Does that mean Denard Span's deal was a mistake?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave
Exactly. There is a reason why teams aren't going around giving Juan Pierre multi year deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwak
Printable View
Does that mean Denard Span's deal was a mistake?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDaveExactly. There is a reason why teams aren't going around giving Juan Pierre multi year deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwak
Except that Michael Bourn, is being pursued by multiple teams offering monster numbers. Here is clearly an exception to your assertion He's obviously a better player than Pierre, but here is the combined for WAR for both:Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDaveExactly. There is a reason why teams aren't going around giving Juan Pierre multi year deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwak
Juan Pierre WAR- 5 seasons, ages 26-30- 16.1
Michael Bourn WAR- 5 seasons, ages 26-30- 20.3
Pierre career batting: .336/.363/.700
Bourn career batting: .344/.363/.707
Thus, a good percentage of the difference in WAR is clearly defensive, an average of .84 WAR/yr during their prime years and yet, Bourn is about to break the bank.
[QUOTE=Brock Beauchamp;66351]No, I'm saying that they use a surplus to their advantage by trading it off, they don't sit on that surplus and wait for it to lose value.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokinI assume you assume they would always, without fail, strictly take the sabremetric argument to determine player value, and I concur it has merit, especially in a small market team with little leeway for making a personnel error. There is also the fans-in-the-seats and more Neilsen rating points for FSN argument, too. Plus you have an an extremely athletic guy at 23 who clearly has a potential for a significantly higher ceiling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp
As for Revere, I keep hearing "expected improvement", "significantly higher ceiling", etc. etc. What are all of you basing this on? The fact that he hasn't posted an OPS higher than .741 since low A? That he hasn't been a plus hitter since Beloit? Brian freakin' Dozier dominated AA for almost an entire season. Revere couldn't even do that. Beyond trying to snatch hope and dreams from the skies, what is the basis for this faith in Revere? Because his on-field performance has said very different things for 4+ years now. Revere may be an acceptable centerfielder. I'm not saying there's no hope for him as a player. My argument is that there is no evidence to support that he will be a plus player. He has no power. He has no patience at the plate. He hasn't been a good hitter at any level since 2009. Every skill he has as a baseball player is based around the fact that he can run really, really fast.
And baseball is historically unkind to those types of players. This isn't sabermetrics. This is observation through 100+ years of the sport. Guys who have one tool tend to fall on their faces, especially if that power is speed.
As for Bourn, his upcoming contract is irrelevant. We should be laughing at whoever Boras hoses into paying that guy big money going into his 30s, just as many of us laughed at Seattle when they did the same for Figgins. How'd that work out for the Mariners? What makes anyone think Bourn is going to hold up as he ages? He's the exact kind of player that doesn't hold up as he hits his 30s. Just because some teams are willing to throw bad money around doesn't mean the Twins should follow suit, particularly when all the cards are in their favor (ie. they have five more years of control of Revere).
This is Baseball 101 and pure common sense, folks.[/QUOTE]
Your assertion then, is that only you have a monopoly on the "common sense trait" and that at least a half a dozen GMs who actually pull the trigger on multi-million deals are cluelessly in over-their-heads? Which one of those jobs have you been interviewed for yet? Newsflash---the top players always get overpaid, especially in the out years--- and I believe that was the point in how this thread started, this isn't a break the bank, "outyears" deal, yet the guys on your side are lining up to club the baby seal.
You've unfairly "Chonesed" poor Ben Revere just as he turns 24 at the start of his career, not 34 at the end of his career, like Figgins. Geez, this topic didn't start out talking about a Michael Bourn contract for Revere, this is about $15-$17M as a 3-year extension bridge to age 30 when the physical breakdowns usually start, the Twins would be mortgaging or risking very little in a deal like this. And if, as you assert, MLB is apparently replete with potential GM "hosees", a deal to "palm Revere off" on one of the many suckers, anywhere along the way, will be a pretty simple task, the Mariners aren't going anywhere.
