Article: Twins To Sign Lance Lynn

[tarheeltwinsfan]

 

I tend to agree. The hype around these foreign stars gets pretty absurd. It seems too often that these guys simply can't live up to it. That's unfortunate. I can't imagine that playing in LA will help matters.

Can anyone say Nishi or Park?

[Squirrel]

Why do we keep talking about what Ryan did or didn't do and/or could or couldn't do?  We don't know what he was allowed to spend.  We don't know if he was frugal or spent all of what he could. And even if we did, it's irrelevant now. 

 

We need to move on instead of continuously slamming/defending his moves/non-moves. He is gone.

And I will add, as a moderator, particularly in threads where it has no bearing. Start a new thread, please, if you want to go down the TR vs Levine path instead of thread-jacking this thread.

[Riverbrian]

 

I take Darvish. I only care about this team being formidable in the playoffs and I don't have any faith in Lynn or Odorizzi matching up with the top of the other rotations in the AL.

That said, they couldn't/didn't get Darvish. The front office was active and bold. I don't like all the players brought in, but they made splashes unlike any other year. I'm glad for the effort and the deals are short, they can try again next year.

 

I agree with you... I also wanted Darvish but that uncomfortable feeling of lack of faith in Lynn or Odorizzi matching up is just projecting it forward. Kyle Gibson could be our World Series Hero this year. After we win the title of course. 

 

I've seen too many unsung heroes every single post season and too many ordinary to sub-par performances from the superstars to feel comfortable with those uncomfortable feelings. 

 

Enrique Hernandez of the Dodgers killed the Cubs last year while I was wondering who he was. Charlie Morton was vital against the Dodgers and he wouldn't have produced that faith when he was signed. 

 

Chris Sale and Zach Greinke were rather horrible in the 2017 playoffs. 

 

Roberto Perez and Coco Crisp were surprising producers for the Indians in 2016 while Clayton Kershaw struggled. 

 

2015 was Daniel Murphy's coming out party. It was the opposite for David Price. 

 

 

David Freese in 2011 and David Eckstein in 2006 were World Series MVP's. 

 

 

[jimmer]

 

Can anyone say Nishi or Park?

Neither one of those two are anywhere near Ohtani's talent.  That's why they were so inexpensive.  Ohtani will need some adjustment time.  None of this should be surprising.

[IndianaTwin]

I don't know the roster rules. The articles I'm reading suggest that the Twins hope Lynn would be ready for the season opener, which is less than three weeks away (or three weeks from tomorrow, if one counts the first time a No. 4 starter is needed). 

 

How likely is that? And if he's not ready, is it an option to put him on the 10-day DL until the 5th starter is needed on April 11? That would allow keeping an extra bat or extra reliever until that point.

 

That plan would give Hughes three starts in game action as the No. 4. With a couple of days off the following week, they could either 1) recognize that Hughes isn't ready to be in the rotation and skip him the next time through the rotation; or 2) make the transition to a five-man rotation if he's earned his spot.

 

And by that time, they have a better read on how close Big Erv is to being back. 

Edited March 11, 2018 by IndianaTwin

[ewen21]

 

and because Darvish is much better and getting paid less per year.

He's MUCH better?   Make me understand how you get that.

[Guest]

I don’t get the hate for the deals being short-term, especially in contrast to Darvish. The short-term nature is a feature, not a bug.

 

1. Some good starters in the system may graduate or return to health this year.

2. If Lynn, Odorizzi and Morrison, to pick three, are each 1.5 to 2.0 WAR, they will probably exceed Darvish, who probably has a ceiling this year of 4.0 WAR.

3.Darvish - and most of the veteran signees - is entering the decline phase of his career. If he’s 4.0 WAR this year, he’ll forecast to 3.5 WAR next year and keep declining at that rate. The Twins, however, will be able to sign a new batch next year and perhaps the year after that, and not have the risk of long-term declines.

4. Excellent starters will be available for prospects at the trade deadline, like every year, if needed.

5. It’s preferable not to be locked into long-term deals with relievers, unless they are All Star caliber.

6. The Twins needed to get a staff that should be competitive every day more than they needed to have an ace and some hope at #4 and #5.

7. After what Lance Lynn went through this winter, if he pitches well this year and enjoys himself, the Twins will probably have the inside track to sign him for 2029, if they want him back.

8. Lynn is probably going to give his best this year. In addition to feeling burned and like he has something to prove, i.e., the classic “nobody believes in us (me)” motivation, he’ll be in a contract year.

[VATwinsFan]

The Lynn signing seems to me to be not unlike the Kenny Rogers signing in 2003--signed two weeks before the season started and was a solid addition to be the number 3 starter after Santana and Radke.  I still don't understand why the Twins showed little to no interest in re-signing him for 2004.  Let's hope it works out at least as well as it did in 2003 (31 GS, 13-8, 195 IP, 4.57 ERA).

