2022 Rotation

[tony&rodney]

16 hours ago, tarheeltwinsfan said:

I believe Ryan is a special player with a high ceiling. He still has room to improve, and he was good in his limited roles last year.  He may be the Twins best pitching prospect. 

You may be correct. I like Ryan and was impressed with Ober more the last few times he pitched than earlier because of some adjustment he made. For no really good reason, I like Josh Winder. My point is that a real key for the development of the Twins inexperienced pitchers is to have two strong leaders show the way. My choice would be to keep Ryan but if the A's were allowed to pick one pitcher in our attempt to gain Bassitt and Montas, then I would roll the dice. I named Ryan because he might be my choice if I was picking. A trade I have proposed on several previous posts brings Bassitt and Montas at a cost of Arraez, Larnach, Strotman, Canterino, and Dobnak. That is a pile of talent but it also lines up two solid pitchers against other staffs and reduces the pressure to perform from those who fill the other starting slots. FWIW, I also particularly like Arraez too. I'm open to any ideas that make the Twins better in 2022 and beyond. 

[TopGunn#22]

I have always liked the idea of going BIG and acquiring Montas AND Bassitt.  Even if it means giving up 2-3 of our young pitchers.  In Montas and Bassitt, you have two PROVEN major league pitchers.  Not just proven...but GOOD.  We have 12-14 young pitchers who all have varying levels of possible talent/success.  We can't expect ALL of them to develop and prosper.  Packaging Arraez and Larnach with 2-3 pitching prospects to get both Montas and Bassitt would be tremendous.  Montas would head the staff for the next two years and hopefully beyond.  Depending on how Bassitt pitches in 2022 would give the Twins plenty of reasons (data) to either sign him to an extension or not.  A SP staff in 2023 that would have Montas, Maeda, Bassitt, Balazovic, Ryan and Ober would have talent and depth.  By that time the Twins would be in the situation to determine what their everyday lineup should be going forward.  How are Lewis & Martin impacting the lineup ?  Have Kepler and Sano figured it out yet ?  Is Donaldson O.K. for that last year ?  Is Buxton staying healthy ?  Is Polanco still hitting ?  Whose at SS ?  How has Miranda panned out ?  And on and on.  But getting a couple of GOOD SP's in Montas and Bassitt sets it all up for 2022 and beyond.  

[Squirrel]

23 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Will they? for sure? Winder pitched 72 innings last year and dominated AA for 54.2, and wasn't great for the 17.1 in AAA. Duran pitched 16 in AAA and wasn't good. Balazovic did pitch 97 inning in AA and was mostly good. And has had a good run of success prior to last year, so he is the one I would bet on. I hope and kind of expect WInder to force his way up, but Duran I have zero faith in him (next year).

I think all of them will see time with the Twins next year with spot starts, but as a regular in the rotation? Yeah, not sure. Maybe one or two could hold down a spot by season’s end. I suppose one of them could make the rotation out of ST, and if so, I’d bet on Winder first. But if all three are in to start the season, something will have gone very wrong. I really hope that is not the plan but we’ll see what happens. 

[baul0010]

1 hour ago, TopGunn#22 said:

1 hour ago, TopGunn#22 said:

Montas would head the staff for the next two years and hopefully beyond.  Depending on how Bassitt pitches in 2022 would give the Twins plenty of reasons (data) to either sign him to an extension or not. 

What if they both want market rate deals?  I think it has been proven we don't do market rate deals.  I'd rather take my chances with the prospects than a 1 and 2 year pitching rental.  I would still love to sign a shortstop and let Lewis and Martin battle it out for whatever positions they best fit.  If we added a solid shortstop, develop Lewis and Martin, Kiriloff and Larnach start hitting, the lineup could be scary.

We don't have the arms to compete next year.  Develop our talent and lets get back to winning the division in 2023 with a hopefully stacked and cheap rotation.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

On 12/21/2021 at 10:39 AM, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

I believe they will go with...

1. Bundy
2. Ober
3. Ryan
4./5. Dobnak, Thorpe, Jax, Winder, Balazovic, Duran, etc.

Twins fans:

[wsnydes]

3 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Twins fans:

Beat me to it...right down to the gif!

[Brandon]

On 12/21/2021 at 7:07 AM, baul0010 said:

What if they both want market rate deals?  I think it has been proven we don't do market rate deals. 

Josh Donaldson says Hi.  So does Sano.  and Rogers, and Buxton and Simmons, .....

