It’s Time to Pay Jose Berrios

[Danchat]

I think the negotiation starts at 5 years, $100M. He’s asking for market rate money and has been more healthy than McCullers with similar numbers. A month back I was more on the Trade Berrios bandwagon, but with the way our rotation has imploded, I am swinging towards keep Berrios, trade Buxton.

[dbminn]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

They got Moncada prior the winter between 2016-17 and he played 54 games in 2017 and was full-time in 2018.  The equivalent in this case would be a prospect who is playing for us full-time in 2023.  Giolito was up in 2017 as well.  He just wasnt good until 2019.  That trade had a huge impact on them becoming a contender.  The Cardinals let Pujlos go after a 90 win season in 2011 and won 97 in 2013.  We have been over Tampa letting Snell go.  

It's very reasonable to believe the Twins could trade for prospect(s) that will be ready in 2023.  Anyone who believes this mess is going to be completely turned around next year is welcome to that belief but I believe that is purely fanatical think.  They are going to contend again if and when the current SP prospects can contribute significantly to a contender.  When that time comes an additional top prospect could be aiding that contention for several years.  Tampa understands these principals better than most teams which is why they contend with 1/2 the revenue as most teams.  

This is the first year that the White Sox are in contention. It took 4-5 years.

[Brock Beauchamp]

25 minutes ago, dbminn said:

This is the first year that the White Sox are in contention. It took 4-5 years.

The White Sox were also in contention last season. 

[nicksaviking]

For me, his healthy track record pushes the scale toward overpaying and keeping him. Most free agent pitchers come with injury concerns; it's really hard to find quality arms that are healthy. He's close enough to an ACE and he's consistent. If he played for another team and was a free agent, everyone would be begging the Twins to sign him.

[dbminn]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The White Sox were also in contention last season. 

? oops...

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

For me, his healthy track record pushes the scale toward overpaying and keeping him. Most free agent pitchers come with injury concerns; it's really hard to find quality arms that are healthy. He's close enough to an ACE and he's consistent. If he played for another team and was a free agent, everyone would be begging the Twins to sign him.

It's an interesting battle for me... do you pay a guy long-term who works so hard and stays on the field, or are you still worried about his lack of size and how that will impact him as he ages?

I tend to lean toward the former but the latter still lingers in the back of my mind.

[D.C Twins]

Worst case (and exceedingly likely) scenario:

Twins keep him until FA and lose him.....followed by the inevitable internal leak that they 'offered him a great contract that veeeeeeery competitive and juuuuuust below what he took elsewhere' to save face. 

Shame on them if they think we are dumb enough to buy into such a scenario

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It's an interesting battle for me... do you pay a guy long-term who works so hard and stays on the field, or are you still worried about his lack of size and how that will impact him as he ages?

I tend to lean toward the former but the latter still lingers in the back of my mind.

The issues are all tied together.  I feel like injury/health is the next big area that analytics can tackle - even if definitive answers can't be obtained, trends could be teased out that identify who are the good candidates and whom to steer clear of.  Except... I suspect this kind of analytics is already in a pretty advanced state or close to it, and the teams that have it aren't publicizing it.

As with analytics on the fundamental tools of playing the game, there is interplay between the identification and the development.  Find the good candidates, then bring them along correctly.  If I were younger and looking for work, I'd be really interested in getting hired to a team's analytics department, finding out the state of the art on injury analysis, and trying to push that frontier forward. Body type? Track record? Work load? Many avenues to explore.

[Dman]

If they cannot extend Berrios I think it will be hard for them to compete in 2022.  With Berrios and Maeda at the top and Ober hopefully a 5th starter option they just have to add one Good free agent pitcher and possibly a vet on a one year deal or some combination of Duran, Balazovich, Winder or Sands for the 4th spot.  If the pitching gets better next year and the pen resolves itself this team can compete next year.

Without Berrios you have to essentially fill two top spots with longer FA contracts on older pitchers which I don't see the Twins doing or you have to rely more on the young pitching coming up.  Given we haven't developed a starter since Berrios and it took him a year or two to adjust to MLB I think losing him makes competing in 2022 tougher.

