Donaldson contract discussion - 4/100? 4/110?

[Mike Sixel]

It is implied by the position that assessed value is stupid. Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent. On several occasions in the past posters have stated they could care less about winning the value proposition. This ignores the need to get production per dollar spent. The basis of any personnel strategy in MLB is assessed value. So, in a word, yes!

Most posters are saying sign one expensive free agent. Are you suggesting they cannot?

[ewen21]

 

It is implied by the position that assessed value is stupid. Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent. On several occasions in the past posters have stated they could care less about winning the value proposition. This ignores the need to get production per dollar spent. The basis of any personnel strategy in MLB is assessed value. So, in a word, yes!

It isn't even implied.  Witness the term "stupid tax" that has been thrown around in regards to overpaying free agents.  Over and over posters have stated that they don't care about the last several years of contracts like this.  If we can get one or two good years that is all we really need because we are a "win now team"

[ewen21]

 

Most posters are saying sign one expensive free agent. Are you suggesting they cannot?

What are you talking about?  How can he impose a moratorium on anything?  He doesn't have administrative clearance to do so.  All he is doing is explaining his side of the issue and he is doing a pretty good job of it.  Sounds as it he has you questioning yourself.

 

Hang in there, Mike.

[tony&rodney]

Can someone who objects to signing JD for 4/$100 million please explain what other options you are thinking of for the 2020 season?

 

Josh Donaldson would almost surely (no player is a guarantee)  improve the Twins.

The Twins have the money now and going forward.

While 3/75 seemed good, the market changed.

Who will receive the money from the 2020 budget?

[launchingthrees]

 

 

Who will receive the money from the 2020 budget?

 

Someone with the last name Pohlad that probably hasn't been born yet.

[prouster]

Can someone who objects to signing JD for 4/$100 million please explain what other options you are thinking of for the 2020 season?

 

Josh Donaldson would almost surely (no player is a guarantee) improve the Twins.

The Twins have the money now and going forward.

While 3/75 seemed good, the market changed.

Who will receive the money from the 2020 budget?

I don’t care if they sign him for that much, but I can see why they wouldn’t. If they don’t, then I guess the only realistic way they could spend that money would be by taking on a contract in a trade, whether that’s before the season or at the deadline.

[Battle ur tail off]

It is implied by the position that assessed value is stupid. Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent. On several occasions in the past posters have stated they could care less about winning the value proposition. This ignores the need to get production per dollar spent. The basis of any personnel strategy in MLB is assessed value. So, in a word, yes!

Right. Until you are sitting here with a productive team full of young guys making nothing. Right now they ARE getting the most value per dollar spent. It’s not very often a team like us is in the position they are in now. We can be “stupid” and sign a few guys for big money and not be hurt by it financially. Of course this also most likely improves the team.

[twinsfansd]

Lest we forget, there are any number of young players on this team that need to be extended, and the only way to intice them to do that it to offer them more money up front this season. That will eat up some of those budget dollars that everybody thinks are still unspent. The REAL front office has to consider all those things as they try to put a team together inside a budget.

[launchingthrees]

 

It is implied by the position that assessed value is stupid. Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent. On several occasions in the past posters have stated they could care less about winning the value proposition. This ignores the need to get production per dollar spent. The basis of any personnel strategy in MLB is assessed value. So, in a word, yes!

 

It depends on if the Twins promised to spend half of incoming revenue on players, which they did promise. Do you think they should keep their word or not? They certainly made no mention of any strings, or caveats w/r to "assessed value" attached to that statement.

 

Now the Twins are asking us to be happy that they offered the highest dollar amount to exactly 0 top tier free agents this offseason because of some magical "assessed value" calculation.

 

[IndianaTwin]

 

Can someone who objects to signing JD for 4/$100 million please explain what other options you are thinking of for the 2020 season?

 

Josh Donaldson would almost surely (no player is a guarantee)  improve the Twins.

The Twins have the money now and going forward.

While 3/75 seemed good, the market changed.

Who will receive the money from the 2020 budget?

 

Off the top of my head, with the $25 million you’re allocating to Donaldson, I’d...

• use about $3 million to front load a contract that turns Odorizzi into $54 million over 3 years.
• use another good-sized chunk to sign Berrios to a deal that buys out at least one year of free agency. I think it’s going to be tough to buy out a large number of years, but maybe he’d go for one year of free agency in exchange for big raises the next three years.
• use a few million on Moreland.
• consider taking on some of the cost in someone’s salary dump trade for pitching (Price is a guy that’s been named, but there’s probably others).
• start exploring guys on minor league contracts, but hang on to them this time rather than dropping them like we did Anibal Sanchez.  

