Pitchers we didn't get - updated

[greengoblinrulz]

Also don't see Jeremy Guthrie listed

Personal fav of mine LAST yr

[whydidnt]

So you think the year the Twins should open up their wallet is after a 96 loss season? Sanchez and Grienke would have made this team into a WS challenger? That makes sense to you?

 

Only teams that might apply advanced stats know how to save money? Surprising. Ryan was the only GM of a small market team that kept his team competitive while changing out the nucleus of his team. And moneyball's author first wanted to write about Ryan and the Twins and went to the A's only after Ryan said no.

 

Well, if you lose 96 games, it seems to me cutting the payroll isn't a way to improve. By your logic, the more you lose the less you should spend? It seems counter-intuitive to me to expect to improve by spending less. You can say you don't think they are going to win anyway so why bother. However they are't asking me to watch less or pay less so It think it's reasonable that they try to field the best team possible, not the cheapest team possible.

 

Actually, it's not about saving money, it's about maximizing your investment and the Twins really haven't been very good at that over the last several years. Continually throwing 4-5 million a year at awful pitchers. I didn't bring up the Rays and A's, I'm just pointing out that those organizations make decisions in a vastly different manner than the Twins. Finally, over the last 3 years the Twins have had access to a huge amount of resources compared to those teams but have made bad decisions on how to spend that money.

 

I just want to know WHEN is the time for the Twins to spend the money for that one big name free agent that could help them win. Under Ryan the answer is NEVER, and we have very few playoff victories and exactly 0 World Series appearances under his leadership.

 

I think while you can be reckless with money and waste it, the Twins, particularly under Ryan, have taken the opposite approach and have been too conservative, wasting chances to make investments that could have helped put them over the top.

[gunnarthor]

1. I would think any time is a good time to add premier players to your team. It even strikes me that perhaps the optimal time to add free agents is when your existing talent has proven itself so bad that you've lost 90+ games in consecutive seasons. "We're so bad it makes no sense to get better" has never been an argument that makes sense to me.

 

2. Maybe Greinke and Sanchez don't make them into a WS challenger. Then again, maybe they do, it's impossible to say at this point. The better questions, IMO, are "would they have made the Twins better in 2013?" and "would they have made it easier for the Twins to be WS challengers over the life of their contracts?" The answer to the first question is almost certainly yes, and to question 2, most likely yes.

 

Spending money is not a magic wand that makes you a WS contender. However, neither is not spending money. In fact, the only guarantee in baseball is that NOT spending money that you could have spent is absolutely, positively guaranteed NOT to result in additional wins.

 

Spending in free agency might help. Putting that money in the owner's pocket WILL NOT help.

 

Spending money poorly is a great way to make your team worse in the short and especially in the long run. Grienke is already hurt and will be out for a bit. Sanchez is 29 and his next 200 ip season will be his first. Incidentally, 29 was also the age of Johan Santana's last truly elite season. Those aren't the guys you gamble on. Get a foundation established and build around that. Which looks like it is exactly what the Twins are doing.

[gunnarthor]

Well, if you lose 96 games, it seems to me cutting the payroll isn't a way to improve. .

 

Seattle certainly agrees with you.

[Guest USAFChief]

Spending money poorly is a great way to make your team worse in the short and especially in the long run.

How is that different from not spending the money at all? It's wasted either way, except spending it MIGHT improve your team, putting it in the bank WON'T improve your team.

 

"Greinke is already hurt" is irrelevent, by the way, and I think we both know that. In the practical sense, he was hurt in a fight, which doesn't occur if he's not with the Dodgers. In the larger sense, he's no more likely to get hurt than any other pitcher, including the guys to sign to build around the "established foundation."

 

As for Sanchez being 29, once again, any guys you sign to "build around a foundation" are likely to be as old, or older. That's the nature of free agency.

[Mike Sixel]

Greinke was hurt in a fight, not from throwing the ball. Are we really going to argue that is a baseball injury?

