kab21

The Pirates goal in trading Cole, McCutchen or Rivero will mostly be to rebuild with young prospects. They might want to save money but that will not be the focus of any trades that they make. If you were a fan of the Pirates then you would never be proposing anything like this during a rebuild moment. The Dodgers for example are most definitely not going to trade a young and good pitcher (Wood) for Dozier. Perhaps they are desperate enough to trade Urias but he was firmly on the untouchable list last year. The Mets or DBacks are theoretically plausible but they will likely want something else for good, young and established starting pitching. These teams know exactly why you want to trade him. It isn't a secret that he is a FA in a year.

That kind of trade is incredibly rare. Pittsburgh hangs up the phone if you build a package (or even include) around either of them. They might trade Cole, Rivero or McCutchen but only to get younger and plunder another team's farm system. They won't be interested in Dozier or Santana for the same reason that you insist that the Twins should trade them. Whenever anyone proposes a trade they need to ask themselves if they would do this if they were a fan of the other team. People can include as many marginal prospects (Stewart, Jorge, etc...) or as many sort of valuable MLB'ers (an ode to Duensing) as they want but these types have very little value in major trades.

Both work. But if trading Santana brings back a prospect that is needed for Cole and saves half of the yearly salary of Darvish then I make that trade. If trading Dozier brings back a top 25 pitching prospect (plus more prospects) that is a year or less away then that is a good trade. Both of these specific examples address the elephant in the room (starting pitching). This would be a very aggressive offseason with non-traditional FO thinking. But I don't think any team will come close to my asking price for them.

Trading them for really good (pitching) prospects? Show me the full offseason and it could be an easy sell. For example trade both of them and spend the money on Darvish, trade several prospects for Cole, sign Escobar to a small extension and bring in a very good relief arm (or two) and I think most would be on board.

Trading away good veterans for relatively small value doesn't make the team better next year no matter how much you dislike the 5 WAR Dozier. I have no problem trading either of them for a top trade package. Maybe a top 25 and a top 100 prospect for Dozier or 2 borderline top 100 prospects for Ervin but I doubt that anyone offers that for either of them.

Catch 22 You won't know that the Twins are a major WS contender until they have some starting pitching. This team is going nowhere significant until the acquire some starting pitching.

Completely unrelated to this thread but I am going to set a 2 year goal to see a Nippon Ham Fighters game in Japan. I want to slowly catch a game in each of the NPB stadiums on trips to Japan and now I have a connection with Tonkin. Always liked him but he couldn't really produce. Good luck to him.

The biggest thing is the variability in football (and also baseball to a degree). One good but not great team can go on a run and win the championship but you need to truly be a top 2-3 team to win in the NBA. For the Wolves it really comes down to what Towns and Wiggins develop into and whether or not Butler resigns. They have the core talent if some defense develops but right now it is difficult to see them being anything better than the Clippers. As a fan I will be very happy with a run of near greatness (or very goodness) like the Clippers had.

I was about to congratulate the Wolves on a big bounce back win but they almost blew a 26 pt lead in the 4th quarter and the bench went 3/20 from the field. It is a win but nothing I can get excited about.

This was a very entertaining thread to read all the way from the beginning.

The point is that it is EXTREMELY rare that backup catchers get injured during the 1-2 innings that they play. Carrying a 3rd catcher for that rare circumstance that might not happen all season hurts the flexibility of a bench regardless if it is NL or AL. Of course, a 3rd catcher is still (very slightly) more valuable than Diaz because I don't expect him to hit much better in the majors than Turner did last year. Quoting managers regarding the importance of a 3rd catcher is also meaningless. They do many things that we disagree with. For example - sacrifice bunts. 3rd catchers is no different.

This makes no sense. Are you saying that they are pinch hitting for their catcher twice in one game? Pinch hit for a catcher and then replace him with your backup catcher. The 3rd catcher remains unused on the bench with only a utility infielder. Carrying 3 catchers is an awful idea unless you are DH'ing one of them often.

