Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 85

Thread: Article: Glen Perkins Signs Extension With Twins

  1. #61
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    IMO, not a great move. He and Willingham are the only players that could conceivably bring back a top tier pitching prospect that the Twins desperately need. Sure we have a lot of pitching talent in A-ball and below but above that....

    In addition, as others have said, there was really little reason to do this, and it isn't a particularly "Home town friendly" deal. This was also another opportunity to front load the contract come and gone (no worries about >20% paycut as you can see from David Wright's contract).

    The other problem I have with this is, contrary to the previously espoused views, the only research I could find on the subject shows that elite relievers don't stay elite for long. Also, long term deals to relievers aren't a great idea in general.

    Sorry if this was a little rambling/confusing. It's 2am and I'm really tired but wanted to hammer this post out before signing off.

  2. #62
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave View Post
    Teams don't front load contracts like that, and it would make no sense for the Twins to do so, it would set a really bad precedent.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Teams don't do it because players don't want to/have agreed as a union not to. That goes for front-loaded deals and hometown discounts. Lots of discussion on this in the past, probably not worth rehashing - just look up the threads.
    There are several contracts that have done this actually. David Wright, Ryan Braun, Scott Feldman, Dustin Pedroia all have this off season. Probably more I just don't remember them.

  3. #63
    Senior Member All-Star Hosken Bombo Disco's Avatar
    Posts
    1,045
    Like
    1,644
    Liked 489 Times in 285 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oxtung View Post
    IMO, not a great move. He and Willingham are the only players that could conceivably bring back a top tier pitching prospect that the Twins desperately need. Sure we have a lot of pitching talent in A-ball and below but above that....

    In addition, as others have said, there was really little reason to do this, and it isn't a particularly "Home town friendly" deal. This was also another opportunity to front load the contract come and gone (no worries about >20% paycut as you can see from David Wright's contract).

    The other problem I have with this is, contrary to the previously espoused views, the only research I could find on the subject shows that elite relievers don't stay elite for long. Also, long term deals to relievers aren't a great idea in general.

    Sorry if this was a little rambling/confusing. It's 2am and I'm really tired but wanted to hammer this post out before signing off.
    I think you are dreaming

    I can understand your concerns and have some of my own, but I also have some serious issues with the data in the articles you linked to. For starters, we could all try to measure closers by Saves and not WAR.

    Anyway, I think this is a good deal for both sides and I'm happy for Perkins. His head is in a good place and I agree w/ the Twins that he's more likely to perform like a veteran closer than many of the younger guys who come and go.

  4. #64
    I can see both sides of this argument. Perkins is a leader, recruiter of free agents and he is pretty darn good with the media too. That has value. Cuddyer filled this role very well. Unless I misunderstand the deal, we are only on the line for one more year with an option for a second year and the salary is below that of other relievers of his caliber.

    The other side of the argument has some merit too. When you are as bad as our favorite team and a couple years away from getting better, you dump all of the assets you can (IE Astros) and further build the farm system. Perkins is our best trade chip. There was also minimal value in extending him so there is merit in the position that this adds risk with little value.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    301
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    I am 100 percent in agreement with this idea of dumping ALL of the assets and further building the farm system but are most fans on board with this? Plus we get mixed signals from ownership and management on the same subject as they both often are trying to build a decent product for the current year and looking to the future as well. I think it is impossible to do both well, so we'll see especially starting in 2015 when the so-called turn around is supposed to begin.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Double-A
    Posts
    133
    Like
    4
    Liked 10 Times in 7 Posts
    Wow, pretty amusing thread. Let no good deed go unpunished, eh Twins?

  7. These 2 users like Dave T's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    biggentleben (03-15-2014), cmathewson (03-15-2014)

  8. #67
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,530
    Like
    79
    Liked 173 Times in 107 Posts
    Blog Entries
    31
    I don't understand the need. They had him with option through 2016. They had him in a contract that was trade friendly. Buying the 34 year old season of any reliever, 4 seasons down the road is a risk.

    I do understand honoring the loyalty. He was underpaid for his performance relative to other closers. He is a Minnesotan. This doesn't seem like a good business deal, but loyalty and treating players fairly can often be good business.

  9. #68
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    242
    Like
    106
    Liked 73 Times in 50 Posts
    I'm reminded of the Empty Bottle in Chicago and their slogan... "Cheep! Cheep!" Bigtime bargain.
    Feel free to pile on about Suzuki.

