Go get Verlander

[Mike Sixel]

 

Errrr, I didn't say anything about not spending money.  They absolutely have to spend.  But they have to spend wisely.  Jumping into another big-money contract, and having that contract go sideways, would set the franchise back several years.  

 

Every year, every FA, people rightly point out the reasons not to sign every player. At some point, you have to take risks. There really are few WISE FA contracts. OTOH, sitting around waiting for all your prospects doesn't work either. So, sure, spend wisely. But they are a playoff team right now, do we know they will be next year? Things have broken right, I'd prefer they leap on the chance.

 

I understand that not everyone agrees, but we all know that next off season every FA comes with risk....and 20+ other teams will also be buying. So, food luck getting a SP as good or better than ESan has been, given the list of options.

 

And, no, I am not sure Verlander is the right choice. All I am relatively certain of, is that if they never try to go all in, they are not likely to win.

[Doubles]

Good discussion here- lotta really valid points brought up, even if we are not in unanimous agreement.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Good discussion here- lotta really valid points brought up, even if we are not in unanimous agreement.

 

agreed, also nice and respectful. thanks!

[USAFChief]

 

Darvish will come in over $20m per season but I'm not sure how much over. And five years was just throwing out a number, I have no issues with the Twins going longer term than that if required.

 

And Darvish was traded so the QO does not apply. In any case, I'm far less worried about losing a draft pick than I am losing a prospect who may contribute in the near future.

 

But I'm also not against trading prospects for a pitcher. Basically, go find a good pitcher with control. I don't really care how it's done but I'd prefer free agency if given the choice.

Darvish will get more than 5 years, at more than $20M per year.   6/$150, minimum.

 

In any case, he hasn't been much, if any, better than Verlander over the past couple years.  He's younger, for sure.

[AlwaysinModeration]

I'd rather get Verlander than Mike Leake, who is a worse pitcher and is owed nearly as much money (and was just traded to the Mariners).

 

If Verlander gets the Twins across the finish line to the play-offs (and maybe wins a wild card game in NY?), that would be worth it right there.

 

I agree that if the Twins take the entire contract, the asking price shouldn't be too high. However, the Tigers would likely need to get something back, to save some face with the fans.

 

I think Kohl Stewart seems like a decent offer. Maybe Stewart and the new reliever, Moya?

[AlwaysinModeration]

Just stopped by to say I appreciate the spirited, but reasoned and courteous discussion. TD is a good place.

 

Those of you who disagree are still wrong, of course, but wrong in a thoughtful manner.

Chief, I think you could / should copy and paste this at the bottom of every TD thread.

[nicksaviking]

 

Same here. I want more than another Santana if the Twins dip into free agency. My point was whether Verlander would actually be better than that $13-16m guy, not whether the Twins should pursue that guy in FA.

 

Verlander is marginally better than Santana right now, who is not only a $13-16m guy but also closing in on the back of his contract.

 

He might not be, but I think it's rare that you get a $13-16M guy except on a 4 year+ deal unless they too are aging. 

 

I don't think that money goes as far as it did even a couple of years ago if we're talking about pitchers in the 13-16M range. Last year Rich Hill was at the top of that range getting a deal with an average payout of 16M. So he's basically the top end of that range and also aging. So aside from getting lucky or intentionally mining for undervalued talent* I think if we want a known commodity that is a difference maker to fill out the rotation we realistically have to be talking about a 16-20M guy minimum. And on a long term deal.

 

*Something I fully support and expect this front office to do regardless if they acquire any big ticket players.

[Rosterman]

You can sign a guy for pretty much the same amount of money, probably much younger, and have the ability to maybe trade him off for prospects before the 5-7 year contract expires. Of course, you can also get an arm injury and hope you paid for insurance.

 

If there is depth in prospects (possibly outfield, most definite shortstop, plus a lot of treading water supposedly fine bullpen arms that could be passed by still more bullpen arms) you trade prospects from your depth...one being as good as, say, another.

 

You have 140 guys down on the farm and in the next 3-4 years no more than 20-25 will make any kind of major league impact, if even that...because you usually end up getting guys from elsewhere to add to your own depth that surpass your drafted prospects.