[Otto von Ballpark]

Actually an interesting deal structure for Arrieta -- he can opt out after 2 years, but if he does so, the Phillies can exercise a 2/40 extension.

[wsnydes]

Can anyone say Nishi or Park?

Or basically anyone not named Ichiro...

[jimmer]

 

Or basically anyone not named Ichiro...

Been quite a few quality Asian players.  Yes, only one HOFer.

[wsnydes]

Been quite a few quality Asian players. Yes, only one HOFer.

Yup, there has been. That's not what I was trying to imply, but that is what I typed so that is fair. My point was that many of the high hype players don't live up to it. They may be quality players, but just don't live up to the hype. That's not meant as a shot, just pointing out that the hype is a bit unfair to begin with. Edited March 12, 2018 by wsnydes

[KirbyDome89]

 

Why do we keep talking about what Ryan did or didn't do and/or could or couldn't do?  We don't know what he was allowed to spend.  We don't know if he was frugal or spent all of what he could. And even if we did, it's irrelevant now. 

 

We need to move on instead of continuously slamming/defending his moves/non-moves. He is gone.

There's a strong desire by some to reaffirm that the current FO > the former. A convenient way of doing this is holding up positive moves the current FO makes and proclaiming the previous regime was incapable of doing anything similar with no regard given to the validity of such proclamations. 

 

The old FO has become a punching bag for hyperbole. Their failures necessitated a change, but the topic has become polarized to the point where acknowledging that direct comparisons aren't necessarily fair or viable in some areas is a "defense." 

[ashbury]

I once typed that my leg hurt and someone responded with "no it doesn't". 

No you didn't.

[RaoulDuke]

 

At 6'5"and a listed 280 maybe Lynn can take a little heat off Sano

According to Bert pitchers are the best athletes on the field.

[Riverbrian]

 

No you didn't.

 

No you didn’t.

 

You and Chief are starting to meld into one organism. You may be way too far along in the process to stop it. 

 

I'm not sure what your wives are going to think about it but you may want to let them know what is happening. 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

 

No you didn't.

Did too!

[Tomj14]

 

Concur.  Should have been traded a couple years ago.

Going on that logic is it time to trade May? Not defending Gibson, but at 28 he was coming off two 2.0+ WARs. May is 28 and has career .2 WAR (Baseball Reference)

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don’t get the hate for the deals being short-term, especially in contrast to Darvish. The short-term nature is a feature, not a bug.

1. Some good starters in the system may graduate or return to health this year.
2. If Lynn, Odorizzi and Morrison, to pick three, are each 1.5 to 2.0 WAR, they will probably exceed Darvish, who probably has a ceiling this year of 4.0 WAR.
3.Darvish - and most of the veteran signees - is entering the decline phase of his career. If he’s 4.0 WAR this year, he’ll forecast to 3.5 WAR next year and keep declining at that rate. The Twins, however, will be able to sign a new batch next year and perhaps the year after that, and not have the risk of long-term declines.
4. Excellent starters will be available for prospects at the trade deadline, like every year, if needed.
5. It’s preferable not to be locked into long-term deals with relievers, unless they are All Star caliber.
6. The Twins needed to get a staff that should be competitive every day more than they needed to have an ace and some hope at #4 and #5.
7. After what Lance Lynn went through this winter, if he pitches well this year and enjoys himself, the Twins will probably have the inside track to sign him for 2029, if they want him back.
8. Lynn is probably going to give his best this year. In addition to feeling burned and like he has something to prove, i.e., the classic “nobody believes in us (me)” motivation, he’ll be in a contract year.

 

I see no one hating on the short term deals. Not me. What I've said is they'll need to do the same in two years. But I don't see anyone hating the short term deals.

 

to answer the Darvish or this question, I'd rather have Darvish. Darvish plus three players probably is more wins than the four players they are paying the Darvish money.

[spanman2]

Really like the signing.  Lynn will be pitching for his next contract.  We should get his 'A' game this season.  To echo others and the obvious it is a super low risk venture.  He is a solid MLB pitcher IMO.  Certainly helps solidify this rotation.  You really cant look at any starter and say 'oh goodie goodie' look who we get to tee off on today.  With the payroll flexibility down the road in '19 and our farm system looking stout this organization is looking well prepared in the current/future.  WIN TWINS!

 

Santana (when he returns)

Berrios or flip he and Odo

Odo

Lynn

Gibby

 

That is a rotation a guy can look forward to watching pitch.  Not a layup there if we can get back half of '17 Gibson performance not 1st half.  Gotta give huge kudos to the FO boys!  They have done a fantastic job this offseason. 

