Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 101 to 113 of 113

Thread: Never Happening, But...

  1. #101
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,136
    Like
    371
    Liked 331 Times in 220 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    That's not what I'm saying. Projecting player development is what matters. You adding this part about surplus value is a distinction without a difference.
    .
    Where's that SPEED! guy from last spring, now when we need him most, to differentiate without distincting?

  2. #102
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    289
    Like
    4
    Liked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    All that's relevant is how they project and develop because the costs aren't variable.

    As for how it dictates trading, the assumption is that these players will be league average. We see plenty of examples of good, even great, prospects never even managing that.
    The fact that the costs aren't variable is the important factor. It now just comes down to performance.

    Whether they bust or pan out makes no difference. It's about the risk, reward. The risk is the league minimum salary. The reward is league average or above performance. When your other options are replacement level players, that has more value to you.

    Let's say it takes Meyer, Gibson, Arcia and filler to acquire Price. You now have Worley, Diamond and Presley in those spots while increasing payroll to $92M. Now what do you do? You just traded for Price and filled out your roster with replacement level players.

    What did Florida get out of that deal with Detroit for Miggy?
    You're comparing an 88 win team trading for a 24 year old position player to a 66 win team trading for a 28 year old pitcher.

  3. #103
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,136
    Like
    371
    Liked 331 Times in 220 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrylos View Post

    b. Yeah it would, but a team needs 22 more guys and you hope that some of them would be paid more than the minimum and you hope that you can carry 3-4 more good (read expensive) guys. I'd rather see them spend that $30M for 3 or 4 guys who would play 150+ games each rather than a guy who can impact only 30 some games...
    In 2016:
    The top 3 guys make ~$54M
    The bottom 15 guys make ~ $10M
    That leaves (adj. for inflation to a $120M payroll) ~$56M for Players # 4 through 10, averaging out to $8M/player/year in the mid-range category.

    I'd say that's doable. Hughes is done after 2016, Nolasco comes off no later than 2017, Mauer after 2018, Price/or other Ace to be named later- after 2019 or 2020? This leaves room to begin the process of buying out the arb years for the potential budding superstars, beginning in 2018, as well as signing additonal FAs to supplement at areas of need.

  4. #104
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,136
    Like
    371
    Liked 331 Times in 220 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by JP3700 View Post
    .


    You're comparing an 88 win team trading for a 24 year old position player to a 66 win team trading for a 28 year old pitcher.
    Since you'rre quite liberal in your use of WAR, the numbers should work out in a similar fashion. And, as I noted previously, Detroit dropped to 74 wins the next year, and it took 4 years for them to make the playoffs after the acquisition of Cabrera- there's little reason to think that Price diminishes much from his current value (if at all) 4 years from now.

  5. #105
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,076
    Like
    97
    Liked 341 Times in 194 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JP3700 View Post
    You're comparing an 88 win team trading for a 24 year old position player to a 66 win team trading for a 28 year old pitcher.
    Which is precisely my point - it's a matter of timing. Not surplus value. By your arguments and Cameron's - the Tigers made a horrifically stupid trade that was likely to cause them a tremendous loss of surplus value.

    Which is clearly absurd, but that's the kind of corner you back yourself into when you are using surplus value. And we could find examples that go both ways, suffice to say it's not a particularly good way to evaluate a trade. It's better to consider the timing and consider the players in question on an individual basis.

  6. #106
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    289
    Like
    4
    Liked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Which is precisely my point - it's a matter of timing. Not surplus value. By your arguments and Cameron's - the Tigers made a horrifically stupid trade that was likely to cause them a tremendous loss of surplus value.

    Which is clearly absurd, but that's the kind of corner you back yourself into when you are using surplus value. And we could find examples that go both ways, suffice to say it's not a particularly good way to evaluate a trade. It's better to consider the timing and consider the players in question on an individual basis.
    Just about every post I've had, referred to timing. I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times that I would advocate a trade if we were higher on the win curve.

    I also stated that you can make an argument for Pittsburgh to make that trade when I posted the link to Cameron's article. I think it's a closer decision due to their lack of finances. It would be like the Rays trading to the NL Rays.

    The whole premise of timing is based on surplus value. Since the Twins will be spending somewhere in the $90-110M range, they will naturally have to get a surplus value from players making below what they're worth to be an above .500 team.

    You're not going to achieve that by playing replacement level players and you aren't going to achieve that by buying players through free agency. Your best bet is to let your major league ready prospects play and hope a core of them become league average+ players. Then you make the big splash.

    If you agree that the timing is not right, I'm not even sure what else there is to discuss.