Did this rule change? It is used to carry over until the next season. If that is the case then he probably won't be selected because he didn't have TJ until May last season.

Signing Santana with the uncertainty around Sano just doesn't work. If Sano has to be the DH (1/2 of the games) then the Twins would have spent a lot of money and created a roster/playing time issue. I like the idea of signing Santana but don't think it works for the Twins. Todd Frazier on the other hand plays 3B and is very good defensively. If I added an offensive player then it would be someone with some positional versatility.

But carrying a 3rd catcher for most of the season kills any of the positional flexibility that you speak of. But they can stash him on the DL for 2018 and then let him rehab over the winter before bringing him up to the majors in 2019. He doesn't have to be on the bench in 2018 and he will likely be ready again in 2019. But does a team (the Twins or another team) use up an offseason 40 man roster spot for two offseasons? This is why I don't disagree with the Twins decision to leave him unprotected. I wouldn't be surprised if another team did this.

I am not terribly concerned about any of the guys left off and am intrigued that the FO left 4 open spots for them to work with. I think Burdi will probably be selected by another org and stashed on the DL. Reed, Bard or even Stewart might as well since they could be stashed as the long man in the bullpen. But that doesn't mean the Twins were wrong to leave them off the 40 man. If they sneak through then the Twins have more flexibility with the roster next season. I also think the Twins chose the correct route to gamble with Diaz. I find it hard to believe that a team could keep him rostered all year with 12-13 man pitching staffs. Slegers staying on the 40 man is fine and I like Seth's argument but he isn't as necessary with Gonsalves, Romero, Littel (maybe AA) and Jorge all likely in AAA. But don't just toss away a solid arm until there is a true roster crunch.

The FO added 2 promising arms (3 added and 1 subtracted) to a system that desperately needed pitching. They also showed a willingness to be creative and buy prospects. I have no problem with a 49-53 team trading two alright impending FA's even if they had just acquired one of them the week before or if they did end up making the playoffs as a wild card. The part that gives me pause is the relative lack of action or creativity in the offseason. Castro was a very good move and Gimenez proved to be a nice under the radar addition but they largely stood pat with an awful pitching staff. I am hoping to see more of the trade deadline (outside the box) strategy this offseason.

This is why I continue to think of him as a 1B/DH. Just move him and keep him and his bat in the lineup.

This is not even remotely close to being true. If you look at ALL of Nishioka's stats then you would see that he was a very good Japanese player that would project as a borderline starter or bench player. And that is what the Twins paid for him. If he was the star that you say he was then they wouldn't have signed him so cheap. Otani is an absolute star in the Japanese league. He is possibly the best pitcher that has come to the US. Better than or equal to Darvish, Tanaka or Matsuzaka. Whoever signs him is getting an absolute steal.

I stayed out of that thread but Verlander is not a player of that caliber now. And only has 2/3 guaranteed seasons left on his contract. Players of this actual caliber don't become available often although Bryce Harper and Manny Machado are possibly hitting the open market soon. Even then chances to acquire these level of players are difficult to find.

Not really. Giancarlo wouldn't be any different than Joe Mauer and the previous FO did that. You make these kind of commitments for no doubt elite/near elite players. Giancarlo is one that I add and take the long term risk on. The early production very, very likely makes the contract worth it. And it gives the Twins 3 potential 4-6 WAR offensive players at the same time.

I am less convinced about the Wolves. They are not close to the best team right now and I don't really believe their record. One issue is that they really haven't beaten any really good teams aside from a Spurs team w/o Kawhi (and Parker). The Thunder are a mess. The big thing though will be whether or not Butler resigns in 2 years. I think they might end up being capped out with 2 max players and guys like Teague and Dieng still around. At that point they become the next version of the Blake/Paul Clippers that were always good/great but never finalists. The Vikings might be the safe choice but I am going to say the Twins. I think Falvey/Levine really surprise us this winter with a trade/signing or two that really strengthens the pitching staff. And there might be several really good baseball teams right now but the playoffs are less predictable than the NBA where more skilled teams generally win. In baseball you only need to reach a certain level (the Twins are not there yet) and then get a few lucky breaks.