To me this whole team and or build process they are in is dependent on 2 of 6 arms (Duran, Balazovich, Winder, Sands, Canterino and Enlow) working out. By working out I mean mid rotation starters not 5th.  They also need to find better pen arms although they cannot do worse than Colome so likely no place to go but up there.  If the young pitching establishes it self I think this team is good to go.

Unless a team just offers something to good to pass up then I think they should extend Berrios to give them a solid pitcher to build around.  A guy who can take his turn every week and keep the team in games.  I think the FO won't want to go into 2022 without Berrios because they cannot afford another year like this one.  We will see what happens around the deadline.

[Ted Schwerzler]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

You said pay him what he wants. I'm asking if that is really true....

I think it is pretty clear he wants more than the Twins want to pay, or he'd be signed.

 

It depends what the Twins want to give him too. Originally he was in the Nola/Severino area, which is fine. I can't imagine him wanting more than $20M AAV realistically. Even around there though, I'm still more comfortable giving him that then trying to replace his production and watching the dollars go unspent or spent unwisely.

[Ted Schwerzler]

1 hour ago, Johnny Ringo said:

This starts with a flawed premise. Berrios would blow his nose at a 5 year/$80 contract from the Twins. It seems odd even writing that but it's true. 

I don't think I suggested that as a number, or any number for that matter. Even 5/$125 doesn't seem outlandish given his age and the alternatives.

[Ted Schwerzler]

49 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

For me, his healthy track record pushes the scale toward overpaying and keeping him. Most free agent pitchers come with injury concerns; it's really hard to find quality arms that are healthy. He's close enough to an ACE and he's consistent. If he played for another team and was a free agent, everyone would be begging the Twins to sign him.

Bingo.

[Ted Schwerzler]

45 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It's an interesting battle for me... do you pay a guy long-term who works so hard and stays on the field, or are you still worried about his lack of size and how that will impact him as he ages?

I tend to lean toward the former but the latter still lingers in the back of my mind.

Even still though, you're only committing to him until he's 32 with a 5 year deal. At that point, he could still go sign another lucrative contract,

[wsnydes]

1 hour ago, Danchat said:

I think the negotiation starts at 5 years, $100M. He’s asking for market rate money and has been more healthy than McCullers with similar numbers. A month back I was more on the Trade Berrios bandwagon, but with the way our rotation has imploded, I am swinging towards keep Berrios, trade Buxton.

Same.  And if I'm the Twins and in a position where you're likely to only sign Buxton or Berrios, Berrios is the safer signing.  He's remained healthy, he's productive and less risky.  I'm not sure "safer" is "better", but I also don't think that signing Berrios would be a negative thing.  The same can't be said about Buxton.

[roger]

32 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

Same.  And if I'm the Twins and in a position where you're likely to only sign Buxton or Berrios, Berrios is the safer signing.  He's remained healthy, he's productive and less risky.  I'm not sure "safer" is "better", but I also don't think that signing Berrios would be a negative thing.  The same can't be said about Buxton.

I don't want to think about what could happen with Buxton.  We don't trade him and he won't sign an extension this winter.  The 2022 season doesn't happen and Buxton is a free agent a year from this November.  He signs with Team X, say the Yankees and goes on to play 155 games in 2023, hitting around .290 with 35 home runs, 120 runs scored, 40 doubles, 100 RBI and 40 stolen bases...while picking up his second platinum glove and first MVP.  You know that's what is going to happen?

[sckelm]

I wonder how the looming negotiations between the players association and owners will (are??) impacting short-term negotiations for all players.  The storm clouds sound like they have been forming for some time.  If a season may be lost due to a work stoppage (or partially lost), how does that influence the thinking of each side? 

[old nurse]

4 hours ago, dbminn said:

Ted wants a retool, not a complete roster teardown. The White Sox traded their veterans for prospects in 2016 and 2017.  It took 4 to 5 years for them to develop. For the Twins, that means they would be ready to compete when Larnach, Jeffers and Kirilloff are about to become free agents.