 

If you are afraid of injuries, why sign your own guys to extensions? Taking your arguement to its logical conclusion, you would never sign any player to a multi-year deal, becuase he might get injured and you'd have dead money. That seems unlikely to produce a winning team.

[whydidnt]

Seattle certainly agrees with you.

Yet, the Marlins fans seem to agree.

[Rosterman]

At some point you take a risk on a proven stopper. ,Yet Grienke can get injured. Dickey shows he needs to pitch in the NL. Lohse needed spring training.

 

Before we get overly excited...right now the Twins have two pitchers -- Diamond, still a "diamond in the rough" but shows a helluva a lot of promise, and Correria, who has come out of no where, but is not the long-term (2-3 years) need for the Twins. Pelfry and Worley are doing worse than expected. Hernandez and Hendriks have yet to grab hold. The Twins still have more of the same in the wings (DeVries, Walters, Deduno) and maybe a good-looking future (Gibson, Meyer, May, Hermsen). We can argue about not signing someone this year to longterm. Why waste a year and hope someone better or mores Twins worthy is out there in 2014, or 2015. We are all surprised by Correia. Hell, I'm surprised by Diamond...still.

[gunnarthor]

How is that different from not spending the money at all? It's wasted either way, except spending it MIGHT improve your team, putting it in the bank WON'T improve your team.

 

Well, the 43m the team would be spending on Grienke and Sanchez in 2017 could really screw up the prime years of our younger guys, esp if those guys are just broken down pitchers at that point, which is likely.

[cmathewson]

Do you see what your saying man? You sound like a typical Twins fan/owner. To be good you have to have good players, yes theres a risk in every FA/Draft pick but the reward is worth the risk. What you said makes me think that you believe that the Twins should never sign a good FA and thats sad. Sanchez has been consistent the last 3+ years and DET made a great move.

 

Didnt you ever wonder why DET was just in the world series and the Twins havent been since 20+ years ago? Hmm maybe its because DET goes after top players and pays them so they can be better. They took a risk on Fielder and it payed off, they took a risk on Sanchez and now they have the best roto in baseball. You have to pay good players to win.

 

I never said you shouldn't sign good free agents. I loved the Willingham signing, for example. I just don't think you rely on them to build your club. You build your club primarily through drafting, international signing and development. You use acquisitions and free agents to fill gaps. Sanchez was a huge gamble by the Tigers. I liked him going into the offseason, but he quickly got way too rich for my blood because he was the only guy besides Greinke who could anchor a rotation, and every team in baseball needs one of those guys. So he is way overpriced. The Tigers will be lucky to get his value out of him over five years.

 

If you try to rely on free agents too much, there is more risk because you are not in control of signings, the player and agents are. If you build your farm system right, free agents are a last resort. The only reason why the Twins had to rely on them this year is our farm system let the team down. That trend is reversing itself, but it takes time. If you want instant gratification, follow NASCAR.

 

10 years ago, Detroit was horrible. The Twins were like 45-10 against them the first five years of last decade. Fortunately for them, they used their favorable draft position to get players like Justin Verlander, Curtis Granderson, and others. Then they parleyed this strong system into a contender. They would never have become a contender without a strong system. Same with Kansas City.

 

Once they had a contender, the owner decided to spend his personal fortune on a championship. We can't expect the Pohlads to do that. If you want that, stop being a Twins fan, 'cause it ain't gonna happen.

[gunnarthor]

Greinke was hurt in a fight, not from throwing the ball. Are we really going to argue that is a baseball injury?

 

If you are afraid of injuries, why sign your own guys to extensions? Taking your arguement to its logical conclusion, you would never sign any player to a multi-year deal, becuase he might get injured and you'd have dead money. That seems unlikely to produce a winning team.

 

You sign the right guys. Twins extended Santana and got all but one of his elite years. Mauer was arguably the best player in baseball. Morneau wasn't at that level but he was an MVP with a pretty good track record and signed a reasonable long term deal. The extension deals we used on Kubel, Cuddy and Baker were reasonable as well.