[nicksaviking]

I don’t get the hate for the deals being short-term, especially in contrast to Darvish. The short-term nature is a feature, not a bug.

 

1. Some good starters in the system may graduate or return to health this year.

2. If Lynn, Odorizzi and Morrison, to pick three, are each 1.5 to 2.0 WAR, they will probably exceed Darvish, who probably has a ceiling this year of 4.0 WAR.

3.Darvish - and most of the veteran signees - is entering the decline phase of his career. If he’s 4.0 WAR this year, he’ll forecast to 3.5 WAR next year and keep declining at that rate. The Twins, however, will be able to sign a new batch next year and perhaps the year after that, and not have the risk of long-term declines.

4. Excellent starters will be available for prospects at the trade deadline, like every year, if needed.

5. It’s preferable not to be locked into long-term deals with relievers, unless they are All Star caliber.

6. The Twins needed to get a staff that should be competitive every day more than they needed to have an ace and some hope at #4 and #5.

7. After what Lance Lynn went through this winter, if he pitches well this year and enjoys himself, the Twins will probably have the inside track to sign him for 2029, if they want him back.

8. Lynn is probably going to give his best this year. In addition to feeling burned and like he has something to prove, i.e., the classic “nobody believes in us (me)” motivation, he’ll be in a contract year.

I'm just fine with 1 year deals. More than fine actually, they tend to be great gambles.

 

This offseason my number 1 concern was that I wanted a front line starter. To get out of the play-in round of the playoffs and advancing far enough, the Twins hopes now rest almost entirely on Berrios developing into a top 10 pitcher or so.

 

I also think good pitchers will be available at the trade deadline. Unfortunately the Twins are almost certainly already at their max salary position; they're not going to be able to afford 2018's version of Justin Verlander now.

 

And while I'm just fine taking a flyer on Lance Lynn for one year, I don't think he's probably going to have his best year. I can't see any way a guy is going to do any better than he already has when he doesn't have an off speed pitch. If he was coming up through the system today he would have been moved to the bullpen before he got to AA. His repertoire is severely limited; think Tyler Duffey but instead of the curveball, just different kinds of fastballs.

 

I'm not raining on any parades, it was a fantastic off season.

[kab21]

 

I see no one hating on the short term deals. Not me. What I've said is they'll need to do the same in two years. But I don't see anyone hating the short term deals.

 

to answer the Darvish or this question, I'd rather have Darvish. Darvish plus three players probably is more wins than the four players they are paying the Darvish money.

Why is it a problem to do the same in two years? And how do you know that they will have the same needs in two years?

 

The Twins have some legit rotation talent in the upper minors. It would have been risky to roll with that this season but those pitchers are going to have opportunities in the next two years. In addition to that these deals and the other major expirings allow the Twins to chase bigger targets if they want to. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Really like the signing.  Lynn will be pitching for his next contract.  We should get his 'A' game this season.

What was Lynn pitching for last season?

 

How did Hector Santiago do, pitching for his next contract last season?

 

(Not comparing Lynn to Santiago as pitchers, just noting that I don't see "pitching for his next contract" as a meaningful factor. Guys generally pitch to the best of their health and ability regardless.)

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Why is it a problem to do the same in two years? And how do you know that they will have the same needs in two years?

 

The Twins have some legit rotation talent in the upper minors. It would have been risky to roll with that this season but those pitchers are going to have opportunities in the next two years. In addition to that these deals and the other major expirings allow the Twins to chase bigger targets if they want to. 

Exactly. A two year deal is the sweet spot, especially at the prices the Twins paid this offseason.

 

In two years, the rotation might look solid but third base is a black hole. Or maybe an outfielder goes down with an injury that removes them from the field permanently. Any number of guys could simply fail.

 

A two year contract allows you the flexibility to do a few things:

 

1. Lock down a position in the mid-term.

2. Retain future payroll flexibility to adapt to new challenges.

3. Rotate through free agents and avoid what too often become albatross contract seasons in years four, five, and six.

 

There's absolutely no downside here because we're not talking about locking down a 25 year old Clayton Kershaw, we're talking about locking down a 30-something Yu Darvish. Long term contracts are always a risk but they almost always contain a serious downside unless you're talking about one of the generational players who broke into the majors at 20-21 and reached free agency in the middle of their prime.

 

And the Twins will never be able to afford one of those players so it's a moot point anyway. Where the Twins will play in free agency has enormous risk and a lot of downside at the back end of long-term deals. If the risk wasn't there, the player would be too expensive because teams like Minnesota can't afford to give Bryce Harper an eight year, $300m deal.

[howieramone2]

 

I agree.

