Should the Twins Sign Jose Miranda to a Long-Term Extension?

I think I would wait a year (or two?) to see if any injury issues come up, or is he pretty durable.  We have seen too many times our Buxton's, Kirilloff's, and many more young players come up and give us hope, only to go down time after time with injuries.  We have time to see if Miranda is going to be alright long term, and if he is, make him an offer that is good for both sides and will keep him around a very long time.

Absolutely the Twins should sign to a longer term contract and keep this guy. Even with some of our potential budding stars, Kiriloff, Larnach, Garlick, and others, this is the guy along with Arraez the Twins cannot let go. Injuries, either frequent, lingering or various seem to plague a few of our other potential stars. Miranda seems pretty durable.

Hopefully we'll keep this guy and Lewis 

Twins Geezer...out!

If he will sign for 50 million or less and buy out a arbitration season it sounds like a good deal. There also isn’t anything wrong with going through his sophomore season especially because I don’t think he will count as a super 2 because he came up late this season. 
 

Harris isn’t a good comparison because he is 21 3 yrs younger, a top 50 prospect and plays a premium defensive position. 

I’d be more excited about Miranda if we saw him more at 3B and knew he would be the starter there for the next decade. 1B are easy to find and I believe Arraez will be there moving forward.

I would be much more interested in signing Arraez to an extension this off-season.  That bat is the real deal and keeping him at 1B DH and the occasional fill in at 2B has kept the knees healthy.   Defensively I have really liked him at 1B he has learn the position well on the fly and has nice soft hands.  I know he isn’t the traditional 1B with massive power but still can’t deny how good the bat and his eye at the plate is.

I think the Twins should try to extend him.  He does not provide much defensive value but the bat is just sooo good and he doesn't K that much so I think he stays this good or better at the plate.  Always risky with early big contracts and potential injury\performance regression to the player but if the player does work out the savings is substantial as well.  For Miranda I think it is a risk worth taking.

No problem waiting another year to sign Miranda, but it should be done...soon.

It is more important this winter to sign/extend Arraez, Gray, and Mahle.  Then get Miranda done next winter while also signing Duran.

I am not a fan of signing guys that are rookies to long term deals.  Maybe after year 2 I would be open to it.  Not saying I expect a huge drop off, but this has burned some teams, and many times rookies have big seasons then league adjusts, or player tries to adjust and regresses.  Not saying they are same player, but one example is Badoo for Detroit.  Many fans here hated he was left in rule 5 to go to Tigers, and he had up and down rookie year, but many thought he would be even better this year, but he has been not even playable at MLB level.

Now, Miranda has not regressed after his initial terrible start and short demotion.  Something clicked and he has been good for months, without much regression.  So hopefully he continues it for years, but I am not ready to just say he is a superstar for years to invest large amounts of money.  

Whats the rush?  He's under control for 5 more years right?  So let him play this well for another 2 years and then hopefully still want to buy out his arb years plus a couple more.  Too early to have this discussion.

Yes.

1 hour ago, farmerguychris said:

Whats the rush?  He's under control for 5 more years right?  So let him play this well for another 2 years and then hopefully still want to buy out his arb years plus a couple more.  Too early to have this discussion.

Technically there is no rush but the longer you leave it and if the player does perform then you will have to pay much, much more to buyout the later years.  After two to three years most players just wait it out for FA unless the team really pony's up.  It is a risk for both sides to do it early but if you think you have a superstar or even above average player on your hands and want to keep them though their complete prime which is around age 33 for me then best to strike early if you want a deal.  The downside is if the player gets injured or regresses then the value you might have received goes down.  It is a gamble not to be taken lightly but given Miranda has always had good contact skills and has improved his plate discipline over time he seems like a good bet to only get better IMO and thus cost more money down the road.

Wait a year. He's under team control to age 30 already.

I'm glad they didn't give Danny Santana a long-term deal in 2014. Miranda isn't even a starting position player at the moment.

I am all for signing him to a long term deal but I would make it incentive heavy. In fact, the only long term deal I would make with any player would have incentives tied to it. Too many players get a big contract and then regress in performance. Sano is the biggest contract mistake made lately that cost $9.25M this year and a buyout of another $2.75M just so they don't have to pay him $14M next year. 

