Winter meeting thread

A place for Twinscentric Discussion
User avatar
JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157]
Posts: 1270
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157] »

Did some research. He had a 6 ERA at Chattanooga, 27 appearences, all relief. To put that in perspective, Duffy had a 2.56 ERA in 8 starts and Berrios had a 3.08 in 15 starts. So no big whoop.

I see Jake Reed is now playing for Chattanooga. I love the Twins taking chances on "second-career" players like John Hicks and Jake Reed. (c;
User avatar
Jester1534
Posts: 3551
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by Jester1534 »

He's a guy with a + fastball but major control problems, could be a lighting in a bottle reliever if he can figure it out.
User avatar
khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]
Posts: 6414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by khans2k5 [enjin:6608728] »

Hayward got 8 years 184 million. 23/year average. Man it sucks being on the sidelines for this stuff. I'm not a fan of relying on prospects so much to push us to the next level. We're banking a lot on unproven commodities.
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

khans2k5 wrote:Hayward got 8 years 184 million. 23/year average. Man it sucks being on the sidelines for this stuff. I'm not a fan of relying on prospects so much to push us to the next level. We're banking a lot on unproven commodities.


I'd much rather allow Sano, Buxton, Kepler and Rosario chances to bloom into studs than pay Hayward, a good-but-unspectacular player, $23M for the next eight years.

I do get your overall point, though. I like free agent splashes.
User avatar
JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157]
Posts: 1270
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157] »

He got Joe Mauer money. So if they would have let him go, instead of thinking, "Well, no funny business that a single-digit homerun guy suddenly hit 28, lets lock him up!", they would have that money to spend on someone else. And I won't even get into Nolasco, who was treated as Walter Johnson even though he had a 4.37 ERA they day he joined the team.
User avatar
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
Posts: 9432
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564] »

Camden wrote:
khans2k5 wrote:Hayward got 8 years 184 million. 23/year average. Man it sucks being on the sidelines for this stuff. I'm not a fan of relying on prospects so much to push us to the next level. We're banking a lot on unproven commodities.


I'd much rather allow Sano, Buxton, Kepler and Rosario chances to bloom into studs than pay Hayward, a good-but-unspectacular player, $23M for the next eight years.

I do get your overall point, though. I like free agent splashes.


I couldn't be more in agreement with the bolded statement. $23 million for Hayward is my new definition of insanity.
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 23501
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by Monster »

longstrangetrip wrote:
Camden wrote:
khans2k5 wrote:Hayward got 8 years 184 million. 23/year average. Man it sucks being on the sidelines for this stuff. I'm not a fan of relying on prospects so much to push us to the next level. We're banking a lot on unproven commodities.


I'd much rather allow Sano, Buxton, Kepler and Rosario chances to bloom into studs than pay Hayward, a good-but-unspectacular player, $23M for the next eight years.

I do get your overall point, though. I like free agent splashes.


I couldn't be more in agreement with the bolded statement. $23 million for Hayward is my new definition of insanity.


I remember seeing something about Hayward being a guy some team would pay a bunch of money for this offseason and that was months ago. I think based on the deals that have been handed out this offseason MLB is doing a lot better than it has been for a while. It sucks some that the Twins aren't making big splashes but I don't really want to commit both big money and years to guys that might end up not being worth it. The $$$ of the deal to get Park keeps looking more and more solid as time goes on. Hopefully he turns out to be a nice player.
User avatar
khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]
Posts: 6414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by khans2k5 [enjin:6608728] »

longstrangetrip wrote:
Camden wrote:
khans2k5 wrote:Hayward got 8 years 184 million. 23/year average. Man it sucks being on the sidelines for this stuff. I'm not a fan of relying on prospects so much to push us to the next level. We're banking a lot on unproven commodities.


I'd much rather allow Sano, Buxton, Kepler and Rosario chances to bloom into studs than pay Hayward, a good-but-unspectacular player, $23M for the next eight years.

I do get your overall point, though. I like free agent splashes.


I couldn't be more in agreement with the bolded statement. $23 million for Hayward is my new definition of insanity.


He's the best defensive outfielder in the league (most defensive runs saved since 2010), has a lot of potential at the plate and is not one of these 30 something guys getting a long-term deal. He's an advanced stats darling. He's 8th in WAR since 2010. If you're gonna pay someone, it's better to do it at 26 than at or past 30. He's worth the money.
User avatar
bleedspeed
Posts: 8162
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by bleedspeed »

How old was Joe when we signed him to his deal?
User avatar
JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157]
Posts: 1270
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Winter meeting thread

Post by JasonIsDaMan [enjin:7981157] »

A month short of his 27th b-day. But remember, he was a catcher, not an outfielder.
Post Reply