The only road to winning for a small to mid revenue team is devloping minor league talent. The Twins won’t sustain success unless they develop their own pitching. Signing free agent pitchers whether short or long term will not lead to sustained success.

The free agent signings this winter are great. Lynn is a great add on a short term deal. The long term success relies on their ability to develop their talent to success at the major league level.

40% of our starting rotation was drafted and developed by our favorite team. I look for Gonsalves by the All-Star break and Romero in September. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by howieramone2

[jorgenswest]

40% of our starting rotation was drafted and developed by our favorite team. I look for Gonsalves by the All-Star break and Romero in September.

 

I would add Mejia as one in the developed category also as the Twins get all of his years of control. Next year could be the year where they have 80% home grown.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Why is it a problem to do the same in two years? And how do you know that they will have the same needs in two years?

 

The Twins have some legit rotation talent in the upper minors. It would have been risky to roll with that this season but those pitchers are going to have opportunities in the next two years. In addition to that these deals and the other major expirings allow the Twins to chase bigger targets if they want to. 

 

I don't know anything, but here is what is likely:

 

ESan is retired in 2 years, or not that good.

Gibson is gone.

About 1/3 of the upper minors' starters turn out to be really good

Odorizzi is gone

Our Yankee pitcher is gone

 

That leaves some holes in the rotation, since a team needs 8-10 starters every year, not five.

 

It's been a very good off season. Other than signing Darvish, it is hard to see how it could be better. But, for years people have told me you can't successfully fill multiple holes in free agency. Now that I'm agreeing, I'm somehow wrong, or hating, or something.

 

I've been 100% clear. It's been a good off season. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

Why is it a problem to do the same in two years? And how do you know that they will have the same needs in two years?

 

The Twins have some legit rotation talent in the upper minors. It would have been risky to roll with that this season but those pitchers are going to have opportunities in the next two years. In addition to that these deals and the other major expirings allow the Twins to chase bigger targets if they want to. 

5 of their 10 "best," starters are gone within that two year frame. I would qualify that as a need.

 

Right now they have Romero, Gonsalves, and ....?

 

Saying they'll spend the $$ cleared on big time FAs in the future is nothing but false hope. 

Edited March 12, 2018 by KirbyDome89

[jimmer]

Going on that logic is it time to trade May? Not defending Gibson, but at 28 he was coming off two 2.0+ WARs. May is 28 and has career .2 WAR (Baseball Reference)

yeah, I am not sure how you look at what I wrote (and you quoted)about Gibson and then write what you did.

 

What logic did you see in that quote that makes you compare what I said about Gibson to May. His bWAR? Couldn't have been bWAR (cause I don't use bWAR to back up opinions). Nor was it fWAR. I didn't mention WAR at all.

 

I don't know how anyone compares the bWAR or fWAR between these two pitchers. Gibson has been given tons of starts, May was given half a season worth of starts then relegated to the bullpen and then been injured.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Exactly. A two year deal is the sweet spot, especially at the prices the Twins paid this offseason.

 

In two years, the rotation might look solid but third base is a black hole. Or maybe an outfielder goes down with an injury that removes them from the field permanently. Any number of guys could simply fail.

 

A two year contract allows you the flexibility to do a few things:

 

1. Lock down a position in the mid-term.

2. Retain future payroll flexibility to adapt to new challenges.

3. Rotate through free agents and avoid what too often become albatross contract seasons in years four, five, and six.

 

There's absolutely no downside here because we're not talking about locking down a 25 year old Clayton Kershaw, we're talking about locking down a 30-something Yu Darvish. Long term contracts are always a risk but they almost always contain a serious downside unless you're talking about one of the generational players who broke into the majors at 20-21 and reached free agency in the middle of their prime.

 

And the Twins will never be able to afford one of those players so it's a moot point anyway. Where the Twins will play in free agency has enormous risk and a lot of downside at the back end of long-term deals. If the risk wasn't there, the player would be too expensive because teams like Minnesota can't afford to give Bryce Harper an eight year, $300m deal.

There's no arguing most of the benefits associated with a short term deal, but I'm not sure rotation through FAs is one of them. FA pitchers aren't signing short term deals because it's in their best interest. Those guys are signing 1 and 2 year deals because their hand is forced by recent issues regarding health and/or ineffectiveness. Yes, you're avoiding the backend of long term deals, but you're also taking on a significantly higher performance risk in the short term, and then you're compounding that risk by rotating arms through every year or two. 

 

If you're reshuffling the deck that often what are the chances you continue to hit on a high enough percentage of arms to fill out half a rotation? If we were talking about one or two spots near the bottom of that 8-10 man range I would be totally on board, but right now the plan is to find at least 2, maybe 3 arms, (depending on how Gonsalves and Romero turn out) to slot into that top 5 range. IMO there's plenty of downside to that strategy.