I'd say watch him the rest of the season, and next season if he continues to excel even with league adjustments then lock him down! May cost a bit more but should be worth it too! He's a really fun player to watch along with Arraez and shows a lot of promise for the Twins future!

I say yes but after next year.  The FO needs to find that sweet spot for these signings.  For example, we waited too long with Berrios (some might say we were lucky but lots of time left on his contract) and sometimes we may sign them too early like with Dobnak (although much less painful financially).  Polanco and Kepler contracts were at done the exact right time.

In general, I think signing players who prove their worth very early in their career are good candidates for this approach and are win-win deals for player and team.  This strategy is especially true in the Twins case since they are adverse to long-term / high AAV contracts.

I would for sure don't see any reason not to.

Not to get off topic but how the heck does Atlanta continue to turn out young stud prospects? (Age debuted)

Harris (21), Grisson (21), Contreras (22), Austin Riley(22), Dansby Swanson(22), Acuna Jr (20), Ozzie Albies (20), Fried (23), Strider (22), Kyle Wright(22)

I would start discussions. I would also try and long-term Duran and Arraez while we are at it.

21 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

I would for sure don't see any reason not to.

Not to get off topic but how the heck does Atlanta continue to turn out young stud prospects? (Age debuted)

Harris (21), Grisson (21), Contreras (22), Austin Riley(22), Dansby Swanson(22), Acuna Jr (20), Ozzie Albies (20), Fried (23), Strider (22), Kyle Wright(22)

Different team, different people, different system: some Minnesota should do is change some thing in their system.

52 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

I would for sure don't see any reason not to.

Not to get off topic but how the heck does Atlanta continue to turn out young stud prospects? (Age debuted)

Harris (21), Grisson (21), Contreras (22), Austin Riley(22), Dansby Swanson(22), Acuna Jr (20), Ozzie Albies (20), Fried (23), Strider (22), Kyle Wright(22)

To be fair, they were gifted Swanson.  It's not their fault the D-Backs made a terrible trade.

The Twins should spend most of their budget in 2023 on new stars, solidify that group. After 2023 get into extension talks, as you have a lot of contracts off your books and a lot of cheap rookies (hopefully) coming in and being capable to cover their role

58 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Not to get off topic but how the heck does Atlanta continue to turn out young stud prospects? (Age debuted)

Harris (21), Grisson (21), Contreras (22), Austin Riley(22), Dansby Swanson(22), Acuna Jr (20), Ozzie Albies (20), Fried (23), Strider (22), Kyle Wright(22)

Anyone know - are they drafting high schoolers who are taking 3-4 years to get through the minors or are they drafting college players who spend very little time in the minors?

5 minutes ago, FlyingFinn said:

Anyone know - are they drafting high schoolers who are taking 3-4 years to get through the minors or are they drafting college players who spend very little time in the minors?

To be fair to the Twins they also have had younger guys come up Buxton, Arraez, Polanco, Kepler, Sano, Berrios. It just seems like Atlanta guys have shined brighter.

Albies and Acuna were young international signings, Grissom was a 11 round pick and Harris a 3rd rounder in 2019  both high school picks and completely amazing they were not affected by the Covid year like all the Twins prospects.

Back on topic, It seems like a no-brainier to sign these young guys early for how many years were Kepler and Polanco for example considered great trading chips compared to the guys that didn't sign these contracts. Sure you might miss on a guy or two but the upside is so much higher that it seems like a gamble worth taking.

37 minutes ago, MTV said:

The Twins should spend most of their budget in 2023 on new stars, solidify that group. After 2023 get into extension talks, as you have a lot of contracts off your books and a lot of cheap rookies (hopefully) coming in and being capable to cover their role

 Using what crystal ball?

Signing Miranda now is gazing into a crystal ball, at best.

3 hours ago, Dman said:

Technically there is no rush but the longer you leave it and if the player does perform then you will have to pay much, much more to buyout the later years.  After two to three years most players just wait it out for FA unless the team really pony's up.  It is a risk for both sides to do it early but if you think you have a superstar or even above average player on your hands and want to keep them though their complete prime which is around age 33 for me then best to strike early if you want a deal.  The downside is if the player gets injured or regresses then the value you might have received goes down.  It is a gamble not to be taken lightly but given Miranda has always had good contact skills and has improved his plate discipline over time he seems like a good bet to only get better IMO and thus cost more money down the road.

