Jake Odorizzi, What's going on w/ him?

[Doctor Gast]

Since the beginning there was a lot of FA talk surrounding Jake &    that      there        was a lot of interest from various teams. Thought he'd be gone by now but so far nothing.  Is he waiting for a bigger haul? Now there are a lot of trade rumors for starters w/ already some deals.  Where does that leave our friend Odo? The way things are going, it doesn't look good for him. Will he have to settle for less than what he deserves? Does the Twins have a shot at him? Please share your thoughts.

[whosafraidofluigirussolo]

It's true that Odorizzi's name has been in a number of rumors without any deal happening so far - but many more starting pitchers have not signed yet than have signed. It'd be hard to conclude that the market has moved on from him.

[nicksaviking]

I'd bet several clubs were interested in him as a bounce back candidate expecting him to take a typical bounce back contract of like one year plus an option.

 

I'd guess Odorizzi has set loftier goals than these clubs were expecting.

[Rosterman]

Looking at the right price on a multi-year deal, at least two years and an option. Then he will go down from there.

 

[DocBauer]

Our FO tends to play very close to the vest.

 

They were heralded a couple years ago for some very smart late signings that didn't turn out. But they seemed smart at the time.

 

They traded virtually nothing for Odorizzi and that turned out pretty darn good.

 

The Maeda trade was not on the radar and it looks pretty darn good despite giving up a good young BP arm.

 

There is a method to their madness that usually makes sense.

 

But I am surprised there has been no rumors about Oddo. They traded for him for a reason. He turned in a great 2019. While he was a darkly humorous 2020 injury factor, he had ZERO lingering injury concerns. He's actually the perfect guy to bring back. The devil you know. Dance with the date you brought. Either both sides are posturing here...OR...the FO is truly looking at Walker, Richardson and Kluber and deciding where the best value and upside is.

 

My guess? Oddo for a 1yr deal around $12-13M, or a 3yr $39M because they really do like him and want him back. Mutual benefit. OR, they give Kluber some sort of $10M deal with a $12-ish option for a 2nd year deal with a buyout. Just makes too much sense at this point, IMO.

[SkyBlueWaters]

 

... My guess? Oddo for a 1yr deal around $12-13M, or a 3yr $39M because they really do like him and want him back. Mutual benefit. OR, they give Kluber some sort of $10M deal with a $12-ish option for a 2nd year deal with a buyout. Just makes too much sense at this point, IMO.

 

Not a bad guess. If they could get Jake for $12-13M for next year, that would be a great deal. Where it gets sticky is a multi-year deal, especially for a pitcher. Historically, premier everyday players are a safer long-term bet for multi-year deals than pitchers are. 

 

Jake turns 31 next March. Should be plenty of quality innings left. But his missing most of 2020 becomes a concern. Personally, I really like the guy. I like how he could deepen our rotation. 

 

A GM with a fat budget could snap him up for three years and Jake could easily make him look pretty savvy. The fat budget goes a long way toward forgetting the deal *if* Odorizzi struggles or gets injured and the team has to move on. 

 

We need to re-sign Cruz or replace the veteran bat. We'll see where the FO is after that.

 

[ashbury]

A GM with a fat budget could snap him up for three years and Jake could easily make him look pretty savvy. The fat budget goes a long way toward forgetting the deal *if* Odorizzi struggles or gets injured and the team has to move on.

Really good summary of how I see things too. I also like Jake. But the one word that comes to mind when reading this summary is, "luxury."  I want him, but not at the expense of something else, if that makes sense.

 

[SkyBlueWaters]

 

... the one word that comes to mind when reading this summary is, "luxury."  I want him, but not at the expense of something else, if that makes sense.
 

 

Agreed.

 

Does anyone have an idea or a theory why we don't see more contracts that are heavily incentive laden, like the one Maeda signed with the Dodgers before getting dealt here?

 

I suppose the players and their agents don't like them, because the $$ isn't locked in.

 

But man, if I were a guy like Odorizzi out to show that 2019 was no fluke and he could do it again, a multi-year contract heavy on clauses re innings pitched, etc., would be just the ticket.

 

And it buffers the front office on having the contract blow up in their face(s), too.

 

[umterp23]

Part of the problem could be the agents being money whisperers to the players.  Guarantee this, get guaranteed that, etc.  I'm big fan of incentives to make more money for sure, just doesn't happen as much as we hope.  I would love to see all the clubs have cap on annual salary that is the same for all the players and then incentives can be up to the individual teams. For example: All MLB players make $1m per year for let's say rookies through year 2. $2m for year 3-5, then like $4M for 6-9, etc.  The incentives on performance than can be set based on position played, offensive/defense etc and you get your year end bonus, etc. or even pay it out monthly.  