[baul0010]

On 12/23/2021 at 3:53 PM, Brandon said:

Josh Donaldson says Hi.  So does Sano.  and Rogers, and Buxton and Simmons, .....

Rogers is through arbitration, we were actively trying to trade him because we don't want to pay him.  We struck out with pitching and the front office needed to spend money... Donaldson!  How is Buxton even remotely market rate?  A non-injured Buxton would be getting 300mil.  If I remember right, Buxton was damn near traded as well.  Simmons and Sano, that's just proof our front office office knows how to spend our money wisely.

[h2oface]

On 12/19/2021 at 5:58 AM, Sconnie said:

What does that mean?

My usual take on most of the nursing.

[h2oface]

What the Twins have been reduced to when it comes to starting pitching is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo depressing.

Say what you will, the fact is........... the only solution to long term pitching by contract status that has been achieved by this FO is..............  Randy Dobnak. Ouch.

[Major League Ready]

6 hours ago, h2oface said:

What the Twins have been reduced to when it comes to starting pitching is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo depressing.

Say what you will, the fact is........... the only solution to long term pitching by contract status that has been achieved by this FO is..............  Randy Dobnak. Ouch.

Joe Ryan / Bailey Ober and Jorge Alcala are not long-term solutions?  Yes, I know Ryan has a grand total of 5 starts but he looks like a long-term solution at this point.  They are betting they can establish multiple additional long-term solutions this year. If they are correct the long-term looks much better than it would had they signed a couple free agents.  If we look at how players are acquired on playoff teams, draft, developing and trading for prospects has proven to be a much better long-term approach.  It does not make sense to criticize the long-term implications of this approach while supporting strategies that pay off quickly while ignoring the long-term implications.

[h2oface]

On 12/26/2021 at 4:37 AM, Major League Ready said:

Joe Ryan / Bailey Ober and Jorge Alcala are not long-term solutions?  Yes, I know Ryan has a grand total of 5 starts but he looks like a long-term solution at this point.  They are betting they can establish multiple additional long-term solutions this year. If they are correct the long-term looks much better than it would had they signed a couple free agents.  If we look at how players are acquired on playoff teams, draft, developing and trading for prospects has proven to be a much better long-term approach.  It does not make sense to criticize the long-term implications of this approach while supporting strategies that pay off quickly while ignoring the long-term implications.

Thank you for once again telling me what makes sense or not in your all knowing manner. Never changes. I said, by contract, and starters. They have one long term contract in Dobnak, (and he may not even continue to be a starter.) All you speak of have team control, but contracts happen every year, for the next year = not long term. There are hopes. I predict only Ryan will carve out a lasting spot in the starting roster, And Acala is not a starter.  Ober is a throw in like Dobnak and 27 already in July. By contract, there is one long term contract, and that is now only 4 years left (thankfully, although it is for very little money yearly).  I will now revert back to my no response to MLR policy.....

[jorgenswest]

On 12/21/2021 at 5:28 AM, TopGunn#22 said:

 

I have always liked the idea of going BIG and acquiring Montas AND Bassitt

 

They were great last year. Both had career years. Assuming they hit their projections they would add 5.5 WAR to the Twins next year. If I believed the Twins were an 88-90 win team without them I would definitely see this pair as putting them over the top and make them World Series contenders.

However I think the team is closer to a 78-80 win and the Twins would be trading 2023 assets in order to try to compete for a wild card spot, I wouldn’t make that trade.

I would explore trading for Montas who will be 29 and would a 2023 asset. Bassitt will be 33. He had a really good age 32 season but not a long career of success. I would not be interested in him beyond this season as I don’t want to pay for the decline.

Yes to a Montas type deal acquiring a pitcher in their 20s with multiple years of control. No to a Bassitt type deal.

[old nurse]

On 12/25/2021 at 9:24 PM, baul0010 said:

Rogers is through arbitration, we were actively trying to trade him because we don't want to pay him.  We struck out with pitching and the front office needed to spend money... Donaldson!  How is Buxton even remotely market rate?  A non-injured Buxton would be getting 300mil.  If I remember right, Buxton was damn near traded as well.  Simmons and Sano, that's just proof our front office office knows how to spend our money wisely.