Tampa Bay traded Archer.   Tampa traded Snell. 

[old nurse]

17 minutes ago, sckelm said:

I wonder how the looming negotiations between the players association and owners will (are??) impacting short-term negotiations for all players.  The storm clouds sound like they have been forming for some time.  If a season may be lost due to a work stoppage (or partially lost), how does that influence the thinking of each side? 

No play, no pay. Low signing bonus, higher salary,

[Cap'n Piranha]

59 minutes ago, Ted Schwerzler said:

I don't think I suggested that as a number, or any number for that matter. Even 5/$125 doesn't seem outlandish given his age and the alternatives.

This seems to contradict your claim in the immediately preceding post, where you opined that you can't imagine him wanting more than $20M AAV.  Berrios is right around the 20th best starter in baseball over the past 3 years at almost any metric you look at (he appears anywhere from 17th to 25th on almost everything one would consider important for a starter; ERA, FIP, xFIP, k/9, bb/9, hard hit rate, swinging strike rate).  That seems like something any number of teams would be interested in, particularly given the durability he's shown, and if more than one team wants him, the bidding war ensues which the Twins cannot be competitive in.

The Angels have needed pitching for years, and in the next two years shed the contracts of Fowler, Cobb, Bundy, Quintana, Heaney, Upton, and Pujols.  That's $111M they free up before 2023, meaning they could hand out 3 $20M AAV contracts next year, give out $20M in arb raises to their homegrown players, and still offer Berrios $30M AAV (given his willingness to bet on himself, do we really think a 28.5 year old Berrios would turn down a 3/$90M deal?  He'd get to sign his second huge contract before 32, or the Angels could easily absorb 5 and $150M).

The Dodgers will clear the contract of David Price next year, as well as Turner, Kershaw, Jansen, and Kazmir.  That's also $111M, and they'll again have to replace those guys, but I don't think they'll struggle to find the coin (their current payroll is $250M, and they only have $107M in commitments for 2023).

The Yankees, Mets, and Red Sox are also teams with deep pockets, in competitive windows, who are shedding salary to some degree in the next couple of years.  I think it's very possible 2+ of those teams want Berrios as their number two starter.  Would any of them be willing to pay $30M a year for that?  Maybe not.  But a year and half out, you're probably going to have to give Berrios that to keep him from exercising his right to find out.  After all, if I can look all that up in about 15 minutes, I guarantee you Berrios' agent has as well.

Should the Twins sign Berrios?  In a vacuum, yes.  In reality, no; because the only way you get him to sign on the dotted line right now is to give him either $30M AAV, or something like 8 and $200.  Anything less than that, and he'll just wait for the bidding war after the 2022 season.

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, Ted Schwerzler said:

I don't think I suggested that as a number, or any number for that matter. Even 5/$125 doesn't seem outlandish given his age and the alternatives.

 

 

[Major League Ready]

3 hours ago, Ted Schwerzler said:

I posted this on Twitter, and given my stance that this team can compete in 2022 while not needing a rebuild, nothing about this group should make Berrios expendable.

 

The 2022 free agent SP class is loaded! Greinke, Verlander, Kershaw, Bauer, Scherzer, Stroman, Gausman. That's probably the list of those better than Berrios. Paying any of them? Any of them have interest in coming to MN? Realistically, Stroman/Gausman should be paired WITH Jose

What if you can get a player as good or better than Berrios in return that will be ready the 2nd half of 2022 or in 2023 and replace him with one of the players you listed or similar?  Isn't that what Tampa Bay would do?

