Thread: Jason Frasor

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Yeah, now there is one. It's only going to build until games, even meaningless ones, are played. And people are justified to feel that way, even if it annoys you to hear it.

Quite the opposite, it amuses the hell out of me, why do you think I keep coming here? I would have hated to grade college papers for some people around here, the title would have been 500 words.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

Quite the opposite, it amuses the hell out of me, why do you think I keep coming here? I would have hated to grade college papers for some people around here, the title would have been 500 words.

Fair enough, in that case others are going to need a thicker skin on this issue.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

I fail to see how this helps. Jason Frasor, Shaun Marcum, hell even Michael Bourn, would all "fill holes" on this team. The Twins could sign three relievers and still be filling holes in all likelihood. Your point was that players don't sign to be moved, but players sign short deals for opportunities that they know may result in a trade all the time. That claim was 100% false on your part.

What player signs saying they really wanted to play for another team? When you make that sort of claim, proof would be nice. Yes player are signed all of the time to short contracts to fill holes. While they all know they can get traded, that is hardly likely their intent for signing a contract. But you are 100% right on everything you sat and everyone else is just an idiot in comparison.

Originally Posted by old nurse

What player signs saying they really wanted to play for another team? When you make that sort of claim, proof would be nice. Yes player are signed all of the time to short contracts to fill holes. While they all know they can get traded, that is hardly likely their intent for signing a contract. But you are 100% right on everything you sat and everyone else is just an idiot in comparison.

I didn't make that claim. No one signs KNOWING they will be traded. But players sign for bad teams for greater opportunity to showcase knowing that there is a strong chance that they may be traded as a trade-off to the opportunity. And I gave you examples. Teams sign them to fill holes, players agree to those deals for the opportunity knowing full well they might be moved.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

I didn't make that claim. No one signs KNOWING they will be traded. But players sign for bad teams for greater opportunity to showcase knowing that there is a strong chance that they may be traded as a trade-off to the opportunity. And I gave you examples. Teams sign them to fill holes, players agree to those deals for the opportunity knowing full well they might be moved.

Dave Hollins was 16 years ago. Otis Nixon was signed and never traded. It was his second to the last as a major league player, last year with a starting role. Again, if it was something that was done regularly you could remember a more recent example of a flipped player, or an incident that actually happened.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Dave Hollins was 16 years ago. Otis Nixon was signed and never traded. It was his second to the last as a major league player, last year with a starting role. Again, if it was something that was done regularly you could remember a more recent example of a flipped player, or an incident that actually happened.

Last year the following players signed short term deals and were dealt: Jonathon Broxton and Paul Maholm all signed smaller deals with bad teams and were flipped by that team sometime during the year. Now, please save yourself some dignity here and don't go with "yeah but those players didn't sign to be traded....bla bla bla" - what they did was sign with bad teams that would guarantee them of an opportunity to showcase themselves in hopes of a bigger contract the next year. Part of that guarantee comes with the potential of being traded because you never signed for stability, you signed for opportunity. No one sits at the table and says "hey...we just want to play you and then trade you"....."Oh, good, I was just using you guys to make money." Both sides go in knowing the risks and rewards. Some players accept the high risk of being dealt if successful in exchange for the greater opportunity to showcase.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Last year the following players signed short term deals and were dealt: Casey McGahee, Jonathon Broxton, Paul Maholm, Jeremy Guthrie, and Jonathan Sanchez all signed smaller deals with bad teams and were flipped by that team sometime during the year. Now, please save yourself some dignity here and don't go with "yeah but those players didn't sign to be traded....bla bla bla" - what they did was sign with bad teams that would guarantee them of an opportunity to showcase themselves in hopes of a bigger contract the next year. Part of that guarantee comes with the potential of being traded because you never signed for stability, you signed for opportunity. No one sits at the table and says "hey...we just want to play you and then trade you"....."Oh, good, I was just using you guys to make money." Both sides go in knowing the risks and rewards. Some players accept the high risk of being dealt if successful in exchange for the greater opportunity to showcase.

Sanchez was not eligible to be a free agent last year. He was obtained by KC from the Giants. McGehee was not a free agent signed and traded, he was initially dealt to Pittsburg., Jeremy Guthrie was not signed as free agent from Baltimore, he was traded to Colorado. So 3/5 wrong.

