Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

A Closer Look at Cole Nelson

First of all, congratulations to Jim Thome on turning in the best moment of 2011. For one night last night, I forgot where the Twins were in the standings and felt so happy that it was like the Twins had just clinched the division. Congratulations big man, I couldn't be happier to see you do it as a Twin!

Moving on... Based on yesterday's poll, it's apparent that about two-thirds of readers here disapprove, in some capacity, of the trade that sent Delmon Young to the Tigers for Cole Nelson and a PTBNL. It's certainly not a bountiful return, but let's take a look at Cole Nelson after the jump and expand on the newest Twin.

Star-divide

Nelson is a 6'7", 233-pound left-hander who was taken in the 45th round by the Rays in 2009 and then again by the Tigers in the 10th round of 2010. An Edina native, he was listed as one of Keith Law's 30 Sleeper Prospects to Watch coming into the 2011 season. Law had this to say:

Big lefty Cole Nelson didn't throw a whole lot at Auburn and wasn't great when he did pitch, but the Tigers took a chance on his physicality and lengthened his stride to raise his release point. He touched 96 mph in the GCL, sitting 90-94, with feel for a changeup, while the slider is a work in progress.

Nelson's numbers, at first glance, make it pretty apparent that he didn't live up to Law's expectations, but if you look at his numbers since a role change -- a shift to the bullpen -- there's a slightly different story behind the towering southpaw. As Baseball Prospectus' Kevin Goldstein points out on Twitter, Nelson has been a completely different guy out of the 'pen. He's fanned 19 in 18 innings of work while only allowing five earned runs on 17 hits and four walks -- a far cry from his numbers as a starter.

It's a small sample, but it certainly looks like Nelson has benefited from the transition, and it's always encouraging to see a talent evaluator with Goldstein's reputation in the industry go out of his way to offer praise on the strides made by a player within your organization.

Baseball America tells us that Nelson sits comfortably at 92 mph with sink and tail on his fastball but has touched 95 mph. And, while his changeup is nothing special right now, he varies the speed and trajectory of his breaking ball depending on which box his opponent is standing in. Versus lett-handers he'll throw a curve with a lateral break, whereas against righties he'll drop a more 12-to-6 version of that same curveball.

Let's also not forget that there's a second player in this deal, and it'll be revealed who it is no later than October 15. This isn't out of the ordinary for trades; often times you'll see teams agree on a list of names and the recipient will have X amount of time to choose a name from that list. This could also mean, however, that the prospect is someone on the Tigers' 40-man who might not clear waivers right now and therefore must be a PTBNL. Given Young's performance and salary, that may be unlikely, but it's at least worth mentioning in passing.

if you'd told fans at the end of 2010 that this is ultimately what Delmon would be traded for, I don't think many would've believed you. I'd be in that boat as well.

Still, Delmon's a risk to tender a contract to, hasn't hit this year, and is a poor left fielder who even in his best season with the Twins totaled just 1.8 WAR because of his glove and baserunning ability. The Twins would've gotten more had they moved him in the offseason, but hindsight is 20/20.  I went on record last winter as saying I'd be OK with the Twins trading him prior to 2011, but also that I'd be glad to see him hang around because I thought he'd improve offensively upon last year's numbers a bit. I, like many Delmon fans, was very wrong and very disappointed.

In terms of this move though, I'm OK with it. The Twins were unlikely to give Delmon a raise by tendering him a contract next season, and a hard-throwing left-hander with good feel for his breaking ball plus a PTBNL isn't the worst possible outcome. At the very least, it's a step up from a straight salary dump where the Twins get nothing but a warm body and the pleasure of not paying Young. Remember, the Twins don't have to pay the remaining $1.3M on Delmon's contract, and that amount right there is slightly more than first-round pick Levi Michael signed for last night, so by making this deal, the Tigers essentially paid for the Twins' signing bonus on their first-round pick as well.

I wish Delmon the best of luck in the rest of his career, and I'm disappointed to see his time in Minnesota end like this after making strides in 2010, but I don't think the move is a terrible one by the front office.

Steve Adams writes for MLBTradeRumors.com and MLB.com and contributes at 612Sports.NET. You can follow him on Twitter: @Adams_Steve

Comment 111 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

PTBL

Rumor has it, the player can’t yet be traded because he was a 2010 draft pick.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 9:29 AM EDT reply actions  

It has to do with when you signed, I believe

A drafted player has to be signed for 1 year before they can be traded. Not sure what the rules are for International FAs…

by John_Locke on Aug 16, 2011 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

Sickels

Doesnt have Nelson in the preseason top 20. So no need to get too excited about him yet.

http://mobile.minorleagueball.com/2011/7/31/2306561/detroit-tigers-2011-top-20-pre-season-prospects-in-review

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 9:44 AM EDT via mobile reply actions  

That's not surprising

He was a 45th round draft choice after all.

He’s a high-upside lefty. As such, I don’t mind this pay off, all things considered. The PTBL is gravy.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

10th rounder by Detroit

His was picked in the 45th by the Rays the year before.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 16, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Ah, good to know

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

High upside?

Im no scout but i see LOGY at best

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 11:11 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

good writeup.

thanks Steve.

