All Things 2021 Minnesota Twins In-Season Thread

Donate To GopherHole

Gopher_In_NYC said:
The Athletic said that in spite of his Mendozaesque BA, he performs above average for corner OFs offensively and is considered a plus average RF and adequate/fill in for CF.

I'm ready to move on from - let's see what Rooker can do with extended playing time at this point.
Click to expand...
Rooker is a DH/1B long term. He's pretty much Josh Willingham in the OF.
 

howeda7 said:
Rooker is a DH/1B long term. He's pretty much Josh Willingham in the OF.
Click to expand...
Good point, but at this juncture, I just want him to get as many ABs as possible to see if he's legit or not - I'll live with the occasional dropped fly or wrong angle to the ball at this point - last place or bust!!
 

Gopher_In_NYC said:
Good point, but at this juncture, I just want him to get as many ABs as possible to see if he's legit or not - I'll live with the occasional dropped fly or wrong angle to the ball at this point - last place or bust!!
Click to expand...
DH spot is open. He's been filling it. No need to see his statue in the outfield.
 

howeda7 said:
I wouldn't go 7 years on Buxton. I don't understand why they're trying to do that. But I would do 4/$80 or 5/$100. It's risk/reward. If he is the player he's been so far this year, and stays reasonably healthy, you have a league MVP caliber player at a pretty much bargain rate. Sano is/was never going to be that.
Click to expand...

I remember when people wanted to do the same with Sano several years ago. Being a MVP caliber player for the first 100 ABs of one season is not a reason to give someone 20+ million per year.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
I remember when people wanted to do the same with Sano several years ago. Being a MVP caliber player for the first 100 ABs of one season is not a reason to give someone 20+ million per year.
Click to expand...
Not ideally. But the timing is what it is. You either take the chance and put up the $ or trade him for potentially pennies on the $.

If you structure it with increases each year, he would start out at $16 and end at $24. He wouldn't hit $20 million until 2024. And that's still less than they paid Mauer and Donaldson.
 

The Buxton situation is really unique.

When he's healthy, he's one of the best players in the majors.

But, in his career, he has been "not healthy" a lot more than "Healthy."

Here are his games played:
2016 - 92
2017 - 140
2018 - 28
2019 - 87
2020 - 39
2021 - 27

Do you want to give a guy $20 million a year when he might play less than half of the season? that is essentially paying him like a $40-mill a year player. The availability has to be factored in.

I think $12 to $15 a year is more than fair. Add a few incentives and Buxton is getting fair value - BASED ON AVAILABILITY - not on talent.

But of course, his agents want to be paid strictly on talent and ignore availability.

Tell you what, go to your boss and tell him, "I'm a great employee, so I think I should get a big raise, but I'm only going to show up for work half of the time." See how that flies.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
The Buxton situation is really unique.

When he's healthy, he's one of the best players in the majors.

But, in his career, he has been "not healthy" a lot more than "Healthy."

Here are his games played:
2016 - 92
2017 - 140
2018 - 28
2019 - 87
2020 - 39
2021 - 27

Do you want to give a guy $20 million a year when he might play less than half of the season? that is essentially paying him like a $40-mill a year player. The availability has to be factored in.

I think $12 to $15 a year is more than fair. Add a few incentives and Buxton is getting fair value - BASED ON AVAILABILITY - not on talent.

But of course, his agents want to be paid strictly on talent and ignore availability.

Tell you what, go to your boss and tell him, "I'm a great employee, so I think I should get a big raise, but I'm only going to show up for work half of the time." See how that flies.
Click to expand...
For 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020 he averaged the equivalent of 106 games/162. For 2020, 39 games out of 60 = 105 games. 2018 he was on the minors some of the time.