 

Grienke and Sanchez are nice pitchers but neither is a true ace and it isn't worth spending nearly 50m a year for them over the next 6 years. Grienke has put up 3.4, 1.5, 3.6 WAR the previous 3 years. (Diamond put up a 2.4 WAR last year. Correia has 1.3 already this year). Sanchez put up 3.2, 3.8, 2.4 WAR the previous 3 years. Those are good numbers but not even remotely elite. Hell, Edwin Jackson was 2.1, 2.9, 2.0 WAR the last three years.

[Guest USAFChief]

Well, the 43m the team would be spending on Grienke and Sanchez in 2017 could really screw up the prime years of our younger guys, esp if those guys are just broken down pitchers at that point, which is likely.

How? Of the "younger guys" who will be in their prime in 2017, who is going to need a large contract? Plouffe? Parmelee? Worley?

 

The simple truth is, if there was ever a time the Twins could afford a couple large, long term contracts, it's now. They have:

-lots of money available now,

-existing contracts expiring in the near future,

-extra broadcast revenues ($25M) starting next year,

-and nobody needing to get paid in the mid term future.

 

There is almost no possible way $43M--even if totally wasted, which isn't a guarantee--would seriously handcuff the Twins in 2017. All it would do is perhaps prevent them from signing similar contracts to different pitchers.

[gunnarthor]

There is almost no possible way $43M--even if totally wasted, which isn't a guarantee--would seriously handcuff the Twins in 2017. All it would do is perhaps prevent them from signing similar contracts to different pitchers.

 

Wouldn't spending 43m in 2017 to help build around a base of Hicks, Arcia, Meyer, Gibson, Sano be better then having that 43m be wasted on two roster spots of broken down/bad pitchers? I can't see how wasting that money isn't helpful.

[whydidnt]

Wouldn't spending 43m in 2017 to help build around a base of Hicks, Arcia, Meyer, Gibson, Sano be better then having that 43m be wasted on two roster spots of broken down/bad pitchers? I can't see how wasting that money isn't helpful.

You may have a point. However, the real point is that current Twins management has never spent money to build around a nucleus like this. What would make you think they would do so in 2017? There is virtually nothing in TR's past to indicate he will ever invest that kind of money to supplement home grown talent. NOTHING.

 

The money that isn't spent today isn't being saved to spend later. It's going into the owner's pockets. That's their right as owners, but it doesn't mean that we as fans have to like it or worse, encourage it.

[big dog]

There's a key point here that people seem to be missing- if you were a 28-yr-old stud pitcher with multiple bidders for your services, would you be excited to go to a 96-loss team? These guys were not solely going to the highest bidder, no matter what. Sanchez would come here instead of Detroit? Greinke would prefer us to multiple teams expected to compete for the WS? They want money and a ring, not money. We have to be in better position before we can even think about getting these premier free agents. Or even some of the second-tier free agents based on what Rob Antony said in March.

 

As Suzie Derkins said when she was wishing Calvin would be nice to her: while I'm at it, I might as well wish for a pony.

[whydidnt]

There's a key point here that people seem to be missing- if you were a 28-yr-old stud pitcher with multiple bidders for your services, would you be excited to go to a 96-loss team? These guys were not solely going to the highest bidder, no matter what. Sanchez would come here instead of Detroit? Greinke would prefer us to multiple teams expected to compete for the WS? They want money and a ring, not money. We have to be in better position before we can even think about getting these premier free agents. Or even some of the second-tier free agents based on what Rob Antony said in March.

 

As Suzie Derkins said when she was wishing Calvin would be nice to her: while I'm at it, I might as well wish for a pony.

 

 

This is true with some guys, but Grienke flat out said he signed for the most money. In some cases the money is what matters, and I think that's probably true in a majority of cases. I am very skeptical that every guy the Twins supposedly tried to sign ended up taking less money elsewhere. We have a nice stadium, a decent track record that isn't too far in the distance, a supposed players manager etc. Guys are seriously going to pick Cleveland over the Twins if it's not about the money???

