The Twins should sign Yu Darvish, regardless of price

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Why would we all do the same? Not everyone has an unrealistic view of their worth. It was reported by Yankee reporter Michael Kay that Darvish received a 7 year 160 offer after Darvish said he got no offer. Then Darvish took to Twitter to say he got an offer, but those terms were not right.

 

There is a lot of weirdness around this guy. Tough to reach, tough to communicate with effectively and I am unsure he is being truthful as far as the Yankees offer. If the offer was anything close to what Kay reported then Darvish is delusional.

it was a miscommunication via a medium limited to 140 (or whatever number) characters. I can see why that might happen. I don’t read too much into it. Maybe the “term” missed was really “informal offer pending clearing salary”.

 

Nothing’s moving so the Yanks moved on.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Since all this Darvish talk began I have been scanning my mind to find guys who came to a team as a free agent (at age 31) and assumed the role of ace after not pitching 200 innings for a number of years. I can't find one.

Darvish was 24th in MLB in innings in 2017 (not counting postseason). That would be over 200 innings for most of MLB history, but the game is different today. Analysis has to adjust.

[ewen21]

 

Seems like the TWins might currently be high offer.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/02/latest-on-brewers-search-for-a-starter.html

Looks like Darvish is holding out for a big player like the Cubs or Yankees to clear space and start a bidding war.

Why would the Twins up their own ante? Just wait it out.

 

The Yankees are earnestly trying to stay under the luxury tax threshold.  I live in NY state and heard this refrain on WFAN not long after I moved in July and it has been a theme.  Then they signed Stanton.

 

I don't think the Yankees are going to go too far going for Darvish.  This harkens back to the "bidding war" between the Red Sox and Yankees for Johan.  There was no real bidding war.  The difficulty in that case was trying to convince the Twins.  Here Darvish has the veto power.  I think Darvish and his people are being even more foolish than Bill Smith was during the Johan situation.

 

I think Darvish missed the boat.  I think that if he is expecting/holding out for Strasburg money then he will be not only be sitting on the sidelines through the open of training camp (not a good look for him), but also losing out on money and years.

[ewen21]

 

Darvish was 24th in MLB in innings in 2017 (not counting postseason). That would be over 200 innings for most of MLB history, but the game is different today. Analysis has to adjust.

 

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?

[Riverbrian]

 

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?

 

I have no idea but they might be trying to adjust it and it's causing the hold up. All the GM's and Support staff are seeing what you are pointing out about the contracts and production. 

 

And as a result... the players and the agents are starting to speak up because they are sensing an adjustment. 

 

Ultimately tho... The CBA would have to be adjusted to make an adjustment. 

 

Full disclosure... I'm on the players side... they are not hurting for money so I'm not losing sleep but I am on the players side. 

 

For 6 years... Players are controllable. The players have no choice at all.

 

For the first 6 years... Lorenzo Cain was paid 21.5M. Based on his production over that time... you could say that he was very underpaid in comparison. 

 

When Cain reaches free agency he finally gets leverage. (Only for those who are good enough to survive the first 6 years). This is Lorenzo's time to use that leverage... play where he wants to play instead of what team drafted him and held him securely.  

 

The Problem players run into with the CBA is that they are controlled over their most productive years so once GM"s starting looking at the metrics... like you have. They start questioning the value of signing long contracts and when they refuse to offer them. We get long hold outs... we get players threatening to strike and agents starting to point fingers... because the players held up their end of the bargain... they allowed themselves to be underpaid (by industry standards) to wait for the pay day and now the teams are saying... hey wait a second... we don't want to pay you here either. 

 

You raise a very valid point... but as you can see... the system was designed for this very thing. 

 

I don't know who said it... but there is a quote that I absolutely love: 

 

"Your systems are perfectly designed to give you the results you are getting".

