youth and "pretty good" was as far as I was willing to go, because I wasn't sure if he was good, very good or most excellent. And I was too lazy to look it up.

[drjim]

We will now slowly watch if next season and the following the Twins have TOO MANY PROSPECTS in their system that might find playing time elsewhere. When you start adding up the numbers, they jsut can't keep everyone eligible on the 40-man. Some hard decisions have to be made, and some of these guys could've been moved for pieces.

This won't be a problem.

[ashbury]

I vaguely remember reading that President Trump played baseball as a youth and "pretty good" was as far as I was willing to go, because I wasn't sure if he was good, very good or most excellent. And I was too lazy to look it up.

Mod note: If this tangent is to flare up again, I'd like to ask that it be taken to the Sports Bar forum area, as it fits better with that scene.

[USAFChief]

Reminds me of the saying: There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. But there are no old bold pilots.

Bold moves are what cost the Blue Jays and the A's. During recent years they made bold trades to try to win it all. Now their performances have trended downward with not even a World Series appearance to show for it, much less a World Championship. And those teams were in better positions to make bold moves than the Twins were this year. Perfect situation for the Twins to get Verlander? Far, far from it.

Remember the Ramos/Capps trade? Getting Verlander now would have made that trade look good. We would have seen Berrios and Buxton performing as perennial all-stars for someone else in exchange for us winning 2 postseason games this season instead of zero. Reasonable cost? Far, far from it.

Better to aim high and miss, than aim low and hit. Imnsho.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Reminds me of the saying: There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. But there are no old bold pilots.

Bold moves are what cost the Blue Jays and the A's. During recent years they made bold trades to try to win it all. Now their performances have trended downward with not even a World Series appearance to show for it, much less a World Championship. And those teams were in better positions to make bold moves than the Twins were this year. Perfect situation for the Twins to get Verlander? Far, far from it.

Remember the Ramos/Capps trade? Getting Verlander now would have made that trade look good. We would have seen Berrios and Buxton performing as perennial all-stars for someone else in exchange for us winning 2 postseason games this season instead of zero. Reasonable cost? Far, far from it.

I think the poster who mentioned the names Buxton and Berrios only did so to refute a point from another poster that the Twins didn't have any pieces to interest Detroit. At least that's how I read it. I didn't see anyone on this thread suggesting that would be a reasonable cost, because you are correct, it is not.

 

I think if even ONE of those guys was part of an offer for Verlander, I think Verlander would have been a Twin faster than you can say Wild Card.

[jorgenswest]

I agree that it would only take one and I think it would take at least one. Otherwise the Astros have the better young player to offer.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I agree that it would only take one and I think it would take at least one. Otherwise the Astros have the better young player to offer.

Thanks for clarifying, and that's fair.

 

When it was rumored that Verlander was available, my hope was that Nick Gordon and two of our top MiLB pitchers (not sure which) might be attractive enough (setting aside the no-trade clause issue). Maybe also Garver or Granite ILO one of those named above. At this point we can never know.

[spinowner]

 

I think the poster who mentioned the names Buxton and Berrios only did so to refute a point from another poster that the Twins didn't have any pieces to interest Detroit. At least that's how I read it. I didn't see anyone on this thread suggesting that would be a reasonable cost, because you are correct, it is not.

I think if even ONE of those guys was part of an offer for Verlander, I think Verlander would have been a Twin faster than you can say Wild Card.

This is a fair point. But I will leave specific names out of the picture and say that if any player the Twins would have traded for Verlander became a long-term good major leaguer the price would have been too high because he would not have made this team a World Championship team. However, if Houston wins the WS the price they paid for Verlander would not be too high. That's the difference.

[spinowner]

 

Better to aim high and miss, than aim low and hit. Imnsho.

It's important to choose the proper target in the first place. If your target was a Twins 2017 World Championship you would have had to use a huge amount of ammo and you would still be very, very unlikely to hit it. I am glad Falvine were not so unwise to try to hit that target.

 

 

[Jham]

I was following the tigers forums pretty hard toward the waiver deadline, and their fans didn't even bring up the twins let alone twins prospect packages in their discussions. We were excited when the media speculated verlander could be had for free Alex Rios style on waiver claims. In reality the tigers demanded a premium prospect package. We were never close. There's risk either way. He could turn into a pumpkin, conversely we may end up am elite arm short and end up signing worse guys for more, or trading top prospects for less.

[Squirrel]

I think the poster who mentioned the names Buxton and Berrios only did so to refute a point from another poster that the Twins didn't have any pieces to interest Detroit. At least that's how I read it. I didn't see anyone on this thread suggesting that would be a reasonable cost, because you are correct, it is not.

 

I think if even ONE of those guys was part of an offer for Verlander, I think Verlander would have been a Twin faster than you can say Wild Card.

Except for the opinion he didn’t want to be a Twin ...

[amjgt]

At this point I don't feel like this thread is even about Verlander and the specific hurdles of his deal. He just happens to be this year's example. People that are still on the "trade for Verlander" bandwagon likely just don't want the Twins FO to miss out/whiff/not try on an opportunity like this in the future.

 

Ps. If the Twins really wanted him, they could've just claimed him on waivers, then Verlander wouldn't have had any say about what level of "contender" he wanted to go to.