  10. #69
    The Twins are trying to build a Major League team. Hopefully, it comes together sooner rather than later. While a team can be put together with only young prospects or with only veterans, it seems to me that the best teams have a combination of the two.

    I cringe every time someone brings up trading a good veteran for prospects to "build up the minor league system". At some point you have to stop trading away all of the team's good players. The Twins need major league players to be successful, not prospects. Yes, prospects can help in the future. All major league teams need a steady supply of prospects in their systems. But at some point you have to start putting the pieces together and field a major league team.

    The Twins appear to be making moves indicating that they are ready to put the pieces together. The Perkins extension in addition to the rotation signings seem to indicate that the team thinks it is time. The top prospects are close. The majority of them should reach the majors in the next year or two. So you're looking at 2016/17 to be competitive. The Twins will need a closer by then. Why not Perkins? Why worry about having to bid for Perkins' service when they don't need to? Perkins is a Minnesotan. Who better to give his best for this team? He is a homegrown Twins prospect, playing for the team he has grown up with. Why pay another free agent to come play for the Twins when we have someone who WANTS to play here? Who has taken a team friendly contract to stay here. Who has the skills to play the position.

    Let's stop trying to trade away the team's good players for untested prospects who may or may not ever make the team and field a competitive team. As fans, we have put up with three forgetable seasons. It's time to put the pieces together.

  11. #70
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    423
    Like
    70
    Liked 72 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by alarp33 View Post
    Why exactly did they need to bring his monetary value closer to his market value? I'm not trying to be a smartass, but where exactly would you draw the line? Hughes is making around $8million a year, if he wins Cy Young this year would you propose ripping up the final 2 years of deal and giving him 5 years for $110 million? If Perkins would have lost the closer job last year due to performance, it would only be fair that he reduce the remaining years of his deal?

    Signing a player to a longer term deal involves risk from both sides, the player is risking that they could out perform the deal and undervalue themselves, the team is risking guaranteed money for a player that could get hurt or underperform.

    Perkins and the Twins knew of these risks in 2012 when they agreed to contract. That extension looked pretty good in hindsight for the Twins, sometimes the extensions don't work out as well (Blackburn).
    The Twins didn't have to do anything. They had a great contract for Perkins as it was. The risk of the new deal is greater for them than it is for Perkins as they have no idea what his value will be in those later years.

    Values for players are established in arbitration all the time. The better the players performance then the higher the value of the contract. Granted this isn't arbitration but the concept is similar. When a players value far exceeds his monetary compensation contracts get extended all the time to change the imbalance. I think that was done for Ryan Howard and others as well. I believe Mike Trout will be another one.

    If my theory is correct (and I have no proof what so ever that is) Perkins worked with the Twins on the earlier contract so that it would work for the closer and setup role. Neither side knew he would be an All Star closer at the time. Perkins worked well with them in negotiations then and so they were more amenable to reciprocate when his value changed. In short Perkins sold himself short to remain with the Twins and the Twins were willing to take on more risk to even that out. Tit for tat if you will.

    To your further point why not pay for performance etc. for everyone on the team? That is why the Perkins deal is sold the way it is. He is a great closer we want to lock him up long term etc, etc. Personally I don't believe that. Read between the lines, however, and this is about rectifying a performance to value imbalance. No team consistently pays for proportionate performance to monetary value. The players don't like it and teams don't like it. The stars have to align and in this case they did.
    Last edited by Dman; 03-15-2014 at 10:17 AM.

  12. #71
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    I think the time to "dump all the assets" was when the FO decided not to spend in 2012. At that point it was clear this was going to be a multi-multi year rebuild and that our assets would just be aging with no hope of winning. I even advocated trading Mauer to the Red Sox that offseason (and still think it could have been the right move).

    At this point though I don't think "trade everybody" works. We have the payroll to have some pieces in place when our young guns come up and I think it will be beneficial to do so. It will help turn things around quicker, there is always a chance Buxton, Sano, Meyer put up big numbers right off the bat and I'd hate to waste those years because we didn't have a supporting cast. There is potentially a benefit (though not necessarily true or needed) to having veterans around the club house.

