Please pass on Yu Darvish Twins

[darin617]

As much as it would be good for a couple of years it would not be a wise decision to invest over $150M for a SP who by the way will be turning 32 in August. I thought teams were getting smarter not attempting to sign pitchers over 30 to such long term deals.

 

Sure, teams like New York & LA can stomach signing someone knowing that the last 2-3 years the pitcher won't be worth half is salary. The Twins are not that type of team.

[Hollywood42]

All depends on how many years. If we can get him to a 4 year deal, it's absolutely worth it, even if we have to pay $25ish million each year. If he's absolutely not willing to take less than 6 years, then it starts to become more of a question. You do have to consider that we'll need to be looking at extending Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Berrios, Kepler, and so on in the next few years. But the bottom line is that our team desperately needs a true #1 ace starter, and getting one would, I believe, set us up for a deep playoff run. Darvish is the best opportunity we've had in forever to get an ace through free agency, and it would be arrogant to not at least explore that option

[KirbyDome89]

3 years puts Buxton, Sano, and Rosario on the cusp of FA. The fact that the Twins don't have projected front end talent moving through the system during that time doesn't help. They're going to have to either sign pitching or trade for it. Personally I would rather give up $ than prospects. 

[darin617]

Scott Boras is his agent. Pretty much no way he takes less than 6 years.

[Riverbrian]

 

Scott Boras is his agent. Pretty much no way he takes less than 6 years.

 

If by Boras you mean Joel Wolfe of Wasserman Media Group.

 

I don't believe that Darvish will be holding out for 6 years while turning down 5 so he can stay on the sidelines without a team into May. If he did... his tweets would get interesting. 

 

Anyway... It's my opinion that whenever anyone says... I will do X years but not Y Years or I will do X amount of dollars but not Y amount of dollars. You end up X and Y'ing yourself out of the top end of Free Agency. 

 

You are turning off that spigot forever. If you are waiting for that 27 year FA  that makes a 6 year contract less risky... so is every other team and his value goes up accordingly. And... those agents like to throw you a curve ball and ask for a 10 year deal with the 27 year old so you pay to age 37 anyway. 

 

The price of a free agent is the price of a free agent and drawing a line in the sand will only get you a line in the sand. 

 

If you want the player... You have to pay the price that will complete the transaction. 

 

You obviously don't want the player. We disagree on that... I want the player.     

 

 

[Jham]

As much as it would be good for a couple of years it would not be a wise decision to invest over $150M for a SP who by the way will be turning 32 in August. I thought teams were getting smarter not attempting to sign pitchers over 30 to such long term deals.

 

Sure, teams like New York & LA can stomach signing someone knowing that the last 2-3 years the pitcher won't be worth half is salary. The Twins are not that type of team.

What would Darvish command on a 1 year deal? How much would you have to pay him to turn down the additional years and money? $50-$60 mil? Then he's a free agent? Is he worth that? No. You'd be overpaying. So you're getting him at a market discount over the first couple years. You've financed the contract out over more payments.

 

What you're actually having a problem with is the inflated cosy of high end free agents. Is a Manny's steak 5x as good as Applebee's? No. But is it significantly better? Of course. Pay the premium price or you never get the premium experience.

[nicksaviking]

 

As much as it would be good for a couple of years it would not be a wise decision to invest over $150M for a SP who by the way will be turning 32 in August. I thought teams were getting smarter not attempting to sign pitchers over 30 to such long term deals.

 

Sure, teams like New York & LA can stomach signing someone knowing that the last 2-3 years the pitcher won't be worth half is salary. The Twins are not that type of team.

 

Why aren't they? That's the exact same position they've been in with Mauer for a half decade and it hasn't had any impact on payroll.

 

If spending on a top free agent arm isn't appealing, what is the plan for matching up with Houston, Cleveland, Boston and NY in the playoffs? Are we just going to be satisfied to get there and making off season plans in the first week of October?