Buxton has played maybe one season without significant time lost. As far as near traded, prove it,

[DocBauer]

Part of the problem is not knowing much less understanding, what plans the FO has in mind for 2022. They may have simply blown opportunity, OR, they may have a plan in mind we can't wrap our heads around at this time. I also have no idea what the 2022 payroll is targeted to he, but for now I'm assuming the making of a public statement that payroll will be in the same range it's been for the past 3-4yrs was accurate and honest and will be around that $130M mark. Again, they may have blown opportunity already and are circling the wagons, OR, they are just getting started.

What is my ideal scenario? Rodon checks out to their med staff and gets a 1yr or maybe 1+1 that is something like $18-20M year one and maybe a buyout if they do the 1+1. Next, they make a trade for a quality 2nd SP that's just a smart deal without giving away an arm and leg. Think Odorizzi and Maeda. Pineda is still a fallback option.

I think this is practical and realistic. I think 1 trade and 1 FA, likely Pineda, on a 1yr deal is most likely. Even then, the rotation isn't in as sorry a state as it is now and there is ample opportunity to work in the prospects.

[Major League Ready]

12 hours ago, h2oface said:

Thank you for once again telling me what makes sense or not in your all knowing manner. Never changes. I said, by contract, and starters. They have one long term contract in Dobnak, (and he may not even continue to be a starter.) All you speak of have team control, but contracts happen every year, for the next year = not long term. There are hopes. I predict only Ryan will carve out a lasting spot in the starting roster, And Acala is not a starter.  Ober is a throw in like Dobnak and 27 already in July. By contract, there is one long term contract, and that is now only 4 years left (thankfully, although it is for very little money yearly).  I will now revert back to my no response to MLR policy.....

And what is the difference in terms of producing long-term solutions which is the point right?  The only distinction between a contract and players under team control is that with a contract the team has X number of years of control and are obligated to pay the player regardless of how they perform.  Under team control the team has 6 years of control but has the option to cut them at any point.  Obviously, the latter is far superior.  Having an entire rotation of prearb or even arbitration eligible SPs would be a far superior position to having “contracted players”.  You are trying to suggest that following a superior practice is somehow creating a problem.  Framing it the way you have just demonstrates a complete lack of objectivity.  

Am objective view would be to look at how successful teams have been built over the past 20 years.  That view would clearly illustrate that building from within has been by far the more effective approach, especially for teams with below ave revenue.  An objective view would also recognize FA SPs fail at a high rate, especially after the first year.  They may or may not execute on this plan but building from within has very clearly been demonstrated to be the superior approach.  Yet, you are bent out of shape because the FO has best practices which btw they have already demonstrated their ability to executive albeit with a different organization.    
 

[Major League Ready]

10 hours ago, DocBauer said:

Part of the problem is not knowing much less understanding, what plans the FO has in mind for 2022. They may have simply blown opportunity, OR, they may have a plan in mind we can't wrap our heads around at this time. I also have no idea what the 2022 payroll is targeted to he, but for now I'm assuming the making of a public statement that payroll will be in the same range it's been for the past 3-4yrs was accurate and honest and will be around that $130M mark. Again, they may have blown opportunity already and are circling the wagons, OR, they are just getting started.

What is my ideal scenario? Rodon checks out to their med staff and gets a 1yr or maybe 1+1 that is something like $18-20M year one and maybe a buyout if they do the 1+1. Next, they make a trade for a quality 2nd SP that's just a smart deal without giving away an arm and leg. Think Odorizzi and Maeda. Pineda is still a fallback option.

I think this is practical and realistic. I think 1 trade and 1 FA, likely Pineda, on a 1yr deal is most likely. Even then, the rotation isn't in as sorry a state as it is now and there is ample opportunity to work in the prospects.

IDK Doc, shouldn't we expect them to follow the same strategies Cleveland used during Falvey's tenure.  With the exception of Oakland, Cleveland had by far the most 90 win seasons in the past 20 years.  I think this path is very intentional.  It's not hard to see the blueprint.  Establish 2, 3, even 4 pitchers (SP&BP) at the major league level.  Transition Miranda and Martin and maybe Lewis to the big leagues in 2022 and also figure out if they have a LFer among the prospects.  I am not hung up in the least on their spending level in 2022.  Let's find out what holes Miranda and Martin will fill.  Let's find out of we have a SS and a LFer and let's find out if we have a top of the rotation guy or 2 among these prospects.  Having that budget next year to spend once we have a better understanding of long-term needs will be a good thing.   