I am not failing to take into account that the later years will be overpriced. You are completely ignoring the surplus value early in the contract. I will trust the team at fangraphs and their analysis of 1 WAR = 8M. The significant factor that you left out is the excess value that players at the MLB minimum or in arbitration produce. The key to using WAR effectively in building a team is to find a few well above average players on the same team because 1-2+ WAR players can be acquired rather cheaply (i.e. prospects or flawed veterans). In addition to that, the goal in building a baseball team isn't to win the WAR/$ spent equation. It is to spend on the correct players such that you maximize your wins. Choosing to spend on elite players that have many extremely above average seasons makes a lot more sense than spending moderately big chunks on average players (i.e. Alex Cobb or Zack Cozart). The Twins are actually in a great position to add a high priced player to the payroll right now since Mauer's contract ends next season and the Twins have many players earning the MLB min or arb contracts. The goal here is to win a World Series. It isn't about worrying about the 2025 team payroll.

No, I understand perfectly. You will make a case against signing or trading for any free agent (almost always 30+) or trading for any veteran player. The key here is to get a player on a long contract that includes his age 28-32 seasons (your selection of players back this up) since that will likely give you substantial excess value. Even if you consider Stanton only to be a 5+ WAR/yr player then he is worth 40+M/yr. I think he definitely has 3-4 seasons of 5+ WAR left and that is why I choose this deal. I find it convenient that you left out Miguel Cabrera's 2008 contract. Mauer's 2009 and ARod's 2008 contract were included. For some reason you consider Ryan Howard and Ellsbury comparable which they are not even remotely close to. Howard average 1.3WAR for the two seasons before signing his ridiculous contract. Ellsbury's value was based on his defensive. I wouldn't even consider using Hamilton as an argument against signing any kind of FA due to his past. Let's throw out those 3 comparisons out and you are left with Tex - the early part of his contract has justified the later part even if he sucks now Mauer - he was great until he suffered a concussion and even then his contract has not prevented the Twins from signing anyone or retaining anyone. It is not the reason that the Twins were bad for so long. Pujols - He signed his contract at age 32. Your data certainly suggests that this is a bad idea. Getting Stanton at age 28 to enjoy the 4 peak years before Pujols signed his contract is a great idea. Signing Stanton after he could opt out is a poor idea. Cabrera - fantastic deal (2008) despite many people at the time expecting it to be awful long term. Stanton isn't quite MCab but this is the upside of the deal. MCab's new contract = LOL ARod - fantastic deal Analyzing this the exact same way as you but getting rid of players that either sucked (Howard), had disproportionate defensive WAR (Ellsbury) or were recovering drug addicts (Hamilton) shows that this could be a huge win for the team that acquires him. I am not even sure that I would include a catcher as a comparable due to the wear and tear and increased chance of an injury. FWIW - I don't even regret Mauer's deal. It hasn't prevented the Twins from signing or retaining players. The absolutely most important part of making this deal is finding players that will be at or near their peak for the time that the Twins have their young core under guaranteed team control. And increasing payroll substantially to add pitching. It certainly doesn't make any sense to add Stanton if you are rolling out last year's staff. If a team has a chance to acquire an elite player that is 28 yrs old then they have to jump at that chance because they aren't available often.

And the comparison still fails since he is 28 now and 3-5 years younger than all but 2 players on your list. And substantially better than many of them. Stanton is an elite player in his prime and you are adding him to a team that is ready to go. If you have a chance to add a 5-6+ WAR player then you do it. There is no guarantee that the Twins can sign any of their young stars to long extensions so the window is the next 4-5 years which Stanton should remain at a minimum at an above average level. Adding him does require ownership to increase payroll substantially in order to address the pitching though. This type of move can't happen without the other move. And Kepler is a nice player and all but he put up a 1.2 WAR at age 24 with signs of a LHH problem. Finding players at his level are possible. Romero has upside but he also has Alex Meyer downside. Prospects fail. Even top 100 ones.