 

Now the players would argue, never will work, because Mgmt can bench a guy closing in on reaching certain bonuses, and "cap" the money paid out.  Maybe the monthly payout alleviates some of that, don't know.  I know it would never fly but would be fun to see players on same level and then picking teams to play for.  Talk about balance of teams being competitive, since guys wouldn't be chasing big market teams with deep pockets and huge guaranteed contracts.  Plans has flaws, not a financial GM detail guy, just fun to think about different perform to pay concept.

[FlauerPauer]

Jake was really good for the first half of 2019 and was good the second half of 2019. Got a good pay day, and had a rough 2020. Maybe 1 year and a vesting option with like 150 IP. I don't know about his price tag. 17 million was way to high even for his 2019 production. I'd probably try to do 8 million this year and the vesting option for 14.

[terrydactyls]

The Pohlad family bought the Twins for $36M in 1984 and it has an estimated value of $670M. The Pohlad family is worth $3.8B. I think they can afford to offset their main business profits with financial losses by the Twins. Therefore, I propose they skip all the posturing and tell Falvey and Levine to sign Cruz, sign Odorizzi, sign Cory Oliver, sign Didi Gregorius, sign Brad Hand, fill any remaining weaknesses with the best available options, and get ready for a run at the World Series in 2021.

[tony&rodney]

No way to know if it is accurrate but Calvin said that Pohlad paid $5 million down and then another five for the next six years. The payments were all from profits. Carl was a very savvy business man. Currently, Forbes has the Twins as worth $1.3 billion. Baseball is a good business if you can get admitted into the club.

The post concerns Odorizzi and he may want 3/$45 million or more. Teams will wait to find the limits of their budgets before agreeing to those contracts. If the vaccines go smoothly, maybe the purses are loosened a bit.

[Doctor Gast]

What I think might happen is that Odo will bet on himself     again    & take the best 1 yr. deal, hoping that he can get a better           multi-year                                deal next year.

[Nick Nelson]

Red Sox said to be interested in Odorizzi. And Rich Hill, which is interesting since they grabbed Martin Perez after the Twins moved on a year ago. 

If I'm the Twins, Odorizzi is one of my top priorities. Looks like there is a market for him, so he won't be crazy cheap, but they can get it done. 

[Oxtung]

It always fascinates me when fans talk about bringing back players who have hit FA. My recollection is that this happens very infrequently. I'm curious what people think are the chances he returns? Personally, I would give it <5% chance that he returns to the Twins. What say you?

[strumdatjaguar]

No Odo. The Twins will sign a 3-4-5 type on FA or may go for a bigger talent in a trade.

[DocBauer]

Plains men? Traded for a reason. He was solid in 2018 for a disappointing team. He was largely excellent in 2019 and made the All Star game. He slumped a bit and finished strong.

 

He is coming off a ridiculous 2020 from back spasms early and a wicked chest contusion and and a crazy bloody blister. He suffered no arm or elbow issues.

 

How is he not a quality 3rd starter brought back for 2021 or beyond?

[nicksaviking]

I'd rather have Hill on one year than Odorizzi on three.

[bighat]

Read today the Mets were talking to him.

 

Twins seem to be uninterested.

[mnfireman]

Odorizzi fills the 3 or 4 spot well, as long as he doesn't want 1 or 2 money I'm good. 

[Brandon]

I wonder if the Twins are gauging the cost to acquire Luis Castillo. 3 years team control a 3-5 million cost next year in salary and a number 2 starter. What would we have to give up to get him? Blazovich, Larnarch and Colina maybe add a young pitcher like Poppin or Smeltzer. Going with quantity as Cincinnati may want lots of prospects for a faster rebuild. With a top starter at a low dollar cost we can pivot to bullpen, SS and Cruz and have enough to deal for all.

[Major League Ready]

 

The Pohlad family bought the Twins for $36M in 1984 and it has an estimated value of $670M. The Pohlad family is worth $3.8B. I think they can afford to offset their main business profits with financial losses by the Twins. Therefore, I propose they skip all the posturing and tell Falvey and Levine to sign Cruz, sign Odorizzi, sign Cory Oliver, sign Didi Gregorius, sign Brad Hand, fill any remaining weaknesses with the best available options, and get ready for a run at the World Series in 2021.

 

Let’s pretend for just a moment that the best allocation of tens of millions of dollars from those other businesses would be to spend an extra $XM on player payroll. You know as opposed to feeding the homeless, building battered women’s shelters, curing cancer, etc.