He's a $30 million/player when healthy. If you pay him $20 million your "break even" is at 108 games. I'm comfortable that he can average that over 5 years. If he does more than that, he gets paid more via incentives for plate appearances..
 




howeda7 said:
I hope they get Graterol back if it's the Dodgers. Looks like he's having a tough year, but I'd still take him.
Click to expand...
I don't think they can trade Graterol now. Their bullpen is a mess right now.
 






short ornery norwegian said:
Tell you what, go to your boss and tell him, "I'm a great employee, so I think I should get a big raise, but I'm only going to show up for work half of the time." See how that flies.
Click to expand...
The health factor is a big concern, but look at it from the other side. I go to my boss and say:

"I understand your concerns, but I have unique talents and am by far your most important employee. I miss a lot of work, but I have been injured because I give you everything I have got. Your competitors are willing to pay me 50-75% more than you are offering and are willing to take on the risk that you want to push onto me. Why should I spend more than three seconds rejecting your proposal?"
 

howeda7 said:
Not ideally. But the timing is what it is. You either take the chance and put up the $ or trade him for potentially pennies on the $.

If you structure it with increases each year, he would start out at $16 and end at $24. He wouldn't hit $20 million until 2024. And that's still less than they paid Mauer and Donaldson.
Click to expand...

I actually think his trade value his high right now because of what he did earlier this season, and he's under a cheap contract for next season.

Players who are always injured rarely suddenly become healthy long term. Especially with the way he plays outfield. If they can land a few quality prospects, I move him in a second.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
The Buxton situation is really unique.

When he's healthy, he's one of the best players in the majors.

But, in his career, he has been "not healthy" a lot more than "Healthy."

Here are his games played:
2016 - 92
2017 - 140
2018 - 28
2019 - 87
2020 - 39
2021 - 27

Do you want to give a guy $20 million a year when he might play less than half of the season? that is essentially paying him like a $40-mill a year player. The availability has to be factored in.

I think $12 to $15 a year is more than fair. Add a few incentives and Buxton is getting fair value - BASED ON AVAILABILITY - not on talent.

But of course, his agents want to be paid strictly on talent and ignore availability.

Tell you what, go to your boss and tell him, "I'm a great employee, so I think I should get a big raise, but I'm only going to show up for work half of the time." See how that flies.
Click to expand...
If buxton was healthy all the time he would require $250 million over 10 years and the twins would never pay that. The only reason the twins have any chance to sign him is his injury risk.

I still think they should sign him for 7 and $110 with incentives. But I also understand if he’s tired of the twins and the whole process from the manipulation keeping him down to the low ball offers.
What I don’t want the twins to say is because we basically threw money away on Donaldson and the terrible pitchers we signed this year we are not gonna sign buxton. Your fuck ups in prior years should not be an important consideration moving forward.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Why would you want Graterol back? He's a reliver long term with only two pitches that have proven to be very hittable at the MLB level, plus he has arm issues.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he should be the primary piece. But we need bullpen help and I still think he'll be good long-term. I was not aware of the arm issues.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I actually think his trade value his high right now because of what he did earlier this season, and he's under a cheap contract for next season.

Players who are always injured rarely suddenly become healthy long term. Especially with the way he plays outfield. If they can land a few quality prospects, I move him in a second.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's significantly higher now than it will be in the off-season. Trade for him now and you don't even know when he'll be back from the IL.

His injury history is unique in that it is not recurring at all, outside of concussions. The rest have all been random/bad luck. Clearly he's more injury prone than the average player, but it's not something like Donaldson's calves, where it's just a matter of time until it pops again.
 

howeda7 said:
If he performs as he has this year and were healthy, he's worth $30 million/year easy.

I agree the potential to earn $25 million/year with incentives is fair. But he's not going to accept a base of $10 with $15 in incentives. There are almost no similar contracts in MLB and certainly none for someone of Buxton's stature. The player's association would flip. They have to get the guaranteed amount somewhere between $15-20/year.
Click to expand...
Buxton's "stature"? I'm not trying to get into a pissing match over Buxton. But he's had a half a good season one year, and this year he's had a good month +. Yes, he's been very dynamic in those stretches. He's had one season where he's even approached "full time" (and wasn't even to 500 AB's in that year). Even a big market team like the Angels got hammered by the Pujols deal, in that they were grossly overpaying for diminished productivity. The Sox traded Betts away for way under value to just get out of paying him. Even large market teams can be hindered by crippling contracts. If a big market team wants to roll the dice and think the previous 7 years are the outlier and once signed he's magically going to give them 400+ AB's a year on a consistent basis, they can have him. Or if they think he's worth $20MM+ while only getting 250ab's out of him is worth it, again, they can have him. I'm not convinced a team is willing to give him big bucks, but as stated many times, it only takes one bad GM.