I don't know, but I've been told it's hard to run with the weight of gold,
'the other hand, I've heard it said, it's just as hard with the weight of lead.

by montanatwinsfan on Aug 16, 2011 10:35 AM EDT reply actions  

Put me on record...

…I believe the PTBNL will be Andrew Oliver. A big lefty the Twins drafted out of high school and are very high on. He is on their 40-man roster, thus would be difficult trading until after the season is over. The Twins also indicated the PTBNL would arrive by October 15th. That means none of the 2011 draft picks are options because they can’t be traded until next June.

by roger13 on Aug 16, 2011 10:44 AM EDT reply actions  

That would be pretty amazing

Oliver is one of the Tigers top prospects and would completely change my opinion of things, but I have a hard time believing that Smith was able to extract that much out of the Tigers. Almost every other team in the AL didn’t think Young was worth his contract, and passed on him during the waiver process. At this point the Twins didn’t really have a lot of leverage. I hope you are right, I really do, but I not too optimistic. I’m guessing they agreed on a list of low level prospects and the Twins will spend the next month scouting those guys to decide which one “pitches to contact” better.

by whydidnt on Aug 16, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

It's all how you look at things...

If you look at the context of where Delmon is right now, considering his production, awful defense, and salary, the deal isn’t awful. If you consider we dealt Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett for him, just a few years ago, and that Tampa was able to land 4 pretty darn good prospects just for Garza this last off-season, you see just how poorly Bill Smith is doing. We have seen it over and over with him, he’s afraid to pull the trigger on deals, and by the time he finally makes a deal the player’s value has fallen to nothing…remember the Santana fiasco?

The scary part is that the Twins are pretty lousy this year, their minor league teams are all doing fairly poor, especially at the higher levels, meaning they don’t have a lot of help coming for next year, they don’t have a lot of trade chips that could turn into anything, and they have shown little to no interest in improving the club via Free Agency. We could be looking at another losing year next year as well, especially if Smith keeps steering the way he has.

by whydidnt on Aug 16, 2011 11:20 AM EDT reply actions  

We can’t judge this trade based on the Garza/Bartlett trade. We can all have our opinions on that trade, but it is in the past. It is silly to criticize this trade because of what we had traded for Delmon 4 years ago. At this point, it’s irrelevant.

The Twins, like Steve said, got to keep $1.3m to give to their draft picks. Nelson might never seen the majors, but who knows about the PTBNL? I’ll be optimistic about that player.

by al-exx on Aug 16, 2011 11:47 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Seriously

Enough about Matt Garza. Holy cow this is getting old.

The beard abides.

by Jason Kubel's Beard on Aug 16, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions   3 recs

I am still mad about the Tommy Herr trade.

so… thanks for keeping perspective.

"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan

by Kpz1234 on Aug 16, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

that was a bad one

even though I loved the Smith-Herr DP combo on the Cards

The beard abides.

by Jason Kubel's Beard on Aug 16, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm still mad about Garza too.

Really mad actually, but there’s nothing I can do about it now.

It’s only useful to mention as one more part of showing Bill Smith has risen to this level of incompetence.

by MNPundit on Aug 16, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

what’s really getting old and worn is billy smith’s tenure as GM.

by fortmyer on Aug 16, 2011 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

Right

Would love this to be his last year

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 11:13 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

An Edina kid?

Welcome to the team, cake eater!

Oooh… this is just like Mighty Ducks when they recruit Adam Banks!

by ColossusOfRhode on Aug 16, 2011 12:09 PM EDT reply actions   2 recs

I never got the cake-eater reference.

Was that some sort of French Revolution legend allusion? Who doesn’t like cake?

by MNPundit on Aug 16, 2011 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's been tied to Edina for as long as I can remember

It’s an allusion to the fact that they’re (allegedly) all so rich and snobby that they eat cake instead of bread — yes, a la the French Revolution. And/or they can have their cake and eat it too.

Although, as a Wayzata alum, it’s also a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.

by ColossusOfRhode on Aug 16, 2011 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can't see how this is a bad deal for the Twins

This trade likely means that the Twins had already decided to non-tender Delmon after the season. So, from the Twins perspective, you’re choosing between nothing and 2 players. I’ll take the 2 players, thanks.

Aside from what the Twins get, Delmon’s absence also means more playing/development time for Revere, and about $1 million saved from what they would have paid Delmon for the last 6 weeks of the season.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 16, 2011 12:44 PM EDT reply actions  

Yes

It’s all good. And I’m especially interested to see Revere in left every day.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Isn't Revere

a bit more polished Carlos Gomez, minus the power? Just asking.

"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan

by Kpz1234 on Aug 16, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Revere = Gomez - power - arm + plate discipline - attitude

Honestly, I bet he’ll give the Twins about the same amount of value overall.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 16, 2011 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

They're actually very different players

They have similar range in the field. But that’s where the similarities end.