  7. #107
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,076
    Like
    97
    Liked 341 Times in 194 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JP3700 View Post
    You're not going to achieve that by playing replacement level players and you aren't going to achieve that by buying players through free agency. Your best bet is to let your major league ready prospects play and hope a core of them become league average+ players. Then you make the big splash.
    We agree here, but for different reasons. All I'm trying to explain to you is that you've added a confusing layer to this that really amounts to a distinction without a difference. At the end of the day what you need to happen is what you posted above, which really comes down to your prospects not busting out and developing to what you hope they can be.

    So that's why I'm on board to wait a bit yet, not much longer, but a bit longer until we start to see some debuts.

  8. #108
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    289
    Like
    4
    Liked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    Since you'rre quite liberal in your use of WAR, the numbers should work out in a similar fashion. And, as I noted previously, Detroit dropped to 74 wins the next year, and it took 4 years for them to make the playoffs after the acquisition of Cabrera- there's little reason to think that Price diminishes much from his current value (if at all) 4 years from now.
    Just because your team doesn't perform to it's projection doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. At the time, Detroit was looking to push themselves over the top.

    The Red Sox were a 90 win team in 2011 and won 69 games in 2012. Just because they won 69 games doesn't mean they weren't putting a 90 win team on the field on opening day. This happens quite often. It happened to the Nationals this year. Just not to that extreme.

    The difference is how often do 69 win teams win 90?

  9. #109
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,141
    Like
    3
    Liked 179 Times in 106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Are people actually suggesting they wouldn't trade Meyer for Price, straight up? That's how a lot of these posts are reading.

    I'm as excited about Meyer as anyone, but don't forget he was traded straight up for Denard Span last winter. Good trade for the Twins, but it keeps Meyers value in perspective a little.

    I'm pretty sure Tampa Bay would flat-out refuse an offer of Meyer for Price, which should be an indicator that the Twins would easily win the trade. Even if the Twins didn't extend Price and didn't compete in 2014 or 2015, they could almost certainly flip Price again for more value than Meyer alone currently has.

    Obviously, if we re-enter the realm of reality and the offer becomes Meyer, Arcia, Rosario, etc. for Price, then the calculus becomes different. But then its less about Meyer vs Price, and more about org prospects 3-7 vs Price. That trade probably doesn't help the Twins, particularly if those prospects are anywhere close to MLB.

  10. This user likes spycake's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    mike wants wins (12-10-2013)

  11. #110
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,141
    Like
    3
    Liked 179 Times in 106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrylos View Post
    So you feel that the Twins will get a bargain and will be able to do much if they have $70M committed on 3 players (Mauer, Nolasco and Price) for the next 4 seasons?
    Just curious: Mauer makes $23M per season, and Nolasco $12M. Are you projecting David Price to make $35M per season?

    Seems a wee bit high, considering the current high is $27.5M, right? And 2014-2015 are both still arb years for Price, so he'll probably only average $15M between them.

  12. #111
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,694
    Like
    32
    Liked 772 Times in 423 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    Are people actually suggesting they wouldn't trade Meyer for Price, straight up? That's how a lot of these posts are reading.
    If I was Friedman, I would not trade David Price for Alex Meyer. I'd want more than that.

    I bet he could get an Alex Meyer-level prospect if he keeps Price for a year and trades him next offseason. The receiving team gets David Price for a year with the possibility to extend him or, at the very least, receives a comp pick in the following draft. That's worth a 40-60 range prospect.

  13. #112
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,141
    Like
    3
    Liked 179 Times in 106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Brock: agreed. I meant, many posts read like they wouldn't want the TWINS to make that deal, which is kinda crazy.

  14. #113
    Senior Member Double-A
    Posts
    158
    Like
    11
    Liked 22 Times in 20 Posts
    It really all comes down to timing. As many have said we're not getting Price for Meyer straight up that's ridiculous. do you raid the system for 3 of your top 6 prospects to get a guy for two years when your team already had holes all over? I don't think so, it's not the right timing.

    Now, if you could work out a deal where you get a reasonable extension then yes I say you go for it. I honestly wonder if due to price being two years away from FA a team could commit say 5/100 or 6/120 starting in 2014 to him. That would be hard and honestly kind of stupid for any pitcher to turn down. He's banking on two fully healthy years with similar performance to get a mammoth 200 million contract. Or he could go for a five year 100 and know he's going to hit free agency again at 32 and if he continues his success could still demand a huge contract. Not sure if the Rays have even explored this type of deal with him but I have to think if he got a 9 figure deal wafted in front of him he wouldn't take it.

    All this said, I dont' think the Twins are that interested due to the timing, their will be other guys on the table next year and the year after to go for. Give these young guys some time to develop before making a huge move to run for a championship.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

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.