[baul0010]

12 hours ago, old nurse said:

Buxton has played maybe one season without significant time lost. As far as near traded, prove it,

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/07/byron-buxton-trade-rumors-twins-phillies.html

Falvine's my Uncle, I just called him (them?), he said "yep, damn near traded"!    ?

[AceWrigley]

Timely article over at MLB Trade Rumors 12-27

"Five-Year Deals For Free Agent Starting Pitchers Rarely End Well"

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/12/five-year-deals-for-free-agent-starting-pitchers-rarely-end-well.html

 

[AceWrigley]

1 hour ago, baul0010 said:

Falvine's my Uncle.

Excellent Simpson.

[KirbyDome89]

On 12/26/2021 at 6:37 AM, Major League Ready said:

Joe Ryan / Bailey Ober and Jorge Alcala are not long-term solutions?  Yes, I know Ryan has a grand total of 5 starts but he looks like a long-term solution at this point.  They are betting they can establish multiple additional long-term solutions this year. If they are correct the long-term looks much better than it would had they signed a couple free agents.  If we look at how players are acquired on playoff teams, draft, developing and trading for prospects has proven to be a much better long-term approach.  It does not make sense to criticize the long-term implications of this approach while supporting strategies that pay off quickly while ignoring the long-term implications.

None of the FAs the Twins passed on would've filled the current, or likely future roll of any of the 3 examples you listed. It still makes absolutely no sense to opt out of an affordable 1-2 type arm even if they end up with a back end anchor, a 3-4 starter, and a solid reliever (the absolute best case scenario.) 

[Major League Ready]

8 hours ago, AceWrigley said:

Timely article over at MLB Trade Rumors 12-27

"Five-Year Deals For Free Agent Starting Pitchers Rarely End Well"

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/12/five-year-deals-for-free-agent-starting-pitchers-rarely-end-well.html

 

I have posted the same information for all of the 5+ year free agent pitchers on several occasions starting three years ago.  I used fWAR because it's higher in most cases and I did not want to be accused of bias.  I even summarized the average WAR and the average WAR after the first year in order to address the viability of signing them before we are ready to compete.   Based on the posts here year after year I have to assume those who lobby so relentlessly for these signings simply ignore the information and will ignore this information as well.  Some downright ridiculed the assertion that building a pitching staff through free agency is a poor practice with a high probability of failure.  

[Major League Ready]

4 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

None of the FAs the Twins passed on would've filled the current, or likely future roll of any of the 3 examples you listed. It still makes absolutely no sense to opt out of an affordable 1-2 type arm even if they end up with a back end anchor, a 3-4 starter, and a solid reliever (the absolute best case scenario.) 

That has nothing to do with my post.  My post responded to a post that suggested we don't have any long-term contracts with SPs.  While technically true, we have the same advantages (years of control) with prearb or arbitration eligible pitchers without the risk.  Therefore a distinction with no downside.  Perhaps more importantly building a staff from within provides longer control in most cases at lower cost and lower risk.  Something you are ignoring for a fast fix that is an inferior strategy.   That's really what this is about. Immediate satisfaction  vs taking the time to follow a better strategy.

[DocBauer]

13 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

IDK Doc, shouldn't we expect them to follow the same strategies Cleveland used during Falvey's tenure.  With the exception of Oakland, Cleveland had by far the most 90 win seasons in the past 20 years.  I think this path is very intentional.  It's not hard to see the blueprint.  Establish 2, 3, even 4 pitchers (SP&BP) at the major league level.  Transition Miranda and Martin and maybe Lewis to the big leagues in 2022 and also figure out if they have a LFer among the prospects.  I am not hung up in the least on their spending level in 2022.  Let's find out what holes Miranda and Martin will fill.  Let's find out of we have a SS and a LFer and let's find out if we have a top of the rotation guy or 2 among these prospects.  Having that budget next year to spend once we have a better understanding of long-term needs will be a good thing.   

Perhaps I should have been more specific in my opening. Everything you stated I'm pretty much on board with and am agreement, long term thinking and team building. I've been on record as to stating a similar strategy, thus "seeing" the method in their planning. Once again, the plan was for a couple arms to be ready by now, but then covid 2020 and LA k off IP in 2021, etc, etc. Happ and Shoemaker, again, were smart stopgap for 1yr along with Dobnak, and Colome in the pen. Shoemaker was a hopeful flier but Happ just shouldn't have been that bad considering history and his 2020, Dobnak and Maeda weren't "supposed" to get hurt, etc, etc, yet again. 