[Cap'n Piranha]

It's all well and good to say we don't want a rebuild, but I'm pretty sure one is coming.  The Twins have at most 5 pitchers that can be counted on to be full year contributors next year (Maeda, Berrios, Ober, Rogers, and Duffey).  With a 13 man staff, where you need at least 5-6 solid options in the bullpen, that means the Twins need to find at least 5-6 arms this offseason; if any of the above get injured, or regress (can't be counted out, especially for Ober and Duffey), that number goes up.  We can hope that Duran, Winder, Balazovic, and a couple of relievers can make the jump from the minors, but can you really feel good about your playoff chances if you're counting heavily on 4-5 rookies?  There also won't be a ton of money to spend, because while you're clearing about $43M with Cruz, Pineda, Simmons, Happ, and Shoemaker moving on, all of those guys need to be replaced, and Berrios, Buxton, and Garver will get raises.  To truly feel good about competing, I think the Twins would need to spend around $70M a year in new contracts for 2022, and that's just not going to happen.

Accordingly, the only thing that makes sense is to completely tear down, to try and shorten the imminent rebuild from 4-5 years to 2-3.  Trade Cruz, Berrios, Buxton, and Rogers for sure--those guys should net you 4-6 Top 100 guys.  If you find takers for Simmons, Sano, Donaldson, Duffey, Robles, or Pineda, trade them as well.  Play Gordon every day in center or short to see where he best sticks.  Let Rooker DH every day to see how he handles the bigs.  Call up every reliever from AAA/AA you can to see if any of them show flashes.  Get Miranda up towards the end of the year as well.  With any luck, you'll find a couple of keepers from that group, have a farm system with 6-8 Top 100 guys, some high draft picks, and loads of cash to use starting in 2023 to build onto a core of Kiriloff/Larnach/Arraez/Jeffers/Duran/Balazovic/others.

[Major League Ready]

3 hours ago, dbminn said:

This is the first year that the White Sox are in contention. It took 4-5 years.

The point was that they got a return very soon after the trade.  They were not going to compete for a couple years regardless of ifthe kept Sale which is why they traded him.  I don't believe the it's realistic to believe the Twins will compete next year.  This board has been wildly optimistic for as long as I have been here.  To suggest the Twins won't compete for 4 or 5 years if they trade Berrios makes no sense.  The Twins competing or not will be a product of many other things.  I do believe we are positioned to rebound in a shorter period of time than the Whitesox but the pitching prospects will need to transition between now and the end of 2022.  2023 and forward .

It's kind of this simple ... The Twins can invest the money Berrios is demanding in any number of ways.  If he is demanding an over pay, then that money could be spent to make the team better than they would be with Berrios.  Plus, IF they can get a top prospect, there is a reasonable chance the team will be significantly better over the next several years as a result.  People act as if we are automatically worse.  Basically, we break even or get somewhat better by investing elsewhere instead of overpaying for Berrios if the prospect we get washes out.  What if the prospect is as good or better.  Obviously, the team is much better of in that scenario  by trading him and investing elsewhere. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I am sure the Twins can compete in 2022 if they improve their pitching. 

We had a similar conversation about Brian Dozier after the 100-loss 2016 season. Against the wishes of fans on this discussion board, the Twins kept Dozier instead of trading him—and then he helped lead the Twins to the postseason the following season. I had a lot of confidence in this front office at that time.

Let’s add to the pitching staff between now and 2022, instead of subtracting from it, and go into next year and see what happens. Anyone confident that the front office can negotiate a nice return for Berrios now should be equally confident that they can negotiation a slightly less nice return for Berrios a year from now, if need be.

[Vanimal46]

13 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

I am sure the Twins can compete in 2022 if they improve their pitching. 

We had a similar conversation about Brian Dozier after the 100-loss 2016 season. Against the wishes of fans on this discussion board, the Twins kept Dozier instead of trading him—and then he helped lead the Twins to the postseason the following season. I had a lot of confidence in this front office at that time.

Let’s add to the pitching staff between now and 2022, instead of subtracting from it, and go into next year and see what happens. Anyone confident that the front office can negotiate a nice return for Berrios now should be equally confident that they can negotiation a slightly less nice return for Berrios a year from now, if need be.

I’m with you. There won’t be an internal candidate ready and able to meet Berrios’ 3 WAR benchmark. The ones that can will be much more expensive in free agency than Berrios’ final arbitration year. Trading for one will require a lot of prospect capital. 
 