Or some combination thereof.

 

[tony&rodney]

 

Lest we forget, there are any number of young players on this team that need to be extended, and the only way to intice them to do that it to offer them more money up front this season. That will eat up some of those budget dollars that everybody thinks are still unspent. The REAL front office has to consider all those things as they try to put a team together inside a budget.

 

It could happen.

Berrios, Buxton, Sano, Rodgers, and Rosario are all targets for extensions.What would you offer? I don't think the Twins extend Rosario beyond 4/50. They might go 4/60 for Berrios and Sano, but Buxton is a tough call, maybe 4/50 to 4/60. Also, something makes me think that Berrios, Buxton, and Sano are willing to play it year to year.

Either way, there is still money for extensions and JD. Right now there is just over $20 million plus committed for 2021.

 

[tony&rodney]

 

Off the top of my head, with the $25 million you’re allocating to Donaldson, I’d...

• use about $3 million to front load a contract that turns Odorizzi into $54 million over 3 years.
• use another good-sized chunk to sign Berrios to a deal that buys out at least one year of free agency. I think it’s going to be tough to buy out a large number of years, but maybe he’d go for one year of free agency in exchange for big raises the next three years.
• use a few million on Moreland.
• consider taking on some of the cost in someone’s salary dump trade for pitching (Price is a guy that’s been named, but there’s probably others).
• start exploring guys on minor league contracts, but hang on to them this time rather than dropping them like we did Anibal Sanchez.  

Or some combination thereof.

 

Ok, I think I see the reasoning.

 

Odorizzi is an interesting study. Will the Twins believe that he would be worth 3/$54? Would Odorizzi want to see how the year goes before he signs?

What numbers would you throw out for Berrios? Is he looking for Wheeler money?

I actually had Moreland on my list in October, but I think the shift is away from him. Not sure why.

I would be totally surprised by the Twins taking on more than $12-14 million for Price.

The only guy I still see available is Alex Wood. I wanted Jimmy Nelson for $2 million.

 

Thanks for the ideas, but we must see it differently. I think the money is there for JD.

[IndianaTwin]

 

Ok, I think I see the reasoning.

 

Odorizzi is an interesting study. Will the Twins believe that he would be worth 3/$54? Would Odorizzi want to see how the year goes before he signs?

What numbers would you throw out for Berrios? Is he looking for Wheeler money?

I actually had Moreland on my list in October, but I think the shift is away from him. Not sure why.

I would be totally surprised by the Twins taking on more than $12-14 million for Price.

The only guy I still see available is Alex Wood. I wanted Jimmy Nelson for $2 million.

 

Thanks for the ideas, but we must see it differently. I think the money is there for JD.

 

I agree that Odorizzi is interesting. A number of folks have named that he may be kicking himself for taking the QO given how contracts have gone. When he signed, he talked openly about having another shot next winter, but he also named an interest in an extension. In an earlier thread, I said that I hoped the message to him was “We’re going to give you the QO because we do want you. We’d like to give you a 3-year deal, but we also are hoping to get some other impact pitching (sorry, I couldn’t resist). Once the market has settled out, we’d like to come back and open the conversation about an extension.” I’d like to think that openness and honesty can be part of good negotiations, and I’d like to think that Odo is smart enough to know the business and can understand and appreciate that approach. Who knows? 

 

On Berrios, I don’t have a good sense of what arbitration progressions look like. But MLBTR is predicting $5.4 million in this, his first year. I didn’t see great comparisons among others, but they project Eduardo Rodriguez at $9.5 million and Noah Syndergaard at $9.9 million in their second year. The best starter I could find in his third year is Marcus Stroman, but that was only $11.8 million. So given those, if something like $5MM-$10MM-$15MM makes sense as a three-year progression, would he consider the 4/$60MM you named above, knowing that he’d still be hitting free agency at age 30 (at least under this CBA — who knows how that could change?)? Maybe we could structure it as $12MM-$14MM-$16MM-$18MM and include an option year at $20MM?

 

I named Moreland and Price primarily because they’ve been named by others. I don’t have particular thoughts on them, other than to say they are examples — a cheap 1B and a salary-dump pitcher. I think you’re about right on the maximum the Twins would want to pay on Price.  