  • Gomez swings and misses about 8 times a game. Ben Revere swings and misses about 8 times a week.
  • Gomez takes about five pitches per game; Revere takes 10 pages a game
  • When Gomez makes contact, the ball jumps off his bat. When Revere makes contact, the ball rolls off his bat.
  • Gomez has one of the top five outfield arms in the game. You’d be hard pressed to find five outfielders with worse arms than Ben Revere
  • They have similar speed, but Revere tends to get better jumps and will tend to have a better stealing percentage

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

pages=pitches

Occupational hazard of working in Web development

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Now I really don't like not developing Gomez.

But that’s b/c I like having good arms in the outfield. I remember from watching Gomez he appeared very unfocused and undisciplined. But the talent IS there.

"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan

by Kpz1234 on Aug 16, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Have you already forgotten his throw results?

He threw like a banshee from hell … 10 feet wide of the mark.

I don't know, but I've been told it's hard to run with the weight of gold,
'the other hand, I've heard it said, it's just as hard with the weight of lead.

by montanatwinsfan on Aug 16, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

He was no Torii Hunter. But he was no Jacque Jones either

All things considered, it was the strongest outfield arm I’ve ever seen.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

ever?...

i couldn’t go that far. vlad, larry walker, etc.

by DJSkillz on Aug 16, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

I never saw Vlad or Walker live

Choo is actually pretty close. I just saw some throws from Gomez that I had never seen live—deep in the gap on-the-fly strikes to the base to nail fast runners.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

gotcha...

ya, i don’t know about live. but all-time, there’s no way i could say that.

i believe guys like ankiel/walker/vlad all had stronger arms. i’d even guess cuddy’s arm was better.

by DJSkillz on Aug 16, 2011 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not Ankiel or Cuddy

I saw them both, of course. Ankiel’s arm was surprisingly just above average considering that he threw 97 from the mound. I think he dialed it back for accuracy. Cuddyer’s is about as good as Hunter’s, maybe a touch better. Gomez is a cut above Hunter’s.

Vlad’s was the best I’ve seen on TV, but it was erratic.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

i disagree on all counts...

but that’s okay. reasonable people can…

by DJSkillz on Aug 16, 2011 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Fuck

I am sick an tired of people cheerleading Twins FO cheapness

Think they will lower the cost of beer? no way

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 11:14 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

Intelligence should be cheered.

If you’re out of the race, why pay an extra $1 million to a player you’re going to non-tender? I’d rather the Twins put that money to better use in the offseason.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

but they won't

they will spend to their % of revenue like they always do

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

Lately, they've spent it pretty wisely

Thome, Pavano, Mauer, Span, Baker….

They’re not cheap, by any stretch.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

I would agree except with Span.

The Twins signed Span to a 4-year deal last spring with a club option for 2015. At that time, he was still 2 years away from being arbitration eligible. Then, he would have 3 more years of team control before he could become a free agent. He was already locked up through 2015. the contract did not extend team control at all.

All the Twins did really was make Span happy and save a few million over a 5-year period. So far, it’s not bit them in the buttocks, but that doesn’t mean it was a good decision at the time. To put that into perspective, you need to realize that the Twins also “locked up” Nick Blackburn for he already team-controlled years that offseason. Look at how that turned out.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

Span has one of the most team-friendly contracts in the game

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

It's back-loaded, and it's not that much better that arbitration would have been.

Spans’s salary looks good now, but you have to look at contracts in their entirety. His salary goes up over the course of the deal. The cost looks great until you realize that he would have made about as much in arbitration anyway. The Twins simply took on risk in exchange for a small discount over a 5-year period.

If Span had fizzled out after 1 good year or suffered a career-threatening injury, the deal would have been a huge mistake. The day the deal was signed, the Twins guaranteed him $17 million regardless of what might happen. Just because it hasn’t gone wrong doesn’t mean that it was a good decision at the time.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

This

Also, it was widely understood at the time that Span’s and Blackburn’s longer-term contracts were in an effort to create some roster & payroll stability leading up to Mauer’s risky long-term deal.

  Span’s avg. $5MM is an absolute steal for an above average starting CF & leadoff man, and a drop in the bucket of a $115-120MM payroll, especially with all of the cheap, young prospect we have coming up through the system.

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Aug 17, 2011 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

It would be real cheap if he were a free agent.

-But he was still under team control for 5 years. On top of that, he was 26 year-old player with less than 2 years of experience in the majors. Yes, he was a good young player, but part of what makes good young players so valuable is that you don’t have to commit long contracts to them.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

Part of contract science is knowing when to sign guys to save money

This is a team-friendly contract. I.E. it will save the team many millions over it’s life. Ergo, they did a good job signing him. Was it luck or prescience? Probably a little of both. But we get credit for good luck, no?

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think it saved much.

He signed to a 4-year $16.5 million contract + a $9 million club option for 2015 with a $0.5 million buyout. Assuming the Twins do pick up that option (because that’s the best case scenario resulting from the contract), that’s 5 years for $25.5 million.

Now, Span would have made very little for 2010 and 2011 (prior to being arbitration eligible) and then hit 3 years of arbitration where he would have made somewhere in the range of $25 million altogether, assuming he’s healthy and producing at a high level.

Without the contract, you’re probably looking at paying Span $28 million over that 5-year period. That’s a savings of only $2.5 million verses guaranteeing 4 years and $17 million.