 

The idea is sound that getting a proven Verlander for 2-3 years is a good deal, and is he enough to send you thru the playoffs this season, and then you worry about next season?

 

Would Detroit want anyone from your current 40-man roster (Romero, Jorge, Rosario, Granite, Polanco, for example).

 

I would jsut free agent shop after the dust settles after the postseason and you start to address your depth and current roster more.

[wsnydes]

 

I'm not against mortgaging the future, my sticking point is whether Verlander is the guy you choose to do it. We both agree the Twins need to spend money and plug holes.

I'm against mortgaging the future, but spending money and/or trading prospects to acquire a guy that will be around for a few productive years that makes the club better is not mortgaging the future in my opinion.  There's obvious risk there.  The question goes back to who that right piece is.  I'm with you on that I'm not convinced that Verlander is that guy, but I'm not convinced that he's not either.  I tend to go back to trusting what the FO thinks they can get during the offseason.  If Verlander is the better than what they expect to acquire in the offseason, then I think this team is in a position where a deal makes sense.  If that isn't the case, I think you wait until the offseason.  There is always the chance that Verlander is still available at that point too.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Darvish will get more than 5 years, at more than $20M per year.   6/$150, minimum.

 

In any case, he hasn't been much, if any, better than Verlander over the past couple years.  He's younger, for sure.

Yeah, he'll probably be in the $25m range, which doesn't really matter much compared to $20m. It's a utility infielder difference.

 

And while Darvish hasn't been much better than Verlander recently, I have more confidence he'll be at that level for two more seasons where I'm not sure Verlander can do it. That's my biggest problem with a Verlander acquisition. He's been pretty good recently but he's at the age where he could turn pedestrian (or worse) in a hurry.

 

And that two window season should be the Twins' primary focus, IMO. Maybe they're good for 4+ seasons but I think they'll peak in 2019-2020.

[amjgt]

 

Yeah, he'll probably be in the $25m range, which doesn't really matter much compared to $20m. It's a utility infielder difference.

 

 

 

..... or a good 7th inning guy

[Tomj14]

 

The huge risk is that Verlander suddenly starts pitching like he's 35 years old and the Twins have no payroll space to resolve that problem. It's a mid-term problem and only really affects 2018 (after which Mauer comes off the books and opens payroll space) but the Twins' window might only be 2-3 seasons, at which point you're closing the door on 33% or more of your contention window.

 

Whereas if you go pick up another decent pitcher for $20m per year over 4-5 seasons, you're getting the front end of that contract during your contention window, a time when that pitcher is likely 29-31 years old. Every pitcher is a risk but the front of a contract is less risky than the back.

Agreed that would be a risk (I am not sure Verlander is the answer either, I just don't see much out there to trade for or sign), but when ever weighing the risks, how much more of risk is that than the prospects don't pan out or are not ready next year?

Also if this site is correct I don't see any pitcher out there that I want to spend 15+ million a year on. Although Cobb does interest me)

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/starting-pitcher/

[Mike Sixel]

current FA list, starting with guys I have no interest in at all.

 