 

Wood would be at the top of my list as well, but there are a couple of other names that could be even more of a flyer. Taijuan Walker, Danny Salazar, Clay Buchholz, and Felix Hernandez are all guys that I wouldn’t mind bringing to camp on a minor-league contract, with incentive-based contracts for if they make the team. Maybe even Shelby Miller? I think those guys are all still available, unless I missed a signing somewhere. Even if Buchholz makes it eight starts before this year’s injury, he will have covered the Pineda suspension.

 

Overall, I’m not adamantly opposed to Donaldson. I just tend to be a guy who likes to spread risk out over a larger number of players. 

[IndianaTwin]

 

Ok, I think I see the reasoning.

 

Odorizzi is an interesting study. Will the Twins believe that he would be worth 3/$54? Would Odorizzi want to see how the year goes before he signs?

What numbers would you throw out for Berrios? Is he looking for Wheeler money?

I actually had Moreland on my list in October, but I think the shift is away from him. Not sure why.

I would be totally surprised by the Twins taking on more than $12-14 million for Price.

The only guy I still see available is Alex Wood. I wanted Jimmy Nelson for $2 million.

 

Thanks for the ideas, but we must see it differently. I think the money is there for JD.

 

Oh, and from your earlier thread, I’m also on board with extensions for Sano, Rogers, Buxton, and Rosario, probably in that order of interest (and Sano the first by a long shot). I don’t have a good sense on what their numbers ought to be. 

[tony&rodney]

Berrios is ripe for an extension. After he signs this year, offer a 5/$80 million package to begin next year.

Sano is more difficult, but a 4/$60 million that begins this year might work.

The Twins would likely pause after two extensions.

This still leaves money for JD.

I'm being persistent, but I also really do like the idea of Sano at 1B and a combo playing 1B as acceptance of a failure to add Donaldson.

[howeda7]

 

It is implied by the position that assessed value is stupid. Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent. On several occasions in the past posters have stated they could care less about winning the value proposition. This ignores the need to get production per dollar spent. The basis of any personnel strategy in MLB is assessed value. So, in a word, yes!

No one is saying they don't care if it turns into a bad signing or if it's a good value. We're saying that IF he breaks down and isn't healthy the last couple years, it's not the end of the world. We're not the Rays or A's. In 2022 and 2023, we should be able to afford a $150-160 million payroll. Being on the hook to Donaldson (or MadBaum or Ryu) for $20-25 million isn't going to cause us to have to blow up the team.  We can't afford 5-6 bad contracts at a time like the Red Sox or Dodgers. But one won't kill us. 

[howeda7]

Signing guys to extensions is fine, but it's not likely that considerable amount would be shifted into 2020. 

[Major League Ready]

 

Has anyone argued otherwise? You yourself said that this year they should sign a legit free agent. This is the one that is left. I'm not sure it's sign him, but that about trading for expensive pitching instead.

 

No. My plan was specific to one of two expensive FAs… Wheeler was #1 and Bumgarner #2. If Donaldson can provide impact pitching your point might make sense. That budget considered AAV and years to ensure key players could be retained. When that failed to materialize I did not assume the next best strategy was the sign the guy who costs the most. That has very consistently been your strategy as well as many others here who asserted the need to sign players like Machado at 30M/yr or Harper for 35M. I think the ability to identify and sign Charlie Morton and DJ Lemahiau who produced a combined 11.6 WAR vs 3.1 for Machado is more important to building a contender. It leaves me enough left over to sign Clippard too. This just so happens to be the essence of assessed value.
 
You have a very consistent assumption … more years and more dollars = better. You have never provided any support for this position. It’s an assumption and I have given you the hard facts to refute that assumption. You elect to ignore them. The function and value of assessed value is irrefutable. Rather than acknowledging that it is a practice in most strategic decisions, you fired back with “we just want one expensive free agent. This once again demonstrates the complete absence of critical thought. You could make a point that assessed value could be used to determine the relative merit of any plan but you certainly can’t assert that the inclusion of an expensive player in the plan somehow discredits the use of assessed value. It makes absolutely no sense.

[USAFChief]

 

No. My plan was specific to one of two expensive FAs… Wheeler was #1 and Bumgarner #2. If Donaldson can provide impact pitching your point might make sense. That budget considered AAV and years to ensure key players could be retained. When that failed to materialize I did not assume the next best strategy was the sign the guy who costs the most. That has very consistently been your strategy as well as many others here who asserted the need to sign players like Machado at 30M/yr or Harper for 35M. I think the ability to identify and sign Charlie Morton and DJ Lemahiau who produced a combined 11.6 WAR vs 3.1 for Machado is more important to building a contender. It leaves me enough left over to sign Clippard too. This just so happens to be the essence of assessed value.
 
