2014 Free Agent Power Rankings

[ThePuck]

Give Ryan credit, however, for improving the farm system via trades made and not made, in Meyer and May in particular. And Smith deserves criticism for doing exactly the opposite, especially by trading away Wilson Ramos and accepting garbage like Hoey and Jacobsen for Hardy.

 

Yeah, the farm system was ranked pretty high in 2011...so give Smith credit for improving a poor farm system himself because the farm system was not good when he took over and very good when Ryan took back over. Ryan improved it by being being the GM during two drafts in which his scouting director was able to draft very high. He helped it by the May and Meyer trade.

 

I doubt Ryan ever spends what was needed to get Sano.

[jay]

Ryan could also get criticism for not moving any of the aging assets on the roster for young talent.

 

Assuming that he was offered young talent for any of the aging assets might not be accurate.

 

One thing I was consistent about with Smith was that I appreciated his aggressiveness - even in failure - because at least it showed a genuine drive to make the team better. He just wasn't very smart in the process.

 

Are we talking about W. or Bill Smith? For some reason, my mind draws parallels between the two.

[jay]

My personal ranking: 1. Lincecum, 2. Kuroda, 3. Johnson, 4. Nolasco, 5. Santana, 6. Jimenez, 7. Haren. 3 or 4 of that group, at minimum.

 

I hope that's not your honest expectation. I'd add a few more guys to that list and be extremely happy with getting 2, placated with 1. Signing an entire rotation out of free agency in one off-season just doesn't happen.

[AROG]

Interesting thought. The Twins should be losing a lot of payroll this season which has been very highly publicized. If were were to trade Willingham this offseason, which is probable. That would free up more. Could it be possible either in that trade or others to trade away an inexpensive player, like a prospect just outside the top 20 for a decent, yet overpaid pitcher and a better prospect because we are eating their salary for a year or two. We have the flexibility now to handle it for two to three years until we will need it to sign some people and with teams so concerned about overpaid contracts we could snag a good prospect for an overpaid player. What do you think?

[ThePuck]

I hope that's not your honest expectation. I'd add a few more guys to that list and be extremely happy with getting 2, placated with 1. Signing an entire rotation out of free agency in one off-season just doesn't happen.

 

He said 3 or 4 of those group at minimum. We replaced 3 this offseason, poorly I might add, so it's not like it's unheard of.

[jay]

He said 3 or 4 of those group at minimum. We replaced 3 this offseason, poorly I might add, so it's not like it's unheard of.

 

Poorly being the key word. From the list of names that was provided there, that's unheard of.

[ThePuck]

Poorly being the key word. From the list of names that was provided there, that's unheard of.

 

unheard of or not, Ryan would never do it.

[jay]

unheard of or not, Ryan would never do it.

 

Ryan or not, no GM has ever done it. Although, I'll certainly give you that he doesn't top the list of GMs that would uncover a market inefficiency in free agent starting pitching... just as much as that's a completely made up thing.

[ThePuck]

Ryan or not, no GM has ever done it. Although, I'll certainly give you that he doesn't top the list of GMs that would uncover a market inefficiency in free agent starting pitching... just as much as that's a completely made up thing.

 

He just replaced 3 guys in the rotation this year. How are you saying it's never been done? Because only two were in free agency? I'm trying to sift through all of the not so veiled sarcasm and trying to have a real discussion.

[Mike Sixel]

I still think they should abandon the "starter" model completely (other than Deduno and one other player, pick one). That is a market inefficiency that if you intentionall try it (not like teams in the past that tired it because their real plan did not work), that would work.

[ThePuck]

Next question, how many times has a team rotation been so bad they needed to replace 3 or more starters AND that team had the financial flexibility to do it?

[jay]

He just replaced 3 guys in the rotation this year. How are you saying it's never been done? Because only two were in free agency? I'm trying to sift through all of the not so veiled sarcasm and trying to have a real discussion.

 

I guess trying to fault Ryan for not doing something that no GM has ever done threw me off from thinking it was a real discussion. I was referring to 3 guys off that list of the what is basically (and unfortunately) the best free agent starting pitchers. I apologize if the previous post didn't make that clear.

 

Yes, a GM can replace 3 pitchers in a rotation. No GM has ever signed 3 (or 4, or 5) top free agent SPs in one off-season.