He’s been offered extensions the past 2 seasons and declined. In order to lock him in now, we’ll have to go above and beyond. Another year tacked on to the counter offer from Berrios’ representation. Another million or two added on to the AAV. The time to pay up and get a reasonable extension was 2 years ago when the negotiations started. It’s too late. 

[KirbyDome89]

15 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

What if it is 25 per year, six years?

I'd imagine there's a sweet spot somewhere between 5/80 and 6/125 that gets the ball rolling. I understand what you're saying in response to the "pay him what he wants," sentiment. That said, I'd be fine with an overpay. I'm 100% with you in that if this team doesn't get SP contribution from the minors, i.e. at least two of the Duran/Balazovic/Canterino/whoever group needs to stick in the rotation or they're not going to compete any time soon. Ted is right, FA pitching has been a disaster for this FO and expecting them to hit on 60-80% of a rotation that way is asking for disappointment. 

If the pitching you're required  to bank on is cost controlled, and most of the position players that project to be part of the team beyond the next year are either pre arb or signed to team friendly deals, I think it's ok to shell out for a guy that admittedly isn't an ace but is reliably at the top end. A huge part of Jose's deal would be done by the time the Twins are trying to pay Kirilloff, Larnach, Jeffers, Arraez, Duran, ect. Worst case, you pay Jose a lot of money to pitch for a bad team in the hopes that the young guys come along and you can make a run sooner rather than later. The way I'm looking at is if you're going to be bad, I'd rather pay a good pitcher who's at least an asset rather than throw money at Perez/Lynn/Happ/Shoemaker/Hill types.

Donaldson and a potential Buxton signing complicate things financially. In a perfect world, another team takes Donaldson at the deadline, MN kicks in a small amount of $$ and the FO/ownership count that as a sunk cost rather than calculating it into payroll moving forward. I'm willing to admit I almost certainly can't have my cake and eat it too in regards to keeping both soon to be FAs.

 Moving Berrios signals a full on rebuild in my mind, and selfishly I'd rather this group get at least one more shot before committing to another 3-4 year run of being awful.

[roger]

1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

This seems to contradict your claim in the immediately preceding post, where you opined that you can't imagine him wanting more than $20M AAV.  Berrios is right around the 20th best starter in baseball over the past 3 years at almost any metric you look at (he appears anywhere from 17th to 25th on almost everything one would consider important for a starter; ERA, FIP, xFIP, k/9, bb/9, hard hit rate, swinging strike rate).  That seems like something any number of teams would be interested in, particularly given the durability he's shown, and if more than one team wants him, the bidding war ensues which the Twins cannot be competitive in.

The Angels have needed pitching for years, and in the next two years shed the contracts of Fowler, Cobb, Bundy, Quintana, Heaney, Upton, and Pujols.  That's $111M they free up before 2023, meaning they could hand out 3 $20M AAV contracts next year, give out $20M in arb raises to their homegrown players, and still offer Berrios $30M AAV (given his willingness to bet on himself, do we really think a 28.5 year old Berrios would turn down a 3/$90M deal?  He'd get to sign his second huge contract before 32, or the Angels could easily absorb 5 and $150M).

The Dodgers will clear the contract of David Price next year, as well as Turner, Kershaw, Jansen, and Kazmir.  That's also $111M, and they'll again have to replace those guys, but I don't think they'll struggle to find the coin (their current payroll is $250M, and they only have $107M in commitments for 2023).

The Yankees, Mets, and Red Sox are also teams with deep pockets, in competitive windows, who are shedding salary to some degree in the next couple of years.  I think it's very possible 2+ of those teams want Berrios as their number two starter.  Would any of them be willing to pay $30M a year for that?  Maybe not.  But a year and half out, you're probably going to have to give Berrios that to keep him from exercising his right to find out.  After all, if I can look all that up in about 15 minutes, I guarantee you Berrios' agent has as well.

