Twins confirm interest in signing pitchers Dallas Keuchel, Craig Kimbrel

[h2oface]

 

there will be RPs available, will they pay the price? Will they outbid the other clubs? Will any of them be as good as Pressley?

 

Yes, probably. But not as good as Pressly. 

[prouster]

Man, you’d think the way the season has gone the front office would have earned a little more trust. I guess not...

 

I’m glad they didn’t pay this much for a reliever. Trade for a couple arms and continue to steamroll through the league.

[Vanimal46]

I’m glad they didn’t pay this much for a reliever.

I guess I don't really understand why people are saying this... Other than to protect Jim Pohlad's wallet.

[prouster]

I guess I don't really understand why people are saying this... Other than to protect Jim Pohlad's wallet.

Because whether you like it or not, every team will always weigh the dollars and cents cost/benefits before making any move. We can pretend they don’t, we can get angry when they do, but they will always do it.

 

They can use some of that money toward a trade, or toward arbitration raises, or toward extensions. Maybe the Pohlads will pocket it, but I think Falvey has done enough to let us trust him under a (BS or not) budget that isn’t going away until the team is contracted or MLB vanishes into thin air.

[prouster]

there will be RPs available, will they pay the price? Will they outbid the other clubs? Will any of them be as good as Pressley?

You remember how Houston got Pressley (and Verlander, and Cole, and . . .) right?

[TheMatt]

Rosenthal said that the super tight Rays were the runner up, offering 39 mill over 3 years.  I guess i am disappointed that the Twins weren't at least the runner up.  

[Vanimal46]

Because whether you like it or not, every team will always weigh the dollars and cents cost/benefits before making any move. We can pretend they don’t, we can get angry when they do, but they will always do it.

 

They can use some of that money toward a trade, or toward arbitration raises, or toward extensions. Maybe the Pohlads will pocket it, but I think Falvey has done enough to let us trust him under a (BS or not) budget that isn’t going away until the team is contracted or MLB vanishes into thin air.

I understand. I'm just curious why you, and other posters here, are *glad* they don't pay that much for a reliever? Why does it matter what he's paid? It's coming from the pockets of Jim Pohlad.

[prouster]

I understand. I'm just curious why you, and other posters here, are *glad* they don't pay that much for a reliever? Why does it matter what he's paid? It's coming from the pockets of Jim Pohlad.

Because I think they’ll invest it elsewhere.

[Vanimal46]

Because I think they’ll invest it elsewhere.

Where and when? Extension is money spent in the future with a modest bump in pay today. If this team is truly run like a business, they should operate as such and focus on capitalizing profits (by winning more games and acquire better players) today.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I understand. I'm just curious why you, and other posters here, are *glad* they don't pay that much for a reliever? Why does it matter what he's paid? It's coming from the pockets of Jim Pohlad.

I understand your take. I don't simply want to win the "most WAR per $" prize either. But something about big money for relievers scares me more than other positions.

 

That said, 3/43 isn't *that* big (the Twins gave Nathan an effective 3/42 extension back in 2008), and the current season might warrant some special action. Hopefully it's yet to come.

[Vanimal46]

I understand your take. I don't simply want to win the "most WAR per $" prize either. But something about big money for relievers scares me more than other positions.

 

That said, 3/43 isn't *that* big (the Twins gave Nathan an effective 3/42 extension back in 2008), and the current season might warrant some special action. Hopefully it's yet to come.

Ironically, the Joe Nathan extension was for his age 34-36 seasons. I'm sure there were underlying stats back in the day we could cherry pick to show he could be a bad investment too.

[Puckett34]

 

Rosenthal said that the super tight Rays were the runner up, offering 39 mill over 3 years.  I guess i am disappointed that the Twins weren't at least the runner up.  

Personally, I don't really care that the Twins didn't come in 2nd. Could've came in 2nd or 30th. They didn't get him. 

 

Pure speculation, I'm guessing the Twins offered more money per year, but fewer years. Kimbrel seemed to want more years with a lower AAV. Which is fine.

 

Was it wise to pass on Kimbrel's demands? We shall see. 

 

Or maybe he just didn't want to sign in Minnesota.

[Vanimal46]

Not sure why Kimbrel wouldn't want to join a team with the 2nd best win percentage in baseball... Especially if they made a competitive offer. Makes me think the offer wasn't competitive.