Capture1.JPG
 

howeda7 said:
Yes, Terry Ryan made the decisions. But there was no "President of Baseball Ops" when Terry Ryan was GM. He reported to Dave St. Peter. Derek Falvey is in Terry Ryan's job with a different title. Thad Levine is essentially the Assistant GM with a different title.

I saw Larnach was drafted in 2015, but that was the Padres, so you're right on that one.

Berrios is not "average". He's not an "ace" but he is one of the 20 best starters in the league. His market value is easily 5/$110 or so, and there's no reason they can't pay him that.

My issue is that if they don't sign Buxton/Berrios, they will be either pay just as much for an external FA who's probably not as good, or they will have about a $70-80 million payroll going forward.

Except for Donaldson, there's no precedent for the former, and there's no excuse for later. They had a ~$140 million payroll going into 2020. There's no reason that can't be the norm.
Click to expand...
Spot on. They're going to have to overpay a FA pitcher to come here. Hell, even getting a FA pitcher to visit here is a pretty big feat. So just flippin' sign Berrios. No, he's not an ace. Fine. But he's a good and DURABLE pitcher. He certainly has warts (like fading at the end of the season), but nobody else you find is going to be free of them either. They can absolutely afford to pay him $20mm+, especially since Maeda's deal is very team friendly.

Better yet is to look at the flip side and what you do if you don't sign him. Now you still need to sign or develop an "ace" AND you need to sign or develop a no.2.

edit: all of that is predicated on what they could get for him in return via trade. But I'd say that about any player on the roster. If you give me enough, you can have him; everybody should be for sale at the right price.
 
Last edited:

forever a gopher said:
Spot on. They're going to have to overpay a FA pitcher to come here. Hell, even getting a FA pitcher to visit here is a pretty big feat. So just flippin' sign Berrios. No, he's not an ace. Fine. But he's a good and DURABLE pitcher. He certainly has warts (like fading at the end of the season), but nobody else you find is going to be free of them either. They can absolutely afford to pay him $20mm+, especially since Maeda's deal is very team friendly.

Better yet is to look at the flip side and what you do if you don't sign him. Now you still need to sign or develop an "ace" AND you need to sign or develop a no.2.
Click to expand...
Well, i think they are very interested in getting prospects because they have sucked at drafting
 

Gopher_In_NYC said:
The Athletic said that in spite of his Mendozaesque BA, he performs above average for corner OFs offensively and is considered a plus average RF and adequate/fill in for CF.

I'm ready to move on from - let's see what Rooker can do with extended playing time at this point.
Click to expand...
He's good defensively, seemingly a good team guy, and durable. His contract isn't outlandish, so I'm OK with keeping Kep, especially as mentioned, I don't know that he brings a bunch via trade. If you can get some decent prospects, them ship him off. But if you're just sending him away without much in return, hold on to him.
 

Jose Berrios is having his best season of his career so far and this is how he ranks across several main statistics:

ERA - 28th
Quality Starts - 44th
WAR -57th
Wins - 29th
K's - 24th
WHIP - 16th

That's not worth 20+ million per year.

Just because he's the best pitcher on the worst rotation in team history, does not mean you overpay him.
 

forever a gopher said:
Buxton's "stature"? I'm not trying to get into a pissing match over Buxton. But he's had a half a good season one year, and this year he's had a good month +. Yes, he's been very dynamic in those stretches. He's had one season where he's even approached "full time" (and wasn't even to 500 AB's in that year). Even a big market team like the Angels got hammered by the Pujols deal, in that they were grossly overpaying for diminished productivity. The Sox traded Betts away for way under value to just get out of paying him. Even large market teams can be hindered by crippling contracts. If a big market team wants to roll the dice and think the previous 7 years are the outlier and once signed he's magically going to give them 400+ AB's a year on a consistent basis, they can have him. Or if they think he's worth $20MM+ while only getting 250ab's out of him is worth it, again, they can have him. I'm not convinced a team is willing to give him big bucks, but as stated many times, it only takes one bad GM.