You have a very consistent assumption … more years and more dollars = better. You have never provided any support for this position. It’s an assumption and I have given you the hard facts to refute that assumption. You elect to ignore them. The function and value of assessed value is irrefutable. Rather than acknowledging that it is a practice in most strategic decisions, you fired back with “we just want one expensive free agent. This once again demonstrates the complete absence of critical thought. You could make a point that assessed value could be used to determine the relative merit of any plan but you certainly can’t assert that the inclusion of an expensive player in the plan somehow discredits the use of assessed value. It makes absolutely no sense.

Name 2020's Charlie Morton and DJ Lemahiau (sic) now. Today.

 

Anyone can pick two underpayed players after the season. That's not "assessed value." That's just cherry picking. Tell us now which 3rd baseman the Twins could sign for little money that will allow the Twins to improve their defense, and put up better numbers than Donaldson.

 

"Assessed value" might be fine when you're considering where to invest your retirement nest egg. When you're trying to beat 29 other MLB teams, it's meaningless.  The idea isn't to get the most value per dollar spent. The idea is to put together the best team you can.

 

By the way, if "That budget considered AAV and years to ensure key players could be retained," then the same could be said about a Donaldson signing, since all three players will end up in the same ballpark for dollars/money.

[Major League Ready]

 

No one is saying they don't care if it turns into a bad signing or if it's a good value. We're saying that IF he breaks down and isn't healthy the last couple years, it's not the end of the world. We're not the Rays or A's. In 2022 and 2023, we should be able to afford a $150-160 million payroll. Being on the hook to Donaldson (or MadBaum or Ryu) for $20-25 million isn't going to cause us to have to blow up the team.  We can't afford 5-6 bad contracts at a time like the Red Sox or Dodgers. But one won't kill us. 

 

Look back. I have not offered an opinion on Donaldson because I am somewhat indifferent. The only point I have been making is that maximizing value per dollar spent is essential to building a winner. That concept is generally lost here. What is even more disturbing is the constant waxing on about the incompetence of the organization by people who don't understand the function and value of assessed value. The irony is that so many clamored for analytics and apparently don't understand assessed value is a significant product of those analytics.

[nicksaviking]

 

Putting the best team on the field requires getting the most value per $ spent.

 

 

No. My plan was specific to one of two expensive FAs… Wheeler was #1 and Bumgarner #2. If Donaldson can provide impact pitching your point might make sense. 

 

I don't know how you reconcile signing any big money free agents then because they will never get you the most value per $ spent. If Randy Dobnak is making 250K and Zack Wheeler is making 25M, Zack Wheeler would have to be 100x better than Randy Dobnak which isn't possible.

 

A team with a payroll of $10M made up of 26 pre-arbitration players is going to have better overall assigned value than the Yankees. You don't have to "win" the assigned value game to win the World Series. From a business standpoint I understand why they look at it this way, but it does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with on field production. In fact, the Yankees were winning more WS BEFORE they started putting a conscious effort into building an economically sound club. 

[Major League Ready]

 

I don't know how you reconcile signing any big money free agents then because they will never get you the most value per $ spent. If Randy Dobnak is making 250K and Zack Wheeler is making 25M, Zack Wheeler would have to be 100x better than Randy Dobnak which isn't possible.

 

A team with a payroll of $10M made up of 26 pre-arbitration players is going to have better overall assigned value than the Yankees. You don't have to "win" the assigned value game to win the World Series. From a business standpoint I understand why they look at it this way, but it does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with on field production. In fact, the Yankees were winning more WS BEFORE they started putting a conscious effort into building an economically sound club. 

 

See link below.

 

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/30/Appeal-to-Extremes

 

I could make the same argument that it would cost $500M to put together a team of free that produced 100 wins but that is taking the premise to absurdity. To argue that a below average team MUST extract more production per dollar spent is truly ignorant. I don't mean stupid. I mean willingness to ignore an irrefutable fact. It's this simple ... The more effective the FO is where this principal is concerned, the more ability they have to spend in free agency. Yet, people detest the practice. The problem is not that the FO just does not get it.