Anibal Sanchez (34) — $16MM club option with a $5MM buyout-----hahahahaha
Bartolo Colon (45)---and you think Verlander is old?
Brett Anderson (30)----hahahahahaha
CC Sabathia (37)-----hahahahaha
Chris Sale (29) — $12.5MM club option with a $1MM buyout----not gonna be a FA
Chris Tillman (30)----one of the worst pitchers in the game this year
Chris Young (39) — $8MM mutual option with a $1.5MM buyout----just a bit old
Clay Buchholz (33)----is he even playing?
Clayton Richard (34)----hahahahaha
Derek Holland (31)----hahahahahaha
Doug Fister (34)-----hahahahahaha
Francisco Liriano (34)----hahahaha
Gio Gonzalez (32) – $12MM club option with $500K buyout; vests with 180 innings pitched in 2017----won’t be a FA
Hector Santiago (30)-----kind of have my doubts
Ian Kennedy (33) — Can opt out of the remaining three years, $43MM on his contract-----hahahahaha
Jaime Garcia (31)-----no thanks
Jered Weaver (35)----hahahahaha
Jesse Chavez (34)---too old
John Danks (33)---hahahahahaha
John Lackey (39)----hahahaha
Johnny Cueto (32) — Can opt out of the remaining four years, $84MM on his contract—no chance he opts out now
Jordan Lyles (27)----ya, no, not good
Jorge De La Rosa (37)------hahahahahaha
Josh Tomlin (33) — $3MM club option with a $750K buyout----ya, so they either keep him, or he’s not worth $3MM
Madison Bumgarner (28) — $12MM club option with a $1.5M buyout---not going to be free agent
Marco Estrada (34)----older, not great….why bother?
Martin Perez (27) — $6MM club option with a $2.45MM buyout------well, at that price, they either keep him or he’s bad, really bad
Matt Cain (33) — $21MM club option with a $7.5MM buyout----when was he last good?
Matt Garza (34) — $13MM vesting option/$5MM club option (can become $1MM club option based on DL time)---no way
Matt Moore (29) — $9MM club option with a $1MM buyout---no thanks. Just not good.
Michael Pineda (29)----out with TJ surgery
Miguel Gonzalez (34)----kind of old
Nathan Eovaldi (28) — $2MM club option---if he’s good, won’t they keep him for that?
R.A. Dickey (43) — $8MM club option with $500K buyout----------no chance he’s good
Ricky Nolasco (35) — $13MM club option with a $1MM buyout---hahahahahaha
Scott Feldman (35)----hahahahaha
Trevor Cahill (30)-----not interested at all. Is anyone?
Ubaldo Jimenez (34)----too old
Wei-Yin Chen (32) — Can opt out of the remaining three years, $52MM on his contract---injured, why would he opt out?
Yovani Gallardo (32) — $13MM club option with a $2MM buyout----if he’s good, they’ll keep him
Masahiro Tanaka (29) — Can opt out of the remaining three years, $67MM on his contract----so, if he opts out of that, you are paying him more and the Yankees aren’t buying him back?

 

These guys might be worth signing. that's it.
Alex Cobb (30)----possibly worth signing?
Andrew Cashner (31)----possibly worth signing
Jake Arrieta (32)----not young, not aging well, going to be costly, how good is he now?
Jason Vargas (35)----kinda old, you MIGHT go 1 year
Jhoulys Chacin (30)-----possibly worth signing, but he’s never had 1 good year all year
Lance Lynn (31)----I like this possibility. I’d explore this. Most likely future Twin.
Tyler Chatwood (28)---interesting candidate, would need to look at underlying data, but won’t CO re-sign him?
Yu Darvish (31)-----probably the top choice here. I can’t see the Twins winning the bidding for the top player
Jeremy Hellickson (31)----one good year. A tease. Is he actually any good?
Tyson Ross (31)-----flyer back from injury that wasn’t great before
Wade Miley (31) — $12MM club option with a $500K buyout---not a believer, but I can see why some might be tempted

[nicksaviking]

 

 

And that two window season should be the Twins' primary focus, IMO. Maybe they're good for 4+ seasons but I think they'll peak in 2019-2020.

 

Wouldn't that be a reason to trade for him then? There's so little on the free agent market and realistically any trade target is likely going to be affordable and controlable.

 

Honestly, his two years remaining is a big plus in my book, not a negative. If this team could sign free agents on two year deals instead of four year deals I'd be thrilled. I don't care about the money commitment, I care about the years. I don't care how much dead-weight is there, I just care that it can be set free in a timely manner. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Wouldn't that be a reason to trade for him then? There's so little on the free agent market and realistically any trade target is likely going to be affordable and controlable.

 

Honestly, his two years remaining is a big plus in my book, not a negative. If this team could sign free agents on two year deals instead of four year deals I'd be thrilled. I don't care about the money commitment, I care about the years. I don't care how much dead-weight is there, I just care that it can be set free in a timely manner. 

That's fair. Again, my concern isn't about Justin Verlander today, it's Justin Verlander in 2018 and 19. If you're confident he'll be the same pitcher in two years, you go get that guy.

 

Well, within reason. If the Tigers ask for Gordon, you politely tell them the fastest and most direct route straight to hell. But for Gonsalves, you start negotiating.