 

Brandon Moss was saying the same thing. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/truth-moss-free-agent-freeze-out-article-1.3797095

 

 

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

As far as his age is concerned, a decline is inevitable. That isn't a claim or an opinion. That is a fact.

A future decline can be assumed to be a "fact" over a large enough sample, but 1 year of 1 pitcher is not a large enough sample. Darvish himself saw a 56% increase in WAR from age 29 to 30. Does that invalidate aging curves? No, 1 year of Darvish is just one data point among thousands. The average over all the thousands would be a decline, but a substantial number each year improved or held steady.

 

Even over a sample of 5 years, for 1 pitcher, just through normal statistical variation, you might see 1 year of a notable increase, 1 year of small decline, 1 year of small gain, 1 year of holding steady, and 1 year of notable decline. This isn't really dependent on pitcher quality either -- just picking a past Twins name at random, Kevin Tapani's 2nd best WAR season was age 32. Age 34 was virtually the same WAR as age 28. Age 36 was the same WAR as age 30. Age 33 was actually the 2nd best season of his career by rate, but only 13 starts. Over 5 years, you could see the decline, but he still had valuable seasons within those 5 years.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Just has contract terms have to adjust, no?

Perhaps, teams might want to budget more for relievers. But if, say, a 10% reduction in innings meant a 10% reduction in salary, it would only take a couple years of inflation to wipe that out. And a 5/125 deal for Darvish could already be a downward adjustment from, say, 6/155 for Lester 3 years ago.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, if we are going to consider Darvish as being a guy who will get us over the hump we must consider his post-season meltdown. A "get us over the hump" guy is the kind of guy with some post-season/big game pedigree. Tell me it is a small sample size, but can we not glean ANYTHING from that? Was he not uncomfortable to watch? Given the extra motivation of putting it to the Astros and Guerriel the guy really retreated horribly. He did not look like he wanted to be there. We can talk of "tipping pitches" and that being "fixable", but under those circumstances, and on that stage, I want better than that. Tipping pitches in that situation really isn't an acceptable excuse. He is a veteran pitcher in a big game and that is not a valid explanation. It shows a lack of professionalism and a lack of poise, in my opinion.

 

How do you explain Darvish's great starts in the 2017 DS and CS rounds? Also, consider that in the WS, Darvish was pitching into November for the first time in his life, is his first full season back from TJ, no less. It was a terrible performance in the WS, and I am not making excuses for it, simply suggesting that drawing conclusions about his professionalism and his future from that tiny sample is probably not warranted.

 

Also worth noting that Darvish has been healthy for the first half of the MLB season 4 times, and all 4 times he has been named to the all-star team (which I believe is done by player vote?). The opinion of his peers would seem to be a better indicator of his professionalism than the results of his last 2 starts.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I see WAR projections being pasted up here and I shake my head. It is not like he is a Verlander, Wainwright or a Sabathia.

Honest question: do you think the Darvish projections here have anything to do with Verlander, Wainwright, or Sabathia? Because they don't. They are based on Darvish's own record, plus aging curves based on the entire sample of MLB pitchers. That means Mike Pelfrey counts just as much as Justin Verlander or any other pitcher who survived to pitch in MLB at ages 30-31.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Adam Wainwright had TJ like Darvish has and the timeline is very similar. He had strong seasons at 31 and 32 and has been middle of the road since. Sabathia cratered at 32. John Lackey had TJ and is still going at 38, but he has not been a number one starter in almost ten years.

Wainwright basically had peak seasons at age 31 and 32. (And he's an August birthday like Darvish, so that means he actually turned 32 and 33 in those seasons )

 

John Lackey almost had a career best season at age 36 (also after TJ).

 

These guys still fit the general overall trend of being worse in their 30's than in their 20's, but that doesn't mean they were valueless. In fact, both proved worthy of the long-term deals they received around age 31.