[Otto von Ballpark]

As I understand it, the criticism of "assessed value", in this thread, is that it's perhaps unwise to stick too close to a 4/85 valuation when 4/100 or thereabouts could land Donaldson, improve the team, and we're not confident there's a better imminent alternative for those resources.

 

Let's keep the discussion within those specific parameters, rather than expanding it to generalities and extremes.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Here's a good MLBTR round-up of the Donaldson situation as it stands now:

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/assessing-the-state-of-the-josh-donaldson-market.html

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Off the top of my head, with the $25 million you’re allocating to Donaldson, I’d...

• use about $3 million to front load a contract that turns Odorizzi into $54 million over 3 years.
• use another good-sized chunk to sign Berrios to a deal that buys out at least one year of free agency. I think it’s going to be tough to buy out a large number of years, but maybe he’d go for one year of free agency in exchange for big raises the next three years.
• use a few million on Moreland.
• consider taking on some of the cost in someone’s salary dump trade for pitching (Price is a guy that’s been named, but there’s probably others).
• start exploring guys on minor league contracts, but hang on to them this time rather than dropping them like we did Anibal Sanchez.  

Or some combination thereof.

I'm skeptical that this is a better or more attainable allocation of resources than signing Donaldson for 4/100 or thereabouts.

 

1. Odorizzi is already guaranteed 1/17.8 -- looking at the FA market this offseason, I don't think frontloading $3 mil makes any difference in whether he is willing to add a 2/36 extension on top of that right now. (And if it was, you could always do a corresponding backload in a Donaldson deal -- $22 mil this year, more later.)

 

2. We've been trying to sign Berrios for a year-plus, and he hasn't signed yet. I suspect the difference there is more than just how much is front-loaded, in which case you're basically asking the front office to exceed their existing valuation of Berrios instead of exceeding it for Donaldson. That's just shifting risk, and at best improving the 2023 team at the expense of the 2020-2022 teams.

 

3. Respectfully, Moreland isn't good. I don't particularly want to give him a job at any price, it is doubtful that he improves this team.

 

4. We've already considered Price and other salary dump trades, and nothing has materialized so far. So again, if you want something done today, you're essentially just asking the front office to exceed their existing valuation of Price etc. instead of Donaldson. Or if you're waiting, hoping that Boston's or whomever's valuation drops in the next month to match yours and you can strike a deal, there's still significant risk a deal never happens and those resources are left unspent, and the team thus unimproved.

 

5. Minor league contracts aren't guaranteed, and rarely involve significant sums unless performance bonuses are reached -- in which case, the money isn't really directly related to Donaldson's salary. The Twins would probably be happy to go over budget $2-5 mil if a guy like Sanchez is a healthy and effective SP for the whole season to earn those bonuses.

[howeda7]

 

Look back. I have not offered an opinion on Donaldson because I am somewhat indifferent. The only point I have been making is that maximizing value per dollar spent is essential to building a winner. That concept is generally lost here. What is even more disturbing is the constant waxing on about the incompetence of the organization by people who don't understand the function and value of assessed value. The irony is that so many clamored for analytics and apparently don't understand assessed value is a significant product of those analytics.

Value /$ isn't the holy grail. By that measure the Rays and A's are the perfect organization and no one can match them. They get the most wins per payroll dollar nearly ever year. Good for them. They also usually miss the play-offs and have won zero World Series in the last 28 years.

 

We're a middle of the pack team in revenue that IS trying to win a World Series. Most other teams in our revenue area can and do afford a major free agent signing every few years when they're in a window they think they can go all the way. Usually they work out. Sometimes they don't. Only the Twins are totally risk averse and unwilling to put all their chips on the current team waiting for a tomorrow that will never come.

[Mike Sixel]

 

No. My plan was specific to one of two expensive FAs… Wheeler was #1 and Bumgarner #2. If Donaldson can provide impact pitching your point might make sense. That budget considered AAV and years to ensure key players could be retained. When that failed to materialize I did not assume the next best strategy was the sign the guy who costs the most. That has very consistently been your strategy as well as many others here who asserted the need to sign players like Machado at 30M/yr or Harper for 35M. I think the ability to identify and sign Charlie Morton and DJ Lemahiau who produced a combined 11.6 WAR vs 3.1 for Machado is more important to building a contender. It leaves me enough left over to sign Clippard too. This just so happens to be the essence of assessed value.
 
