Joe Saunders

[luckylager]

3 years/$24 million in a heartbeat.

[Big City]

You're sure they are the same people? Cause I'm all for getting him

 

I didn't see any comments from you on this string saying to only go 2-years for Saunders unless I missed it. My comment was directed at those who said they'd only go two years but have ever bitched about the Twins not signing good free agent starting pitching this offseason. Not to name any names but, *cough* Seth Strohs *cough*.

[old nurse]

Maybe I just see things differently but I am getting tired of this narrative, one pushed by the Twins. The problem, and what shapes the perception, is that the Twins don't fall into the category of team in your last sentence. They don't have interest in signing "key" or impact FA.

 

Last year they tried to get Buehrle, this year they were linked to Dempster. It is not as simple as you make it out to be.

[ashbury]

Maybe I just see things differently but I am getting tired of this narrative, one pushed by the Twins. The problem, and what shapes the perception, is that the Twins don't fall into the category of team in your last sentence. They don't have interest in signing "key" or impact FA.

 

They could be lying. They could be telling the truth. Lack of activity at the high end in off-season 2012-13 does not give much information either way about off-season '14-15. I choose to view it as an application of Occam's Razor to keep truth-telling as my assumption. (Of course a different application of Occam would be to note their past history in the FA market - but the conditions in the past aren't necessarily duplicated anymore and again I take them at their word for this year.)

[ThePuck]

I didn't see any comments from you on this string saying to only go 2-years for Saunders unless I missed it. My comment was directed at those who said they'd only go two years but have ever bitched about the Twins not signing good free agent starting pitching this offseason. Not to name any names but, *cough* Seth Strohs *cough*.

 

No, what you said was, 'Hillarious how people bitch and moan about not signing any good free agent pitchers and then this Saunders rumor comes back around and those same people are saying that they wouln't go 3-years for him. '

 

And I'm saying, seems there are quite a few people who were, as you say, 'bitch and moan about not signing any good free agent pitchers' who seem fine with the 3 year move. As your post read, it seemed like you were saying all the ones complaining before are now hesistant to give 3 years...you know, 'those same people' That's not the case. Perhaps you mean some people?

[DelawareTwinsFan]

Three year deal for Saunders shouldn't be a deal breaker. He's been a consistently solid starter, as everyone has pointed out, been of the Twins mold. Doesn't walk guys, should be a inning eater solid middle of the rotation guy. Probably holds runners pretty well though I haven't heard any mention of how well he does this and I don't recall. He's not Buehrle but as a lefty and a veteran, I suspect he's pretty good. In 3 years, we will still need an inning eater, solid back end guy which he will fill this need pretty well. I suspect in 2015 we might have a rotation of Myer and/or May, Gibson, Diamond, Worley and Saunders. If we're flush with flame throwers (maybe Berrios is ready then, we can always make some trades). However, having solid veteran starters is important for any team and Saunders fits this bill. Would give him the 3 years and give him some inning based incentives.

[old nurse]

No, what you said was, 'Hillarious how people bitch and moan about not signing any good free agent pitchers and then this Saunders rumor comes back around and those same people are saying that they wouln't go 3-years for him. '

 

And I'm saying, seems there are quite a few people who were, as you say, 'bitch and moan about not signing any good free agent pitchers' who seem fine with the 3 year move. As your post read, it seemed like you were saying all the ones complaining before are now hesistant to give 3 years...you know, 'those same people' That's not the case. Perhaps you mean some people?

 

You could have asked him when has Seth ever complained as long as you were pointing out problems with the post. I don't recall Seth ever stating anything but opinions on players values and skills. Seth might be closer to what you criticize people as being relatives to the Pohlads. Has anyone seen Seth and Jim Pohlad together? Lol.

[Mike Sixel]

I think occams razor should lead you to conclude they will not sign big money free agents with this ownership and GM.

[LimestoneBaggy]

I echo Jim C. and Ashbury J. Frankly, I think the problem in evaluating Joe Saunders now and Joe Saunders at the inception of free agency is the heart of the issue. If you told me Saunders for 3/24 at the beginning of free agency, I probably would have said I would sign him for less and fewer years. However, with the increased paychecks to starting pitchers this year, in combination with the Twins moves to this point, I think signing Saunders takes on a completely different perspective. Saunders, right now, 3/24 is a decent deal to helpt the Twins be "better" to watch in 2013. He is what he is: average. Average helps the Twins. No huge financial drain, and likely to get value +/- some trade value if you need it.

[Jim Crikket]

Seth might be closer to what you criticize people as being relatives to the Pohlads. Has anyone seen Seth and Jim Pohlad together? Lol.

 

If Seth was a Pohlad, the Twins' Class A team would play in Warroad MN.