The skillset matters and Revere's is a dangerous one to extend because it is limited. And while people continue to want to ask "Was Span's a mistake?" - I'd counter with this: If we think extending players at this stage in their career is a brilliant idea, how would a 3 year 15M extension to Danny Valencia after his first full season look now? How did Nick Blackburn's look?
Piling guaranteed money into a player at this stage is just not wise. Period.
The only way Revere would be extended is an extreme lowball offer. Revere wouldn't be stupid enough to take it, nor would the Twins offer it. The Twins have to be hoping that better OF are in the pipeline that would relegate Revere to 4th OF status.
Jesus, way to twist what I'm saying. I'm saying it's common sense to not extend Revere when the Twins have five more years of control. It's an unnecessary risk because players of his type generally don't age well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokin
How am I unfairly "Chonesing" Revere? He's under team control until his late 20s, just as Figgins was when the Angels let him go. This isn't only about Figgins. This is about Pierre, who dropped off a cliff and never posted a WAR higher than 1.8 after his age 28 season. This is about Vince Coleman, who was a 2 WAR player for several years before dropping off a cliff at age 28, never posting another WAR higher than 1.0. This is about Marquis-freakin-Grissom, who posted a ridiculous 25 WAR in his age 23-29 seasons. After that, he only cleared a 1.0 WAR in three more seasons and posted negative WARs in three more seasons. This is about a list as long as my arm of guys just like Ben Revere; guys who played well through their mid-20s and then hit a brick wall. You can wish and hope all you like but the players of Revere's ilk who play well for an extended period of time are few and far between while the guys who crash and burn after 2-3 seasons are nearly innumerable.
Revere's ceiling is low and his risk of failure is high. Every player that relies on speed and BABIP is walking a very fine line of baseball success. Why on Earth would you give a low ceiling, high risk guy an extended contract, especially when you control him for five more years no matter what happens? This is exactly like Nick Blackburn, Part 2. I cannot see why people around here can't see that. It's staring you all straight in the face.
Ben Revere and Denard Span are not even close to the same player. Revere puts the ball on the ground 10% more time while Denard puts it in the air nearly 15% more of the time. Denard has a multi-year track record of taking pitches, working counts, and getting on base. Revere hasn't done that since Beloit. Revere relied on over 30 infield hits to post his meager stats in 2012; Denard has never had more than 24 infield hits and that was during a season where he posted nearly a .400 OBP. Denard had 46 extra-base hits in 2012. Ben Revere had 19.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokinDoes that mean Denard Span's deal was a mistake?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDaveExactly. There is a reason why teams aren't going around giving Juan Pierre multi year deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwak
Would you like me to go on?
Also, even given the obviously differences between Revere and Span (it still alarms me that people don't see these differences--the Twins, in a smarter management world, should just give up and bat Mauer leadoff), the Span deal was a bit of a reach at the time and certainly could legitimately be called a bad risk. That he recovered from the concussion problems made that deal good (as does this trade . . . . pretty please).
Again, there is no reason to risk Blackburnesque dollar amounts (sound different than Spanesque, doesn't it?) in order to save, what, $3-5 million bucks over the controlled years? If Revere progresses and puts up some Bourn-like numbers, the pay he earns will be WORTH IT. If if doesn't perform that well (which is more likely) then they haven't committed to him long-term and will be saving $8-12 million or more. I would really hope that Revere isn't starting in 2014, because that will mean bad things for the Twins concerning the development of better players like Hicks, Arcia, and even Benson. Regardless, by 2015, I will be SHOCKED if Revere is starting for the Twins. The time to trade him will probably be pre-2014 deadline.
We should not extend Ben at this time. The Twins can afford to be patient on this one. It make sense to patient. We should not extend Ben at this time... Maybe next year... Maybe never...
Can we stop tearing the kid down now please. He doesn't deserve it.
