Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

sconnytwinsfan

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 sconnytwinsfan

  1. sconnytwinsfan
    This arbitration outcome has ZERO to do with Berrios being happy or unhappy here. The Twins taking their stand has nothing to do with their perceived value of him and his arbitration number has nothing to do with his precise belief in HIS value. It is all about the players trying to push up the HIGH POINT for a first year arbitration eligible starter and the owners trying to prevent that from happening. The Twins aren't trying to save $375,000...they are trying to preserve a system that allows them to keep cheap talent for these arbitration years. Also...him not signing long term is because he has three seasons remaining and he expects to be one of the top arms on the market when the time comes. He is betting on himself to build his value. He is trying to maximize his value before he signs. That is a GOOD sign considering we've got him for these three years in an open window winning cycle. Keep calm! The window's open and the Twins are definitely in a position to contend for each of the next three years while he works his butt off to become a Cy Young starter.
  2. sconnytwinsfan
    I think it's kind of premature for Twins fans to think they know what they're getting in Murphy. What's encouraging to me is that the Yankees were definitely trading from depth for depth and I kind of think that Ryan wouldn't have pulled the trigger this early on a deal for Hicks if he didn't really like the value he was getting. How valuable would Hicks be if it meant him being a 4th outfielder, especially once Keppler is up? And if we get 105 games a year at catcher with a .265 average and a .725 OPS with 10-12 HR and 12-15 2B plus a good pitch caller for four years for Hicks? Well worth it. I read some NY press about this kid from when he first came up in 2013 and again at the beginning of last season and this. They were high on him. Not just the Yanks. The general feeling among the NY press I read was positive about this kids makeup and savvy.
  3. sconnytwinsfan
    I think that most people have lost touch with how trade values are working in MLB now. To even get a legitimate 8th inning guy with a track record in exchange for Plouffe would be a big deal. He has turned himself into a top half 3rd baseman....but there isn't as much trade value in that as you'd like. Even to trade for an up and coming 2nd or 3rd year veteran with top of the rotation ceiling is going to cost too much in trade value. This is not going to be a big splash year. We got spoiled by the bonanza T-Ryan brought in for AJ ten plus years ago. It doesn't work like that anymore. We couldn't even get Liriano back for Plouffe now. I say....upgrade at catcher. Don't trade Plouffe....you're not going to get an ace in a deal with him without sending Berrios out the door, too and that would be stupid. Upgrade the bullpen...first by keeping Jepsen around. They've been drafting power arms out of college for three years now. Give some of those guys a shot to catch on and see what happens. If you can unload Nolasco for some bullpen help or a catcher with a .250/.325/.400 bat, do it! Get in the mix next year and don't consider making a trade with an asset until you know if you're a buyer or a seller. I don't think you need to go all in during the first year of this window until you have a better idea of how far you can get.
  4. sconnytwinsfan
    Question: Why don't teams in financial situations like the Twins do $36M three year deals that front load higher dollars in the first year and make the third year less, to make the ability to trade the player more workable? For example, instead of $12M a year, pay the guy $14M this year, $14M next year and $8M the third year? If he's still a 180+ inning caliber starter, any number of teams would be interested in him as a 4th or 5th two years from now at that price. Is there something in the CBA that prevents that kind of front end loading of contracts? That said...with Correia coming off the books at the end of 2014, Hughes in 2016 and Nolasco potentially in 2017....to me signing a 2 year innings eater makes sense as a place holder while our A & AA talent progress. You open up a slot a year and get money back every year to either replace that lost starter or to meet another need as team-controlled cheap pitchers fold into the rotation.
  5. sconnytwinsfan
    I think minn55441 is right about the Arroyo/Pelfrey choice. Honestly...I don't see a spot in the rotation for Pelfrey if they sign either Garza or Arroyo. I was in the camp that I thought a two year deal for Arroyo from the start was a good idea. I think if he can be had for two years (with a club option and a $1M buyout for a third) that it's a great idea. The key is to get a deal that makes him a tradeable asset this year if two of Gibson, Deduno and Meyer start to click. But if rumors are true, the Diamondbacks are hard core wanting Tanaka. If that's the case, the Garza thing could actually happen here. And if you can get Garza for $3m a year more than Arroyo, it seems like a no-brainer. I don't think any of the top of the rotation trade options are really options anymore.
  6. sconnytwinsfan
    Wow! So disappointed to hear how this went down! That truly IS a lottery ticket deal for the Rockies. Kind of a bummer for Anderson, though. Not too many lefties interested in free agent deals to start in Coors Field. Not exactly a place to build a reputation for a future payday. Geez....if we hadn't DFA's him, (jokingly) we might have been able to send Liam Hendricks and Anthony Slama to Oakland and got back Anderson, $2M cash and a taco truck.
  7. sconnytwinsfan
    Here's my other question: There have been rumors about the Nats shopping Denard. Right Field defense looks like it's going to be more essential to team success right now. The lack of a lead-off guy also hurt the lineup last year. Wouldn't it make sense to go out and get him back if he's available? Willingham and Doumit are likely to be trade bait this year. And ultimately, whoever you give up to get him back, will essentially be ALL that you gave up to get Alex Meyer. I'm fairly certain the Nats aren't thinking they'll get that kid of return back. But even one of the A level starters might be worth the move. He's a great clubhouse guy and putting him in right will instantly mean less runs scored against us than sending Arcia out to patrol that wall.
  8. sconnytwinsfan
    I like that the approach so far has been to get veteran arms, who are in their prime, who fit well as mid-rotation guys. That doesn't mean that I'm not hoping they pull off a Homer Bailey trade or Matt Garza signing. It would be amazing and I think getting a guy like Bailey (who has already "arrived) is likely worth the thought of including Gibson or May or Berrios in the deal. But for now the idea should still be that Meyer & Gibson (or maybe May) are intended to fill that 1 & 2 slot in 2015 or 2016 with Nolasco & Hughes moving down the line. If you think about it that way, then Hughes even settling in as a .500 pitcher making 28-33 starts and pitching 175-200 innings at a 4.10-4.25 ERA would make him a steal on this deal. Put another way....remember Nick Blackburn of 2008-2009? 22-22 with a 4.04 and 402 innings? Is there anyone who wouldn't pay $8 million a year to get that production from a starter on this rotation now? Is there anyone who doesn't at least like Hughes' chances of getting close and vastly outperforming the 28 & 29 year old Nick Blackburn? I know he's a completely different kind of pitcher, but he misses WAY more bats. The big question is can Rick Anderson revive his reputation by helping Hughes develop a plus second pitch.
  9. sconnytwinsfan
    I'm a little concerned Hughes isn't looking for a one year payday, too. That said, I think it's impossible to ignore the negative effect that pitching for the Yankees can have on some pitchers. The press there is relentless! Pavano left and was productive. Burnett left and was productive. Ideally...I'd like to see Ryan pay for Garza and sign Hughes to a one year deal with an option. With the Twins' cash situation for this year, I'd even be willing to overpay him for the one guaranteed year if it gives you the option to walk away after one year. I think he knows that this park, this manager, this pitching coach are more his speed and expectations won't weigh as heavy. But the upside is too strong to not give it a whirl. How often do you get the option to sign this young of a free agent pitcher with upside?
×
×
  • Create New...