12-09-2013, 09:46 PM #101
12-09-2013, 10:16 PM #102
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?
12-09-2013, 10:18 PM #103
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.
12-09-2013, 10:23 PM #104
12-09-2013, 10:23 PM #105
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.
12-09-2013, 10:47 PM #106
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.
12-09-2013, 10:53 PM #107
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.
12-09-2013, 10:58 PM #108
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?
12-10-2013, 11:05 AM #109
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.
This user likes spycake's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:
mike wants wins (12-10-2013)
12-10-2013, 12:09 PM #110
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.
12-10-2013, 12:24 PM #111
- Liked 811 Times in 439 Posts
- Blog Entries
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.
12-10-2013, 07:34 PM #112
Brock: agreed. I meant, many posts read like they wouldn't want the TWINS to make that deal, which is kinda crazy.
12-10-2013, 10:58 PM #113
- Liked 23 Times in 21 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.