26 year old Cuban SS Alexander Guerrero

[glunn]

Moderator note -- please tone down the invective in this thread. You may debate, but let's be more understanding of people who disagree with you.

[old nurse]

If one tries hard enough, there's always a way to find some rationale/justification/excuse for not signing someone. The perfect FA doesn't exist..and the closest ones, well they are just too darn expensive...

 

It is so easy to find fault. 2012 Willingham was the perfect FA. What is it this year but cries that the Twins should have traded him. Try Hicks out in CF a year too early, doesn't work. Disparaging comments about the thinking capacity of the FO and then many boderline players are mentioned or unrealistic scenarios are put forth as a better solution are what comes back at the Twins. There is and always will be a never ending supply of ways to criticize. It is fine for people to criticize. Then it is also fine for people to respond to the thinking with a different viewpoint and not have it dismissed as excuse making.

[jay]

jay, that's a very rational post.....thx.

 

 

One point I'd make:

I don't think we really know they were in the hunt, since we are not to believe the GM when he speaks publicly, and we are not to believe the media when they print/speak about what they are hearing, we really have no idea if they were in on this guy or not.

 

Ok, one more point:

It is certainly possible that they decided he was not better than Floriman (ouch), but then why "leak" that they were in on the guy? That just sets up fans to be disappointed when they don't, again, actually sign the guy.

 

Mike, I think you're trying to extrapolate a little too far here. Interpretations of what was said by various sources have been called into question (ie - using the word "money" in a sentence). They could have been feigning their interest, but there isn't really anything to interpret here.

 

The interpretation is in the second point you make and that's the part we don't actually know... how serious they were (if at all) about signing him.

[Mike Sixel]

fair again, Jay. Let's just agree that you and I disagree on whether or not Smith and Ryan's words about being competitive were appropriate or not.

 

Another point: I don't care if they were in on a guy. I care if they add talent and the team has good players. Right now, it does not. Ryan added 3 new pitchers to a historically bad SP rotation, and it got worse.......

 

edit: that should read St. Peter, not Smith....sorry Bill!

[ThePuck]

It is so easy to find fault. 2012 Willingham was the perfect FA. What is it this year but cries that the Twins should have traded him. Try Hicks out in CF a year too early, doesn't work. Disparaging comments about the thinking capacity of the FO and then many boderline players are mentioned or unrealistic scenarios are put forth as a better solution are what comes back at the Twins. There is and always will be a never ending supply of ways to criticize. It is fine for people to criticize. Then it is also fine for people to respond to the thinking with a different viewpoint and not have it dismissed as excuse making.

 

2012 Willingham was the perfect FA? Why because that's one that can be pointed to that Ryan did? He was signed during his supposed declining years, he was signed when we aren't competitive. His contract exists during rebuilding. His contract fits the criteria of quite a few people's ideas of a bad FA signing.

 

About the declining years reason, Willingham will be 35 at the end of his contract...Sanchez will be 34 younger when his contract is up. But one reason many of us were told it was a bad idea to even try and get Sanchez was we'd be paying for declining years.

 

Of course, I, personally, had no problem with the signing. I liked it, in fact. I thought it was silly to say it was a good signing because it was cheaper than signing Cuddyer...only because the saved money wasn't put back into the product on the field...but overall I liked the signing. Doesn't change the fact that it is a signing that fits quite a few criteria of a bad signing given by a lot of people here.

[Alex]

You're absolutely right about the history aspect. As mentioned in the previous post, I (and, I believe, you) don't actually think the payroll will be ~$50m next year. Perhaps some will be spent on a replacement for Morneau. Given that would be likely an improvement, it isn't quite fair to not count that signing, as you suggest.

 

The only way payroll goes up is FA, trade, or int'l. So, despite history, it almost has to happen?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the only increases are through arbitration and that they don't significantly replace the salary that's been lost. To be clear, I'm not predicting that that won't increase payroll, but I think it's far from "has to happen."

 

First, I think this offseason could be an interesting FA market with all the new TV money coming in and that you could see some very big signings. With the way the front office, or at least TR, has been risk averse last season, if contracts do inflate, I don't see them getting all that deep in the muck where the team is at right now and for next season.

 

The bigger reason, though, is I'm just not clear where they are going to spend on anything but journeymen replacements. Most positions in question have possible younger players coming up sometime next season or the year after (3B Sano may arrive, CF: Do you sign a CF when Buxton may be up in 2015, etc...). I'm not convinced they'll replace Morneau and, if they do, it might be small signing because they'll want to leave first as an option for Mauer.