That’s a high risk (or if you prefer: medium risk) / low reward situation, which is bad business. I would have been much happier if the contract ran past 2015 (the year he was already under control through), but it doesn’t.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

You probably know better what those arb values are

But they seem a bit low to me. Of course, it hinges on Span performing like he did to start the season, which is a question mark. So medium risk is about right.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

agreed...

steal of a contract. michael bourn is probably a pretty good comp, and he’s set to get paid a LOT soon.

by DJSkillz on Aug 17, 2011 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

The biggest problem I had with the contract was the length of it, actually.

Squabbling about $1-2 mil doesn’t really matter much. You can argue that the Twins were looking for payroll stability before signing Mauer, but neither Span’s not Blackburn’s contracts changed much in terms of what they would be making. The biggest thing they did is make sure the Twins couldn’t non-tender either player if the need to do so would arise.

I actually really like Span and am/was glad that he’s going to be a Twin for several more years. What bothered me the most was fans and the media patting Bill Smith on the back for “locking up” Span for the exact same amount of time he was under team control anyway. Even if the Twins were convinced that he was a lock as the lead-off hitter for the next 5 years, they should have tried to gain some team control in the deal.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

maybe...

but did you really want them to go to a 6-7 year deal on an unproven player?

regardless, they did excellent. they’ve saved tons of money over the life of his deal.

by DJSkillz on Aug 17, 2011 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

No, they didn't.

As I illustrated above, the Twins likely will have saved around $3 million over 5 years if Span continues to contribute well. He wasn’t going to get a big payday until 2016 anyway.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Bitter clutterheart is bitter.

The Twins are cheap! Beer costs too much! Kent Hrbek never returns my calls! Everything sucks!

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

I look at this trade as a step forward for 2012 for this team.

I think re-signing Young would have been a step backward (more time and resources sunk into a former top prospect who can’t seem to live up to his high expectations), and non-tendering him would have been, well, no step at all.

 The only thing I don’t get is why in the world no one in this division minds giving Detroit major league ready pieces? Again, I’m not hurt to see Young go (at least we got something for him), but we’re now the 3rd team to deal the Tigers a usable piece in the past 13 months. The Indians sent Jhonny Peralta there at last season’s non-waiver deadline, the Royals did the same with Betemit this year, and now the Twins have given them what actually appears to be an upgrade to their outfield, as hard as that may be to comprehend. So why is it that what has always seemed so taboo is getting to be somewhat “normal” for the Tigers?

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Aug 16, 2011 12:49 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Unless he cleared waivers they had to trade him to Detroit

or hang on to him until the offseason. Smith did the right thing for the team and for DY. Now Young gets to play for a contender and the Twins can start looking to 2012.

by Stefa on Aug 16, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ha!

2 minor league relievers….where have I heard this before?!?!

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Aug 16, 2011 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Minor league stats

254 IP
11.2 K/9
4.0 BB/9
3.22 ERA
2 career starts, both as an 18-year-old in the Venezuelan summer league when he was 18 – he’s exclusively a reliever

He’s currently 23 years old and had a cup of coffee with the big league club in July, throwing 8 innings in 9 appearances.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 16, 2011 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

Really interesting to watch his numbers as he's moved up through the minors.

Looks like he keeps getting promoted mid-season after lighting up a lower level, then moves up and gives up more hits & walks, but also generally gets more K’s as well. Probably just a result of small sample size?

  Sounds like this season has not gone well for him going from AA → AAA → MLB → AAA → and then back to AA.
 

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Aug 16, 2011 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

No clue on it's accuracy

But this seems to be a decent little profile on the guy.

by archie2227 on Aug 16, 2011 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is having a rough rough year at AAA, and MLB we know he can handle AA

I’m not too thrilled

~David Kahn is pretty much clueless~
Twins top 11 ~ Gibson, Sano, Hendriks, Hicks, Arcia, Salcedo, Benson, Michael, Kepler, Rosario, Gutierrez ~

by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Aug 16, 2011 3:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Better than nothing

at the very least these two clowns will probably provide some laughs on this board from time to time

The beard abides.

by Jason Kubel's Beard on Aug 16, 2011 4:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Joke

This trade is a joke. Delmon has not performed as well this year as he did last year. That is one big reason why we are where we are in the standings (though Mauer’s weak season, Morneau’s injuries and Billy Smith’s horrifying bullpen — filled with people who would not have a job in the major leagues but for the Twins — are other factors).

That said, it’s crazy-talk to think that a relief pitcher in single-A is comparable (even with a PTBNL). There are many other players who may or may not make it between now and when Cole gets his call-up (assuming he gets a call-up). Until fans demand a much better GM, this franchise will continue to deteriorate until the only player left is Mauer (and the only fans left at Target on non-Yankee/RedSox nights are employees).

by Teo12345 on Aug 16, 2011 4:45 PM EDT reply actions  

The PTBNL

Is Lester Oliveros. Done today.