    In today's game if you want to go to the playoffs you have to be a top 10 team in starting pitching. If you want to advance you have to be top 5 (I've actually done the research but have never bothered to write it up into a blog...I should get around to that someday). That said, I think we are short a premier pitcher. If Meyer turns out to be a 2/3 we're sunk. The Twins won't pay the asking price for an ace. IMO the Twins need another pitcher that could develop into that front of the rotation player because counting on Meyer for that is just too risky. Before anyone says Kohl Stewart, he won't be with the Twins until 2017 at the earliest and even that would be counting on him coming in and being an Ace from day 1. It's more likely he'd take a season or 2 until he's in form. So you're looking at 2018-2019 before the Twins are truly competitive if Meyer doesn't turn into the stud we need.

  13. #72
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hosken Bombo Disco View Post
    I think you are dreaming

    I can understand your concerns and have some of my own, but I also have some serious issues with the data in the articles you linked to. For starters, we could all try to measure closers by Saves and not WAR.

    Anyway, I think this is a good deal for both sides and I'm happy for Perkins. His head is in a good place and I agree w/ the Twins that he's more likely to perform like a veteran closer than many of the younger guys who come and go.
    If you can find some counter evidence or articles I'd be happy to read it. As I said that is the only research I've read on the subject. BTW, I think using saves to judge pitchers is a pretty poor analytic. Saves don't actually tell you about a players pitching but rather about the effect of that pitching. It is a secondary measurement. You can rack up saves and be a poor pitcher and vis-versa.

  14. #73
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    I want to add that I can see the human side of this argument. Minnesota guy, loyal, etc... From what I can tell Perkins is a great guy, I think he even brought a round of drinks for some of the TD guys from the bullpen late last season, but I don't see how that helps the Twins get to the World Series. To me, as a fan, that is the point of this game so if a move doesn't further that agenda I don't agree with it.

  15. #74
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,355
    Like
    1,313
    Liked 1,295 Times in 749 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oxtung View Post
    In today's game if you want to go to the playoffs you have to be a top 10 team in starting pitching. If you want to advance you have to be top 5 (I've actually done the research but have never bothered to write it up into a blog...I should get around to that someday). That said, I think we are short a premier pitcher. If Meyer turns out to be a 2/3 we're sunk. The Twins won't pay the asking price for an ace. IMO the Twins need another pitcher that could develop into that front of the rotation player because counting on Meyer for that is just too risky. Before anyone says Kohl Stewart, he won't be with the Twins until 2017 at the earliest and even that would be counting on him coming in and being an Ace from day 1. It's more likely he'd take a season or 2 until he's in form. So you're looking at 2018-2019 before the Twins are truly competitive if Meyer doesn't turn into the stud we need.
    I don't disagree with this and I've long expressed the need for a #1 -- I'm just not sure exactly how it relates to the tradeability of Perkins. If Perkins continues to excel as a closer, at the time of any trade, what remains of 4/5 years of cost-control may get you more than what remains of 2/3 years. And the no-trade clause is only 2 teams per the Strib. I think the idea is for Perkins to remain in Minnesota but it is certainly not contractually guaranteed.

  16. #75
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    301
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    As mentioned here, saves per se are a complete joke and the rule(s) and/or stats governing them should be changed. For one thing why save your best reliever for say the last inning when your opponent's are sending up the 7,8,9 part of the batting order. Better to use them in the eighth inning when say 4,5,6 hitters are coming up with men on base. Plus on lousy teams that are not competing a "closer" is not even necessary. If a team has such a "closer" on their roster trade them to a contender for young building blocks. Plus aren't "our lads" as Reusse calls them always building anyway?

  17. #76
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Oxtung View Post
    In today's game if you want to go to the playoffs you have to be a top 10 team in starting pitching. If you want to advance you have to be top 5 (I've actually done the research but have never bothered to write it up into a blog...I should get around to that someday). That said, I think we are short a premier pitcher. If Meyer turns out to be a 2/3 we're sunk. The Twins won't pay the asking price for an ace. IMO the Twins need another pitcher that could develop into that front of the rotation player because counting on Meyer for that is just too risky. Before anyone says Kohl Stewart, he won't be with the Twins until 2017 at the earliest and even that would be counting on him coming in and being an Ace from day 1. It's more likely he'd take a season or 2 until he's in form. So you're looking at 2018-2019 before the Twins are truly competitive if Meyer doesn't turn into the stud we need.
    The argument comes down to the value of the closer role. About this, there is no consensus. If you think a closer should be paid like a set-up guy and traded as soon as he acquires enough saves to give him sufficient trade value, this is a bad deal. If you think a closer is difficult to develop and should be held onto as long as there is a chance at a championship, this is a great deal.