[cmathewson]

How? Of the "younger guys" who will be in their prime in 2017, who is going to need a large contract? Plouffe? Parmelee? Worley?

 

The simple truth is, if there was ever a time the Twins could afford a couple large, long term contracts, it's now. They have:

-lots of money available now,

-existing contracts expiring in the near future,

-extra broadcast revenues ($25M) starting next year,

-and nobody needing to get paid in the mid term future.

 

There is almost no possible way $43M--even if totally wasted, which isn't a guarantee--would seriously handcuff the Twins in 2017. All it would do is perhaps prevent them from signing similar contracts to different pitchers.

 

Makes sense, but you said yourself neither Greinke nor Sanchez was money well spent. I can understand opening up the purse strings if you have four or five guys like that on the market so the demand doesn't drive their price through the stratosphere. But not when the only front-line starters are really #2 starters, but they're going to get #1 money because there are no #1s on the market and there are only 2 #2s. Next offseason the market looks much more promising. Maybe that's when you open the purse strings a bit more.

 

Or is that not important? Do you overspend on purpose because you can? If so, are you prepared to pass on the better talent in the following offseason because you don't have as much flexibility?

[big dog]

I'm guessing Grienke meant he signed for the most money, subject to having a chance to win. I bet his agent had a list of teams he was willing to go for, and he took the most money off that list.

[big dog]

Guys are seriously going to pick Cleveland over the Twins if it's not about the money???

 

Also please note that neither Sanchez nor Grienke signed with Cleveland. They did get Brett Myers. They can have him.

[Mike Sixel]

I missed the part where someone said sign both of them......look, if you are satisifed with the kind of FAs that Ryan signs, great, that's your right. I am not. I think the math is very self evident, this team has the money to spend the next 3-6 years, without it constraining one current player on this roster from being retained, and they choose not to spend the money to even try to be great. Some of you have reached a different conclusion, that risking your team on crappy players, but having money for the future (even though that money is apparently not carried over) is a better way to run a baseball team than spending money and taking the risk that player isn't good (even if you have the money to spend). We are just never going to agree on this.

[whydidnt]

I'm guessing Grienke meant he signed for the most money, subject to having a chance to win. I bet his agent had a list of teams he was willing to go for, and he took the most money off that list.

 

Actually this is what Grienke said “I could play for the worst team if they paid the most. . . . If the last-place team offers $200 million and the first-place team offers $10, I’m going to go for the $200 million no matter what team it was.”

He was pretty specific about going where the money was, and I really don't think it's that unusual. These guy are getting advised by agents that are paid on commission, and it's really somewhat unusual for them to take a lesser deal - even hometown discounts are pretty rare these days.

[launchingthrees]

Including the Twins in with the Rays and A's is also a little strange to me, since both of those organizations apply and use advanced statistical analysis to try and offset some of their lack of funds. The Twins have for years ignored that and this off season, despite saying they now included this analysis in their decisions, signed two poster boys for the "scouts said he was good" camp.

 

Good post. The twins are still in the dark age. I understand fans that can't understand the more complex side of analytics. On the other hand a MLB team not getting it is quite troubling.

[whydidnt]

Also please note that neither Sanchez nor Grienke signed with Cleveland. They did get Brett Myers. They can have him.

Apparently that's what the Twins thought too. I was replying to your previous quote about 2nd tier free agents though anyway. AND I still stand by the statement that money is what matter 95% of the time in FA signings. If the Twins really wanted to sign some of the other 2nd tier FA's they just had to increase the offer. There is no way you or anyone else will convince me that none of those 10+ 2nd tier free agents wouldn't have agreed to play here if we had offered the most money. If it was 1 or two guys I could potentially buy it, but the list is too long.

[edavis0308]

Wouldn't spending 43m in 2017 to help build around a base of Hicks, Arcia, Meyer, Gibson, Sano be better then having that 43m be wasted on two roster spots of broken down/bad pitchers? I can't see how wasting that money isn't helpful.