You have a very consistent assumption … more years and more dollars = better. You have never provided any support for this position. It’s an assumption and I have given you the hard facts to refute that assumption. You elect to ignore them. The function and value of assessed value is irrefutable. Rather than acknowledging that it is a practice in most strategic decisions, you fired back with “we just want one expensive free agent. This once again demonstrates the complete absence of critical thought. You could make a point that assessed value could be used to determine the relative merit of any plan but you certainly can’t assert that the inclusion of an expensive player in the plan somehow discredits the use of assessed value. It makes absolutely no sense.

 

I think I see the problem! We were talking past each other a bit here.....

 

When I responded to your post about $/WAR, I thought you were arguing they couldn't afford Donaldson. That appears not to be the case. What you are saying is that he specifically isn't the FA you'd sign.

 

On that, I'm unsure how I fell one way or the other. I would have preferred pitching any of the last three off seasons, but we aren't getting that. It appears, after three years of needing starting pitching, that the team won't pay for the top end of the market. The question is, then, do I want them to spend that money on other top line players? I would have preferred a Machado (26 years old) but that was never going to happen. That leaves us with this specific choice, now that the only other good FA hitters are outfielders, which this team doesn't need.

 

I would have preferred the less expensive Moustakis if this was the plan, but they didn't do that either. In looking at next year's FA class.......well, I haven't don that much yet. But, from everything you read, it pales compared to this year. So I'm not sure saving that money does much good.

 

To Chief's point, it is easy to say after the fact that random pitchers are better, but who is left for this year that is going to be better than 1 WAR with any level of certainty?

 

I'm mostly indifferent on Donaldson. It would not have been my play at all, but the ship of my plan has sailed for the third straight year. At this point, the question is, now what? 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Oh, and from your earlier thread, I’m also on board with extensions for Sano, Rogers, Buxton, and Rosario, probably in that order of interest (and Sano the first by a long shot). I don’t have a good sense on what their numbers ought to be. 

 

Mid market teams with multiple very good OF prospects cannot afford to extend a good corner OF. And, Rogers is a RP, at most you go 2 years on a guy like that.

 

Cruz and Rosario and Odo are likely not on this payroll in 2021 and beyond......there is more than enough money to extend Berrios (if he will sign) and Buxton and Sano.

[Major League Ready]

 

I think I see the problem! We were talking past each other a bit here.....

 

When I responded to your post about $/WAR, I thought you were arguing they couldn't afford Donaldson. That appears not to be the case. What you are saying is that he specifically isn't the FA you'd sign.

 

On that, I'm unsure how I fell one way or the other. I would have preferred pitching any of the last three off seasons, but we aren't getting that. It appears, after three years of needing starting pitching, that the team won't pay for the top end of the market. The question is, then, do I want them to spend that money on other top line players? I would have preferred a Machado (26 years old) but that was never going to happen. That leaves us with this specific choice, now that the only other good FA hitters are outfielders, which this team doesn't need.

 

I would have preferred the less expensive Moustakis if this was the plan, but they didn't do that either. In looking at next year's FA class.......well, I haven't don that much yet. But, from everything you read, it pales compared to this year. So I'm not sure saving that money does much good.

 

To Chief's point, it is easy to say after the fact that random pitchers are better, but who is left for this year that is going to be better than 1 WAR with any level of certainty?

 

I'm mostly indifferent on Donaldson. It would not have been my play at all, but the ship of my plan has sailed for the third straight year. At this point, the question is, now what? 

 

I used specifics as illustration of a concept. The point being identifying the Morton type deals is even more important than signing the 5+ year guys. The track record of these FAs makes that quite clear. The argument was never the affordability of Donaldson. I posted a plan which clearly shows a budget capable of absorbing Donaldson. This whole line of debate for me is purely the ignorance associated with the dismissal of utilizing assessed value. The responses would suggest most respondents never actually considered what I was actually saying and rushed to conclusion I must be dismissing the viability of signing Donaldson when I never once even offered an opinion. I don't think it matters if they they can't find a way to add impact pitching but I would support adding him at 4/90 or less.

[tony&rodney]

Good points by many and plenty of discussion.

The topic is whether to sign JD at somewhere around $100 million and it seems that all the discussions and opinions, whether fans of JD or not, do not really say that the Twins cannot afford the contract. Some people do not want to spend the money on Donaldson though.

Extensions would begin next year, some players with strong money will surely not be bask in 2021, there are prospects moving forward, and the Twins are not at all likely to take on a contract like Price or Sale.

Spring training is about a month out - the Twins should sign JD. I would expect, given the chatter, that 4/$95 million would do it. I guess we will know when we know.