 

I'm not; I'd rather have a team that misses the playoffs but has a chance to win it all than have a team that makes the playoffs but doesn't.

[Platoon]

By the end of this off season, one should have a fairly good handle on the Twins new MO. But, it may be not as new as we would have liked. It could be the "new improved" version of their old MO. At this point they do not seem serious about a big buck FA acquisition, nor have they made any indication of making a blockbuster trade for a frontline SP. which leaves us with the upgraded TwinsWorld2. This version continues the ever popular economically conservative roster tweaking, and combines it with a modern system of analytics, scouting, drafting and player improvement. As an added attraction, a change in the motif of one of the drinking establishment in Target Field will be included at no additional cost. . Sarcasm aside, it is not an undoable process. While it does rely on being smarter than everyone in the room, it is also the only competitive alternative to a controlled payroll and limited trading philosophy. It could work, but if and when it does, the core group of players on this roster will not be involved in the result.

[howieramone2]

 

Why aren't they? That's the exact same position they've been in with Mauer for a half decade and it hasn't had any impact on payroll.

 

If spending on a top free agent arm isn't appealing, what is the plan for matching up with Houston, Cleveland, Boston and NY in the playoffs? Are we just going to be satisfied to get there and making off season plans in the first week of October?

 

I'm not; I'd rather have a team that misses the playoffs but has a chance to win it all than have a team that makes the playoffs but doesn't.

In 2-3 years Darvish will be the next Nick Blackburn. When they dump him in the pen, he'll be the next Jim Hoey.

[nicksaviking]

 

In 2-3 years Darvish will be the next Nick Blackburn. When they dump him in the pen, he'll be the next Jim Hoey.

 

Holding aside the fact that Nick Blackburn is a terrible comp for Darvish in just about every way you can evaluate pitchers, if your scenario holds true, at least they'll be giving themselves a shot to win in the first 2-3 years. So what if the last couple he's not worth his contract?

[howieramone2]

 

At least they'll be giving themselves a shot to win in the first 2-3 years. So what if the last couple he's not worth his contract?

We have already won 2 of the past 3 years. Let me provide some foresight. When we are staring at our computers after the 2021 season, we will have won 6 of the past 7 years. Few, if any, mid-market teams will be able to say that.

[nicksaviking]

 

We have already won 2 of the past 3 years. Let me provide some foresight. When we are staring at our computers after the 2021 season, we will have won 6 of the past 7 years. Few, if any, mid-market teams will be able to say that.

 

I see zero WS trophies since 1991. I haven't seen a playoff win in over a decade and a half. This team hasn't won squat. Getting to the playoffs and losing ASAP isn't good enough for most of us, and that's right where they're headed once again unless they get significantly better starters.

[howieramone2]

I see zero WS trophies since 1991. I haven't seen a playoff win in over a decade and a half. This team hasn't won squat. Getting to the playoffs and losing ASAP isn't good enough for most of us, and that's right where they're headed once again unless they get significantly better starters.

You are hardly qualified to speak for the millions of loyal and knowledgeable Twins fans out there. On any fan board you are always going to find fan members, who feel if you don't win the final game, you have failed. Just as you will find members where the train is not exactly on the track.

[cmoss84]

3/100 for Darvish would be perfect. 

[USAFChief]

 

You are hardly qualified to speak for the millions of loyal and knowledgeable Twins fans out there. On any fan board you are always going to find fan members, who feel if you don't win the final game, you have failed. Just as you will find members where the train is not exactly on the track.

I betcha every single Twins player, coach, and administrative person from the Owner to the assistant office manager would also agree that the team has not reached it's goal since 1991.

 

I also don't believe you're qualified to guarantee the results of the next several seasons.

 

[TheLeviathan]

It doesn't have to be Darvish.  

 

But it does have to be significantly more than "nothing".