 

All of the owners have substantial financial resource from other sources. Therefore, if it makes sense for the Pohlads to take a loss of X million, it makes sense for all the other owners to do the same. The result would be that the Twins would have an even bigger budget disparity vs big market teams given those teams produce considerable more profit than the Twins. Here is the good news. You no longer have a reason to be mad that the team is unwilling to take a giant loss.

[terrydactyls]

Let’s pretend for just a moment that the best allocation of tens of millions of dollars from those other businesses would be to spend an extra $XM on player payroll. You know as opposed to feeding the homeless, building battered women’s shelters, curing cancer, etc.

 

All of the owners have substantial financial resource from other sources. Therefore, if it makes sense for the Pohlads to take a loss of X million, it makes sense for all the other owners to do the same. The result would be that the Twins would have an even bigger budget disparity vs big market teams given those teams produce considerable more profit than the Twins. Here is the good news. You no longer have a reason to be mad that the team is unwilling to take a giant loss.

Do you subscribe to other conspiracy theories, or just ownership collusion? I understand the economics of ownership. All I was "attempting" to point out is that this would be a great time to think outside the box and build the team.

[twinsfansd]

I've never been able to figure out why people think owners should voluntarily spend millions of dollars just because they have money from other businesses. Does anybody ask you to buy them movie tickets just because you have some money in savings? Well, maybe they do, but should they?

 

You know of course that these people are already being asked every day for donations to other causes. It's not like they don't have plenty of places to hand out freebies.

[Physics Guy]

 

I've never been able to figure out why people think owners should voluntarily spend millions of dollars just because they have money from other businesses. Does anybody ask you to buy them movie tickets just because you have some money in savings? Well, maybe they do, but should they?

 

You know of course that these people are already being asked every day for donations to other causes. It's not like they don't have plenty of places to hand out freebies.

Well how about we ask them to spend savings from previous years from the baseball team?  It's my opinion that the Twins have rarely exceeded that 50ish% of revenues that people talk about and more often are well under it.  I'm fine with saving some $$ when you are rebuilding and aren't quite ready for young players to take off (for example 2013-2016), but when we are contenders let's use those savings to get over the hump.

[Dodecahedron]

 

I've never been able to figure out why people think owners should voluntarily spend millions of dollars just because they have money from other businesses. Does anybody ask you to buy them movie tickets just because you have some money in savings? Well, maybe they do, but should they?

 

You know of course that these people are already being asked every day for donations to other causes. It's not like they don't have plenty of places to hand out freebies.

 

I understand you are responding to a thread, but the Twins don't lose money. The team can afford to pay players.

 

We know the team doesn't want to spend money, sure. We have recent history of a GM who opened up the coffers who was then demoted and replaced by his old boss.

[prouster]

I've never been able to figure out why people think owners should voluntarily spend millions of dollars just because they have money from other businesses. Does anybody ask you to buy them movie tickets just because you have some money in savings? Well, maybe they do, but should they?

 

You know of course that these people are already being asked every day for donations to other causes. It's not like they don't have plenty of places to hand out freebies.

You have in fact described the entire premise of consumer culture in your one example.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'd rather have Hill on one year than Odorizzi on three.

Eh... probably, but only from a risk mitigation position because Hill looked entirely human down the stretch. I don't think he will be good in 2021.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I've never been able to figure out why people think owners should voluntarily spend millions of dollars just because they have money from other businesses. Does anybody ask you to buy them movie tickets just because you have some money in savings? Well, maybe they do, but should they?

 

You know of course that these people are already being asked every day for donations to other causes. It's not like they don't have plenty of places to hand out freebies.

I don't think owners should operate teams at a loss (though I wouldn't complain if they did, as owning a team is often a status purchase and every ownership group sees a massive windfall when they sell) but it'd be cool if they operated closer to where they're supposed to operate, which is just over 50% of revenue going to payroll.

 

But ownership groups cook the books so heavily that most don't actually get anywhere near that percentage.

[arby58]

 

The Pohlad family bought the Twins for $36M in 1984 and it has an estimated value of $670M. The Pohlad family is worth $3.8B. I think they can afford to offset their main business profits with financial losses by the Twins. Therefore, I propose they skip all the posturing and tell Falvey and Levine to sign Cruz, sign Odorizzi, sign Cory Oliver, sign Didi Gregorius, sign Brad Hand, fill any remaining weaknesses with the best available options, and get ready for a run at the World Series in 2021.

It's fun to play with other people's money, but the people that have the money didn't get and/or keep the money by making those sorts of 'business' decisions. Some of the worst professional sports owners have been these types of 'hobby' owners who don't care about business metrics and throw money and caution to the winds. Dan Snyder of the Washington Football Team types.