[whydidnt]

 

That's fair. Again, my concern isn't about Justin Verlander today, it's Justin Verlander in 2018 and 19. If you're confident he'll be the same pitcher in two years, you go get that guy.

 

Well, within reason. If the Tigers ask for Gordon, you politely tell them the fastest and most direct route straight to hell. But for Gonsalves, you start negotiating.

Funny, I was thinking this might be the best time to maximize value for Gordon. I just think his ceiling is so low that the best he's going to be is an average middle IF. Definitely has value, but would be willing to deal him for a shot at the playoffs plus 2 more years. I might consider Gosalves, but think long term he may be more valuable to the Twins. I'm not saying he's necessarily a better prospect, but I tend to lean towards higher risk/reward type guys.

 

[Vanimal46]

 

Funny, I was thinking this might be the best time to maximize value for Gordon. I just think his ceiling is so low that the best he's going to be is an average middle IF. Definitely has value, but would be willing to deal him for a shot at the playoffs plus 2 more years. I might consider Gosalves, but think long term he may be more valuable to the Twins. I'm not saying he's necessarily a better prospect, but I tend to lean towards higher risk/reward type guys.

 

Concur. I've been on the sell high bandwagon for months with Gordon. I don't know if Verlander is the target to trade away Gordon, but he's certainly not untouchable like some on here want. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Funny, I was thinking this might be the best time to maximize value for Gordon. I just think his ceiling is so low that the best he's going to be is an average middle IF. Definitely has value, but would be willing to deal him for a shot at the playoffs plus 2 more years. I might consider Gosalves, but think long term he may be more valuable to the Twins. I'm not saying he's necessarily a better prospect, but I tend to lean towards higher risk/reward type guys.

Gordon is absolutely the higher reward guy of the two. You're underrating just how valuable a good defending, good hitting shortstop is in the majors. That's a 4+ WAR player. And that's if Gordon just performs to his reasonable capability. Gonsalves' reasonable capability is #3 starter if you squint a little. Probably more realistically, he's a #3/4. That's a, what, 3-ish WAR player? Gordon's ceiling is perennial All-Star, a 5+ WAR player. Gonsalves' ceiling... isn't that high. Maybe a very good #3 with the occasional #2 season.

 

Gordon doesn't wow with any single skill but he's average or better in pretty much every regard. That's a very good up-the-middle player.

 

I think people tend to overlook just how hard it is to find a shortstop who's pretty good at everything. The Twins haven't had that player since... Roy Smalley? Gagne couldn't hit, Guzman wasn't very good at anything other than running.

 

We're talking four decades of not being able to field a guy with the rounded skillset of Gordon.

 

And I'm not even that high on Gordon. I think he'll be an acceptable hitter, probably a good fielder. But add that up and it's super-valuable. There's a reason Gordon will be a consensus top 50 prospect this offseason.

[whydidnt]

 

Gordon is absolutely the higher reward guy of the two. You're underrating just how valuable a good defending, good hitting shortstop is in the majors. That's a 4+ WAR player.

 

Gordon doesn't wow with any single skill but he's average or better in pretty much every regard. That's a very good up-the-middle player.

 

I think people tend to overlook just how hard it is to find a shortstop who's pretty good at everything. The Twins haven't had that player since... Roy Smalley? Gagne couldn't hit, Guzman wasn't very good at anything other than running.

 

We're talking four decades of not being able to field a guy with the rounded skillset of Gordon.

 

And I'm not even that high on Gordon. I think he'll be an acceptable hitter, probably a good fielder. But add that up and it's super-valuable. There's a reason Gordon will be a consensus top 50 prospect this offseason.

I guess I disagree regarding his bat, but hope I'm wrong. He's got a career OPS of .721 and even this year (his best) it's .756. Pretty average, IMO. Yes, he's young for the level, but I just don't see him developing into more than a .260 hitting guy with little power or speed. There's even been some question about his ability to stay at SS long term. If he can't stay at SS, his value is even lower. I think best case is he's a middle of the pack SS. Yes, better than what we've had, but not a true difference maker. I think when he gets to the majors his plate discipline is going lose some of it's value, as pitchers aren't going to be afraid to pitch to him, due to his lack of power. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I guess I disagree regarding his bat, but hope I'm wrong. He's got a career OPS of .721 and even this year (his best) it's .756. Pretty average, IMO. Yes, he's young for the level, but I just don't see him developing into more than a .260 hitting guy with little power or speed. There's even been some question about his ability to stay at SS long term. If he can't stay at SS, his value is even lower. I think best case is he's a middle of the pack SS. Yes, better than what we've had, but not a true difference maker. I think when he gets to the majors his plate discipline is going lose some of it's value, as pitchers aren't going to be afraid to pitch to him, due to his lack of power. 