 

The exception, of course, may be starting pitching. There's no reason not to spend money there and hopefully they go out and get someone, but we saw how that went last year in what I think will be recognized as a far better market.

[LaBombo]

2012 Willingham was the perfect FA? Why because that's one that can be pointed to that Ryan did? He was signed during his supposed declining years, he was signed when we aren't competitive. His contract exists during rebuilding. His contract fits the criteria of quite a few people's ideas of a bad FA signing.

Given the constraints of not rolling excess payroll over, and the Twins' tradition of not landing the really big free agent fish, I would say that Willingham was a good signing that became a bad one when the Twins failed to trade him for a good prospect in the offseason.

 

Couldn't agree more about the ala carte rationalization wrt Sanchez.

[Oxtung]

It's a problem if the parade doesn't start in 2015, and to borrow a line from Chief, if we don't have the last draft pick in the first round of the 2018 draft.

 

So, in your opinion the Twins have all the talent they need to win the World Series either in their minor leagues currently or that can be added by free agency during the '14-'15 off season?

[old nurse]

2012 Willingham was the perfect FA? Why because that's one that can be pointed to that Ryan did? He was signed during his supposed declining years, he was signed when we aren't competitive. His contract exists during rebuilding. His contract fits the criteria of quite a few people's ideas of a bad FA signing.

 

About the declining years reason, Willingham will be 35 at the end of his contract...Sanchez will be 34 younger when his contract is up. But one reason many of us were told it was a bad idea to even try and get Sanchez was we'd be paying for declining years.

 

The slope of decline will always vary from player to player. Speed usually goes first, arms second, power last. Skills that deteriorate factor in with age. Willingham was brought in for power. His contract is not the one of an elite player, nor of a very good player but of an average one. Is he in decline or having a bad year? If you say bad year then is Prince Fielder in decline? If signing a player like Willingham thinking he is going to decline is a bad idea then signing a Sanchez might fit the category. Might not either. Really doesn't matter. I am told that what a player says is gospel so here is a quote I found for you.

 

Sanchez made it clear he wanted to be with Detroit after signing with the team, via John Lowe of the Detroit Free Press.

"I just wanted to come here," Sanchez said as he wore his Tigers jersey. "It's not about if they're going to be in the race. It's where I want to be."

It wasn't about the money, it was where he wanted to be.

[ThePuck]

Given the constraints of not rolling excess payroll over, and the Twins' tradition of not landing the really big free agent fish, I would say that Willingham was a good signing that became a bad one when the Twins failed to trade him for a good prospect in the offseason.

 

Couldn't agree more about the ala carte rationalization wrt Sanchez.

 

I didn't say it was a bad signing...I'm saying his signing fits multiple criteria on the reasoning we keep being given for why it's not good to sign a free agent.

[ThePuck]

The slope of decline will always vary from player to player. Speed usually goes first, arms second, power last. Skills that deteriorate factor in with age. Willingham was brought in for power. His contract is not the one of an elite player, nor of a very good player but of an average one. Is he in decline or having a bad year? If you say bad year then is Prince Fielder in decline? If signing a player like Willingham thinking he is going to decline is a bad idea then signing a Sanchez might fit the category. Might not either. Really doesn't matter. I am told that what a player says is gospel so here is a quote I found for you.

 

Sanchez made it clear he wanted to be with Detroit after signing with the team, via John Lowe of the Detroit Free Press.

"I just wanted to come here," Sanchez said as he wore his Tigers jersey. "It's not about if they're going to be in the race. It's where I want to be."

It wasn't about the money, it was where he wanted to be.

 

So it was a perfect FA signing cause it was an inexpensive signing? Ryan has a lot of perfect FA signings then.

 

As far as the quote, you mean after signing with Detroit he said that's where he wants to be? What would you have expected him to say? Would you have expected him to say he wanted to be somewhere else but settled for Detroit?

[IdahoPilgrim]

fair again, Jay. Let's just agree that you and I disagree on whether or not Smith and Ryan's words about being competitive were appropriate or not.

 

Another point: I don't care if they were in on a guy. I care if they add talent and the team has good players. Right now, it does not. Ryan added 3 new pitchers to a historically bad SP rotation, and it got worse.......