[ThePuck]

You could have asked him when has Seth ever complained as long as you were pointing out problems with the post. I don't recall Seth ever stating anything but opinions on players values and skills. Seth might be closer to what you criticize people as being relatives to the Pohlads. Has anyone seen Seth and Jim Pohlad together? Lol.

 

That was funny...you get a like, Sir

[Alex]

Last year they tried to get Buehrle, this year they were linked to Dempster. It is not as simple as you make it out to be.

 

We've done this dance before and, IMO, being linked means nothing. It might not be as easy as I think, but other teams sure seem to be having an easier time than the Twins make it out to be.

 

I believe that the Twins either a) arne't making offers or aren't offering as much as other teams. I don't think it's c) that they're making the best offer and it's getting turned down.

[PseudoSABR]

Well, at least they'd be spending money!

[Oxtung]

I'd rather have Marcum at the same years and $$$ that is being offered Saunders. Now whether Marcum would ever be interested in the Twins...who knows. Saunders is better than many of our alternatives however. So I guess I would have no problem with a 2 year deal.

[Knotholemike]

It will not take an 8-figure annual salary or more than 2 plus an option year to sign Joe Saunders. Pitchers have been signing for about $3.3M per WAR this off-season when one adjusts for the low first-year salary contracts Jeremy Guthrie and Anibal Sanchez signed. Joe Saunders has posted an average WAR of 1.8 the past 6 years with last year being his second best at 2.5. That puts him at about $6M a year (which is what he made last year). There is not a lot of upside potential there so giving him a premium would not be necessary, but his consistency is probably worth an adjustment to say $8M per year. No one (except Dayton Moore and especially not Terry Ryan) is going to give more than a 2 year contract to someone who is consistent but with limited upside. My guess would be 2 years for around $16M or $17M, and maybe an option for a 3rd year based on innings pitched or some other benchmark. He could get more but it would probably be a one-year deal for about $10M.

[old nurse]

We've done this dance before and, IMO, being linked means nothing. It might not be as easy as I think, but other teams sure seem to be having an easier time than the Twins make it out to be.

 

I believe that the Twins either a) arne't making offers or aren't offering as much as other teams. I don't think it's c) that they're making the best offer and it's getting turned down.

A 3/39 as a starting point in last years values for contracts was not off based for Buehrle. Believe what you want, keep repeating it enough ....

[Guest USAFChief]

A 3/39 as a starting point in last years values for contracts was not off based for Buehrle. Believe what you want, keep repeating it enough ....

 

If by a starting point you mean short by 1 year and $19M, then ya..."not off based."

 

However, even if we make the leap of faith that there ever was such an offer from the Twins, that actually sounds pretty "off based" to me. Believe what you want...keep repeating it enough.

[TheLeviathan]

Last year they tried to get Buehrle, this year they were linked to Dempster. It is not as simple as you make it out to be.

 

Care to fill us in on the details of those negotiations? How hard did they try? Things can get pretty simple when you put enough dollars on the table, but by all means, fill us in on how those went. You seem to hold that level of evidence to others.

 

As a very thoughtful poster said here, at some point the simplest answer is the right one. And quite frankly, this team just doesn't like handing out big FA contracts. It doesn't like handing out big contracts to pitchers period. All this spin overlooks the simplest answer.

[old nurse]

Care to fill us in on the details of those negotiations? How hard did they try? Things can get pretty simple when you put enough dollars on the table, but by all means, fill us in on how those went. You seem to hold that level of evidence to others.

 

As a very thoughtful poster said here, at some point the simplest answer is the right one. And quite frankly, this team just doesn't like handing out big FA contracts. It doesn't like handing out big contracts to pitchers period. All this spin overlooks the simplest answer.

1. Buehrle's agent did a fine job of getting his client a fourth year. No other reported offers were for more than three.

2. Evidence. If you don't have to have a single shred of evidence to back what you say and chastise me for calling you on it then I can take the reports of what Buehrle was offered and say what it means. 13 million per year offer was a better offer than anybody not named CJ Wilson got. You can look that up. Miami was so damn proud of that contract that they gave him away. A reasonable contract you should get a prospect to three back.

3. But the team does hand out large contracts. Mauer's contract to keep him from free agency was a discount. So wasn't Morneau"s.

Pavano given his age got a huge one. He was a free agent at the time and ranked by many sites as the second best pitcher available that year. And 3/39 for Buerhle last year, though outspent, was a huge offer for last year's market.

[TheLeviathan]

1. Buehrle's agent did a fine job of getting his client a fourth year. No other reported offers were for more than three.

 

I thought you were playing the "unless it's reported we can't make assumptions" game with everyone else? Why do you insist on having different standards for your assumptions than others? It's beyond annoying at this point. I have to believe you're intentionally using this hypocrisy to troll.

 

3. But the team does hand out large contracts. Mauer's contract to keep him from free agency was a discount. So wasn't Morneau"s.