I wouldn’t look at this as a trade. I look at it as the Twins setting up for the off season. Likely they had already decided they wouldn’t bring Young back for next year. Therefore, might as well get something for him now rather than nothing.

by spanspanspan on Aug 16, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Unreal

For all the whining everyone here does about DY, you would think everyone would be happy that we got more than a bag of batting practice balls and some rosin bags. While I’m not really concerned overall, at least we got something for a non-tender candidate. With the Twins’ glut of outfielders and the fact that 2011 is in the can, it made sense.

but the right pony can be like a friend with benefits...-montanatwinsfan 2/2/11

by carlpavanosmoustache on Aug 16, 2011 5:21 PM EDT reply actions  

I don't see that we DID get more

than another bag of balls for an everyday player.

And quite frankly, I’m sick and tired of this FO getting NOTHING but bags of balls for their front line players. The “Season is over excuse” only cuts is so far, since Smith and Gardy annihilated the team’s depth to PUT us in this position. You can only make so many trades where you toss a dart at the wall for what you get back until you’ve got nothing in the shed.

So no, they should’ve traded one of the players who DID have value at the deadline. And then, maybe gasp try Young in RF, where his lack of range wouldn’t have hurt the team nearly as badly. But no, that bit of selling to build for the future doesn’t register to Smith. Easier to trade the players in the doghouse.

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 16, 2011 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's all relative

I think the Delmon trade is a pretty clear sign that he was going to be nontendered in the offseason – the team simply wasn’t going to pay $6 million for a corner outfielder (and not a good one) coming off a season with an 89 OPS+, and I have a hard time blaming them. If you assume he was going to be nontendered, anything at all is more than they’d have gotten for him in the offseason.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 17, 2011 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

It's simple.

At some point, you have to decide if Delmon is going to be the guy you want in left filed for the long run. At that price, I think the Twins decided they want someone who can actually play left field. It makes perfect sense to me.

by Pesky on Aug 16, 2011 6:15 PM EDT reply actions  

Then you trade when he has value

Not when he’s worthless.

Does it make sense that you trade from a position of strength and get value in return when you trade? Or is that too arcane a concept? At what point should we say we’ve had enough of trading away everyday players for nothing?

I would say we should’ve said ‘enough’ at Hardy. But apparently, many people here are willing to commit the same mistake over again and then wonder why the cupboard is bare next season too. I don’t quite see the need for 2 more bullpen arms that will never make the Majors. Especially when we traded a #2 starter (at worst) and a better shortstop than anyone who we’ve replaced him with since to get Delmon. How many times of being on the losing end of a trade are we supposed to stomach?

Is that simple enough? If you trade, you trade for value. You don’t just chuck everyday players over the side. 1.3 mil in salary is not sufficient for a dump to merit offloading before the end of the season. Is the standard of expectation so low for our Front Office now that we can applaud if they only get fleeced willingly?

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 16, 2011 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

So we should have traded him last year?

That was the only time he’s had value since we acquired him.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

If you keep him through the end of the season

Then you either commit to paying him $10 million or let him walk.

Which would you prefer?

by gbg on Aug 16, 2011 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

10 million?

How would he get that?
They could have nonntendered him but still try to sign him. RH power potential is a major organizational weakness. Now they have Cuddy and Valencia. And to have Cuddy next year they might have to over pay.

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 11:07 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

It's more like $6-7 million

Arbitration is based more on tenure than performance. Since Young will have started more games than just about any other outfielder in his six-year major league career, that will get him the $6-7 million. If this season was like last year’s, it would be more like $10 million.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Non tender him

Then try and sign him back.

by clutterheart on Aug 16, 2011 11:18 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

I doubt they want to do that

They’d rather have Revere playing left every day.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Uh... No.

As I stated below, you don’t give up leverage (team control) and then negotiate a deal. That would be retarded.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

uh...no

all Delmon would have to do is wait until arbritration which means both sides have no leverage
Then its up to some pencil pusher to decide.

So you non tender and hope nobody is going to go after him too hard. He is free to look at the market and decide.

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

*facepalm*

Ok, I guess I have to spell this out for you… Your “plan” would have been for the Twins to non-tender Delmon Young and then try to negotiate an inexpensive contract with him as an unrestricted free agent. Non-tendering him does 2 things:

(1) It allows the player to sign with any team, which gives the player leverage.
(2) It removes the team’s option of forcing the player to accept only a 1-year contract which gives the player leverage.

A player in Delmon’s position is going to demand a multi-year contract if he has that option because he’s young and still has the talent that made him a #1 overall pick, and SOMEONE is going to give it to him. If you give him a multi-year deal, you’re going to be committing a lot more money to him that the $7-8 million that he would have made in arbitration if you hadn’t non-tendered him.

The ONLY WAY this ends up being a smart move is if you knew that Delmon wasn’t going to get an offer for a multi year deal or anything more than $8 million from any of the other 29 MLB teams. The fact is that if the Tigers do non-tender him, he’s probably going to get a 3-year deal from someone in the neighborhood of $20 million. That would not preferable to a 1-year, $8 million contract via arbitration.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

What?

You think Young is going to get 3 years 20 mil as a free agent???
Wow.
My eyebrows would be raised if that happened. So yes. If you think he is worth that much on the open market then non tendering him would be a bad idea.

I think he could be had for much much less as according to Len III he could not be traded because of his dollars.

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 7:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

-Except he was traded.