Broxton signed with KC after having an injury plagued season. Broxton netted KC 2 "C" prospects. Twins version of Broxton would be Pelfrey. Maholm toiled as a mediocre pitcher in Pittsburg. Once escaped, he put together a good season. The Twins version of Maholm would be Correia. The Twins are doing as you would like them to. You should consider yourself wise as to what the Twins are really trying to do. You should be the happiest person in the world that these players were signed and singing their praises.

Originally Posted by old nurse

So 3/5 wrong.

Yup, I was going from memory on my phone, when I fact checked I edited. Broxton did not net two "c" prospects (though, why does it matter, the Royals turned a one year deal into long-term potential, which is the whole point you were rejecting), he landed two players that had been ranked in the Red's top 10 prior to the year. Maholm and Correia are not similar in anything but the position they play.

Even still, because you seem to have forgotten your initial errant comment, the point is players do sign contracts when there is a high degree of likelihood that they will be dealt. They accept that trade-off for an opportunity (like closing in Broxton's case and a rotation spot for Maholm). It isn't that hard, you're arguing something patently false.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Yup, I was going from memory on my phone, when I fact checked I edited. Broxton did not net two "c" prospects (though, why does it matter, the Royals turned a one year deal into long-term potential, which is the whole point you were rejecting), he landed two players that had been ranked in the Red's top 10 prior to the year. Maholm and Correia are not similar in anything but the position they play.

Even still, because you seem to have forgotten your initial errant comment, the point is players do sign contracts when there is a high degree of likelihood that they will be dealt. They accept that trade-off for an opportunity (like closing in Broxton's case and a rotation spot for Maholm). It isn't that hard, you're arguing something patently false.

But you are arguing that signing almost anyone to a contract is worth something. Broxton had value to establish as a closer. Frasor does not have that value. He was not primary set up guy for the closer. To sign someone to use as a chip for prospects is hardly practical. If you overbid the Rangers by a significant amount to get him, kept him for a half a year, you would be buying a low level prospect for 1/4 million. (Assuming Frasor would have replaced a minimum wage scrub the Twins have a few of). As a way to get talent, that gets expensive. Broxton was a 4 mil contract. That gets to be expensive prospects you are buying.

Originally Posted by old nurse

As a way to get talent, that gets expensive. Broxton was a 4 mil contract. That gets to be expensive prospects you are buying.

Well, at least we've moved on from that foolish assertion you made initially. Not all of these contracts are worth it and Frasor is not anything special, but 2Mish money is a drop in the bucket when you're looking at a 25M reduction in big league payroll. At this point you're looking at 25M flushed into the owners pockets or 2M gambled (at whatever odds, you may be right that they aren't great odds) on helping the future. I don't see how anyone can argue that they, as a fan, don't prefer the gamble. And it's perfectly ok, given the amount of available salary, for fans to be pissed that we aren't taking those gambles.

I know personally, as someone who has given literally given over a thousand dollars to this team over the course of TF's existence (as a season ticket holder and dedicated consumer of Kramarczuk's brats) I've paid more than my share to be pissed at the ownership pocketing money after campaigning hard after the season to keep all of us by promising major changes. (I can assure you, as a season ticket holder, that they were just short of harassment in how much they pleaded with me not to cancel) So this smug campaign you and others are on to silence frustration is pretty damn irritating.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Yup, I was going from memory on my phone, when I fact checked I edited. Broxton did not net two "c" prospects (though, why does it matter, the Royals turned a one year deal into long-term potential, which is the whole point you were rejecting), he landed two players that had been ranked in the Red's top 10 prior to the year. Maholm and Correia are not similar in anything but the position they play.

Even still, because you seem to have forgotten your initial errant comment, the point is players do sign contracts when there is a high degree of likelihood that they will be dealt. They accept that trade-off for an opportunity (like closing in Broxton's case and a rotation spot for Maholm). It isn't that hard, you're arguing something patently false.

Yes. Any player knows that unless they have a no trade contract they can be traded at any time. Any fan knows that. The point I should have made clear is that it is neither a common practice nor a good practice to do that with people you are essentially recruiting to come work for you. When a player gets somewhere, they or the team might not find they are a fit. Hollins was an example of that. So long ago I forgot the details. Guthrie got traded to Colorado. It was not a fit. Life was so good once he got to KC, he really did not appear to test the free agent waters.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Life was so good once he got to KC, he really did not appear to test the free agent waters.

