Go get Verlander

[drjim]

They can't trade prospects for Sonny Gray and his salary?

Of course they can once they have good enough prospects. But that has little to do with signing a top FA. That's still going to mostly come down to payroll size, which is usually driven by revenue.

[drjim]

Gray and Quintana were too expensive?

They were in prospects.

[drjim]

Get the best players in FA?

I don't know if that does a whole lot for getting significantly more TV revenue.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I don't know if that does a whole lot for getting significantly more TV revenue.

I don't think the new FO should kick the can down the road until there's a new tv deal, but maybe that's what they agreed to do for the ownership.

[jorgenswest]

The reality is the Twin farm system had no really good prospect to offer. They would be trying to offer a package of B+ and B prospects when the teams that won those deals had better prospects.

 

Some preliminary grade info from Sickels today

 

https://www.minorleagueball.com/2017/10/23/16498538/minnesota-twins-preliminary-prospect-grade-breakdown-for-2018

 

They could have won those deals by offering Buxton or Berrios and I think some would endorse that move. If they weren’t willing to deal Buxton or a Berrios, why should other teams spend much time negotiating with them?

[drjim]

I don't think the new FO should kick the can down the road until there's a new tv deal, but maybe that's what they agreed to do for the ownership.

Kick what can? They have money to play with. Even a new tv deal isn't going to jump their place more than a handful of places. This is the reality of this market and fan base, just not going to be as high revenue.

 

They can sign a high priced free agent, but that is going to take a significantly high percentage of the payroll and they aren't exactly positioned to eat dead money.

[Major League Ready]

 

They can't trade prospects for Sonny Gray and his salary?

 

I would rather go get another Santana in free agency who has been beter than Gray and not give up two top 100 prospects plus a near MLB ready SP that projects as a mid-rotation guy.

 

The same was said of Tulo, Shields, Ellsbury and others.   People forget about all of the proposed great deals that would have hurt this team.  Some proposed we give up multiple assets for Tulo.  That trade alone would have hurt the team for several years.

 

Many suggested we give up some of our top young talent at the time for Lucroy because we were ready to contend.  Lucroy would be long gone.  He certainly would not have gotten those teams to the playoffs and part of our young core would not be here.

 

Some were big proponents of trading Nolasco for Shields and taking on that salary late in his career.  As I recall proponents said him decline would not be a problem.  He is now one of the worst SPs in the league at that $21M would still be on the books next year.  Whatever our chances are of getting a good free agent SP next year would be out the window.   

 

How about Jordan and Zimmerman and least they would not have cost us parts of our young core.  He might even bounce back but his FIP of 5+ and $25M/yr for 3 more years would not look good on our rosster.  How about Sanchez before him.  People said don’t worry about his decline.  He had one good year and 3 consecutive years that would had us begging for Kyle Gibson.

 

How about Ellsbury?  There was not a lot of chatter for him but there were those who went out of their way to make a case for Ellsbury.  How bad would it suck to have that contract on the books until 2021   That signing would have made getting a good SP in free agency or extending our core much harder.

 

I guess it would be hard to understand why any FO does not just jump at these deals if you don't give any consideration to how badly they hurt the team for a number of years when they don't pan out.

[drjim]

I would rather go get another Santana in free agency who has been beter than Gray and not give up two top 100 prospects plus a near MLB ready SP that projects as a mid-rotation guy.

 

The same was said of Tulo, Shields, Ellsbury and others. People forget about all of the proposed great deals that would have hurt this team. Some proposed we give up multiple assets for Tulo. That trade alone would have hurt the team for several years.

 

Many suggested we give up some of our top young talent at the time for Lucroy because we were ready to contend. Lucroy would be long gone. He certainly would not have gotten those teams to the playoffs and part of our young core would not be here.

 

Some were big proponents of trading Nolasco for Shields and taking on that salary late in his career. As I recall proponents said him decline would not be a problem. He is now one of the worst SPs in the league at that $21M would still be on the books next year. Whatever our chances are of getting a good free agent SP next year would be out the window.

 

How about Jordan and Zimmerman and least they would not have cost us parts of our young core. He might even bounce back but his FIP of 5+ and $25M/yr for 3 more years would not look good on our rosster. How about Sanchez before him. People said don’t worry about his decline. He had one good year and 3 consecutive years that would had us begging for Kyle Gibson.

 

How about Ellsbury? There was not a lot of chatter for him but there were those who went out of their way to make a case for Ellsbury. How bad would it suck to have that contract on the books until 2021 That signing would have made getting a good SP in free agency or extending our core much harder.