[Mr. Brooks]

At this point I don't feel like this thread is even about Verlander and the specific hurdles of his deal. He just happens to be this year's example. People that are still on the "trade for Verlander" bandwagon likely just don't want the Twins FO to miss out/whiff/not try on an opportunity like this in the future.

 

Ps. If the Twins really wanted him, they could've just claimed him on waivers, then Verlander wouldn't have had any say about what level of "contender" he wanted to go to.

First, they would have pulled him back if claimed. And second, as a 10/5 guy, yes you still need his permission to claim him off waivers.

[drjim]

At this point I don't feel like this thread is even about Verlander and the specific hurdles of his deal. He just happens to be this year's example. People that are still on the "trade for Verlander" bandwagon likely just don't want the Twins FO to miss out/whiff/not try on an opportunity like this in the future.

 

Ps. If the Twins really wanted him, they could've just claimed him on waivers, then Verlander wouldn't have had any say about what level of "contender" he wanted to go to.

That is probably true, but those are two different conversations that don't merge well into one.

 

"The Twins couldn't get Verlander because he wouldn't have come here and they didn't really have the prospects" probably can't be answered with "Why shouldn't the Twins add a player in a high profile trade."

[Major League Ready]

 

Better to aim high and miss, than aim low and hit. Imnsho.

 

That's a matter of opinion.  Hitting on the Kluber / Arrieta deals is far more valuable than the deals where you have to give up alot to get a lot.  They also don't have the risk of having huge cost and little or modest returns and they don't have the capacity to hurt a team for several years.

 

This opinion is common among fans not so muck among people who are or who have been responsible for 9-figure organizations.   People in that position look at the odds and the odds of the Twins actually getting into a playoff series was very low.  Their chances at the time of getting to the wildcard game were less than 10% as I recall.  Of course, their odds of getting to a playoff series was half of that percentage if you assume the Twins had a 50/50 chance against the Yankees in Yankee stadium.

 

Getting lucky with a bad decision does not make it a good decision.  This whole thread is also based on the premise Verlander would have waived his no trade clause.  Another highly unlikely outcome. 

[old nurse]

 

Better to aim high and miss, than aim low and hit. Imnsho.

Detroit aimed high with Jordan Zimmerman and Anibal Sanchez.  Fulmer as a prospect would be aiming lower. He ended up ROY.

A missed head shot could get you killed.

[laloesch]

I think the poster who mentioned the names Buxton and Berrios only did so to refute a point from another poster that the Twins didn't have any pieces to interest Detroit. At least that's how I read it. I didn't see anyone on this thread suggesting that would be a reasonable cost, because you are correct, it is not.

I think if even ONE of those guys was part of an offer for Verlander, I think Verlander would have been a Twin faster than you can say Wild Card.

I think that it would have taken two of the three (Sano, Buxton or Berrios). Not a price i would be willing to pay at this point.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think that it would have taken two of the three (Sano, Buxton or Berrios). Not a price i would be willing to pay at this point.

That's a far higher price than the Astros paid. Not even close.

[Mr. Brooks]

I think that it would have taken two of the three (Sano, Buxton or Berrios). Not a price i would be willing to pay at this point.

No. One of those 3 alone would have been far more than what they got from the Astros.

[USAFChief]

That's a matter of opinion.  Hitting on the Kluber / Arrieta deals is far more valuable than the deals where you have to give up alot to get a lot.  They also don't have the risk of having huge cost and little or modest returns and they don't have the capacity to hurt a team for several years.

 

This opinion is common among fans not so muck among people who are or who have been responsible for 9-figure organizations.   People in that position look at the odds and the odds of the Twins actually getting into a playoff series was very low.  Their chances at the time of getting to the wildcard game were less than 10% as I recall.  Of course, their odds of getting to a playoff series was half of that percentage if you assume the Twins had a 50/50 chance against the Yankees in Yankee stadium.

 

Getting lucky with a bad decision does not make it a good decision.  This whole thread is also based on the premise Verlander would have waived his no trade clause.  Another highly unlikely outcome.

 

Name the two pitchers that Falvine should target this winter. Two that will be equal to Kluber/Arrieta in 2018.

 

Because What I think actually is common among fans is to post "find the next Kluber." Which sounds great, but has zero actual practical application. Everyone wants to do that. Depending on doing that isn't a plan for success, it's akin to purchasing a powerball ticket as a means to feed your family.

[old nurse]

 

Name the two pitchers that Falvine should target this winter. Two that will be equal to Kluber/Arrieta in 2018.

Because What I think actually is common among fans is to post "find the next Kluber." Which sounds great, but has zero actual practical application. Everyone wants to do that. Depending on doing that isn't a plan for success, it's akin to purchasing a powerball ticket as a means to feed your family.

Off the top of my head, Alex Meyer fits the bill of being the profile of Arrietta. I am sure there are many more talented but inconsistent pitchers out there.  Kluber is another pitcher that did not have the coaching to figure it out until they were in their late 20s   The odds of developing a talented player are not in the powerball range.

Fans want the impossible. Wave the magic wand and you can pick out which of the up and down middle relievers are going to succeed this year, which starter will actually have a bounceback year, what year a pitcher is going to break down.  Some fans even think that a 5/50 player with a stated preference will go to a team that is sub .500