[h2oface]

I am always amazed how some people attach to a billionaires money, and don't want them to spend it. Not all owners don't have fun with their money. Mark Cuban is an example of one that spends to win, for the fun and passion. The baseball team should be a billionaire's hobby. It shouldn't matter how much the "business" might lose at a time that a window is open to win it all. That is the whole point. If it isn't, they should just sell the team to someone that has the passion needed to be a winner instead of just another one of their businesses. Especially when you cajoled taxpayers to pay for the ballpark (mostly). It is just one of his businesses, and it would be like most of us spending a thousand at the same chance.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Ironically, the Joe Nathan extension was for his age 34-36 seasons. I'm sure there were underlying stats back in the day we could cherry pick to show he could be a bad investment too.

I felt that it was a bad investment! Especially on our Metrodome payroll, when we still had control of Nathan for another year. And we just dealt Johan, which limited our ability to compete in 2008 anyway.

 

At least Kimbrel would be adding a player, not just extending him.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Not sure why Kimbrel wouldn't want to join a team with the 2nd best win percentage in baseball... Especially if they made a competitive offer. Makes me think the offer wasn't competitive.

There's some cachet in going to the Cubs (and the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.). Even with our current record, I'm sure the Twins don't have that yet (hopefully soon!). The Cubs aren't chopped liver either -- 2nd best record in the NL.

 

So I could see us having to top the 3/43 offer.

[Puckett34]

 

Not sure why Kimbrel wouldn't want to join a team with the 2nd best win percentage in baseball... Especially if they made a competitive offer. Makes me think the offer wasn't competitive.

Feel the same way about joining the 2nd/3rd best win percentage in baseball. But maybe Kimbrel wanted a more defined role. Maybe he prefers Italian Hot Beef to Jucy Lucy's.

 

 

[prouster]

I felt that it was a bad investment! Especially on our Metrodome payroll, when we still had control of Nathan for another year. And we just dealt Johan, which limited our ability to compete in 2008 anyway.

Right. That contract didn’t exactly end well, either. From the team’s perspective, I don’t think relievers pitch enough to justify investing a bunch of money in a single arm.

[prouster]

Where and when? Extension is money spent in the future with a modest bump in pay today. If this team is truly run like a business, they should operate as such and focus on capitalizing profits (by winning more games and acquire better players) today.

I don’t know where specifically. They can take on salary via trade. They can extend guys on the team.

 

As far as the when, I assume they’ll add before the trade deadline. So...soon. Teams haven’t historically made a lot of trades in June, though, so “today” is more realistically probably after the All Star break.

[yarnivek1972]

Right. That contract didn’t exactly end well, either. From the team’s perspective, I don’t think relievers pitch enough to justify investing a bunch of money in a single arm.

Then you better be able to develop them and have them in your system. How’s that working out?

 

 

On a related note, after a mid May hiccup, Jake Reed appears to be back on track. Over his last 5 appearances, 10 1/3 IP, 9 H, 1 ER, 3 BB, 9 K. Positives are that he misses bats and most of his outings are 30 plus pitch outings. Negatives are so-so command and a very pronounced lefty-righty split this year (like 600 vs 900 OPS). It was not there last year in a considerably larger sample, so it could be flukish. I still believe that at some point the Twins have to find out whether or not Reed can get MLB hitters out. That point SHOULD have been last September. Now, I’d say he should get the next call.

[Otto von Ballpark]

On a related note, after a mid May hiccup, Jake Reed appears to be back on track. Over his last 5 appearances, 10 1/3 IP, 9 H, 1 ER, 3 BB, 9 K. Positives are that he misses bats

25.2% K rate isn't missing that many bats these days. League K rate is 22.6%, and I imagine it is higher among only relievers.

[Mr. Brooks]

I understand. I'm just curious why you, and other posters here, are *glad* they don't pay that much for a reliever? Why does it matter what he's paid? It's coming from the pockets of Jim Pohlad.

Because some of us have accepted the fact the FO operates under a budget, and always will.

Money spent on Kimbrel doesn't ONLY come out of Jim Pohlad's pocket, it also comes out of the payroll budget for each season that he's signed for.

For a mid-budget team, $16 million is a lot of money to allocate to one relief pitcher.

 

I'm not saying that means you automatically pass on it. But, the reality is that the FO does have to weigh the impact that salary has on future payrolls. I imagine the FO has a rough outline of short, medium, and long term payroll spreadsheets, and they just decided that this would be too likely to negatively impact those down the road.