 

Of course, Darvish is a different person, and his future hasn't happened yet, so Wainwright and Lackey are no guarantee of Darvish's future results. But in no way do they support your position either, that a long-term deal for Darvish should be avoided like the plague.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

The Yankees are earnestly trying to stay under the luxury tax threshold. I live in NY state and heard this refrain on WFAN not long after I moved in July and it has been a theme. Then they signed Stanton.

 

I don't think the Yankees are going to go too far going for Darvish. This harkens back to the "bidding war" between the Red Sox and Yankees for Johan. There was no real bidding war. The difficulty in that case was trying to convince the Twins. Here Darvish has the veto power. I think Darvish and his people are being even more foolish than Bill Smith was during the Johan situation.

 

I think Darvish missed the boat. I think that if he is expecting/holding out for Strasburg money then he will be not only be sitting on the sidelines through the open of training camp (not a good look for him), but also losing out on money and years.

agreed, I think the Twins should wait it out.

[ewen21]

 

Wainwright basically had peak seasons at age 31 and 32. (And he's an August birthday like Darvish, so that means he actually turned 32 and 33 in those seasons )

John Lackey almost had a career best season at age 36 (also after TJ).

These guys still fit the general overall trend of being worse in their 30's than in their 20's, but that doesn't mean they were valueless. In fact, both proved worthy of the long-term deals they received around age 31.

Of course, Darvish is a different person, and his future hasn't happened yet, so Wainwright and Lackey are no guarantee of Darvish's future results. But in no way do they support your position either, that a long-term deal for Darvish should be avoided like the plague.

Wainwright isn't anything near what he was and had TJ at about the same time in his life as Darvish.  His career is far more impressive as well.  Lackey is one of those rare cases of a guy who stays relevant in his mid to late 30s.

 

For the life of me, I do not understand the argument about "not knowing the future" when it comes to the age of a pitcher.  CORRECT.  I cannot see the future, nor can all the others who pasted up sabermetric projections.  One thing I have on my side of the argument is the fact that age wins out and that there are very few pitchers who maintain their ability level past 32 years of age.  It happens, but it is pretty uncommon.  If you can't admit that or refuse to see it then that really isn't a ME thing.  That's you trying to go "glass-half full" on this one.  Hope is nice, but it doesn't work.  I prefer to be more pragmatic

[Squirrel]

I want to apologize for the lack of a space bar in the last two posts. Something with this new keyboard.

Use single spaces at the end of sentences instead of two and that will ‘fix’ the spacing issue.

[ewen21]

 

I have no idea but they might be trying to adjust it and it's causing the hold up. All the GM's and Support staff are seeing what you are pointing out about the contracts and production. 

 

And as a result... the players and the agents are starting to speak up because they are sensing an adjustment. 

 

Ultimately tho... The CBA would have to be adjusted to make an adjustment. 

 

Full disclosure... I'm on the players side... they are not hurting for money so I'm not losing sleep but I am on the players side. 

 

For 6 years... Players are controllable. The players have no choice at all.

 

For the first 6 years... Lorenzo Cain was paid 21.5M. Based on his production over that time... you could say that he was very underpaid in comparison. 

 

When Cain reaches free agency he finally gets leverage. (Only for those who are good enough to survive the first 6 years). This is Lorenzo's time to use that leverage... play where he wants to play instead of what team drafted him and held him securely.  

 

The Problem players run into with the CBA is that they are controlled over their most productive years so once GM"s starting looking at the metrics... like you have. They start questioning the value of signing long contracts and when they refuse to offer them. We get long hold outs... we get players threatening to strike and agents starting to point fingers... because the players held up their end of the bargain... they allowed themselves to be underpaid (by industry standards) to wait for the pay day and now the teams are saying... hey wait a second... we don't want to pay you here either. 

 

You raise a very valid point... but as you can see... the system was designed for this very thing. 

 

I don't know who said it... but there is a quote that I absolutely love: 

 

"Your systems are perfectly designed to give you the results you are getting".

