Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,580

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by TheLeviathan

  1. TheLeviathan
    I think we are negotiating against our own difficult situation more than the rest of the league. Mike's 3/45 idea seems right for the market so if I'm the Twins I offer 7/91 with easy incentives to double that by PAs. But I also demand a 4th year opt out as safety against his risks. The Twins would basically be offering double what anyone else would guarantee for his risk level so I feel like that is a fair compromise.
  2. TheLeviathan
    I can see not loving some of these deals considering we are packaging two players, but getting 32nd and 68th best prospects in the same deal is hard to call "light" either. Most teams literally can't offer anything as good or better than that.
  3. TheLeviathan
    I would listen, but I don't think anyone is going to pay enough to make me move a versatile, good fielder, good hitter with a good contract.
  4. TheLeviathan
    It is absolutely all over the two threads. You haven't, which is why I engaged with your totally reasonable 3/45 idea.
  5. TheLeviathan
    I guess I'm coming at this differently than most of you. I would prefer we sign Jose Berrios. He's durable, reliable, consistent, our pitching is an organizational weak point, and I love the kid's approach. That said....I don't believe we could offer anything to Berrios that would have him ink a contract. I really don't. I think he wants to field the market. When he does, I think it'll take 7/140 or 5/125 to be in the conversation, but I don't believe he wants an extension. And good on him, he earned the right to choose where he plays from the best offers available. Buxton? It really depends on the incentives, but I'm ok with something around 7/100 with some significant protections for the team against injury in exchange for incentives for Buck if he's healthy. I think that deal is far riskier and likely to implode on the team. It's also the one that appears doable. So I'd like them to try and bridge that gap and hope the guy can be healthy, but fire them for walking away from a guy who has played 30-40% of his possible games? How on earth is that fair either? If you're firing them, fire them for the failure to build the farm.
  6. TheLeviathan
    3 and 45 is 15M base. 7 and 80 is 11.5M base. It's not that off, especially depending on the incentives. Do I understand why Buxton turns it down? Absolutely. Do I want a piece of whatever delicious intoxicant people are using to suggest he can get 150M guaranteed? Also absolutely.
  7. TheLeviathan
    3/45 with attainable incentives doesn't seem that different than what we know they offered though right? Certainly not insultingly different considering it literally guarantees nearly double that much money. (At a lower AAV of course, but that's the trade off)
  8. TheLeviathan
    Well, we know they went from 7/73 to 7/80 right? Sounds like they guaranteed another 1M per season. We don't know what the offers and incentives were and that makes a huge difference in evaluating things. Where I disagree with you is what the market will yield. Buxton will not get 7 years unless he takes a huge hit in guarantees (much like the offer structure we see). If he takes short term deals he might get a good AAV, but if the injuries persist he may not get another deal. That's the risk, but I guarantee you that Buxton will not get 150M guaranteed. No chance. Too many posters here seem to be too close to the situation for an objective analysis.
  9. TheLeviathan
    I totally understand why Buck would reject the deal. I'm pushing back more on the mythical pedestal/non-accurate understanding of the market the negotiations are happening in.
  10. TheLeviathan
    I could be wrong, but I think there is zero chance Byron Buxton gets 5 years with a guaranteed 100M. If that is offered, it will be with a litany of opt-out options the team has built in to protect them. Effectively making it a much lower deal with incentives. Just like the ones the Twins seem to be offering. In a league where almost no one gets 5 years....it ain't gonna be Buxton that breaks that trend.
  11. TheLeviathan
    I encourage you to find Van's laundry list of lost games on the way to the hundreds and hundreds of lost games by Buxton. I don't care if they are nagging or not, its brutal. I agree about his age being a major positive for Buck, but his game is built on speed. There is no profile of a player more likely to decline with age than one whose game is built on speed. Buxton's hitting has been great in only a smattering or the smattering of at-bats he has actually been healthy. Without his speed, Buxton is a significantly less valuable player. And his speed will decline.
  12. TheLeviathan
    Teams that don't offer anything close to fair market don't often get counter-offers. Your idea of the market does not seem accurate to the actual, current market.
  13. TheLeviathan
    I agree on that second paragraph. His best bet will be to take some large, short-term contracts and bet on himself. But I don't expect those to be much more than 2/30 with protections built in for the club. (Like, the second year is mutual option) My beef is with people not understanding that a 7 year offer structure has a lower AAV because of the security it provides Buck. He is trading larger salaries for a longer commitment by the club with incentives. Likewise he could trade the years for more guarantees. But he will not get both. That's what people need to stop conflating.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Buxton has less track record and worse injuries than Donaldson. And Donaldson had to scrape to get a four year deal while Buxton is getting offered 7. And, yes, he could blow what they offered out of the water in 3-4 years. He might also be so injured and declining that he doesn't earn half of it.