When exactly was the time the Twins couldn’t trade Delmon? Before the season? Nope, they definitely could have traded him then. The Twins were holding out hope of staying in the race, and when they tanked in August, they traded him. It really happened.

And regarding a free agent deal that he might sign, yes I do think that some team will pay him that. He’s going to be a 26 year-old right handed power hitter and corner outfielder. He is a former first overall pick who still has upside, and he hasn’t even entered his prime yet. To put that into perspective, Jason Werth just signed a 7-year $126 million contract with the Washington Nationals last winter. Yes, he’s a proven player, but he’s also 32 and leaving his prime. The Nats were insane to give him that deal, but it shows you what some teams will do for right-handed power. Someone will/would give Delmon a 3-year, $20 million deal because it might pay out big time. That’s the kind of deal that Billy Beane has been known to make.

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

umm, no.

that is the exact opposite thing Billy Bean would do. the point of his money ball mantra is to find players that have skills that lead to winning baseball games that are undervalued by other teams. ie he wouldn’t over pay for a right handed power bat. especially when his metrics just are not that good in that category

other GM’s might however..

Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?

by the Real Thor on Aug 18, 2011 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Also...

Small-market teams aren’t real keen on committing to long-term contracts with guys whose production is unpredictable. A 3/$20M deal to a low-OBP poor-defense guy whose one good season is based primarily on the fact that he had 100 RBI is basically as non-Beane a move as possible.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 18, 2011 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

This

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 18, 2011 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

Procedural question

I seem to recall hearing a few years ago that if you nontender a guy, you can’t re-sign him until May. Was that just a problem with certain players or in certain years, or is that a current rule?

From a practical perspective, if your employer just decided they weren’t going to give you the deal you thought you were going to get, then offered you a fifth of that, would you really consider staying with that employer, especially if there were other places that would give you roughly the same offer? That’s the situation Delmon would’ve been if the Twins had nontendered him – I find it pretty unlikely that he would’ve re-signed, even given an offer competitive with what he could get somewhere else. He’s not a guy who’s real tied into the community, and he’s never been well-liked by the fans or (as far as we know) management; I see no reason he would even consider re-signing with the Twins.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 17, 2011 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

They changed that rule

It was the rule when we nontendered Ortiz. But now you can nontender a guy and sign him back for below his arb number. It rarely happens, though. For obvious reasons, agents hate the practice.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks

I assumed that was the case, but I didn’t recall exactly where I’d heard the other rule, so I wasn’t sure where to look to see whether it was changed.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 17, 2011 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

RH power is indeed a major organizational weakness

I don’t see how a guy who’s hit five homers all season is really helping with that.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 17, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

20 HRs two years ago

Took a huge huge step back. Would like to see him stay at DH and see what happens

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 7:53 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

no way he would've gotten 10.

7 max.

And saving 1.3mil (which they won’t, since they have to pay the scrubs they traded for from that money), did not help the organization in any substantial way.

When you trade, you trade to improve the franchise. You don’t trade to clean out the doghouse. Which with Gardy, is never going to be empty ‘anyway.’

But if they had non-tendered and re-signed, it would’ve been for less than that even. And I’ll still sit here and wonder why they never, ever had the sense to try Young in RF, if range was the issue. Ludicrous.

Am I mad he stunk this year? Sure. But who HASN’T stunk in a Twins uni this season? If we clear out everyone who underperformed this season, we don’t have a roster left.

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 17, 2011 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions  

We'd have Cuddyer

But seriously, how do you explain trading away Young after his 2010 season, when the team clearly says, we want to go back to the playoffs?
If the Twins didn’t want to bring him back, they wouldnt have done it either way, tender or not

by twinscrazy_german on Aug 17, 2011 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

You explain the trade by getting value

That’s been my point all along. We had a log jam of slow, no defense “run producers” (who hit for barely adequate power, at that).

We had NEEDS at MI (after we idiotically let both starters walk last season), back-up catcher, starting pitching that could miss bats, and perhaps depth on the bench. (I won’t say bullpen arms, because that’s the one thing Smith will invariably fixate on.)

Filling 1 or more of these needs by trading Young, or Cuddyer, or Kubel, when they HAD value in the offseason would have 1) justified resigning Thome, who feel-good value aside, didn’t belong on this season’s roster given the backlog of DH ready players we already had. 2) allowed us to better endure the barrage of injuries we took by having REAL depth in the organization instead of calling up Rochester.

We can sit here and say it’s all Delmon’s fault. But pretty much everyone has underperformed this season. Singling him and Valencia out is getting old. Luck is the residue of design. Bill Smith’s design was based on the assumption that EVERY plan they made this offseason would pan out 100%. That’s bad chess, bad poker, bad whatever game you want to play. When something went wrong, we discovered that we have an Ewok instead of Grand Admiral Thrawn as GM. Blame it on bad luck all you want.

It’s bad luck like the economy is bad luck. You make bad decisions, you reap bad results. The luck merely points out that you screwed up already.

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 17, 2011 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

agreed...