 

Wait! Those guys pitch and we didn't use them last year! Oh, wait, you didn't read what I wrote. Should've seen that coming given your recent trolling. I won't address the other nonsense - Pavano was a huge contract to a pitcher? Seriously? That's shameful nonsense.

[edavis0308]

1. Buehrle's agent did a fine job of getting his client a fourth year. No other reported offers were for more than three.

2. Evidence. If you don't have to have a single shred of evidence to back what you say and chastise me for calling you on it then I can take the reports of what Buehrle was offered and say what it means. 13 million per year offer was a better offer than anybody not named CJ Wilson got. You can look that up. Miami was so damn proud of that contract that they gave him away. A reasonable contract you should get a prospect to three back.

3. But the team does hand out large contracts. Mauer's contract to keep him from free agency was a discount. So wasn't Morneau"s.

Pavano given his age got a huge one. He was a free agent at the time and ranked by many sites as the second best pitcher available that year. And 3/39 for Buerhle last year, though outspent, was a huge offer for last year's market.

 

Evidence huh? Interesting.

[ThePuck]

I thought you were playing the "unless it's reported we can't make assumptions" game with everyone else? Why do you insist on having different standards for your assumptions than others? It's beyond annoying at this point. I have to believe you're intentionally using this hypocrisy to troll.

 

 

 

Wait! Those guys pitch and we didn't use them last year! Oh, wait, you didn't read what I wrote. Should've seen that coming given your recent trolling. I won't address the other nonsense - Pavano was a huge contract to a pitcher? Seriously? That's shameful nonsense.

 

'Mark Buehrle has been linked to half the teams in baseball, but Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com reports that the Marlins, Nationals, Rangers, and Twins are the teams known to have made the free agent left-hander a contract offer. Rosenthal writes that Minnesota’s offer is “not as strong” as the others, which he says are for three years and $36-$39 million.

 

 

So the Twins offer was less than the other teams' that offered between 36-39M. I'm reading that correctly right?

 

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/05/marlins-nationals-rangers-and-twins-make-offers-to-mark-buehrle/

[TheLeviathan]

So the Twins offer was less than the other teams' that offered between 36-39M. I'm reading that correctly right? /

 

Yup, how significantly behind we don't know. Unfortunately, facts don't work with trolling methinks.

[Nick Nelson]

I was wondering where this "report" of the Twins offering Buehrle 3/39 came from. First I've heard of it.

 

Pavano given his age got a huge one.

 

"Huge?" He got $18 million coming off a 17-win, 220-inning season because he settled after no team wanted to give up a draft pick to sign him. Come on man. You are shredding your credibility with remarks like that.

[kab21]

I really don't have a problem with Saunders at 3/21. He's unimpressive but solid. I like this better than Jackson at 52+M or Sanchez at 80+M.

 

The problem that I have is the lack of direction that Ryan took this offseason in FA. He had about 30M that he could have spent in FA. If Saunders is signed for 3/21 then he would have spent 17M this year and committed 35M to 3 pitchers that you hope can have 4-4.50 ERA's. And this trio of contact pitchers is in front of a horrible defense. There's nothing wrong with the dollar or year commitments but it's unimpressive considering that money is available.

[Brock Beauchamp]

It says a lot about the free agent acquisitions this offseason that I'd rejoice if the Twins landed Saunders.

 

Jesus, I need a drink.

[old nurse]

I was wondering where this "report" of the Twins offering Buehrle 3/39 came from. First I've heard of it.

 

 

 

"Huge?" He got $18 million coming off a 17-win, 220-inning season because he settled after no team wanted to give up a draft pick to sign him. Come on man. You are shredding your credibility with remarks like that.

Now wins count towards a player's value? Lost count of the people blasted for saying wins matter on this board. Forgot about the draft pick. That draft pick though was top 15 protected. The Cubs, White Sox,and Mets were all teams that would have been in the top 15 thus pushing the pick to the second round and thus not a top 50 pick. Did the big spendings clubs really worry about the pick when they thought the player would help them win? For a player that was not a superstar, that year it was a very good contract. Consider that two years prior to that contract he was worth 1.5 million. Traded for Yohan Pino. 18 million is great money for that track record.

[old nurse]

Yup, how significantly behind we don't know. Unfortunately, facts don't work with trolling methinks.

 

Still can't comment without using vitriol? If I were trolling I would have said that Saunders should come here because he could have Butera as his personal catcher. I could have included Butera would instantly make him a lot better pitcher with his superior game calling ability. I really can't go any further with an example of a trolling type of comment for fear of someone actually not reading very well and thinking I am serious about Butera.

[snepp]

nurse has become the victim yet again, this thread is now complete.

[old nurse]

Not a victim unless that is the way you want to look at it and you obviously do. I did take it as a personal attack to be called trolling. It had nothing to do with the point being made. That some here insist on personal attack rather than focus on the idea is annoying. Would I have been better to just said that was a butt hole remark, the type I expect out of you?