 

Brandon Moss was saying the same thing. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/truth-moss-free-agent-freeze-out-article-1.3797095

Read the Moss article and he is dead right and the players are apparently simmering over the situation.  My feeling on it is screw them.  They get guaranteed money and they should be thrilled they have that.  I have been a baseball fan since 1972 and I have stopped watching a couple of times.  I love the sport and as a teacher I have all summer to get fully into it.  If the players decide to band together and present some kind of statement against what is going on then I don't know how I will react.  Life is not a given.  I bought a home for 358,000 in 2005 and sold it for 285,000 earlier this year.  These things happen.  Do these players think they deserve to have salaries to increase as they have over the last 20 years FOREVER?  Are they really that stupid?

 

This is most definitely a market correction and these players need to wise up and learn how to deal with it.  It has been a long time coming and it is here now.  I would not be surprised if Darvish is forced to settle for way WAY less sometime in April.  Would not shock me at all.  If you ask me, he and his agent are being ridiculous.  I am not interested in him at all.

[Mr. Brooks]

Wainwright isn't anything near what he was and had TJ at about the same time in his life as Darvish. His career is far more impressive as well. Lackey is one of those rare cases of a guy who stays relevant in his mid to late 30s.

 

For the life of me, I do not understand the argument about "not knowing the future" when it comes to the age of a pitcher. CORRECT. I cannot see the future, nor can all the others who pasted up sabermetric projections. One thing I have on my side of the argument is the fact that age wins out and that there are very few pitchers who maintain their ability level past 32 years of age. It happens, but it is pretty uncommon. If you can't admit that or refuse to see it then that really isn't a ME thing. That's you trying to go "glass-half full" on this one. Hope is nice, but it doesn't work. I prefer to be more pragmatic

Perhaps that is why nobody is suggesting anything close to what he'd get on the open market if he were entering his prime? The terms being discussed are already discounted to reflect his expected decline.

[Riverbrian]

 

Read the Moss article and he is dead right and the players are apparently simmering over the situation.  My feeling on it is screw them.  They get guaranteed money and they should be thrilled they have that.  I have been a baseball fan since 1972 and I have stopped watching a couple of times.  I love the sport and as a teacher I have all summer to get fully into it.  If the players decide to band together and present some kind of statement against what is going on then I don't know how I will react.  Life is not a given.  I bought a home for 358,000 in 2005 and sold it for 285,000 earlier this year.  These things happen.  Do these players think they deserve to have salaries to increase as they have over the last 20 years FOREVER?  Are they really that stupid?

 

This is most definitely a market correction and these players need to wise up and learn how to deal with it.  It has been a long time coming and it is here now.  I would not be surprised if Darvish is forced to settle for way WAY less sometime in April.  Would not shock me at all.  If you ask me, he and his agent are being ridiculous.  I am not interested in him at all.

 

It's hard to feel sorry for guys making that kind of cash... So I won't. But... they gave up leverage during prime years for the expectation of a pay day that may not come due to a possible market correction under the current CBA. 

 

The next negotiation will be a difficult one because with every action there is an equal reaction.

 

The players are going to demand a fair chunk of the overall pie. 

[ewen21]

Had we signed Darvish to the Strasburg-like contract he is holding out for it would have been a colossal mistake.  He's lucky if he gets 5 years 135 at this point.  If he doesn't have anything sew up by the time full team workouts begin for Spring Training he will be in a tough spot with his new team.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

there are very few pitchers who maintain their ability level past 32 years of age.

No one is arguing that, okay?

 

What you seem to be missing is that Darvish doesn't HAVE to do that to justify a 5/125 contract. The projections do NOT have him doing that, and yet they show he can still be worth 5/125. He could fall short even of those modest projections, and STILL more or less justify the contract just on the shape of his diminished production (i.e. if he manages to produce most of it in the first season or two, like Anibal Sanchez did).

