Should the twins trade Mauer?

[200tang]

I also don't think that there's "no way" Min agrees to a 7+ year contract.

you mean less than? Although I don't see what the big deal is as long as the contract structure works.

[HoustonGM]

Trading him though is, in my opinion, dumb. Unless the Rays or Rangers literally gives you 6 of their top ten prospects it's not worth it.

Fixed!

[HoustonGM]

you mean less than? Although I don't see what the big deal is as long as the contract structure works.

I mean that I don't think Minnesota is opposed to giving Mauer 7 or more years.

[200tang]

I mean that I don't think Minnesota is opposed to giving Mauer 7 or more years.

I think dickay is scared he's not going to stay a catcher for the seven years and doesn't understand contract structures, /shrug.

[OregonDuck1989]

Should the Colts trade Manning????

[dickay]

They're contenders this year. Even if he weren't to agree to a contract, why would the Twins trade their best player? Who could they get in return that would be worth Mauer and still help them contend this year? Wouldn't it be best just to play out the year with him and take 2 draft picks when he leaves for free agency?

i think that would be worst, or at least a much worst thing to say to your fan base. I'd wait until midseason of course...if i feel I have a legit shot then "maybe" i keep him, but some of that depends on my feelings of the demands too. Not having a big payroll, they have to think long term not just one year.

They may be competitive for the division this year, but not for a WS title. I can't see letting him go for two unknown draft picks. I'd rather appease my fan base by bringing some top prospects who are closer to MLB ready. Look at what the Marlins got for Beckett who was nearing the end of his deal, Hanley Ramirez and co. They could maybe even do as the Marlins did and make the acquiring team take a bad contract (like Lowell).

I just don't like the idea of signing a catcher to a 7 plus year deal worth upwards of 20 mil per. He's had some injuries to knees and back if i'm not mistaken. As a small market, i just couldnt afford that liability.

[200tang]

Should the Colts trade Manning????

If the Rangers and Rays give them 6 of their top 10 prospects.

[200tang]

Not having a big payroll, they have to think long term not just one year.

They're bumping their payroll up to 90M and opening a new stadium. If they can't afford him then that's a joke.

[dickay]

I also don't think that there's "no way" Min agrees to a 7+ year contract.

i never said they wouldn't. But why bother reading anyway.

[dickay]

I think dickay is scared he's not going to stay a catcher for the seven years and doesn't understand contract structures, /shrug.

clearly

[OregonDuck1989]

I just don't like the idea of signing a catcher to a 7 plus year deal worth upwards of 20 mil per. He's had some injuries to knees and back if i'm not mistaken. As a small market, i just could afford that liability.

I'd agree with you if the Twins played in the National League. And if you couldn't have front loaded contracts.

[HoustonGM]

i think that would be worst, or at least a much worst thing to say to your fan base.

Keeping your star player and letting him walk to free agency is worse than saying "We're going to trade our best player even though we're contenders."? Uh.

They may be competitive for the division this year, but not for a WS title.

I don't see why they wouldn't be competitive for the World Series title if they're good enough to get into the playoffs. I don't think giving up on the season - and trading your best player is doing that in any realistic scenario - is the answer.

I can't see letting him go for two unknown draft picks. I'd rather appease my fan base by bringing some top prospects who are closer to MLB ready. Look at what the Marlins got for Beckett who was nearing the end of his deal, Hanley Ramirez and co. They could maybe even do as the Marlins did and make the acquiring team take a bad contract (like Lowell).

I'd rather appease my fan base by going for it all in the last year with the best player I'll have the luxury of having for a while.

I just don't like the idea of signing a catcher to a 7 plus year deal worth upwards of 20 mil per. He's had some injuries to knees and back if i'm not mistaken. As a small market, i just could afford that liability.

His bat is more than good enough, and he more than athletic enough, to move to another position and still be among the best players in the game.

[HoustonGM]

i never said they wouldn't. But why bother reading anyway.

You said:

And no way as MIN am I giving him a 7 year+ contract.

Yes, sorry, I misread it as "No way is Min giving him a 7 year+ contract."

But, that's okay. Instead of just correcting me you'd rather be an ass.

[200tang]

I like your logic dickay. Giving up on the season because it's impossible to win in the playoffs and trading for maybe one impact player prospect and some throwins for half a year of Mauer and probably missing the playoffs because of it. Then, when that player is an impact, you can trade him for another impact player midway through your playoff run because the Yankees will still have the highest payroll and best players in the game in 5 years so what's the point of shooting for the World Series?

Actually, you know what, every team in the AL should just fold. None can beat the Yankees so what's the point?

[dickay]

I'd agree with you if the Twins played in the National League.

to me, if he's not a catcher his value isn't the same. I realize he could be moved to 1st or DH. I just wouldn't want to pay all that coin long term for a catcher without alot of power (this 09 year was likely more of an aberration than the norm) who i may have to move because of knee or back lingering injuries. Who knows the toll taken on his body during catcher 3,4,5 more seasons? Would he be effective moved to 1st or DH? Again...I love Mauer, I just wouldn't want to pay that coin, as the twins, for at least 7 years maybe longer. Some teams can afford that risk IMO, the twins shouldn't.