[jay]

Next question, how many times has a team rotation been so bad they needed to replace 3 or more starters AND that team had the financial flexibility to do it?

 

You make a decent point. Depending on how you frame it, probably not a ton.

 

You could probably argue that the deals for A-Rod, Pujols, Prince, and maybe a few others could have bought 3 good FA pitchers. So, in the last 15 years... maybe a few Yankee teams, a couple Red Sox teams, a few Tigers years (although financial flexibility doesn't really apply given Ilitch's current approach), maybe the new Dodgers?

 

Are you proposing that the Twins have that flexibility and should sign 3 (or 4, or 5) of those guys?

[Mike Sixel]

How about 1? Is it reasonable for us to ask for 1 top free agent SP?

[ThePuck]

I guess trying to fault Ryan for not doing something that no GM has ever done threw me off from thinking it was a real discussion. I was referring to 3 guys off that list of the what is basically (and unfortunately) the best free agent starting pitchers. I apologize if the previous post didn't make that clear.

 

Yes, a GM can replace 3 pitchers in a rotation. No GM has ever signed 3 (or 4, or 5) top free agent SPs in one off-season.

 

How many of those are actual top notch pitchers? They may be the top pitchers available in FA but there is hardly a group of bankbusters.

 

In any event, how can I fault him for not doing something when that point in time hasn't even happened? And how is saying Ryan wouldn't do it necessarily a bad thing...how is that faulting him? I'm saying, based on what we've seen from him, he isn't likely to do it even if he could. If that's a negative statement, other than just a statement made based on what we've seen from him in the past, then I don't know.

 

Here's something else he wouldn't do...get Mauer to waive his no-trade clause so he could trade him for a box of cigarettes. Am I faulting him for not trading Mauer for a box of cigartettes? :-)

[ThePuck]

How about 1? Is it reasonable for us to ask for 1 top free agent SP?

 

Well, the answer would probably be 'yes' now...but if he doesn't do it, then the answer would be changed to 'no' cause we're in transition and that signing would cripple us later when we will most definitely be in contention in some year we're guessing on:-)

[old nurse]

My personal ranking: 1. Lincecum, 2. Kuroda, 3. Johnson, 4. Nolasco, 5. Santana, 6. Jimenez, 7. Haren. 3 or 4 of that group, at minimum.

 

Hughes would just be more of the same. OK fastball, and squat for 2ndary offerings.

 

what makes you think that Lincecum, Jimenez, Johnson, Santana or Haren can regain the form that made them great?

[beckmt]

what makes you think that Lincecum, Jimenez, Johnson, Santana or Haren can regain the form that made them great?

 

There are no guarantees. However the Twins need at least 2 starting pitchers on the upper end until the prospects arrive in about 3 years. If we plan to be competitive by 2015 it becomes a necessity to sign a couple of these. Doing nothing is not an option if you want to fill the seats. Most of the names above carry some risk. I would prefer Linecum, Johnson, Santana, in that order. Haran is too risky as is Jimmenz.

[Mike Sixel]

I guess the better question would be: is it better to sign a guy you pretty much know will stink, or a guy that might regain his old form? Or maybe they should just roll with the rotation they used this year, because May and Meyer are not ready.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Well, the answer would probably be 'yes' now...but if he doesn't do it, then the answer would be changed to 'no' cause we're in transition and that signing would cripple us later when we will most definitely be in contention in some year we're guessing on:-)

 

Hey now, you're mis-representing my point a bit. I was against picking up long-term top-shelf (or even mid-shelf) free agents last season because of timing. Given the progression of Gibson, Arcia, and Dozier and the continued romp through MiLB of Sano, Rosario, et al, I think it's time to start looking into the free agent crop and seeing if anyone is interested in coming to Minnesota.

 

I'm okay with not picking up a top shelf guy this offseason but I'm not against them doing it, either... And, at the very latest, they should be *very aggressive* in the free agent market 16 months from now. By that time, this farm system should be showing some promise on the MLB roster.

[old nurse]

There are no guarantees. However the Twins need at least 2 starting pitchers on the upper end until the prospects arrive in about 3 years. If we plan to be competitive by 2015 it becomes a necessity to sign a couple of these. Doing nothing is not an option if you want to fill the seats. Most of the names above carry some risk. I would prefer Linecum, Johnson, Santana, in that order. Haran is too risky as is Jimmenz.