  15. TheLeviathan
    I agree with many of you that it's very hard to peg what he'd get, but I'm pretty confident of a few things: 1. Anyone who gives Buxton a contract term beyond 3 years is going to want it heavily incentivized, with a lot of outs, or with a lower AAV. Possibly all of those things. He won't get a deal longer than 3 years without at least significant protections of that nature. Again, this is how teams behave now. The free agent spending binges of years past are not the same. 2. The only way he gets anywhere close to a $20M AAV is on a 1-2 year deal with mutual options and other protections that the team will insist on in order to swing for the fences. They won't box themselves in. I don't think people are looking at the current pay rate of centerfielders in the league when they think he's getting 150 or 200M guaranteed. That's just not reasonable. If he had no history or injuries, sure. But Buxton's track record is ugly and teams are gun-shy when there are red flags. GMs know they keep their jobs, in part, by protecting the owner's pocket book from ugly contracts. On top of that, I think a lot of this fanbase is still in love with the myth of Byron Buxton. He's such a likable player and so easy to root for and it doesn't help that he fuels that for 40 games a season when he's just phenomenal, but GMs can't be starry-eyed fans. The sober take on this guy is that guarantees in his next contract are going to be few and far between unless he makes significant sacrifices in other areas of the deal.
  16. TheLeviathan
    Except there is significant risk in that. And Hayes said part of his reason for rejecting it was more security in the back end of the deal.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Before we rush to call the Twins cheap skates, shouldn't we know a bit more about the "unique incentives package" and Buxton's counter-offer? Hayes seems to hint that Buxton wants more assured money in case he gets hurt again, which is totally reasonable, but isn't it also reasonable for the team to be wary of that? If the incentives are low-ball and meaningless, then I'd say the Twins are being cheap. If, however, he can hit 20M a year by just getting on the field, say, 60% of the time than I'd say they aren't being cheap at all. Only ten players in the entire league have gotten contracts in free agency over 4 years in the last three offseasons. Only 5 that have gotten 7 years or more in term: Harper, Machado, Cole, Rendon, and Strasburg. Teams don't hand out deals like this much anymore, so it wouldn't take those incentives being all that elaborate for them to be well in line with MLB behavior right now. (I'd argue they would be acting very generously on the term aspect relative to the rest of the league)
  18. TheLeviathan
    A lot of that depends on how easy the escalators are to attain and how much they pay out too. Sure, the base isn't amazing, but I also think people WAY overestimate how much money is available to him as a free agent. Teams have a several season behavior trend of being much more risk averse. Especially on the term component.
  19. TheLeviathan
    I too will wait for the counter to leak.
  20. TheLeviathan
    Not at all. Firstly, you're declaring this a win for the future two months for the Rays and a "bad result" for the Twins. Now, if you have the ability to predict the future I'd prefer you use your powers for more good than TD posting. (Like, for example, telling me what to bet on in Vegas) But assuming you don't have those powers the truth is you are judging the trade the very next day in the most unfair way possible. Secondly, yes, we can judge it now. As a 41 year old DH-only bat with two months left on his contract, we had an expected value for Cruz. By virtually all accounts, the Twins exceeded that expected value right now. (Because, like Cruz, those pitchers have expected value too) And lastly, Nelson Cruz has no tangible benefit to the 2021 Minnesota Twins. None. Getting anything that even MIGHT have future value for him is a win. Much less guys we might be able to plug in next year. Not to mention more available at-bats for Rooker. Not to mention, in a lost season, who cares about wins? All of those things can be fairly judged right now except for the one way you tried to judge the deal.
  21. TheLeviathan
    Isn't that something we should just wait until the future to decide then when the point of the post is to discuss the current context of value? Nelson Cruz might pull a hammy next week jogging out a double and your post will look silly too. Hand-cuffing yourself to hindsight as the only means of evaluation doesn't seem like a fair way to judge things. No front office gets to do that, we can only judge good processes and hope evaluations are being carried out at a high level. Those later judgments come....., well, later. As they should.
  22. TheLeviathan
    I'm glad more of the minor leaguers are sharing their stories. Putting the spotlight on this stupidity puts pressure on owners and the MLBPA to stop exploiting them.
  23. TheLeviathan
    I like the DeDe news, not so much because I think Cousins will throw to him in the slot, but because it's insurance if Thielen or the kid gets hurt. We're paper thin at WR. And good on the Vikings to act decisively on Dennison.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Glad the team is selling. I wish Nellie the best but we need that DH spot for young hitters. These look like players worthy of starts the last two months. That, in my eyes, is very good value in return.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Team control is perhaps the most valuable commodity in the trade market.
×
×
  • Create New...