What I was referring to was not "the plan" in the long run but the short-term plan for 2022. That's where I think we really don't know or understand what the plan is. I see no way the team can be competitive in 2022, no matter how good the offense or how good the bullpen as the starting staff is currently constructed. And sorry to some, but I just can't wrap my head around multiple rotation turns being a sort of bullpen game. I still believe Pineda is back short term as a logical and inexpensive fit. He at least brings in a solid, experienced arm who gives you a legitimate chance to win. IF Bundy can be some sort of combination of his Baltimore self and his 2020 Angels self, he'd be similar. But with a long season, young arms to audition, and inevitable injuries, that's still not enough. 

If they really intend to compete/contend this coming season then they simply must add one more quality arm. That leaves Rodon or a trade. But the last thing I want is for them to get crazy and deplete the roster or the young talent they've accumulated for a couple short term SP options that might or might not be re-signed and thus blow up the idea of building a pitching pipeline. How does the saying go: "To find 2 quality SP you need 6 potential arms. And to find 3 or 4 you need 10 or 12. Something to that affect.

I see the plan, but right now, I don't think any of us understand the short term 2022 plan.

[DocBauer]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

That has nothing to do with my post.  My post responded to a post that suggested we don't have any long-term contracts with SPs.  While technically true, we have the same advantages (years of control) with prearb or arbitration eligible pitchers without the risk.  Therefore a distinction with no downside.  Perhaps more importantly building a staff from within provides longer control in most cases at lower cost and lower risk.  Something you are ignoring for a fast fix that is an inferior strategy.   That's really what this is about. Immediate satisfaction  vs taking the time to follow a better strategy.

Absolutely am not going to disagree with your opinion/posts or history that is produced by the link/article at MLBTR. I copied this post to simply make a point of opinion for myself.

Not ALL long term signings turn out poorly, as the article points out, within the context of the rewards presented to teams who did reap benefits for 2 or 3 seasons in some cases. In a vacuum, Twins or not, I think there are times to push chips in for that long term deal knowing what you might reap for that 2-3yr window and hope the other years aren't a disaster. Of course, some teams are more willing or able to absorb the poor seasons financially. This would also indicate, IMO, that a smart FO would be more inclined to front load said contracts to mitigate "losses" at the end of the deal, OR, be more open to 2-3yr opt outs for said pitcher still riding a performance high and let the next team take on an extended contract risk.

And while slightly off topic, I think a 3yr deal for a FA SP of quality should never be ignored if available. I reflect back to the Twins signing of Santana, which was very good for the first 2yrs, and the Cubs signing of Stroman this off-season. (I think the Twins blew an opportunity there, FWIW).

I'd much rather sign homegrown, what you know and developed for a 5yr deal. But this is just me spouting off a few thoughts. 

 

[beckmt]

On 12/21/2021 at 7:28 AM, TopGunn#22 said:

I have always liked the idea of going BIG and acquiring Montas AND Bassitt.  Even if it means giving up 2-3 of our young pitchers.  In Montas and Bassitt, you have two PROVEN major league pitchers.  Not just proven...but GOOD.  We have 12-14 young pitchers who all have varying levels of possible talent/success.  We can't expect ALL of them to develop and prosper.  Packaging Arraez and Larnach with 2-3 pitching prospects to get both Montas and Bassitt would be tremendous.  Montas would head the staff for the next two years and hopefully beyond.  Depending on how Bassitt pitches in 2022 would give the Twins plenty of reasons (data) to either sign him to an extension or not.  A SP staff in 2023 that would have Montas, Maeda, Bassitt, Balazovic, Ryan and Ober would have talent and depth.  By that time the Twins would be in the situation to determine what their everyday lineup should be going forward.  How are Lewis & Martin impacting the lineup ?  Have Kepler and Sano figured it out yet ?  Is Donaldson O.K. for that last year ?  Is Buxton staying healthy ?  Is Polanco still hitting ?  Whose at SS ?  How has Miranda panned out ?  And on and on.  But getting a couple of GOOD SP's in Montas and Bassitt sets it all up for 2022 and beyond.  

You are assuming the Twins would sign either pitcher to an extension.  That might be either very difficult or impossible.  That is why I would not do a trade without the extension as a given.  Risk vs reward. 