 

Is a pitcher that will give you a 2-2.5 WAR an upper tier pitcher?

[Mike Sixel]

BTW, just noticed the Dodgers are AWESOME this year....so ya, you can buy wins. Just ask the Yankees, who have been great for over a decade, mostly through purchases of players. Remember when people typed, just a month ago, that the Dodgers "prove" you can't buy wins?

[cmb0252]

Nolasco/Santana/Lincy have bad contracts written all over them IMO and both will require draft compensation. No thanks.

 

Haren is having his second straight bad year (this time in the NL) but won't require a long term contract/draft compensation. I would be interested.

 

Johnson is the one guy I would be interested in as long as he doesn't cost the Twins a draft pick. Also, I wouldn't mind Hughes.

[cmb0252]

BTW, just noticed the Dodgers are AWESOME this year....so ya, you can buy wins. Just ask the Yankees, who have been great for over a decade, mostly through purchases of players. Remember when people typed, just a month ago, that the Dodgers "prove" you can't buy wins?

 

Angels.

[nicksaviking]

I guess trying to fault Ryan for not doing something that no GM has ever done threw me off from thinking it was a real discussion. I was referring to 3 guys off that list of the what is basically (and unfortunately) the best free agent starting pitchers. I apologize if the previous post didn't make that clear.

 

Yes, a GM can replace 3 pitchers in a rotation. No GM has ever signed 3 (or 4, or 5) top free agent SPs in one off-season.

 

But considering the awful rotation this club has put together over the last half decade, they likely should have added top ten talent each of the past three off seasons, so doing three now would would concievably add the same dollars but do so at a time when the Twins are closer to competing.

 

That being said, the free agents are looking ugly and I barely want any of them pretending to be front line starters for my team.

 

My prediction: After once again balking at the asking prices of 2014 free agent pitchers and exasperatedly declaring on MLB Network that he's making offers to everyone but no one wants to play in Minnesota, Terry Ryan signs Santana. The Johan version.

 

The low budget, injury-rehabbing vet has lately been the Twins style. That he's another former Met would be a step toward establishing a tradition. That he's a former Twin super-star is a fact and a hope he can sell to the unwitting but increasingly agitated fan base.

[nicksaviking]

Haren is having his second straight bad year (this time in the NL) but won't require a long term contract/draft compensation. I would be interested.

 

Haren has actually been pretty close to awesome for over a month now. Hard to say where his stock is going, though still likely won't get a qualifying offer.

[diehardtwinsfan]

BTW, just noticed the Dodgers are AWESOME this year....so ya, you can buy wins. Just ask the Yankees, who have been great for over a decade, mostly through purchases of players. Remember when people typed, just a month ago, that the Dodgers "prove" you can't buy wins?

 

I'm not sure "prove" vs. not prove, but if you think that it's possible to simply assemble a winner via FA, you are wrong. There are good "sure-thing" FA signings out there. They do exist. Those guys get top dollar for a reason. There are rarely enough to fill an entire team, or even plug all the holes that a team may have. There's also the problem that there are several teams with the pockets to get such guys (Angels, Dodgers, Yankees, RedSox, and Cubs). If these teams want a guy, they will get him and when they bid against each other, the price becomes exorbitant.

 

As others have said, going crazy in FA to get that one piece makes a ton of sense. Doing so to turn a 90 loss team into a 90 win team is a recipie for having an at best 80 win team with a bunch of really expensive contracts.

[Mike Sixel]

I have NEVER said that, never, ever, never. Not sure why anyone would think that that has been here for a long time and read my posts. My point was that people here were typing that the Dodgers proved you can't buy wins, well, turns out if you do it well (Yankees for most of the last 20 years, and this year the Dodgers) you can do it.

 

As for the Angels, I never said it always worked. I said, clearly, that the Dodgers show that it CAN work, not that it will work.

[TheLeviathan]

Yes, a GM can replace 3 pitchers in a rotation. No GM has ever signed 3 (or 4, or 5) top free agent SPs in one off-season.

 

To me, there is no stronger argument for why we need to be adding NOW, not waiting for some magical aligning of the stars in the future.

[Mike Sixel]

To me, there is no stronger argument for why we need to be adding NOW, not waiting for some magical aligning of the stars in the future.

 

This. Sign one good FA a year (until you don't need to, or cannot afford to)....because it's hard to sign three good ones in one year.