 

 

I don't know if I can get behind the idea of saving 43M to put toward a team that is building around a group of players that only have something like 50 games of MLB experience, one of the two which has been downright awful, especially when we have a hall of fame player in his prime right now, especially when said scenerio is taking place four years from now.

[launchingthrees]

Spending money poorly is a great way to make your team worse in the short and especially in the long run.

 

Cite?

[Oxtung]

Next offseason the market looks much more promising. Maybe that's when you open the purse strings a bit more.

 

Many of those talented pitchers will sign extensions before the year is out. Adam Wainright already has this season. It is far from a forgone conclusion that the 2013 FA crop will be stronger than the 2012 FA.

[Oxtung]

Or, we could ask the Twins, Rays and A's who have been competitive with low payrolls b/c they didn't waste money on risky free agents and instead built with cheap young talent.

 

The A's have had 1 winning season in the last 6 years and are at .500 so far this year. They have been to the playoffs 2 times in the last 9 seasons and haven't been to the World Series.

 

The O's (someone mentioned them earlier too as a good franchise to model after) have had 1 winning season in the last 15 years and have lost 90+ games 7 of those years.

 

The Rays have had 5 straight winning seasons but before that had 10 straight years of 90+ losses with 5 of those years being 99+ loss seasons.

 

So it looks like you're advocating being absolutely terrible for 5-10 years to earn high draft picks. Then before that talent reaches free agency trade that talent to replenish your farm system. That's how the Rays got good and that's how they're staying good. Trade your talent for prospects.

 

That's a nessecity for the Rays, and also for the Twins pre-Target Field, but we now have money we can spend. It's time for us to find our own path forward. One that includes a strong farm system and adding FA talent.

[big dog]

Actually this is what Grienke said “I could play for the worst team if they paid the most. . . . If the last-place team offers $200 million and the first-place team offers $10, I’m going to go for the $200 million no matter what team it was.”

 

OK, I'll go on record as saying we should not have offered Greinke $200 million. And if my offers were $200 million and $10 I'd take the big money too.

 

Look, it bugs me that the Twins aren't spending their money this year. Maybe they are holding it to sign Appel and other top draft picks and internationals, or to spend a ton next year, but I'll believe that when I see it. I just disagree with the idea that spending that much on one pitcher right now is a good idea. A shortstop? That might persuade me. A pitcher who could potentially push us from 88 wins to 95 wins? Absolutely. Coming into the year people were talking about a historically bad team. Buying a guy at his peak doesn't make any sense under those circumstances, unless you think a guy at 28 will be at least as good for 3-4 more years. With pitchers, that's a bad bet to me.

[Mike Sixel]

given that there is a salary cap for amatuers, it is 100% not that they are saving money for the draft or international signings.

[whydidnt]

OK, I'll go on record as saying we should not have offered Greinke $200 million. And if my offers were $200 million and $10 I'd take the big money too.

 

Look, it bugs me that the Twins aren't spending their money this year. Maybe they are holding it to sign Appel and other top draft picks and internationals, or to spend a ton next year, but I'll believe that when I see it. I just disagree with the idea that spending that much on one pitcher right now is a good idea. A shortstop? That might persuade me. A pitcher who could potentially push us from 88 wins to 95 wins? Absolutely. Coming into the year people were talking about a historically bad team. Buying a guy at his peak doesn't make any sense under those circumstances, unless you think a guy at 28 will be at least as good for 3-4 more years. With pitchers, that's a bad bet to me.

Well I didn't paste the entire quote, but he does say Money is the #1 thing and that's it's disingenuous for guys to say they took more money for "their families" since they get so much anyway.

 

Anyway, I'm not necessarily advocating the Twins try to sign a Grienke (Though it would be nice, say once every quarter century). However, I disagree with those who say it's not worth spending the money when the team is bad. I want the team to be better and spending money is one way to help that. I'm not advocating mortgaging the future, just using the resources they have to put a good team on the field. They did not do that this last offseason, and it really ticks me off as a paying fan to hear them spout the nonsense that Free Agents wouldn't come here. That might have happened in one case...