I like the idea of Ross but I think the likelihood of him coming back from his injury is pretty low.  But a one year deal - even if they have to pay 14m - is fine with me to find out.

The likelihood of him coming back has to be pretty low.....that said, it's just money (and a roster spot)....so if they can sign him and not play him if he's not ready, great. But if he takes a roster spot and they can't DL or send him down.....that could create issues. To me, this makes less sense if they acquire a SP for Dozier who will be up day 1....

If it costs that much, I would want an option year.

 

I do like the idea of taking high riak fliers on arms for the next year or two.

There are other teams looking at him too, including the Cubs.  It's doubtful he falls to the Twins unless he fails a physical, in which case the Twins should pass on him too. 

Edited December 27, 20169 yr by Doomtints

A one year deal makes no sense if he's not likely to pitch this year.

 

There are other teams looking at him too, including the Cubs.  It's doubtful he falls to the Twins unless he fails a physical, in which case the Twins should pass on him too. 

Well, besides money, a guy like Ross might prefer non-playoff team like the Twins which might give him 15-20 starts to get himself back into shape over a playoff team that needs every game.  Additionally, he might view TF as a better pitcher's park than other destinations.  

Like Aaron Gleeman always says, it's VERY hard to screw up a 1 year deal. Whatever the money, if you can make it work, it almost never is a bad idea. If Ross can come back and be close to the top of the rotation guy he has shown to be, then flip him at the deadline. If he isn't going to be healthy, then it is only one year.

 

Well, besides money, a guy like Ross might prefer non-playoff team like the Twins which might give him 15-20 starts to get himself back into shape over a playoff team that needs every game.  Additionally, he might view TF as a better pitcher's park than other destinations.  

 

Park Factors has Target field as a hitter's park, not a pitchers' park.  I think we view it as a pitcher's park mostly due to the Twins lack of hitting ability since being at Target Field. 

Wrigley's Park Factor rating jumps around a bit, a key theory is that this is due to the weather but I think it's more due to the Cubs historical lack of a consistent pitching staff.   Last year Wrigley was a pitcher's park in spite of the Cubs lighting up the competition on a regular basis. Historically, Wrigley is a neutral park, so even if things change next year it would still be a better park for a pitcher than Target Field. 

Edited December 27, 20169 yr by Doomtints

 

 

Like Aaron Gleeman always says, it's VERY hard to screw up a 1 year deal. Whatever the money, if you can make it work, it almost never is a bad idea. If Ross can come back and be close to the top of the rotation guy he has shown to be, then flip him at the deadline. If he isn't going to be healthy, then it is only one year.

 

An injury is the one way to screw it up.  And we already know he is coming off an injury.  Gleeman was probably referring to pitchers that project to be healthy. 

 

Additionally, he might view TF as a better pitcher's park than other destinations. 

Ask Jose Bautista if that is his view of Target Field. 

 

Like Aaron Gleeman always says, it's VERY hard to screw up a 1 year deal. Whatever the money, if you can make it work, it almost never is a bad idea. If Ross can come back and be close to the top of the rotation guy he has shown to be, then flip him at the deadline. If he isn't going to be healthy, then it is only one year.

 

Unless you refuse to cut/bench/demote a bad player because of money, and he takes up a roster spot and is bad/blocking a better player.....you only get a couple dozen guys on the roster. We've seen that before. 

 

Park Factors has Target field as a hitter's park, not a pitchers' park.  I think we view it as a pitcher's park mostly due to the Twins lack of hitting ability since being at Target Field. 

Wrigley's Park Factor rating jumps around a bit, a key theory is that this is due to the weather but I think it's more due to the Cubs historical lack of a consistent pitching staff.   Last year Wrigley was a pitcher's park in spite of the Cubs lighting up the competition on a regular basis. Historically, Wrigley is a neutral park, so even if things change next year it would still be a better park for a pitcher than Target Field. 

 

The Twins have finished 16th, 12th, and 7th in the majors in runs scored over the past three seasons. Their offense has not been a problem.  

 

The likelihood of him coming back has to be pretty low.....that said, it's just money (and a roster spot)....so if they can sign him and not play him if he's not ready, great. But if he takes a roster spot and they can't DL or send him down.....that could create issues. To me, this makes less sense if they acquire a SP for Dozier who will be up day 1....

Thoracic outlet syndrome is a 4 to 6 month recovery. Where do you get the notion that coming back from it is low? 

Thoracic outlet syndrome is a 4 to 6 month recovery. Where do you get the notion that coming back from it is low?

This is from beyond the box score http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/platform/amp/2015/7/1/8859137/thoracic-outlet-syndrome-pitcher-effectiveness?client=safari

 

"The prognosis for almost all of the injuries we have discussed in previous installments called for a good-to-excellent chance that the afflicted player would return to his previous levels. However, thoracic outlet syndrome still possesses the potential to be career-ending (or wors)"

2 years 20M - I'm on board.

 

And sign Storen too while we're at it.

2 years 20M - I'm on board.

 

And sign Storen too while we're at it.

At least one with an option, if not 2. A 1 yr deal means you're probably paying for his rehab only.

 

This is from beyond the box score http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/platform/amp/2015/7/1/8859137/thoracic-outlet-syndrome-pitcher-effectiveness?client=safari

"The prognosis for almost all of the injuries we have discussed in previous installments called for a good-to-excellent chance that the afflicted player would return to his previous levels. However, thoracic outlet syndrome still possesses the potential to be career-ending (or wors)"

How does potential mean low likelihood he will return when the previous statement states there is a good to excellent chance that the afflicted player would return to his previous levels.

How does potential mean low likelihood he will return when the previous statement states there is a good to excellent chance that the afflicted player would return to his previous levels.

the article discussed how certain comparable injuries such as Tommy John had a high likelihood of success but Thorasic Outlet did not. Expected recovery is 40-60% but the sample size is less than 100 patients so it's hard to tell