We went into this season with major question marks in the bullpen, 1 not even a question mark but a bad player at backup C who should not be on a ML roster, and FOUR question marks in the infield:

Morneau-we all knew we couldn’t count on him this season
Casilla-this one has worked out IMO, but it was still a question mark
Yoshi-major question mark, no matter expectations; never seen a ML field
Valencia-major question mark

by DJSkillz on Aug 17, 2011 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think Casilla has worked out

They assumed he’d be an every day shortstop, and he failed miserably (again). He’s adequate defensively at 2b, but no better. Really, he’s best for the organization as a Utility infielder. There’s no shame in having a guy who can serviceably play 3 positions, hit for a respectable average, and steal the occasional base (when he doesn’t get picked off, that is).

But Morneau was a red flag all along. Yoshi was rated as a 2b, never a shortstop, and I’m not going to blame the guy for Nick Swisher’s cheap shot, which ruined his season. Valencia would’ve been fine, IF they had a veteran infielder to steady the ship.

But oh wait, they got rid of BOTH of those. facepalm

And I don’t think we spent “wisely” on Pavano either. I don’t know how a 4.75 ERA and one of the worst k per 9 rates in baseball (which means his ERA isn’t a fluke, no matter how you want to dice it, except that maybe he’s lucky it’s that LOW), is justified money to anyone. And I’m pretty sure I can point to about 30 threads in the offseason where I mentioned that Pavano’s career trajectory is a yo-yo. One decent season followed by a disaster. 5.0ERAs are the NORM w/ Pavano, not an aberration. And betting Free Agent Money on a 35 yr old coming off a career year, when that meant sitting/trading a 27 year old entering his prime, was always playing with a lit fuse. Guess what, it went off in our face, I’m shocked.

Paying Pavano and betting Liriano would turn into an Ace was always bad bets for the rotation. Just like letting both Hardy and Hudson go. Just like paying Capps instead of 2 of the relievers we let go with the same money, who both were better in high leverage situations, but didn’t have numbers in the most overrated stat in baseball. And just like keeping all of Young, Cuddyer, Kubel, and Thome was asking for a logjam in the DH position, and crippled the team’s Major League-ready infield depth.

This wasn’t bad luck. It was bad design. And the architects should be held accountable.

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 18, 2011 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Valencia's defensive numbers are intertwined with the churn at short

We see this all the time. Third base UZR numbers are correlated with SS UZR numbers. Valencia’s great season last year was strongly related to Hardy’s strong season. Hardy’s one of the best at covering the hole. He gets outs in the third baseman’s zone. Those outs would be hits and count against the third baseman’s UZR. We saw this with Punto as well. When he played next to Bartlett, he had all-world UZR. When he played next to Harris, not so much.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 18, 2011 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

No disagreement

But that goes again to the “poor planning” point. Gardy pushed the Casilla is an everyday shortstop meme all offseason. Even if you THOUGHT this was a good idea, there was no incentive to dump Hardy for nothing when you could keep a perfectly serviceable infielder on the roster in case things didn’t pan out.

Instead they cleared out ‘every’ experienced MI on the roster to give the job to 2 people with no positive everyday experience. Really, what could go wrong with THIS?

by Shawn Gillogly on Aug 18, 2011 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

The missing piece: The fact the Delmon sucked is on Delmon, not the FO

In all of this, everybody blames Bill Smith. I am as guilty as anyone. Bringing in Young was a bad trade then and it has only gotten worse. You just don’t trade two precious commodities for one player in a position of relative abundance. (And don’t talk to me about Harris and Pridie: They were fillers to grease the skids, nothing more.)

But what is missing is the sense that Delmon Young has underperformed his scouting projections in Minnesota by a huge margin. Those who say we gave away a former number 1 draft pick ad BA top prospect are right. But is that our fault? If you had asked 30 scouts at the time of the trade, 28 would say his future was very bright. All 28 of those were wrong. Even among SABR-centric minor league aficionados on Sickels’ site, the initial consensus was that the Twins got the better end of the deal. It was no mere enthusiasm to expect something between Albert Belle and Vladamir Guerrero from Young.

Is it Bill Smith’s fault that he had one good year and three horseshit years? No. Is it the coaching staff’s fault? No. It’s on Delmon Young. By all accounts, he was one of the most talented players to ever wear a Twins uniform. The fact that he was the worst regular outfielder in Twins history (by the numbers) tells you how poorly he played here. I’m surprised nobody is outraged at what a dog he was.

Go ahead. Get it out. He’s a Tiger now. Now is not the time to play Minnesota nice. Let’s hear a collective Bronx cheer for the biggest disappointment to don a Twins uniform since David McCarty. Let’s give him the regular Chuck Knoblauch treatment when he comes to Target Field. He deserves it!

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 16, 2011 11:33 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Right

He is not the star some scouts thought he might be.
But he should not be given away for so little. He is one of the few RH bats the Twins had. If he was nontendered then resigned he would have value. Now leyland will platoon him and he will bring value to detroit.

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 5:47 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

You would have preferred the Twins get nothing for him instead of something?
he should not be given away for so little

The fact is that if the Twins waited until the offseason to get rid of him, they would have gotten exactly nothing for him in return. I understand that if you’re looking at what we gave up to get him 4 years ago, you would be very disappointed in his return. -But the Twins aren’t trading away 2007 Delmon Young. They’re trading away 2011 Delmon Young, and he’s probably not even worth his contract. Getting anything for him is a win for the FO.