A very interesting observation by #33 Justin during the Twin’s Wednesday game broadcast points to the similarity of the swings of Miranda and Albert Pujols, as well as Miranda’s ability to use the whole field by letting the pitch get deep before unloading.  Also witness the similar body shape and early defensive metrics between the two of them at this very early stage of his career.

IMO, extend him now!

There is zero reason, ever, to sign a long-term deal with a player in their pre-arbitration years.

They're already locked in for cheap. The only pros are that you might save some money if they don't regress or get injured., and that you build some goodwill with the player.

The billionaire owners can afford spending a little more on a proven commodity and there are other ways to keep players happy. Plus, I can only assume many players who lock into these deals regret them years later when they see their market value rise. So it's no guarantee of happiness (if there is such a thing, haha). One could argue that these deals might increase strife. It's pretty common for a player to be upset when a team changes course, rebuilds, hires a new front office, etc, and then they demand a trade or drag others down with them.

6 hours ago, Mark G said:

I think I would wait a year (or two?) to see if any injury issues come up, or is he pretty durable.  We have seen too many times our Buxton's, Kirilloff's, and many more young players come up and give us hope, only to go down time after time with injuries.  We have time to see if Miranda is going to be alright long term, and if he is, make him an offer that is good for both sides and will keep him around a very long time.

It's usually not a wait and see approach.  If he puts up 2 more healthy season's of good to very good ball....he's not signing a team friendly offer.  

18 minutes ago, CarpetGuy said:

 

A very interesting observation by #33 Justin during the Twin’s Wednesday game broadcast points to the similarity of the swings of Miranda and Albert Pujols, as well as Miranda’s ability to use the whole field by letting the pitch get deep before unloading.  Also witness the similar body shape and early defensive metrics between the two of them at this very early stage of his career.

IMO, extend him now!

Compare Pujols defensive numbers at age 24 to Miranda's, BIG difference.

10 minutes ago, CarpetGuy said:

 

A very interesting observation by #33 Justin during the Twin’s Wednesday game broadcast points to the similarity of the swings of Miranda and Albert Pujols, as well as Miranda’s ability to use the whole field by letting the pitch get deep before unloading.  Also witness the similar body shape and early defensive metrics between the two of them at this very early stage of his career.

IMO, extend him now!

If you want to use even HOF player Pujols, how long do you want to extend Miranda?  He is 24 now, we have him until he is 30 without buying FA years.  So we offer say 100 over 10, which if he is betting on himself he would turn down in a heart beat because that would keep him until 34 and would never get a major contract after that.  The fact he is 24 now makes it hard to project what he would be willing to take and what his arb years would be.  I am guessing he will not want to buy out too much FA years without a big overpay on his early years. 

The reason I say this is Albert after age 30 started to drop in production.  He was still hitting HR at a reasonable rate, but his defense fell, and his OPS dropped at 31, then more 32, then more 33, where it stayed stable around .780 for a few years, then low .700 or below where he was getting way overpaid.  Now, if you think he will have the production of his age 25 to 35, and you think he would accept 10 year 100 mil, you would take that in a heartbeat.  However, it is big gamble for both, because if he does put up Albert numbers, then he would be very underpaid, but if he falls flat then we are paying a lot for a poor player.  

I doubt either side reaches that many years of FA.  I think only reason either side does deal is to know cost control, but I still feel we are ahead of us on a rookie that was never considered a top prospect until his breakout last year. 

3 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

The FO needs to find that sweet spot for these signings.

I think they typically have found the sweet spot - Brian Dozier (2 seasons), Jorge Polanco (2 seasons) and Max Kepler (2 seasons) are all good examples.

6 hours ago, High heat said:

I would be much more interested in signing Arraez to an extension this off-season. 

4 years with a club option like Dozier would be fair to both sides.

Tyler Mahle is the other big name they should look at extending this offseason.

I'm under the assumption that he doesn't hit free agency till age 30. The Twins have his 20s under contract. What exactly would be the added benefit of paying a premium price for his next 5 years? If he plays at an All-Star level for these years, I'm fine with him being expensive in arbitration. You usually do these extensions for someone on pace to hit free agency at age 26-28, padding the contract with extra team option years till the player turns 30-32.