 

Technically that depends on how you define effectiveness. Both ERA and OPS are lower for this year's starters than for last year's. Not to say they are good, but they aren't as bad as last year, at least by those two metrics.

[ThePuck]

Technically that depends on how you define effectiveness. Both ERA and OPS are lower for this year's starters than for last year's. Not to say they are good, but they aren't as bad as last year, at least by those two metrics.

 

We are still last in MLB for starter ERA, IP, QS, Ks, BAA, OBPA, SLGA. We were not last in all those last year. Some maybe, but not all.

[Alex]

Technically that depends on how you define effectiveness. Both ERA and OPS are lower for this year's starters than for last year's. Not to say they are good, but they aren't as bad as last year, at least by those two metrics.

 

Yeah, but both of those are lower around the league as well, so pure numbers aren't enough. I'm not sure how they compare when factoring that in.

[LaBombo]

We are still last in MLB for starter ERA, IP, QS, Ks, BAA, OBPA, SLGA. We were not last in all those last year

And almost as sad is the fact that the best starter is a guy who is a very long shot to help the team when they're good again.

 

Combine that with Gibson's fugly debut and the flameouts of Worley and Diamond, and it's safe to say the rotation has been a disaster for the third straight year.

[ThePuck]

And almost as sad is the fact that the best starter is a guy who is a very long shot to help the team when they're good again.

 

Combine that with Gibson's fugly debut and the flameouts of Worley and Diamond, and it's safe to say the rotation has been a disaster for the third straight year.

 

Imagine how bad it would have been if Ryan hadn't done everything possible to greatly improve our rotation this year :-)

[old nurse]

So it was a perfect FA signing cause it was an inexpensive signing? Ryan has a lot of perfect FA signings then.

 

As far as the quote, you mean after signing with Detroit he said that's where he wants to be? What would you have expected him to say? Would you have expected him to say he wanted to be somewhere else but settled for Detroit?

 

I am told to take what a player says after he signs as gospel as that was his intent. It is not what I expect him to say, players are honest and forthcoming about their signing process after they sign. The Twins could have signed Greinke after all, He said he signed with the team that would pay the most even if it was the worst team after he signed his contract.

Willingham's contract is reflective of where he was expected to be. He is neither overpaid nor underpaid. Is that a difficult concept these days? Nowhere did I say it was a good contract because it was cheap. Bad form to try to make a comment what it should be fairly clear it is not. An aging play, Carlos Beltran. Signed a much higher dollar contract. He is really neither overpaid, nor underpaid, hence a good contract for both, even though it is not a cheap contract. CoCo Crisp is underpaid. He did not decline if anticipation of a decline was the reason for his 7m/tr contract. Maybe he just liked playing in Oakland.

[ThePuck]

Again, as a fan, I'm concerned with getting quality players. If a guy is getting 16M and is only producing at 12M, I'm happier with that than getting a guy at 5M and getting 6M value cause the guy giving us 12M value is doing twice as well. This whole underpaid/overpaid thing...I don't care about that...especially when we are well under budget. I'm not a Pohlad beancounter, I care about the quality of the product on the field.

 

So, no, it's obviously easy to understand over and under paid, my question is, as a fan, why do we care when there is plenty of money left untapped? His contract was a 'bargain' compared to the Cuddyer contract and they took that saved money...and did absolutely nothing with it.

 

But I understand...he was the perfect FA signing...because the fact that he was cheap voids some of the reasons normally given for not signing a FA to a multi-year contract...those being that it's bad to sign FA during their declining years or during bad seasons, or during rebuilding seasons.

[old nurse]

Again, as a fan, I'm concerned with getting quality players. If a guy is getting 16M and is only producing at 12M, I'm happier with that than getting a guy at 5M and getting 6M value cause the guy giving us 12M value is doing twice as well. This whole underpaid/overpaid thing...I don't care about that...especially when we are well under budget. I'm not a Pohlad beancounter, I care about the quality of the product on the field.

 

So, no, it's obviously easy to understand over and under paid, my question is, as a fan, why do we care when there is plenty of money left untapped? His contract was a 'bargain' compared to the Cuddyer contract and they took that saved money...and did absolutely nothing with it.

 

But I understand...he was the perfect FA signing...because the fact that he was cheap voids some of the reasons normally given for not signing a FA to a multi-year contract...those being that it's bad to sign FA during their declining years or during bad seasons, or during rebuilding seasons.