If he was nontendered then resigned he would have value.

OK, you obviously don’t understand how contract negotiation and leverage works. You can always negotiate multi-year contracts with players who are arbitration eligible. Why, why, WHY would you think that non-tendering Delmon and then resigning him would be anything resembling a possiblity? A team wouldn’t give up contract control and then negotiate with a player. “Here, let’s get rid of this leverage we have and then hammer out a contract.” That would be idiotic.

The Tigers can still non-tender him. It’s possible they view this as a 1+ month rental to help with their pennant push. Even if they want to bring him back in 2012, they would just offer him arbitration and he would have to take it because he’s still under team control. Then, they would only be on the hook for a 1 year contract (which is what arbitration contracts are).

FIRE DAN EDWARDS!!!

by Flip27 on Aug 17, 2011 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

If they offer him arbritration, they have to sign him due to a formula set by the leauge

If they non tender him but try to sign him afterwords they are free of the formula and arbritrator.

The problem with arbritration is both parties lose leverage and its simply a formula

by clutterheart on Aug 17, 2011 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

The "league" doesn't set a "formula"

Its a legal process originally designed to help resolve disputes outside of a court process.

MLB uses a funny form of arbitration which forces the arbitrator to choose one side’s offer over the other’s rather than make an independent final judgement, but the arbitrator still weighs the evidence for each side’s proposed number.

I would assume MLB uses it as an effective means to secure legally binding decisions while allowing parties to avoid the expense, and nastiness, of court.

There is no “formula”
The “league” isn’t directly involved.

I don't know, but I've been told it's hard to run with the weight of gold,
'the other hand, I've heard it said, it's just as hard with the weight of lead.

by montanatwinsfan on Aug 17, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Maybe formula isn't the right word

But I assume arbiters review similar cases when they make their determination. Looking at similar arbitration cases, a good estimate is $6.5 million. The precedent says players tend to get more credit for playing time than performance.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

agreed. i'd say he'd get $6.5M to $7M or so, at least....

and I bet Slowey gets something like $4M in 2012 after getting $2.7M this year, even with limited PT.

by DJSkillz on Aug 17, 2011 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh I'm sure that the arbitrators have touchstones,

like looking at similar playing time and similar player results, other contracts and other arbitration results etc… which help inform the decision.

But that is a very different process from the league having a formula that sets arbitration prices.

I don't know, but I've been told it's hard to run with the weight of gold,
'the other hand, I've heard it said, it's just as hard with the weight of lead.

by montanatwinsfan on Aug 18, 2011 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

When would they get more?

Year one? By the time they realized he was not as advertised, he had very little trade value
Year two? Ditto.
Last year? That was his best season and he was one of the offensive stars on the team
This offseason? Well, maybe. But we’re not privy to what might have been offered. And again, they had reason to believe he would repeat his 2010 numbers this year. A lot of people thought he had turned a corner.
Before the break? They tried. No one wanted him at the Twins’ price tag.

Bottom line, they probably got what they could for him, given they had to deal with the Tigers or nobody. Frankly, I’m surprised they got as much as they did, considering that there’s one player with a lower WAR since we acquired Delmon: Yunieski Betancourt. And that includes last year, which was a positvie WAR year. It just shows how far he’s fallen since his once vaunted prospect status.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 17, 2011 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

Doubtful on the platooning.

 His line improves like this against LH starters over RH starters: .006/.004/.014, tOPS+ of 103 vs. LH starters, 98 vs. RH starters.

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Aug 17, 2011 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

TT is an SB Nation blog of, by and for the fans. We strive to be the best Minnesota Twins blog by providing quality content and analysis, as well as daily news and notes on the team. We hope you'll make Twinkie Town your home for all things Twins!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Jedi2_small
BBMP6 Challenge™ Scores 5/13-5/24
Tc_at_tf_small
Hope in Beloit?

Recent FanPosts

Puckett_small
A Night in The Cell
2011-06-18_22
Rochester Celebrates 10 years of affiliation by immortalizing Dustin Martin on a Magnet
Small
I get tired of trade or acquisition discussions. . .
Snickers_small
The Next Move
Small
(Cross-post from my blog) Twins. Red Wings. It's a revolving door.
Waterpolo1956_small
Free Anthony Slama!
Snickers_small
"We Gotta Start Trading 'Em...All Of 'Em!"
Small
AAA players who could help the Twins
Justin_morneau-143_small
Fixing the Twins Pitching

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Twinkie Town On Twitter

Yahoo_full_count

Editor-In-Chief

Twinkietown_small Jesse

Senior Writer

Small Bobomojo

Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler

The_jet_small cmathewson

Gladdentwins_small Adam Peterson

Hosken_powell_autograph_small RandBall's Stu

Mustache_small Andrew Bryz-Gornia

Twins_woo_small Steve Adams

W00t__2__small brandonwarne52

Special Contributor

Small roger13

Untitled_small Trevour

Chairmanmauer_small fischean

Metargetfieldjose_small myjah

Small Brady Eyestone