 

I guess it would be hard to understand why any FO does not just jump at these deals if you don't give any consideration to how badly they hurt the team for a number of years when they don't pan out.

Russell Martin was another one of my favorite examples. Lots of calls for big contracts and angst when they aren't signed, followed by minimal reflection on the disasters they become.

[Major League Ready]

 

 

There is always a reason the Twins can never get the best players in FA or trade, when does that change?

 

The FA part is very simple.  The top 10 revenue markets averaged $140M/team more revenue than us.  Collectively that’s 1.4B in incremental revenue those teams have to spend.  Every single one of those teams could sign 5 top free agents and have our revenue left over. 

 

Wishing we could defy the principles of economics is a lost cause.  Long-term success for this franchise is infinitely more dependent on the success of the current efforts to improve analytics, scouting, drafting and development.  If you want to wish for something that will impact the team.  Wish for the new hires in these areas to do a great job and the development process to be dramatically improved.

[Mike Sixel]

 

They were in prospects.

 

so, never trade for really good players, or sign the best FAs? that's your argument?

[Mike Sixel]

 

The FA part is very simple.  The top 10 revenue markets averaged $140M/team more revenue than us.  Collectively that’s 1.4B in incremental revenue those teams have to spend.  Every single one of those teams could sign 5 top free agents and have our revenue left over. 

 

Wishing we could defy the principles of economics is a lost cause.  Long-term success for this franchise is infinitely more dependent on the success of the current efforts to improve analytics, scouting, drafting and development.  If you want to wish for something that will impact the team.  Wish for the new hires in these areas to do a great job and the development process to be dramatically improved.

 

Totally ignoring the trade part of that post.....

[Mike Sixel]

 

I would rather go get another Santana in free agency who has been beter than Gray and not give up two top 100 prospects plus a near MLB ready SP that projects as a mid-rotation guy.

 

The same was said of Tulo, Shields, Ellsbury and others.   People forget about all of the proposed great deals that would have hurt this team.  Some proposed we give up multiple assets for Tulo.  That trade alone would have hurt the team for several years.

 

Many suggested we give up some of our top young talent at the time for Lucroy because we were ready to contend.  Lucroy would be long gone.  He certainly would not have gotten those teams to the playoffs and part of our young core would not be here.

 

Some were big proponents of trading Nolasco for Shields and taking on that salary late in his career.  As I recall proponents said him decline would not be a problem.  He is now one of the worst SPs in the league at that $21M would still be on the books next year.  Whatever our chances are of getting a good free agent SP next year would be out the window.   

 

How about Jordan and Zimmerman and least they would not have cost us parts of our young core.  He might even bounce back but his FIP of 5+ and $25M/yr for 3 more years would not look good on our rosster.  How about Sanchez before him.  People said don’t worry about his decline.  He had one good year and 3 consecutive years that would had us begging for Kyle Gibson.

 

How about Ellsbury?  There was not a lot of chatter for him but there were those who went out of their way to make a case for Ellsbury.  How bad would it suck to have that contract on the books until 2021   That signing would have made getting a good SP in free agency or extending our core much harder.

 

I guess it would be hard to understand why any FO does not just jump at these deals if you don't give any consideration to how badly they hurt the team for a number of years when they don't pan out.

 

Ya, I see Houston is really suffering from trading for Verlander.

 

And, how did the Twins fare the last 5 years by NOT going out and getting pitching? No one ever talks about the price in wins of relying on terrible, but cheap, pitching. Sure, the owners saved money, but the product still stunk.

[gocgo]

 

The FA part is very simple.  The top 10 revenue markets averaged $140M/team more revenue than us.  Collectively that’s 1.4B in incremental revenue those teams have to spend.  Every single one of those teams could sign 5 top free agents and have our revenue left over. 

 

Wishing we could defy the principles of economics is a lost cause.  Long-term success for this franchise is infinitely more dependent on the success of the current efforts to improve analytics, scouting, drafting and development.  If you want to wish for something that will impact the team.  Wish for the new hires in these areas to do a great job and the development process to be dramatically improved.

You are 100 percent correct.  So, the question isn't when will we sign a big time free agent?  The question is when will we try a different approach?  We can't do it the way that those big market teams do it...but we can do it the way that KC did it.  Put together a solid lineup - check, put together decent starting pitching - not quite there yet, put together a lights out bullpen - not there yet.  Rely on your starting pitching to get thru 5-6 innings and then bring in a bullpen that effectively makes it a 5 inning game for the opposition while our lineup gets to feast off other bullpens.  The Yankees have actually put together that type of lineup and they were a game away from the World Series.