    I have seen enough of closers like RD, LaTroy and Crapps to fall in the second camp. Besides, I don't think you create one hole to fill another. By all means, find a way to build a winning rotation, but don't do it at the expense of the bullpen.

    I also think your claim that in three years the Twins will still be one pitcher short of a top 5 rotation a bit dubious. They certainly have the arms to put together a top 5 rotation. Whether that happens is too speculative to base an argument on. If your claim is suppositional (i.e. supposing they are one starter short of a top 5 rotation in three years, then they could use Perkins to acquire that guy), then it makes some sense. But I still disagree with it. First of all, I have yet to see a trade of a closer for an ace straight up. It would take multiple pieces in addition to the closer to acquire an ace. As long as you're including other pieces, that's not the time to trade major league assets for major league assets. That's the time to trade prospects for the likes of David Price.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  18. #77
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    301
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    It is said here that the Twins "certainly have the arms to put together a top 5 rotation". How do any of us know for sure that that is the case with the young pitchers, some will be fine, others not so much, we cannot assume anything along those lines especially on a March day in 2014.

  19. #78
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    I don't disagree with this and I've long expressed the need for a #1 -- I'm just not sure exactly how it relates to the tradeability of Perkins. If Perkins continues to excel as a closer, at the time of any trade, what remains of 4/5 years of cost-control may get you more than what remains of 2/3 years. And the no-trade clause is only 2 teams per the Strib. I think the idea is for Perkins to remain in Minnesota but it is certainly not contractually guaranteed.
    No, he is not contractually guaranteed but for all intents and purposes he is a Twin for the next 2 or 3 years now.

    2014- Perkins is 31. Twins not competitive.
    2015- 32, not competitive
    2016- 33, perhaps be competitive but not a complete team
    2017- 34, This is the first year that I could see the Twins being a strong contender.

    To me acquiring a piece of the future that will be here for perhaps 6 years is more valuable than the one year that Perkins will make a difference to this team (assuming he's still a dominant pitcher 4 years from now which is unlikely).

    I understand others have different time frames for competitiveness and as such YMMV.

  20. #79
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    I also think your claim that in three years the Twins will still be one pitcher short of a top 5 rotation a bit dubious. They certainly have the arms to put together a top 5 rotation. Whether that happens is too speculative to base an argument on. If your claim is suppositional (i.e. supposing they are one starter short of a top 5 rotation in three years, then they could use Perkins to acquire that guy), then it makes some sense. But I still disagree with it. First of all, I have yet to see a trade of a closer for an ace straight up. It would take multiple pieces in addition to the closer to acquire an ace. As long as you're including other pieces, that's not the time to trade major league assets for major league assets. That's the time to trade prospects for the likes of David Price.
    I think you misread/misunderstood my post. My premise was that if Meyer isn't that #1 pitcher that we hope he becomes we have some big rotation problems that won't be fixed until Kohl Stewart arrives. That is a lot of pressure on just those 2 guys. Assuming they'll turn out as their "best case scenario" seems foolish to me.

    As things stand right now this is how our prospects not in A-ball are thought to fit into the rotation: Meyer 1/2, Gibson 3, anyone else 4/5. It's possible somebody else steps forward, like Trevor May, but at this point that is only hopeful wishing.

    In 2013 Nolasco would have been a #4 starter on nine out of the ten playoff teams. That means we need to bring in 3 pitchers better than him and 2 need to be significantly better. The Twins could sign a #1/2 starter in FA or trade for one, but that would be the first time in history that has happened. They could hope that everybody has a career year but that isn't really a plan. After that we're waiting for the young guys at A-ball who are years away.

    I don't really understand the rest of your post. Of course Perkins can't be traded for an established mlb ace. I never said he could be. He could however be traded for one headed to AA this year potentially. That would give the Twins a little breathing room in case Meyer doesn't pan out quite how we want him to.

  21. #80
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by oldguy10 View Post
    It is said here that the Twins "certainly have the arms to put together a top 5 rotation". How do any of us know for sure that that is the case with the young pitchers, some will be fine, others not so much, we cannot assume anything along those lines especially on a March day in 2014.
    That was my point. We have the arms--four in the top 101 according to BP. Whether that becomes a top 5 rotation is up in the air.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.