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

You are hardly qualified to speak for the millions of loyal and knowledgeable Twins fans out there. On any fan board you are always going to find fan members, who feel if you don't win the final game, you have failed. Just as you will find members where the train is not exactly on the track.

Nick is no more qualified than you are to speak for fans... so with that said, let's drop this tangent as it will get us nowhere.

 

and yes, this is a mod warning.

[ashbury]

3/100 for Darvish would be perfect. 

Then you're saying, don't make an offer to Darvish? Because 3/100 is a waste of breath.

[Mike Sixel]

 

In 2-3 years Darvish will be the next Nick Blackburn. When they dump him in the pen, he'll be the next Jim Hoey.

 

What's a reatlistic alternative for acquiring good pitching, if they should not pay for it on the FA market? No team wins w/o trades and FAs.

[howieramone2]

It doesn't have to be Darvish.  

 

But it does have to be significantly more than "nothing".

I can guarantee it will be significantly more than nothing. The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding. They did it at the trade deadline when they picked up 4 arms, after they blinked by trading the pig with lipstick to the Yankees. When Marte could not pass his physical, they picked up 2 players BA had in the top 100 going into the 2017 draft, then used 2018 money for a top prospect made available by Atlanta doing the naughty.

 

If we don't sign Darvish, I certainly hope membership waits for the fat lady to sing, before considering jumping off the ledge.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I can guarantee it will be significantly more than nothing. The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding. They did it at the trade deadline when they picked up 4 arms, after they blinked by trading the pig with lipstick to the Yankees. When Marte could not pass his physical, they picked up 2 players BA had in the top 100 going into the 2017 draft, then used 2018 money for a top prospect made available by Atlanta doing the naughty.

If we don't sign Darvish, I certainly hope membership waits for the fat lady to sing, before considering jumping off the ledge.

 

 I said nothing about any of that.  You spun my post well off the rails and on to something I never said nor implied.  

 

As of the time you read this post and it is on Twinsdaily, the Twins will have done nothing to add to their mix of starting pitchers.

 

I simply want the end result by opening day to be more than nothing.  It could absolutely still happen in the time between now and opening day....but time is ticking.  

[Doomtints]

 

I can guarantee it will be significantly more than nothing. The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding. 

 

I don't even know how to word this in a way which won't start a war, so let me say right off that I'm not attacking YOU, but these ideas strike me as pretty far out there and worth discussing.

 

You don't know where this will land, saying it will be "significant" is a bit crazy because it's a very thin market. There are two "significant" pitchers available and a handful of number twos/threes.

 

It's also hard to call them masters of anything without seeing championship rings on their fingers. They made the playoffs, but they only needed a .500 record to do so. It was a down year in the AL. They played great in August, but that's also the one month the AL was interesting for many teams.

 

 

[cmoss84]

 

Then you're saying, don't make an offer to Darvish? Because 3/100 is a waste of breath.

I didn't say 3/100 was likely...I said it would be perfect. Stranger contracts have been signed, especially when they are signed late January/early February.

 

I'm sure many scenarios and options are thrown out during contract negotiations-not sure it would be a waste of breath though.  

[cmoss84]

Also, if you look at the teams supposedly in the running, most of the ballparks are hitter-friendly...cubs/brewers/rangers. Maybe he would sacrifice 2 years of contract for not being in the spotlight and/or playing in a pitcher-friendly park. I'm fairly certain 100 million would be enough to get by the rest of your life, even if you didn't have another "big" payday. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I can guarantee it will be significantly more than nothing. The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding. They did it at the trade deadline when they picked up 4 arms

You're selling yourself short here -- each of those pitchers acquired at the deadline actually had 2 arms. So the Twins acquired 8 arms total!  None of those 8 arms made our postseason roster, or contributed much of anything to our playoff push, or are projected to make our 2018 opening day roster, but there were in fact 8 of them.