Pipeline is lined up.  Plenty of pitchers play up, plenty of super prospects fail.  That is why this FO is here.  Give them the chance. If the next two years prove them wrong, then bring the pitchforks. 

[Major League Ready]

13 hours ago, DocBauer said:

Absolutely am not going to disagree with your opinion/posts or history that is produced by the link/article at MLBTR. I copied this post to simply make a point of opinion for myself.

Not ALL long term signings turn out poorly, as the article points out, within the context of the rewards presented to teams who did reap benefits for 2 or 3 seasons in some cases. In a vacuum, Twins or not, I think there are times to push chips in for that long term deal knowing what you might reap for that 2-3yr window and hope the other years aren't a disaster. Of course, some teams are more willing or able to absorb the poor seasons financially. This would also indicate, IMO, that a smart FO would be more inclined to front load said contracts to mitigate "losses" at the end of the deal, OR, be more open to 2-3yr opt outs for said pitcher still riding a performance high and let the next team take on an extended contract risk.

And while slightly off topic, I think a 3yr deal for a FA SP of quality should never be ignored if available. I reflect back to the Twins signing of Santana, which was very good for the first 2yrs, and the Cubs signing of Stroman this off-season. (I think the Twins blew an opportunity there, FWIW).

I'd much rather sign homegrown, what you know and developed for a 5yr deal. But this is just me spouting off a few thoughts. 

 

I agree in any other year.  Not that I would object to signing the right guy to a 3 year deal this year but that's not going to make us contenders.  We can pretend to contend or we can invest a season in developing the assets we make us contenders for severl years.  To that end, I have stated on several occasions that free agents can and should be used strategically.  However, that’s not the approach often advocated for here.  For example, it’s often suggested / insisted that we should sign them whenever we can get them.  The idea of timing these acquisitions when we have a good chance of contending has induced some rather crass responses.  For those of us who bother to actually look at the history of these contracts beyond year 1 and 2 it’s brutally obvious these acquisitions need to be timed.  If not, you get a difference maker when the difference does not matter and nothing from a large investment when it could matter.  Call it opportunity cost if you like.

Perhaps more to the point this year is that trying to build three-fifths of a rotation through agency is destined for failure.  Again, history is quite clear if we are willing to be objective and look at how playoff teams acquire pitching.  There is also often an absolute refusal to accept we have far less financial resource.  It’s an absolute certainty we have to get more productivity per dollar spent.  While it’s undeniable, this is another concept that often draws sarcastic ridicule.  

Free agents are an important building block.  However, they have to be timed and we have to be more productive per dollar spent than the high revenue markets.  I am not in the least bit against free agency.  However, the premise of building the entire front end of a rotation or the general attitude of pay whatever it takes are not good practice and we should not be hoping they employ desperate measures through bad practice.

My hope is that they establish a homegrown rotation and use the financial flexibility to sign a top of the rotation guy and or fill any remaining holes.
 

[old nurse]

23 hours ago, baul0010 said:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/07/byron-buxton-trade-rumors-twins-phillies.html

Falvine's my Uncle, I just called him (them?), he said "yep, damn near traded"!    ?

The bar is set low for the term “nearly traded”. Inquiring about a player, loving a player equals nearly traded. The $20 in my wallet says I am nearly a millionaire 

[old nurse]

13 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

I have posted the same information for all of the 5+ year free agent pitchers on several occasions starting three years ago.  I used fWAR because it's higher in most cases and I did not want to be accused of bias.  I even summarized the average WAR and the average WAR after the first year in order to address the viability of signing them before we are ready to compete.   Based on the posts here year after year I have to assume those who lobby so relentlessly for these signings simply ignore the information and will ignore this information as well.  Some downright ridiculed the assertion that building a pitching staff through free agency is a poor practice with a high probability of failure.  

The data for 3 year contracts is a little better only because generally there was only 2 bad years to offset the good one. 

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, old nurse said:

The data for 3 year contracts is a little better only because generally there was only 2 bad years to offset the good one. 

I have to admit I have not studies the shorter deals.  With just a little luck this current crop should produce a bunch of the guys we could get on a 3 year deal.  In spite of being the guy pointing out the poor track record of 5+,year deals, I am hoping all of these prospects position us to sign the next Zack Wheeler.  I guess it would be even better if a couple top of the rotation guys appear as they did in Cleveland.  In that case, they can buy a SS or whatever pieces we still need.  You can't achieve the best case scenario if you don't proceed in a manner that promotes it.