 

The Yankees also spent a pile on that bullpen, but the point is that rather than focusing on getting in a big name starting pitcher, focus on putting in a lights out bullpen.  Give the opposition 5 innings to beat us.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Ya, I see Houston is really suffering from trading for Verlander.

 

And, how did the Twins fare the last 5 years by NOT going out and getting pitching? No one ever talks about the price in wins of relying on terrible, but cheap, pitching. Sure, the owners saved money, but the product still stunk.

If starting pitchers were like canned vegetables, then yeah the Twins could "go out and get another" Ervin Santana every year. Or better yet, two Mike Pelfreys for the price of one Ervin Santana, because 2 > 1

[old nurse]

After the 2012 season here in fantasyland  Pohlad and Ryan said enough is enough, opened up the wallet and got the highest paid hitter that off season, the second and third highest paid starting pitchers, as well as the highest paid reliever and the highest paid outfielder instead of the teams that did get them. Josh Hamilton, Anibal Sanchez, Edwin Jackson, Rafael Soriano and the then BY Upton.  21 years of contracts, 1 good season among them   The year before you could have had the all star lineup of Pujols, Fielder, Reyes, CJ Wilson, Buehrle and Papelbon. Complain all you want about not signing the top free agents. There are a handful that do well, there are more that never play up to the big contract

[Mike Sixel]

 

After the 2012 season here in fantasyland  Pohlad and Ryan said enough is enough, opened up the wallet and got the highest paid hitter that off season, the second and third highest paid starting pitchers, as well as the highest paid reliever and the highest paid outfielder instead of the teams that did get them. Josh Hamilton, Anibal Sanchez, Edwin Jackson, Rafael Soriano and the then BY Upton.  21 years of contracts, 1 good season among them   The year before you could have had the all star lineup of Pujols, Fielder, Reyes, CJ Wilson, Buehrle and Papelbon. Complain all you want about not signing the top free agents. There are a handful that do well, there are more that never play up to the big contract

 

And how did reality work out, in relying on the players they did rely on? Like the list of pitchers they used the last 5 years?

 

And, it's like people are totally ignoring the trade part......

[drjim]

so, never trade for really good players, or sign the best FAs? that's your argument?

Of course not. But you can't make a trade if you don't have as good of prospects.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Of course not. But you can't make a trade if you don't have as good of prospects.

 

You don't think they had enough prospects to get Gray or Quintana? when will they? We are in year 4 or 5 of the rebuild.....Houston did, in the same amount of time. Same with the Cubs.

[Loosey]

I missed the middle of this argument.  No the Twins probably can't go out and get the top 3 FA's.  But they do have the means to get one.  Will it reduce their profit based on last year's revenue?  Yes, but there is a give and take. If the Twins got Verlander for 3/$75M.  He would make the rotation better and help the Twins win more games.  More wins and better players mean more fans and more fans mean more money.  

 

I don't get the argument against getting a top of the line starting pitcher.  

 

 

[old nurse]

 

And how did reality work out, in relying on the players they did rely on? Like the list of pitchers they used the last 5 years?

 

And, it's like people are totally ignoring the trade part......

No better, but you still can't acknowledge the free agency is not a good answer. Complain when it works, blind eye when it doesn't for the other teams.  Verlander I have posted about far too many times on this thread.  Trading 3 prospects for short term rentals. In the position the Twins are in now it would not have helped.  The key is to trade the high upside assets before it falls.  The Twins next year will have plenty of better upside assets to deal. Whatever happened in the Ryan era is not relevant to today's team and management.  Yup they missed out on Gray.  Kaprellian had the upside of a top of rotation. Mateo the upside of an everyday player, Fowler a decent outfielder. Get back on the soapbox when the Twins have top of the rotation upside pitchers. Tyler Jay had it briefly.

[USAFChief]

No better, but you still can't acknowledge the free agency is not a good answer. Complain when it works, blind eye when it doesn't for the other teams. Verlander I have posted about far too many times on this thread. Trading 3 prospects for short term rentals. In the position the Twins are in now it would not have helped. The key is to trade the high upside assets before it falls. The Twins next year will have plenty of better upside assets to deal. Whatever happened in the Ryan era is not relevant to today's team and management. Yup they missed out on Gray. Kaprellian had the upside of a top of rotation. Mateo the upside of an everyday player, Fowler a decent outfielder. Get back on the soapbox when the Twins have top of the rotation upside pitchers. Tyler Jay had it briefly.