 

First off you said there was no ideal free agent. To me there is, one that performs at a level you paid for or higher. You don't have to care whether a player is over or underpaid. It seems like an interesting way to judge talent level if you judge a player by the size of a free agent contract. Over the last 2 years Willingham has done more for his team than Cuddyer has for the Rockies. Yet you degrade him because his contract is less than Cuddyer's. Yes there was money left unspent. You are right in that they should have done something. I guess you never figured out that there is a limited number of quality free agents out there to spend that money on. There were only 6 16/yr million dollar contracts given out the last two years. Supply is kind of limited, especially when they have a team they want to play for. You can't always get what you want.

[PseudoSABR]

Cuddy's having a pretty good season, and wasn't as bad last year as Willingham is this year.

[ThePuck]

First off you said there was no ideal free agent. To me there is, one that performs at a level you paid for or higher. You don't have to care whether a player is over or underpaid. It seems like an interesting way to judge talent level if you judge a player by the size of a free agent contract. Over the last 2 years Willingham has done more for his team than Cuddyer has for the Rockies. Yet you degrade him because his contract is less than Cuddyer's. Yes there was money left unspent. You are right in that they should have done something. I guess you never figured out that there is a limited number of quality free agents out there to spend that money on. There were only 6 16/yr million dollar contracts given out the last two years. Supply is kind of limited, especially when they have a team they want to play for. You can't always get what you want.

 

I'm not sure how many times I have to say I liked the Willingham signing....but I'll do it again, I liked the signing. What I was saying is that the money saved by signing him instead of Cuddy didn't matter cause we didn't use it to help us in other areas. I wasn't 'degrading him' in the least.

 

And I didn't say there's no ideal FA, at least not by MY standard. I'm saying that based on the parameters set forth by many in here who constantly defend the lack of signings by Ryan, there is no FA that can avoid hitting at least one of the conditions of being a bad signing...ergo there is no perfect FA based on all the different excuses thrown around for not signing a player...but those aren't MY parameters.

 

Here's a question. Was signing Willingham better than signing Cuddyer? Throw out the money (since the money save wasn't used to help the team). Who is the better overall player, all things considered (that means defense too)? I'd say Cuddyer. Again, not a slam on Willingham...

[old nurse]

I'm not sure how many times I have to say I liked the Willingham signing....but I'll do it again, I liked the signing. What I was saying is that the money saved by signing him instead of Cuddy didn't matter cause we didn't use it to help us in other areas. I wasn't 'degrading him' in the least.

 

And I didn't say there's no ideal FA, at least not by MY standard. I'm saying that based on the parameters set forth by many in here who constantly defend the lack of signings by Ryan, there is no FA that can avoid hitting at least one of the conditions of being a bad signing...ergo there is no perfect FA based on all the different excuses thrown around for not signing a player...but those aren't MY parameters.

 

Here's a question. Was signing Willingham better than signing Cuddyer? Throw out the money (since the money save wasn't used to help the team). Who is the better overall player, all things considered (that means defense too)? I'd say Cuddyer. Again, not a slam on Willingham...

 

Haven't seen Cuddy play in a couple of years. UZR 150 says they both stink in the field now. Willingham less so than Cuddyer. Over the last almost 2 seasons I would say that pitchers pitch around Willingham more than they do Cuddyer. I would also think that Cuddyer would not be having this good of season if he were with the Twins. On the other hand, Cuddyer is probably a better leader. I would say that Pamelee is a downgrade at 1B/rf from Cuddy and Willingham is an upgrade over Delmon. If May and Worley don't work out then overall the club lost.

[Alex]

Cuddyer and Willingham have almost exactly flip-flopped OPS+ numbers (which account for park differences) between this year and last.

 

I think it's worth caring about the value you get out of a contract when you have a team at or near its own cap. However, at this point, the focus of the team in FA should be adding better players. If they have to overpay a bit, they should.

[nicksaviking]

Cuddyer and Willingham have almost exactly flip-flopped OPS+ numbers (which account for park differences) between this year and last.

 

I think it's worth caring about the value you get out of a contract when you have a team at or near its own cap. However, at this point, the focus of the team in FA should be adding better players. If they have to overpay a bit, they should.

 

Agreed, I'm tired about hearing about getting better value for their money. They will be comfortably within the confines of their self dictated cap no matter how they put together the roster.

 

If you NEED something, you have to pay for it even if you think it's overpriced. None of us have stopped buying gas even though its price is beyond what we perceive it should be. We need it. Ryan needs top of the rotation pitchers.