Pretty much this. The guys that get approached with extensions this early on in their careers typically have already had success to justify it along with the skillset that says "this guy's going to be pretty good." You give extensions to guys like Evan Longoria this early in your career, not to guys like Ben Revere. Even if Revere replicated his rookie season, I'm not sure I'd extend him...Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLeviathanThat's fine, but until we see results like Bourn, we shouldn't pay Revere. I'm not saying he can't reach that level, there is just zero logic in paying him based on the chance that he might be that level of player. Let's at least see which Revere is the real one first: pre-August or August and on before we talk about guaranteeing millions of dollars to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverbrian
The guys who I'd be thinking about extending in the next year or two would be guys like Plouffe and Parmalee assuming they have very good seasons.
You aren't even comparing apples to apples here. Span had come off of two seasons posting an .800 OPS, strong on base skills, and above average defense at a key position. Revere has played for essentially 1 season and has done only the defensive side of things. There's legitimate question as to whether or not he will ever be able to top a .750 OPS and whether his on base skills will improve too. While Span didn't have a ton of minor league success either, Span did show improvement and then got the contract. If Revere can do that for two years, I guarantee you they will give him an extension to buy out his arb years, but if he does not, they should not.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokin
The Twins might want to wait an see if Ben Revere ever actually becomes any good before giving him a big guaranteed contract.
The Twins should extend Revere, and play him in RF, because he doubles the UZR of whoever ends up in CF. I bet he can even get Doumit to frame pitches better.
No. He has shown no ability to get on base at anything approaching an acceptable clip.
Ahahahahahahah, you ass. Well played.Quote:
Originally Posted by USAFChief
Your point may be moot, Revere apparently is already drawing some interest, if you could you get a C+/B- rated "A level minor league experience SP for Revere, this whole discussion is academic. Or, does "teams with pitchers on the block" mean a Vargas-type from Seattle?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobs
from MLB Traderumors:
"Although the Twins seem to be looking at plenty of pitching options in free agency, the team has also been more active in trade talks than expected, says Crasnick. Teams with pitchers on the block have approached the Twins about both Ben Revere and Josh Willingham."
Nobody is tearing him down. Pointing out that he has zero power, no arm and projects more as a 4th OF isn't tearing him down, it's just reality. Nobody will be more happy then me if he proves me wrong, I just don't see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverbrian
If a team offers any SP (or SP prospect) of value for Revere the Twins need to hop on it ASAP. They already have a superior option who is almost MLB ready in Aaron Hicks. I would prefer not to start Hicks clock this early this year, but if it brings back pitching, go for it!Quote:
Originally Posted by jokinYour point may be moot, Revere apparently is already drawing some interest, if you could you get a C+/B- rated "A level minor league experience SP for Revere, this whole discussion is academic. Or, does "teams with pitchers on the block" mean a Vargas-type from Seattle?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobs
from MLB Traderumors:
"Although the Twins seem to be looking at plenty of pitching options in free agency, the team has also been more active in trade talks than expected, says Crasnick. Teams with pitchers on the block have approached the Twins about both Ben Revere and Josh Willingham."
Well, Hicks is a former 1st rounder with 5 seasons in the minors...it's about time he gets a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokinYour point may be moot, Revere apparently is already drawing some interest, if you could you get a C+/B- rated "A level minor league experience SP for Revere, this whole discussion is academic. Or, does "teams with pitchers on the block" mean a Vargas-type from Seattle?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobs
from MLB Traderumors:
"Although the Twins seem to be looking at plenty of pitching options in free agency, the team has also been more active in trade talks than expected, says Crasnick. Teams with pitchers on the block have approached the Twins about both Ben Revere and Josh Willingham."
To be fair, he wasn't exactly making a case to be promoted quickly until last year really.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePuckWell, Hicks is a former 1st rounder with 5 seasons in the minors...it's about time he gets a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by jokinYour point may be moot, Revere apparently is already drawing some interest, if you could you get a C+/B- rated "A level minor league experience SP for Revere, this whole discussion is academic. Or, does "teams with pitchers on the block" mean a Vargas-type from Seattle?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobs
from MLB Traderumors:
"Although the Twins seem to be looking at plenty of pitching options in free agency, the team has also been more active in trade talks than expected, says Crasnick. Teams with pitchers on the block have approached the Twins about both Ben Revere and Josh Willingham."