 

And you're not being "pragmatic" when you're refusing to even try projecting the guy for ANYTHING. I'm glad that's not how the Twins are approaching it.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Use single spaces at the end of sentences instead of two and that will ‘fix’ the spacing issue.

That's really what the problem has been? And only a single space after a period, what is this a heathen operation?

[Rhino and Compass]

Part of the reason that players see their contracts balloon is the big money teams making aggressive moves into free agency, but this year, for various reasons, not the least of which that next year is a more influential class. Nothing changed... Smaller market teams don't suddenly have the money to spend that big market teams do. Only the Cubs are actively seeking pitching, and there are 4 pretty good pitchers out there, and they don't have much competition if they are only looking at Darvish. This offseason is just economics, supply and demand.

Alternatively, I did see something, I believe it was from Hardball Times, that said because the MLBPA failed to look out for international free agents, they became a much cheaper alternative, and there is less interest in those more veteran FA's that cost so much money.

I think it's more Part 1 than Part 2, but its economics over collusion either way

[Squirrel]

That's really what the problem has? And only a single space after a period, what is this a heathen operation?

Ask Brock.

[USAFChief]

 

That's really what the problem has? And only a single space after a period, what is this a heathen operation?

One would think a newly minted lawyer would write better than this.  

[PseudoSABR]

 

One would think a newly minted lawyer would write better than this.  

When complaining, it's probably best not to make sense. 

[ashbury]

That's really what the problem has been? And only a single space after a period, what is this a heathen operation?

One would think a newly minted lawyer would write better than this.  

I'm going to have to ask you to take this explosive topic to the Sports Bar forum area - although, we usually discuss only tamer issues like presidential politics and Middle East peace plans there, so The Chicago Manual of Style and its ilk may be a bit too much to handle, and Warning Points could well be inevitable.

 

_{^{(j/k, for those of a mind to take this literally)}}

[ewen21]

 

No one is arguing that, okay?

 

What you seem to be missing is that Darvish doesn't HAVE to do that to justify a 5/125 contract. The projections do NOT have him doing that, and yet they show he can still be worth 5/125. He could fall short even of those modest projections, and STILL more or less justify the contract just on the shape of his diminished production (i.e. if he manages to produce most of it in the first season or two, like Anibal Sanchez did).

 

And you're not being "pragmatic" when you're refusing to even try projecting the guy for ANYTHING. I'm glad that's not how the Twins are approaching it.

I am using historical data for all starting pitchers. This does the same thing:

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-starters-and-relievers/

 

Seeing what I have seen of Darvish and knowing his career trajectory thus far, I don't see him as being "an ace"

 

We don't agree. Worse things can happen.

It is actually good timbre for a discussion.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I am using historical data for all starting pitchers. This does the same thing:

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-starters-and-relievers/

You do realize that the projections I have been referencing are based on exactly that? I think you are arguing a straw man at this point, so I will bow out.

[Mr. Brooks]

I am using historical data for all starting pitchers. This does the same thing:

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-starters-and-relievers/

 

Seeing what I have seen of Darvish and knowing his career trajectory thus far, I don't see him as being "an ace"

 

We don't agree. Worse things can happen.

It is actually good timbre for a discussion.

If anyone realistically thought he was an ace (depending on how a person defines that), we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, because he'd be well out of the Twins financial reach.

[ewen21]

 

If anyone realistically thought he was an ace (depending on how a person defines that), we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, because he'd be well out of the Twins financial reach.

So then if that is the case why are we signing him "regardless of the price"??

 

 

[USAFChief]

So then if that is the case why are we signing him "regardless of the price"??

because it's not only about WAR/dollar. This isn't a financial exercise, or some theoretical investment contest.

 

It's about winning MLB games, and Darvish represents a realistic opportunity to greatly improve a staff of a team that is ready to take a step up.

 

Do it.

[Mr. Brooks]

So then if that is the case why are we signing him "regardless of the price"??

I understand that is the title of the thread, but not all of us who want Darvish, do so at any cost.