Look at Ray Ray Run

I would guess the 100 million dollar offer is from the White Sox, but who knows?

Plenty of relievers available at the deadline could have given up 5 runs in 13 innings. To say a reliever only had 2 "bad games" in a post-season is saying he didn't have a great post-season.

No one is giving up 7 years of a top 5 prospect for 26 innings from a RP - there's a reason the Cubs are the only ones who have paid such a steep price, and there's a reason it was considered a fleecing at the time.

No matter how many times people say this, it doesn't make it true. Yes, however could the Cubs have won a World Series without that 3.86 and 3.52 ERA in the NLCS and the WS. How could they ever replace such production? The guy gave up 5 runs in 13 innings. He wasn't some lights out, games over, closer piece in the post-season that everyone wants to pretend he was. The Cubs could have replaced his production with someone else and it wouldn't have cost a top 5 prospect in baseball for 3 months of a RP - for 26 innings. There's no excuse for trading 7 years of Torres for 26 innings from Chapman. No "present day vs future value" calculation would ever say that was a good idea - not matter how heavily you want to weight present value.

Went full blown tard there for a second. Thanks.

Arbitration is a really nasty process; no idea why MLB hasnt changed the way it works.

End of the window they better be flirting with 170-180+.

Three big decisions cost Theo. 1. Trading Eloy and Cease for Quintana. 2. Not trading Schwarber when his value was peak - instead convincing himself he could be a nice NL player. 3. Trading Torres for Chapman. If he didn't trade Eloy, moving Schwarber becomes easier. He could have gotten an arm for Schwarber. Not evaluating and moving on from Russell was also a mistake but a more difficult decision to make. Amazing to think that the one prospect theo didnt love and almost made expendable turned out to be his 2nd best player - Baez. Imagine Bryant, Rizzo, Baez, Torres and Eloy. Jaysus.

I dont care what his WAR is, I'd never pay for a pitcher like Marco Gonzales.

Correct. It seems weird if they were not asking the players to take less though... why else protect them? They could still come back but they are UFA's so they wouldnt be capable of taking an assignment.

Then theres something funny about Trouts luxury tax calculation on sportrac. I'm basing my thoughts on that.

I'm not sure this is accurate, but I don't know for sure. For example, he was making 37.666 million this year with the signing bonus, but his cap hit was actually less than 36 million.

Jack, again what is this based on? The Twins haven't even made the guy a formal offer yet - or hadn't as of Thanksgiving - yet you think he would have made his decision already if it was 5/100 million. As of now, we have no idea who has bid on Wheeler and everything regarding his market is pure speculation. He is not a borderline top of the market arm, either. I agree SP's get overpaid more than any position in FA - especially those with ++ stuff - but that doesn't mean he's going to get some absurd 6/130 contract unless his agent pulls a fast one and some team gets real dumb.

Neither could throw strikes back then, and neither throw strikes now.

For luxury tax purposes, his 5 million is on this year. For their budgetary purposes internally, they put it on 2019.

I just don't think they thought anyone would claim him with the injury. He will likely end up accepting an assignment, but who knows? Edit: thought this said Burr. Ignore.

First of all, who is "everyone?" Second of all, the only reason more teams are interested is because he's "more affordable" not because he's better. You don't attempt to sign the more affordable arm for an unaffordable number just to avoid paying the big guns. The higher you go, the more reasonable it gets to just offer the money to Cole. He's got a market because he's not at the top of the market; once he enters that realm, his suitors decrease significantly.

Jack, you are speculating based on your personal bias. There's nothing out there saying the market is anywhere near 6/130. The market predictors, who have been far from perfect, believe he's going to get less than 100 million. Saying you think he would sign if that was his price is an assumption based on nothing. Maybe his offers are 4/80 and he wants 5/100. That's a pretty big difference. Almost no one signed by this time last year, so assuming he would have signed by now is a leap of faith I'm not willing to take.

No way - I actually argued pretty extensively that he would be a hell of a lot closer to Corbin than projections had him at; at FG's and other outlets, so I don't disagree with the basis of your argument. Their valuation of Wheeler was laughably low, but he's not going to get Corbin money I don't think. Corbin just had more advantages and more going for him than Wheeler. I'd be shocked if he got more than 110 and even more shocked if he got 6 years.

I mean, I think they should certainly have a ceiling and if someone greatly overspends what they valued the ceiling to be, they should move on. They shouldn't spend recklessly just to spend, but their valuations better not be significantly lower than everyone else also.... I wouldn't give Wheeler 6 years, 135 million for example - that would be reckless and you'd be better off playing in the big boy pool if you were going to invest that much. They certainly have to have ceilings, but they better be reasonable and built on the premise that FA = Overpay.

I agree with your take, but what is the Twins largest contract ever given to a pitcher? The Sox gave John Danks 63 million at least.

I get it, but Fred didn't really have a system. There was nothing unique about his offense. He ran a bunch of drags with limited shooters (terrible) and he cleared the paint for penetrating guards that didn't really exist. His sets had no fluidity to them - his offense involved perimeter rotations with false pass throughs in the paint constantly. With Rose, MAYBE you could run a spread offense fueled by drags because he could get out on the break so fast.... but the Bulls weren't even "great" in transition when their entire offense was predicated on transitions and drags. That's one broken system. His offense was reliant on constant switching - which does not happen nearly as frequently in the NBA as you'll see in college - to create mismatches off his high screens for Rose or whoever was running PG. Running a bunch of wing weaves with no great shooters just allows defenders to sag down low and double down on the penetrating guard. You didn't even need to shut off both corners because the Bulls didn't have the shooters there to keep the spacing as you'd like in that offensive set. Hoiberg was awful. I was critical of his offenses in college whenever he ran into a team that had two wings athletic enough to guard inside and out - every team in the NBA has that athleticism, and it made Hoibergs offense look like a kid drew it up.

Yes, they're "developing" players in a system that does not fit them. It's a great strategy. Boylen isn't going anywhere though. Amazing the coaches this team has thrown out there recently; Vinnie, Boylen and Hoiberg are just embarrassingly bad - to a level most don't understand. Hoiberg wasn't even a candidate for any other team - he wasn't one of the 10 best coaches in the college game, but he was friends with Gar so he got the job. Vinnie was about as ready as a 12 year old making his first move on a chick. Boylen... he's not even the best Jim Boylen coaching basketball for god sakes.

Based on what exactly? What have the Twins ever done to lead you to believe that they would be the organization to bid high enough to make the Sox uncomfortable?

Man, he must have had a hell of a second half because he wasn't very good in the first half. That's a nice season despite the k rate increase. If he duplicates that, you are correct - he doesn't need to get any better. Had no idea he had that big of a second half.