 

You'd think the second best record in baseball would at least buy this FO the benefit of the doubt until the trade deadline comes to see how they address this bullpen.

I can't imagine they won't address it at some point. And if they don't, they'll rightfully lose that benefit of the doubt then.

[Mike Sixel]

You remember how Houston got Pressley (and Verlander, and Cole, and . . .) right?

They have up great prospects..... Still waiting for this team to ever do that.

[prouster]

They have up great prospects..... Still waiting for this team to ever do that.

I’m guessing there will be a at least a move or two before the deadline. We’ll see I guess.

[Mike Sixel]

I’m guessing there will be a at least a move or two before the deadline. We’ll see I guess.

If they are still this good at the deadline, I don't want moves. I want big moves.

 

The previous front office was into sustainable winning, and didn't take advantage of their opportunities, because giving up prospects was giving up the future. They didn't win anything. I hope this FO is different, and when the opportunity to strike is there, they do.

[bird]

 

They have up great prospects..... Still waiting for this team to do that much more often.

 

 

FIFY. "Ever" is a long time. Wilson Ramos was a great prospect. His absence led to a string of poor decisions and was hugely damaging.

 

But your point is certainly meritorious.

 

It's a lot easier to improve a team when you have a surplus of valuable players, a surplus of valuable prospects, and uncommitted financial resources. We could start to say they had all three with conviction at the end of last season. 

 

They spent money in free agency, just not enough for some people. They added by subtraction in ways they don't get nearly enough credit for (cough cough Dozier cough cough Mauer cough cough Ervin Santana, cough cough etc. etc.).  They added prospect value. Like everyone else, they'll make mistakes (cough cough Pressly).

 

I don't have a beef with them passing on Keuchel OR even Kimbrel as much as I hoped it was in the cards.

 

If they do nothing here to add one good BP arm, I'll be more disappointed in them than I was with their decision to add no one more identifiably good than Blake Parker, that's for sure. Until then...

[prouster]

If they are still this good at the deadline, I don't want moves. I want big moves.

 

The previous front office was into sustainable winning, and didn't take advantage of their opportunities, because giving up prospects was giving up the future. They didn't win anything. I hope this FO is different, and when the opportunity to strike is there, they do.

I agree with your general premise. They’ll likely need to give up Lewis or Kirilloff if they want a top line starter. Personally, I wouldn’t do that unless the guy the got had multiple years of control. So, basically Thor.

 

I don’t think they’d have to give up major prospects for a real bullpen upgrade. Vazquez on Pittsburgh, Greg Holland, Will Smith, could be difference makers that wouldn’t cost a top prospect. A few guys in Oakland’s pen would be good additions depending on how the standings play out.

 

My overall feeling is that they should never have been (and pretty clearly never were) Kimbrel or bust.

[IndianaTwin]

 

From July 27th (blown save vs Twins) to the end of the season:

 

3-0, 10 SV, 19.1 IP, 4.66 ERA

 

I'm not sure that's worth what he got considering his rough postseason too.

 

Also, two of the wins were of the blown-save-but-bailed-out-by-his-team variety.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

I agree with your general premise. They’ll likely need to give up Lewis or Kirilloff if they want a top line starter. Personally, I wouldn’t do that unless the guy the got had multiple years of control. So, basically Thor.

 

I don’t think they’d have to give up major prospects for a real bullpen upgrade. Vazquez on Pittsburgh, Greg Holland, Will Smith, could be difference makers that wouldn’t cost a top prospect. A few guys in Oakland’s pen would be good additions depending on how the standings play out.

 

My overall feeling is that they should never have been (and pretty clearly never were) Kimbrel or bust.

It wasn't kimbrel or bust, but every time they pass on a player, it isn't that player or bust. It's the pattern that might be an issue.

 

That seems to be the part some people miss. When some of us worry about moves it isn't that one move, it is the pattern. Like Vikings passing on OL over and over early in the draft. Then thinking they can find good ones late.

 

Like the AAA players some here want to rely on rather than acquiring RPs from outside. That hasn't worked here all that well, but what the back end of bullpens do is rarely brought up when saying how bad FA RPs are. How are the next two or three guys in AAA compared to them?

[darin617]

We lost out again. The Braves signed him.