I'm sure it had little to do with 3 years and 25M being offered.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Well, at least we've moved on from that foolish assertion you made initially. Not all of these contracts are worth it and Frasor is not anything special, but 2Mish money is a drop in the bucket when you're looking at a 25M reduction in big league payroll. At this point you're looking at 25M flushed into the owners pockets or 2M gambled (at whatever odds, you may be right that they aren't great odds) on helping the future. I don't see how anyone can argue that they, as a fan, don't prefer the gamble. And it's perfectly ok, given the amount of available salary, for fans to be pissed that we aren't taking those gambles.

Then be pissed that they are not signing players with upside rather than jockeying for scrap heap (as others have called them) players. Signing a Sean West

I know personally, as someone who has given literally given over a thousand dollars to this team over the course of TF's existence (as a season ticket holder and dedicated consumer of Kramarczuk's brats) I've paid more than my share to be pissed at the ownership pocketing money after campaigning hard after the season to keep all of us by promising major changes. (I can assure you, as a season ticket holder, that they were just short of harassment in how much they pleaded with me not to cancel) So this smug campaign you and others are on to silence frustration is pretty damn irritating.

Be frustrated that they are not signing players with upside rather than scrap heap recycled below average pitchers that may be slightly better than the Twins. Sign a Sean West type and hope everything works out. Be upset that Dozier and Floriman are right now the next couple years future at MI. That I understand.

Backloaded to make him untradeable after this year. A good enough peripherals to maybe have gotten closer to 30

And you can still go to Kramarczuks on East Hennepin and eat your sorrows away.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Be frustrated that they are not signing players with upside .

Frasor has plenty of upside. He's been a good reliever in his career and would be a fine upgrade over someone like Robertson.

Also, my brain just cramped with the idea that we shouldn't sign scrap heap, crappy pitchers....but should sign Sean West. West certainly has upside as a gamble, but so does Frasor. The difference is, Frasor has actually been a capable to good MLB player. Which makes him a much better, albeit more expensive, gamble.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Well, at least we've moved on from that foolish assertion you made initially. Not all of these contracts are worth it and Frasor is not anything special, but 2Mish money is a drop in the bucket when you're looking at a 25M reduction in big league payroll. At this point you're looking at 25M flushed into the owners pockets or 2M gambled (at whatever odds, you may be right that they aren't great odds) on helping the future. I don't see how anyone can argue that they, as a fan, don't prefer the gamble. And it's perfectly ok, given the amount of available salary, for fans to be pissed that we aren't taking those gambles.

I know personally, as someone who has given literally given over a thousand dollars to this team over the course of TF's existence (as a season ticket holder and dedicated consumer of Kramarczuk's brats) I've paid more than my share to be pissed at the ownership pocketing money after campaigning hard after the season to keep all of us by promising major changes. (I can assure you, as a season ticket holder, that they were just short of harassment in how much they pleaded with me not to cancel) So this smug campaign you and others are on to silence frustration is pretty damn irritating.

I'll assume I'm one of the others, as I've been called out before. I am in no way trying to silence your's or anyone else's frustration, we just have a few degrees of separation on what makes us frustrated and how we express it. Not signing the likes of Jason Frasor and Sean West really doesn't make me anymore bothered than I already am. I get your point about what you feel it represents but for me it's more of a pick your battles type of scenario, not one really worth getting too worked up about.

Robertson is a lefty. Different role.

Originally Posted by Boom Boom

There weren't enough free agents on the market to fix this team in one offseason. I'm not real happy about how things have played out, but if anything I don't think Ryan has gone far enough in trading away "limited resources".

Also, I think you're overrating Revere.

i agree with not going far enough , to me the twins are straddling the fense , trying to fool the casual fans into believing we will do something and trying to add a piece or 2 on the sly.. which shows me they care only for profit margines and not the game...
As for me i would much rather trade away joe justin and josh now and jaime ,doumit and perkins at the allstar break and watch quality prospects then suffer through a non factor season of watching the results of dumpster diving

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

It doesn't have to be Frasor. But this team has publically declared their comfort with being done this offseason. When you see talent like Frasor still out there for reasonable price tags - that is hard to swallow with the amount of budget room left.

Your forgetting the year end bonuses for reducing payroll.....

Originally Posted by old nurse

Robertson is a lefty. Different role.

Yeah, but he's not a very good lefty and he's the third lefty in the pen, I'd gladly keep him in AAA as a injury replace for a guy who has actually been a good MLB reliever.