Who are the "plenty of better upside assets to deal" next year?

 

And while we're at it, who will they deal them for, next year?

 

Specifics, if you please.

[Vanimal46]

 

Who are the "plenty of better upside assets to deal" next year?

And while we're at it, who will they deal them for, next year?

Specifics, if you please.

 

Same story, different year.... There's always better upside assets to deal next year. But wait, now those assets made the majors and did okay. No way they can trade them anymore while they're cheap. It's a vicious cycle. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

No better, but you still can't acknowledge the free agency is not a good answer. Complain when it works, blind eye when it doesn't for the other teams.  Verlander I have posted about far too many times on this thread.  Trading 3 prospects for short term rentals. In the position the Twins are in now it would not have helped.  The key is to trade the high upside assets before it falls.  The Twins next year will have plenty of better upside assets to deal. Whatever happened in the Ryan era is not relevant to today's team and management.  Yup they missed out on Gray.  Kaprellian had the upside of a top of rotation. Mateo the upside of an everyday player, Fowler a decent outfielder. Get back on the soapbox when the Twins have top of the rotation upside pitchers. Tyler Jay had it briefly.

 

Verlander has 2-3 years left on his deal.....that is a short term rental?

 

On the other side, we can't sign FAs to long term deals, because they'll be bad at the end of the contract....

[old nurse]

 

Who are the "plenty of better upside assets to deal" next year?

And while we're at it, who will they deal them for, next year?

Specifics, if you please.

I will give you the same specifics you give for your source that Verlander would have accepted a trade gere

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I will give you the same specifics you give for your source that Verlander would have accepted a trade gere

 

I think Chief's point is that every year, we read that the Twins don't have enough assets to trade, but just wait until next year! Then we read that the costs for those players was just too high (either in assets or money or both), but wait until next year! Same with payroll flexibility, we need to keep it to sign players, but then when they don't sign players it is because they need money to sign players next year.....

 

So, is there ever actually a year?

 

Indeed, I think this is the third year in a row I've asked this question now....

[old nurse]

 

Verlander has 2-3 years left on his deal.....that is a short term rental?

 

On the other side, we can't sign FAs to long term deals, because they'll be bad at the end of the contract....

Sigh. Verlander was not going to accept a trade here. Period. Get over it. The midseason there was an exception of 3 pitchers of that caliber traded with multiple years of controlled cost left.  You can't name 3 others in the last 10 years traded at the deadline that were similar. Shields was traded in the off season with 2 years of control left.  Grienke was traded with 2 years of control left by KC. All he cost was 2 future all stars.  The only other pitcher that was traded for a boatload of potential with multiple years of control left and a near top of rotation in the off season was Gonzales, and that also was a long time ago.

 

Bad at the end of the contract, bad in the middle of the contract, sometimes bad at the start of the contract. Note that I did not say to not sign them, only the consequences. Fans do not tolerate the consequences. See the endless complaints on Mauer.

[old nurse]

 

 

I think Chief's point is that every year, we read that the Twins don't have enough assets to trade, but just wait until next year! Then we read that the costs for those players was just too high (either in assets or money or both), but wait until next year! Same with payroll flexibility, we need to keep it to sign players, but then when they don't sign players it is because they need money to sign players next year.....

 

So, is there ever actually a year?

 

Indeed, I think this is the third year in a row I've asked this question now....

You missed the point that talking about what Ryan did or did not do is moot. Last I checked Ryan was a scout for the Phillies. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

You missed the point that talking about what Ryan did or did not do is moot. Last I checked Ryan was a scout for the Phillies. 

 

I'm talking about what people post, which is literally the same reason the Twins just can't get better, other than "draft better", "develop better", nothing in what people here are posting is changing, even with the new FO. 

 

So far, though, the new FO passed on fixing the SP at either the deadline or the off season.

[howieramone2]

 

You don't think they had enough prospects to get Gray or Quintana? when will they? We are in year 4 or 5 of the rebuild.....Houston did, in the same amount of time. Same with the Cubs.

Actually we just finished year 6 of the rebuild, and were in the hunt 2 of the 6 years. The Astros started 2 years before we did. The Cubbies are a large market team, and if a large market team is firing on all cylinders, we can't compete with them.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Actually we just finished year 6 of the rebuild, and were in the hunt 2 of the 6 years. The Astros started 2 years before we did. The Cubbies are a large market team, and if a large market team is firing on all cylinders, we can't compete with them.

 

so, it's good in year 6 they don't have a good enough minor league system to trade for good, cost controlled, starting pitching, or bad?