He had an OPS over .800 just a few weeks ago. And last season, he was in the FSL, which destroys hitters.

 

He's 21 years old and appears to be wearing down again this season. That's not uncommon, particularly for a guy as lean as he is right now.

 

But everything is trending in the right direction with his bat. He's more patient and he's showing more power this season.

 

Give that guy a year or two more and maybe 5-10 lbs. He may end up an average bat or he may end up a .775-.800 bat, which is worth a ton at shortstop.

[Mike Sixel]

.260 would be the 12 highest BA of any qualified SS in MLB right now. I don't think people realize how low BA are these days.....

 

top 10 fWAR for SS will be around 2.0 this year. 

 

I think people underestimate Gordon's relative value.....in context of MLB SS because there are 5-7 really, really good ones, and everyone else.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think people underestimate Gordon's relative value.....in context of MLB SS because there are 5-7 really, really good ones, and everyone else.

Yeah, exactly. Just because Gordon won't be Correa doesn't mean he won't be really valuable.

 

Never mind the fallback value of any player at shortstop. They can fall downward anywhere on the diamond and likely still be competent, if not good at the position.

[nicksaviking]

 

That's fair. Again, my concern isn't about Justin Verlander today, it's Justin Verlander in 2018 and 19. If you're confident he'll be the same pitcher in two years, you go get that guy.

 

Well, within reason. If the Tigers ask for Gordon, you politely tell them the fastest and most direct route straight to hell. But for Gonsalves, you start negotiating.

 

I wouldn't be 'comfortable' with Verlander, but I wouldn't be comfortable with any free agent pitcher or trade target. I can say I'd be more comfortable with Justin Verlander taking up a roster spot this year and next than I would be with Kyle Gibson. 

 

But we're talking about pitchers so my year-to-year uncertainty is going to be there with anyone they trade for or sign. The uncertainty typically does grow with age, but it decreases with velocity and Verlander still has ++velocity. Either way, I'd not worry as much about dead weight salary in 2018-19 than I would in the years beyond as I'd like to think the team has to deal with big contracts for Sano, Buxton, Berrios and others by then. Two years just seems like a low risk, except from a purely monetary standpoint. There's just so little to spend the money on right now.

 

 

[Tomj14]

 

Gordon is absolutely the higher reward guy of the two. You're underrating just how valuable a good defending, good hitting shortstop is in the majors. That's a 4+ WAR player. And that's if Gordon just performs to his baseline capability. Gonsalves' baseline capability is #3 starter if you squint a little. Probably more realistically, he's a #3/4. That's a, what, 3-ish WAR player? Gordon's ceiling is perennial All-Star, a 5+ WAR player. Gonsalves' ceiling... isn't that high. Maybe a very good #3 with the occasional #2 season.

 

Gordon doesn't wow with any single skill but he's average or better in pretty much every regard. That's a very good up-the-middle player.

 

I think people tend to overlook just how hard it is to find a shortstop who's pretty good at everything. The Twins haven't had that player since... Roy Smalley? Gagne couldn't hit, Guzman wasn't very good at anything other than running.

 

We're talking four decades of not being able to field a guy with the rounded skillset of Gordon.

 

And I'm not even that high on Gordon. I think he'll be an acceptable hitter, probably a good fielder. But add that up and it's super-valuable. There's a reason Gordon will be a consensus top 50 prospect this offseason.

With all that he is hitting .272 with 124 K's in 492 at bats, been caught stealing 7 times in 20 tries and has 21 errors. Yes, I know he is young for the league and I know I am cherry picking stats, but nothing there tells me he is a FOR SURE 10-15 year starting shortstop in the majors, I hope like heck if we don't trade him he is. 