 

 

I can guarantee it will be significantly more than nothing. The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding. They did it at the trade deadline when they picked up 4 arms, after they blinked by trading the pig with lipstick to the Yankees. When Marte could not pass his physical, they picked up 2 players BA had in the top 100 going into the 2017 draft, then used 2018 money for a top prospect made available by Atlanta doing the naughty.

Don't you usually refer dismissively to players not currently contributing in MLB as "pie in the sky"?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Also, if you look at the teams supposedly in the running, most of the ballparks are hitter-friendly...cubs/brewers/rangers. Maybe he would sacrifice 2 years of contract for not being in the spotlight and/or playing in a pitcher-friendly park. I'm fairly certain 100 million would be enough to get by the rest of your life, even if you didn't have another "big" payday. 

 

that's not how people think, generally. Would you turn down an additional 40-50MM dollars to play in a different park? I certainly wouldn't.

[cmoss84]

If I am in my early 30's and get offered more per year on a shorter contract (lets say 33 compared to 25) and I am able to pitch in a ballpark of my choice, it is something I would consider.

 

 

[ashbury]

All depends on how many years. If we can get him to a 4 year deal, it's absolutely worth it, even if we have to pay $25ish million each year. If he's absolutely not willing to take less than 6 years, then it starts to become more of a question.

Well, that's the dilemma, isn't it? If he was willing to take 4/$100M, he'd already be signed. Probably not by the Twins, because 25-29 other front offices would likely take him at that price, and he'd get his pick of teams. Every team can make this same calculation and pull the trigger, if he'd accept.

 

Yes, a longer contract for more money than this will almost surely be dead money. Why do I not care? In effect an overpay in free agency is the Failure Penalty^* for not having developed a difference-maker at a given position. In the case of front-line starting pitchers, Berrios is still a Maybe, and only ESan really qualifies; you need more than one.

 

We're in this position because Terry Ryan, a good baseball man, didn't deliver in this area. He did apparently deliver profits each and every year, even when the team was bad. To me, that is a false profit (pun intended, I guess). Pro sports aren't like the average business, and to me there should be no presumption that profits are guaranteed through thick and thin. Ownership needs to recognize that the cash they tucked away 2012-14, an era when paying more than they did for new players probably would indeed have been a waste, isn't really theirs to keep.

 

I realize that "ashburynobody" presuming to tell billionaires how to spend their money carries no weight with them. And I'm not saying they should keep shelling out money for free agents without limit.

 

All I'm saying is, by my bookkeeping, they are currently in arrears, and they aren't admitting it.

 

Almost certainly, a deal for 3 years or more receives scrutiny from this (or any) ownership. That's assuming they are happy with the top guys in the front office; they won't be firing them for a couple of years, so they set a budget and then let their guys work within it, for 1- and 2-year deals. But a deal for many years may be an albatross for a future GM, if they need to fire the current one, and they won't be able to hire a good one with that albatross, so ownership has to be prepared to eat a bad contract and let the new GM start with a relatively clean slate, if they sign off on it.

 

This is the moment when ownership needs to step up and make that commitment to taking on potentially dead money later on, in the interest of getting the best starting pitcher available.

 

* _{Actually I would call it the Stupidity Tax, if a GM has a self-deprecating sense of humor and recognizes that everyone finds themselves in the unfortunate situation from time to time.}

[ashbury]

The new regime has proven to be masters at rebounding.

Now they're immediately evidence of front office mastery, and proof that major MLB acquisitions are forthcoming?

Moderator's note: This tangent is turning into yet another referendum on the front office, and I'd like to ask that it not be pursued further here. Start a new thread, or get back to the topic at hand.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

that's not how people think, generally. Would you turn down an additional 40-50MM dollars to play in a different park? I certainly wouldn't.

if I were in Darvish’s shoes I’d be less worried about AAV and more worried about total and length. At 32, most likely this is his last multi year contract of his career. He needs to maximize total and length.