Should the Twins sign Berrios?  In a vacuum, yes.  In reality, no; because the only way you get him to sign on the dotted line right now is to give him either $30M AAV, or something like 8 and $200.  Anything less than that, and he'll just wait for the bidding war after the 2022 season.

I am afraid you hit it right on, Cap.  And the unfortunate truth is that you explained why Berrios has been betting on himself as he goes out to free agency.  So the Twins are screwed...no way to sign him now and they can't compete come 2022/2023 offseason.  So I guess you have described the reason it makes a ton of sense to trade him next month.  Had they been in the hunt, would make sense to wait until the offseason, but with them out of it...the FO should work the phones long and hard.  The good news is that you described several wealthy teams who should have an interest.

[Major League Ready]

20 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I'd imagine there's a sweet spot somewhere between 5/80 and 6/125 that gets the ball rolling. I understand what you're saying in response to the "pay him what he wants," sentiment. That said, I'd be fine with an overpay. I'm 100% with you in that if this team doesn't get SP contribution from the minors, i.e. at least two of the Duran/Balazovic/Canterino/whoever group needs to stick in the rotation or they're not going to compete any time soon. Ted is right, FA pitching has been a disaster for this FO and expecting them to hit on 60-80% of a rotation that way is asking for disappointment. 

If the pitching you're required  to bank on is cost controlled, and most of the position players that project to be part of the team beyond the next year are either pre arb or signed to team friendly deals, I think it's ok to shell out for a guy that admittedly isn't an ace but is reliably at the top end. A huge part of Jose's deal would be done by the time the Twins are trying to pay Kirilloff, Larnach, Jeffers, Arraez, Duran, ect. Worst case, you pay Jose a lot of money to pitch for a bad team in the hopes that the young guys come along and you can make a run sooner rather than later. The way I'm looking at is if you're going to be bad, I'd rather pay a good pitcher who's at least an asset rather than throw money at Perez/Lynn/Happ/Shoemaker/Hill types.

Donaldson and a potential Buxton signing complicate things financially. In a perfect world, another team takes Donaldson at the deadline, MN kicks in a small amount of $$ and the FO/ownership count that as a sunk cost rather than calculating it into payroll moving forward. I'm willing to admit I almost certainly can't have my cake and eat it too in regards to keeping both soon to be FAs.

 Moving Berrios signals a full on rebuild in my mind, and selfishly I'd rather this group get at least one more shot before committing to another 3-4 year run of being awful.

The assumption he will sign for "somewhere between 5/80 and 6/125" is a bold assumption.  If he thinks he can get 6/125, there are plenty of players that are not signing for a dollar less.  We also need to acknowledge there are a lot of players who start out with absolutely wild salary demands.  Free agency is the opportunity for all the highest revenue teams to bid on your services.  There are lots of players who are not budging without the benefit of that process so to assume they can convinced to forego free agency is a wild assumption.

[singlesoverwalks]

This could very well go down in history as an idiotic comment, and I think the world of Jose Berrios. But I think given the Twins' constraints, he's probably worth more as trade bait than as a free agent on that kind of money. If we had three other good starting pitchers and we were in contention this year, I would think it was worth it. But (constraint 1) the Twins need multiple good start pitchers, and (constraint 2) they're not a high-spending team (though the Pohlads could probably afford more). Almost every starting pitcher signed to a long-term contract breaks down with injuries at some point during the contract, too; Berrios seems much more durable and fit than most, but it would be silly to bet that he'll buck the trend.

Berrios would fetch a king's ransom in prospects. He's exactly the right age, not owed much money, has exciting stuff, and has no significant injury history. There is always a market for starting pitching because every prospective playoff team needs 4 of them. If the front office is any good, they could really cash in - it could be a foundational trade for a run of good years. And as I've said elsewhere (when advocating trading Buxton), if you do it right, you don't have to "rebuild." Their goal should be to pull off a trade like Cleveland's trade of Trevor Bauer for Franmil Reyes and prospects last year. Cleveland just shifted gears and kept winning.

[Dodecahedron]

No pay Jose!