 

[Vanimal46]

 

He had an OPS over .800 just a few weeks ago. And last season, he was in the FSL, which destroys hitters.

 

He's 21 years old and appears to be wearing down again this season. That's not uncommon, particularly for a guy as lean as he is right now.

 

But everything is trending in the right direction with his bat. He's more patient and he's showing more power this season.

 

Give that guy a year or two more and maybe 5-10 lbs. He may end up an average bat or he may end up a .775-.800 bat, which is worth a ton at shortstop.

 

He may end up being that. He still has a long ways to go against LH pitching, where he's OPS'ing .525 this season. .530 the season before that. 

I just don't know how you can be an everyday SS and quite valuable when there's a massive hole in his game like that. 

[snap4birds]

 

 

 

Lance Lynn (31)----I like this possibility. I’d explore this. Most likely future Twin.
 

I think the trade of Leake means the Cardinals are going to try to re-sign Lynn.   A month ago, it seemed they had too many SP's to re-sign Lynn, so they'd either trade him at the deadline or give him a QO & take the draft pick.  Lance might still go thru free agency (Boras client?), but this shows just how hard it is to get even a #3 pitcher in FA.  I consider Lance to be a very decent #3.  If he's your 4th or 5th best starter, you've got a playoff team (assuming they stay relatively healthy).

[Mike Sixel]

 

I think the trade of Leake means the Cardinals are going to try to re-sign Lynn.   A month ago, it seemed they had too many SP's to re-sign Lynn, so they'd either trade him at the deadline or give him a QO & take the draft pick.  Lance might still go thru free agency (Boras client?), but this shows just how hard it is to get even a #3 pitcher in FA.  I consider Lance to be a very decent #3.  If he's your 4th or 5th best starter, you've got a playoff team (assuming they stay relatively healthy).

 

good point. I bet he hits FA, but will be a tough sign.

[USAFChief]

 

.260 would be the 12 highest BA of any qualified SS in MLB right now. I don't think people realize how low BA are these days.....

 

top 10 fWAR for SS will be around 2.0 this year. 

 

I think people underestimate Gordon's relative value.....in context of MLB SS because there are 5-7 really, really good ones, and everyone else.

What that means to me is, if he's not one of those 5-7 really, really good ones, then he's not really worth very much.  He'd be in the "everyone else" group, which doesn't do a whole lot for your team, and isn't particularly hard to find in trade or free agency.  He'd be cheap, though, for a while, which is worth something, if you use the savings elsewhere.

 

That said, I wouldn't be in favor of trading Gordon for Verlander, and I don't think it takes that much.  It'd mostly take money....which I admit is easy for me to spend (since it's not mine), but which I think it's fair to say the Twins have and can spend.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

What that means to me is, if he's not one of those 5-7 really, really good ones, then he's not really worth very much.  He'd be in the "everyone else" group, which doesn't do a whole lot for your team, and isn't particularly hard to find in trade or free agency.  He'd be cheap, though, for a while, which is worth something, if you use the savings elsewhere.

 

That said, I wouldn't be in favor of trading Gordon for Verlander, and I don't think it takes that much.  It'd mostly take money....which I admit is easy for me to spend (since it's not mine), but which I think it's fair to say the Twins have and can spend.

 

Well, the everyone else group includes some pretty bad players, and only 23 teams have qualified SS.....as I said, 2 fWAR will be around the 10th best this year! Only 16 teams have a guy that will for sure reach 1.0 WAR this year......

[nicksaviking]

 

I think the trade of Leake means the Cardinals are going to try to re-sign Lynn.   A month ago, it seemed they had too many SP's to re-sign Lynn, so they'd either trade him at the deadline or give him a QO & take the draft pick.  Lance might still go thru free agency (Boras client?), but this shows just how hard it is to get even a #3 pitcher in FA.  I consider Lance to be a very decent #3.  If he's your 4th or 5th best starter, you've got a playoff team (assuming they stay relatively healthy).

 

I like Lynn, and I want to like him on the Twins, but he's pretty much a two pitch pitcher. I'm not sure he'd fare too well in the AL.He seems to dabble with a curve and a change but not seriously for about three years. If I was confident he could use them and use them competently I'd be quite interested.