View attachment 13448
Click to expand...
There is no one they can sign as a FA or will likely trade for that has Buxton's upside.

I agree on not going out too far like Pujols. Buxton's speed is already peaked and will decline some, but his power #'s should make up for it. 5/$100 is very fair but hardly going to train wreck the franchise if it doesn't work out.

The Twins aren't big market but they're not small market either. They needed Target Field so they could keep guys like Buxton and Berrios. If we're just going to keep trading everyone the year before they're free agents and putter along with a bottom 10 payroll like Tampa and Oakland, then they could have stayed in the Dome.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Jose Berrios is having his best season of his career so far and this is how he ranks across several main statistics:

ERA - 28th
Quality Starts - 44th
WAR -57th
Wins - 29th
K's - 24th
WHIP - 16th

That's not worth 20+ million per year.

Just because he's the best pitcher on the worst rotation in team history, does not mean you overpay him.
Click to expand...
I would like to see what list you're looking at. The ERA # and quality start #'s seem very low.

These decisions are not made in a vacuum. Who would you get to replace him in the rotation and how much would they cost? Is Scherzer coming here? Syndergaard? Do you want to pay Justin Verlander $25 million for a year and pray his arm isn't cooked?
 

howeda7 said:
I would like to see what list you're looking at. The ERA # and quality start #'s seem very low.

These decisions are not made in a vacuum. Who would you get to replace him in the rotation and how much would they cost? Is Scherzer coming here? Syndergaard? Do you want to pay Justin Verlander $25 million for a year and pray his arm isn't cooked?
Click to expand...
Here's the link:
www.espn.com

MLB Pitching All MLB Stat Leaders, 2024 Regular Season - ESPN

ESPN is the place for MLB stats! Discover the All MLB Pitching stat leaders of the 2024 MLB Regular Season.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

I liked what they landed in the Cruz trade, and those guys are close to MLB ready. If they can pick up similar or even better pitching prospects this week to go with what they have in the system, bring them up and let them pitch next season.

I'd love to see them go after a Scherzer, Verlander, or even a Charlie Morton. I don't think the Twins would have a problem paying bigger money on a 1 year deal. Would they want to come here is the question. I'd stay far away from Syndergaard due to his injury history.
 

It's a moot point anyway. I get the feeling Berrios has no interest in having his career mapped out by a couple of Sabermetic nerds and their daydreaming jackass hand puppet.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Here's the link:
www.espn.com

MLB Pitching All MLB Stat Leaders, 2024 Regular Season - ESPN

ESPN is the place for MLB stats! Discover the All MLB Pitching stat leaders of the 2024 MLB Regular Season.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

I liked what they landed in the Cruz trade, and those guys are close to MLB ready. If they can pick up similar or even better pitching prospects this week to go with what they have in the system, bring them up and let them pitch next season.

I'd love to see them go after a Scherzer, Verlander, or even a Charlie Morton. I don't think the Twins would have a problem paying bigger money on a 1 year deal. Would they want to come here is the question. I'd stay far away from Syndergaard due to his injury history.
Click to expand...
For the same $, none of them are coming to MN. So they would have to overpay them. Probably by quite a bit. I'd rather slightly overpay Berrios.
 

howeda7 said:
For the same $, none of them are coming to MN. So they would have to overpay them. Probably by quite a bit. I'd rather slightly overpay Berrios.
Click to expand...

Based on what? The market isn't going to be large for a 38-39 year old starting pitcher, just like it wasn't large for Nelson Cruz.

If Berrios was putting up those numbers on a different team, no one on here, including yourself would want to give him more than 15 million per season.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I'd love to see them go after a Scherzer, Verlander, or even a Charlie Morton. I don't think the Twins would have a problem paying bigger money on a 1 year deal. Would they want to come here is the question. I'd stay far away from Syndergaard due to his injury history.
Click to expand...
Intriguing.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom