Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Recent Blogs

Photo

Article: Byung-Ho Park Signs With KBO’s Nexen Heroes

byungho park
  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#21 mikelink45

mikelink45

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 2,085 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 10:21 AM

It was worth the gamble.It hurt nothing.No Twin was kept from advancing and if it had worked it would have been great.The Korean League can pretend to be the major league and players like Park can be heroes.Now he can even say he played in the American MLB and that can only help his reputation. 


#22 Deduno Abides

Deduno Abides

    Rochester Plates

  • Members
  • 1,781 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 10:35 AM

For those saying it was worth a shot and didn’t hurt anything, remember that Park’s signing, as well as keeping Plouffe, is why Sano was moved to RF. That hurt.
  • glunn, Thrylos, gil4 and 4 others like this

#23 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,241 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 11:11 AM

 

For those saying it was worth a shot and didn’t hurt anything, remember that Park’s signing, as well as keeping Plouffe, is why Sano was moved to RF. That hurt.

Well, Sano was never going to be DH so Park really had nothing to do with it.

 

Park was a reasonable gamble. For all those who want the Twins to sign Ohtani or Darvish, they'll be blocking Romero, Gonsalves, Thorpe, etc and taking payroll as well. 

  • glunn, Vanimal46 and KirbyDome89 like this

#24 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,851 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 27 November 2017 - 11:18 AM

 

I will always wonder how much of this was marketing, both in Korea and in MN. The Twins had numerous bashers with long swings, who had trouble with both velocity and spin, and the inability to make contact. They put up good numbers in AAA and hardly ever set foot in MN. Yet we "outbid" all of baseball for Park, and were to believe his flaws were a mirage? I tend to be a skeptical pragmatic, and when the MN Twins, at least the previous administration, win a bidding contest at anything bigger than an estate auction, something is amiss.

The Twins 'outbid' the entire MLB and paid backup level money for Park. At that price point it was a chance worth taking.

  • glunn, birdwatcher, Oldgoat_MN and 1 other like this

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#25 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,743 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 27 November 2017 - 11:22 AM

 

Well, Sano was never going to be DH so Park really had nothing to do with it.

 

Park was a reasonable gamble. For all those who want the Twins to sign Ohtani or Darvish, they'll be blocking Romero, Gonsalves, Thorpe, etc and taking payroll as well. 

 

Yeah I agree Park's signing had very little to do with Sano moving to RF. It had everything to do with Plouffe staying in the organization and TR valuing his defense over Sano's. At the time there wasn't any question Plouffe was a better fielder than Sano. 

  • glunn and Oldgoat_MN like this

#26 spinowner

spinowner

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,995 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 12:25 PM

 

Yeah I agree Park's signing had very little to do with Sano moving to RF. It had everything to do with Plouffe staying in the organization and TR valuing his defense over Sano's. At the time there wasn't any question Plouffe was a better fielder than Sano. 

I think the reason Sano had to go to RF is because the Twins had the misfortune of wanting to trade Plouffe when there was no market whatsoever for third basemen. Plouffe would have been a worse defensive RF than Sano and Sano would have been a worse defensive 3B than Plouffe. So they had to keep Plouffe and play him at 3B hoping that someone would trade a used fungo bat for him. Everyone knew it was short term but it was just one of those unfortunate things.

  • glunn, Oldgoat_MN and Sconnie like this

#27 Twins33

Twins33

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 456 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 02:13 PM

For all those who want the Twins to sign Ohtani or Darvish, they'll be blocking Romero, Gonsalves, Thorpe, etc and taking payroll as well.

We keep using the word "blocking" (I've done it too) but has a player ever actually been blocked? Berrios maybe, but that argument could go either way in my opinion. I was for him being up even earlier than he was, just for the record. Nolasco, Duffey and Gibson sure shouldn't have been blocking him as they were all terrible. That's the FO fault for not replacing one with Berrios sooner. They weren't blocking him by pitching well. And Berrios had a rough 2016, but I would have been fine with him taking his lumps over watching those other three.

It's been said for 2-3 years now, we can't sign RP because we have all these stud RP prospects. Then they keep getting injured and we say the same thing the year after. It's a cycle that's happened for many years now. No one ended up being blocked.

SP: Three SP (May, Hughes, Santiago) were lost to injury last year and another (Gibson) was terrible for a big chunk of time. No one in the rotation would have been blocked last year either.

We keep worrying about players being blocked, but it seems like it never happens due to injury (mostly) or poor performance. I think we need to stop saying it and stop worrying about it until it actually happens. When it does happen, it's one of those "good problems to have." Too many healthy, good players is a good problem. The Twins haven't had that problem.

I don't want to block say a Gonsalves either, but I also don't want to pretend like there won't be any injuries or any poor performances that he can replace. Both of those things are likely to happen. There's also the possibility that Santana and Gibson are not on the team by midseason or end of season.

Edited by Twins33, 27 November 2017 - 02:16 PM.

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#28 Brandon

Brandon

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,823 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 02:33 PM

i think Park would have had a shot if he produced in the minirs next year and vargas fizzled or someone was hurt. but Rooker is rising fast and our new front office didnt seem enamored by him either. but if we are able to sign Ohteni then he would get the potential at bats the Park would be fighting for next season so there would be almost no chance for Park. so i guess the contract he got in Korea is the best outcome dor him.
  • glunn likes this

#29 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,612 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 03:54 PM

 

We keep using the word "blocking" (I've done it too) but has a player ever actually been blocked? Berrios maybe, but that argument could go either way in my opinion. I was for him being up even earlier than he was, just for the record. Nolasco, Duffey and Gibson sure shouldn't have been blocking him as they were all terrible. That's the FO fault for not replacing one with Berrios sooner. They weren't blocking him by pitching well. 

Agree 100%, but I don't think labeling that as "blocking," is unfair. Favoring over the hill veteran placeholders to unproven young talent isn't uncommon, but the Twins are notorious for their stubbornness to move on from said vets, even when the necessity for such a move is painfully obvious. To me, continuing to give innings to those players even after it's clear they aren't a better option is in essence "blocking." I think the term is often used in reference to those types of situations and not the talent level on the field actually keeping young players in the minors.

 

The silver lining is that this FO seems more willing to move on quickly from those types of players. If we're using Berrios as an example, then the decision to give Tepesch a start ahead of him was a mistake, and exactly the type of move the old FO would have made. The correction was that he wasn't given another shot after imploding, whereas in previous seasons he may have started a few more games. It's a baby step, but one in the right direction. 


#30 Twins33

Twins33

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 456 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 04:35 PM

Agree 100%, but I don't think labeling that as "blocking," is unfair. Favoring over the hill veteran placeholders to unproven young talent isn't uncommon, but the Twins are notorious for their stubbornness to move on from said vets, even when the necessity for such a move is painfully obvious. To me, continuing to give innings to those players even after it's clear they aren't a better option is in essence "blocking." I think the term is often used in reference to those types of situations and not the talent level on the field actually keeping young players in the minors.

The silver lining is that this FO seems more willing to move on quickly from those types of players. If we're using Berrios as an example, then the decision to give Tepesch a start ahead of him was a mistake, and exactly the type of move the old FO would have made. The correction was that he wasn't given another shot after imploding, whereas in previous seasons he may have started a few more games. It's a baby step, but one in the right direction.

i can see it both ways, it doesn't help that the last front office was so clingy to their players. I don't think they would have only protected three players in the rule 5. I don't think they would have removed Rosario or Tonkin. We don't yet know if this FO will be clingy to their own drafted players, but they don't seem to be with the previous FO players.

If the Twins get Darvish and/or Ohtani or make a trade for a SP and they pitch well are people really going to complain that they are blocking Gonsalves or Littell? I know they will complain if the acquisition sucks, but you can't do anything about that except scout/analyze to the best of your ability and hope a player doesn't get hurt.

If anyone is going to be blocking those two prospects it will likely be Gibson, Santana or Mejia. And they should have no problem ditching the first two for Gonsalves or Littell if needed. So this whole blocking thing shouldn't be an issue until three years or more from now since there is for sure one SP spot open now and could be 1-2 more depending on what they do with Santana/Gibson in the future. And it's hard to see what the pitching depth will be then since we don't even know what they'll be able to accomplish in the next couple of months. And just FYI, I'm not counting on May or Hughes in any of this. We don't know if they'll contribute anything meaningful or how soon they may be able to.

Blocking may be the right word if the FO decides to not cut bait when it's obviously necessary but technically that's more mismanagement/stubbornness than a true block. At least that's my way of thinking about it. It's probably just semantics, but I can safely say that in my opinion no one was blocking Berrios and no one was blocking any one of the RP so the Twins have never had this problem.

(Sorry about the Park thread hijack. I don't think the Park/Nishioka failures should stop them from going after Ohtani or any other Asian player)

Edited by Twins33, 27 November 2017 - 04:41 PM.


#31 Platoon

Platoon

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 4,857 posts
  • LocationTwinsWorld

Posted 27 November 2017 - 05:10 PM

The Twins 'outbid' the entire MLB and paid backup level money for Park. At that price point it was a chance worth taking.

I didn't mean that the chance wasn't worth taking per se. I meant that when the Twins win a bidding war it's time to look under the hood. There has to be something wrong. I don't intend that observation to be snarky at all, it's based on a long and easily verified history of their being well out of the running when making a run at quality talent.
TwinsWorld: Did you hear we just updated the Stadium Club?

If I wanted balls and strikes called by a robot, I would get an Xbox!

#32 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,851 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:04 PM

 

I didn't mean that the chance wasn't worth taking per se. I meant that when the Twins win a bidding war it's time to look under the hood. There has to be something wrong. I don't intend that observation to be snarky at all, it's based on a long and easily verified history of their being well out of the running when making a run at quality talent.

But is it really a bidding war when the amount is low? You talk about being suspicious based on winning a bidding war but every free agent is a bidding war. The reason to have had modest expectations for Park was that they paid backup level money for Park. They essentially got what they paid for.

  • h2oface and jimmer like this

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#33 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Joe's Shades™

  • Members
  • 2,860 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:33 PM

If only some people would have spoken up that teeing off on 86 MPH pitches wasn't going to translate to success in the MLB.

 

I wish Park all the best. He was a good sport and his work ethic was never in question.

Edited by Doomtints, 27 November 2017 - 06:33 PM.

  • glunn, Oldgoat_MN and h2oface like this

#34 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Joe's Shades™

  • Members
  • 2,860 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:35 PM

Also, he didn't block anybody as he wasn't on the 40 man roster last year.

  • Sconnie likes this

#35 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,783 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:51 PM

Even when the move proves to have been awful ... Capps for Ramos, Hicks for Murphy, Span for Meyer......... homers will hold on to the "it was worth the risk" ... "even if it didn't turn out it was the right move...". Homers have a hard time seeing reality sometimes. Park was one of the very wrong moves, and a waste of time, and money. Period. Nice guy, good sport. Who cares. Hopefully, this FO makes decisions early, uses prospects for value, and gets MLB players that perform, and not feed on the bottom like a crustacean.


Another example of how the previous front office was behind the times in where the game was headed. Guys who can't play a position don't stay on a roster unless they have a hall of fame level bat.
Papers...business papers.

#36 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Joe's Shades™

  • Members
  • 2,860 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:57 PM

 

Even when the move proves to have been awful ... Capps for Ramos, Hicks for Murphy, Span for Meyer......... homers will hold on to the "it was worth the risk" ... "even if it didn't turn out it was the right move...". Homers have a hard time seeing reality sometimes. Park was one of the very wrong moves, and a waste of time, and money. Period. Nice guy, good sport. Who cares. Hopefully, this FO makes decisions early, uses prospects for value, and gets MLB players that perform, and not feed on the bottom like a crustacean.

 

True, but this is the nature of the beast.Many if not most people will always try to view things in a positive light when it comes to their favorite sports teams. To some of us, Capps, Meyer, and Park were all obviously not going to work out (and May, I should add). But I don't think it's fair to say this to people who believe otherwise. Sometimes ya just gotta let it go. :)

 

And anyway, none of us are right all the time. I thought Plouffe was better than he is. I thought Gibson could be a #3.Etc.

Edited by Doomtints, 27 November 2017 - 06:58 PM.


#37 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,851 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:14 PM

 

Even when the move proves to have been awful ... Capps for Ramos, Hicks for Murphy, Span for Meyer......... homers will hold on to the "it was worth the risk" ... "even if it didn't turn out it was the right move...". Homers have a hard time seeing reality sometimes. Park was one of the very wrong moves, and a waste of time, and money. Period. Nice guy, good sport. Who cares. Hopefully, this FO makes decisions early, uses prospects for value, and gets MLB players that perform, and not feed on the bottom like a crustacean.

I think literally nobody defends the Capps for Ramos trade. That one was considered very questionable at the time.

Span for Meyer fits your description since the Twins picked up a high upside starter and the move is defensible. It was really only a bad move because the Twins traded away their other CF later in the offseason and had nobody (Hicks) left to play the position.

Park was picked up for minimal money so it is hard to consider it very wrong. The issue that was mentioned at the time was the lack of positional flexibility since the Twins had a few DH/1B options and people did say that it was a tough fit.

  • diehardtwinsfan, 70charger, Doomtints and 3 others like this

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#38 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,612 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:31 PM

 

Park was picked up for minimal money so it is hard to consider it very wrong. The issue that was mentioned at the time was the lack of positional flexibility since the Twins had a few DH/1B options and people did say that it was a tough fit.

Even then Vargas was coming off a poor 15' and Mauer was far from what he showed this season. 


#39 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,822 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:32 PM

It's too bad because we could use a player who can play like... Park was supposed to play. 

 

I was happy that the Twins took a shot and I hope they keep taking shots but I sure do wish they were better at it.  

 

They were two separate players and two separate circumstances from two different leagues but they missed horribly on both Nishioka and Park. 

 

One may have been signed under Smith and one may have been signed under Ryan but I don't believe Smith or Ryan went to Asia personally. They both probably relied on the opinion of the recently let go Howard Norsetter and Howard missed horribly. 

 

Job One for Falvey and Lavine has always been assess and clean up the advisers and they did so by letting Norsetter go and returning Park home. 

 

Norsetter gets credit for Kepler, Thorpe and some other Australians no longer with the organization but MAN... did he ever miss with Nishioka and Park. 

 

With those two... he missed the target like he's never shot a gun before. 

  • glunn and diehardtwinsfan like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#40 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,851 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:37 PM

 

Even then Vargas was coming off a poor 15' and Mauer was far from what he showed this season. 

And they had Plouffe and Sano which led to the failed experiment in RF. 

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: byungho park