Jump to content

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

Article: BREAKING: Twins Trade Rodney To A's

fernando rodney dakota chalmers
  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#101 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 549 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 09:44 AM

 

Do you consider Craig Kimbrel a reliable closer? He's blown 4 saves for the Red Sox this season, versus Rodney's 6. No pitcher is 100% perfect.

 

The Fernando Rodney Experience was never primarily about the blown saves and walk-offs, anyway. :)

otoh...Kimbrel's 4 blown saves came in 37 opportunities; Rodney's 6 in 31.So, that's actually pretty significant difference...and Kimbrel is no longer great.I know nobody wants to look at BS anymore...but the guys that blow them at a healthy clip never have the impressive underlying numbers either, as is/was the case with Rodney.  


#102 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,895 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 10 August 2018 - 09:48 AM

otoh...Kimbrel's 4 blown saves came in 37 opportunities; Rodney's 6 in 31.So, that's actually pretty significant difference...and Kimbrel is no longer great.I know nobody wants to look at BS anymore...but the guys that blow them at a healthy clip never have the impressive underlying numbers either, as is/was the case with Rodney.  

I was responding to the notion that we'd have 5 more wins in the bag if not for Rodney. I'd rather have had a better closer too, but that overstates it.

Modesty, n.: Being comfortable that others will discover your greatness.


#103 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 26,481 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 09:52 AM

 

Who did you want them to go get last winter? Who were the guys they should have been in on?

In my mind, the Twins made some strong moves in relief (and spycake is right that not trusting the young arms is the issue, not the free agents signed as aside from Belisle, the vets were as good as you could expect collectively) and decent moves for starting pitching (went for Darvish, didn’t go too far and then got a solid 1 year guy). After that, I can’t see where they should have been more active. The position players were set and you’d be upset to bring someone in to take a spot from a young guy. Sure Buxton, Sano and to a lesser extent Kepler have had bad seasons but you wanted to roll with those guys because they’re the future. I look at opening day and aside from Polanco being suspended, that’s who I wanted the Twins to have at that position.

 

I don’t see where the Twins should have been more active last offseason in Free Agency.

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

  • Dman, SF Twins Fan and KirbyDome89 like this

One of the best opening day rosters in years. Now go get 'em.


#104 Obsvr

Obsvr

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 98 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 09:57 AM

 

One problem is the surgery.He won't be back until when, mid season?Drafted in 2015, we will need to add him to the 40-man following next year.That doesn't give the Twins a lot of time to judge whether he is deserving.

 

The odds of somebody adding him via Rule 5 are pretty much zero.

  • Mike Sixel likes this

#105 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 13,785 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 10:16 AM

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s).

This is a fair point.

 

A lot of people said they had a good offseason, but honestly, if they had done any less, I think it would have been a disappointing offseason:

 

- We lost 2 relievers from an already suspect pen, so we signed 3 FA relievers (1 of whom was recently back from surgery)

- We lost approximately one SP to attrition (we'll call it the Garcia/Colon spot), so we traded for Odorizzi

- We had a pretty mediocre DH situation, so we signed Morrison

- We lost another SP (Ervin) to injury at the beginning of spring training, so we signed Lynn

 

If we had rolled into 2018 counting more on Duffey, Boshers, Hughes, or Vargas, I think that would have been bad. So really, these moves were kind of the minimum acceptable standard. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think it necessarily deserves any special credit either.

 

Whatever credit you want to give them for not making any really bad moves (like giving a 4/52 deal to Alex Cobb) could just as well be offset by a lack of credit for failing to make any great moves (like getting Gerrit Cole or Miles Mikolas).

  • Mike Sixel, Dman, KGB and 2 others like this

#106 ThejacKmp

ThejacKmp

    Wing Commander

  • Members
  • 2,021 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 10:16 AM

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

 

To finish my thoughts for 2018 free agents, the big contracts were Arrieta, Darvish, JD Martinez, Hosmer, Cain, and Upton. The Twins were in on Darvish and it never felt like Arrieta was a match so no issues on the pitching choices. The OF contracts to Cain and Upton look good through a year but I would have reacted negatively if the Twins were not going with Rosario, Kepler and Buxton in the OF this year. I was (and am) excited about all three. I think you can certainly say the Twins would look awesome with JD Martinez at DH (though that contract could be tough by the end) so that’s a place they could have been active. He’d have fit well with the Twins. It would’ve taken knowing the OF was going to suck or being very confident about JD Martinez. Not a lot to blame the FO for - not a ton of great fits and they were likely right to trust internal youth.

 

They should be in decent shape this offseason. 3B is relatively strong (Machado, Moose, Donaldson, Escobar) and that seems a place of need. Though Sano finishing strong might change that (and might move them back towards Escobar at 2B since he could move to 3B regularly once Gordon/Arraez is ready).

 

1B/DH is a lot harder. With Mauer, Austin and Sano they have some options but Sano off of 3B creates a hole there. The free agent market is pitiful. This is a place that the Twins could use trade pieces or perhaps take another shot on a Logan Morrison type. Might work better the second time?

 

I’m less inclined to move at catcher. Castro should be back and Garver is looking like a nice backup/1B/OF. Next year is a big year for Rortvedt – if he’s doing well in AA next year that may impact the Twins decision making. Same thing with Jeffers at the lower levels. Overall, catcher seems like a place for the Twins to wait another year for more information.

 

You can always use starting pitching. I expect the Twins will be in on that market. Kershaw seems likely to go back to the Dodgers but Dallas Keuchel, David Price, JA Happ, Garret Richards, Charlie Morton, Eovaldi, Ervin Santana, and of course, Bartolo Colon make for an interesting (if not exactly top-heavy) market.

 

I hope the Twins take a similar path to pitching this offseason as last. In on big starters but not getting desperate since they have nice young internal options (Berrios, Gibson, Romero, Pineda, Odorizzi, Mejia, Gonsalves, Thorpe is not a bad crew – though I wouldn’t mind one solid veteran signing). Making some smart free agent reliever moves.

 

And then I’d like to see them go get someone in the infield. Machado seems unlikely but they should be in on him to a point. As a fall back, getting an Escobar or a Donaldson on a shorter deal would be a nice bridge to the next generation.

 

  • Mike Sixel, wavedog, markos and 5 others like this

#107 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 549 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 10:21 AM

Can't work up much of an opinion.Other than count me as one that did NOT think Rodney would fetch anything even remotely approaching a "near major-league ready" player.And he did need to be traded.So....lottery ticket.  

  • Mike Sixel and SF Twins Fan like this

#108 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 8,877 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 10:26 AM

Who did you want them to go get last winter? Who were the guys they should have been in on?

In my mind, the Twins made some strong moves in relief (and spycake is right that not trusting the young arms is the issue, not the free agents signed as aside from Belisle, the vets were as good as you could expect collectively) and decent moves for starting pitching (went for Darvish, didn’t go too far and then got a solid 1 year guy). After that, I can’t see where they should have been more active. The position players were set and you’d be upset to bring someone in to take a spot from a young guy. Sure Buxton, Sano and to a lesser extent Kepler have had bad seasons but you wanted to roll with those guys because they’re the future. I look at opening day and aside from Polanco being suspended, that’s who I wanted the Twins to have at that position.

I don’t see where the Twins should have been more active last offseason in Free Agency.

Since you are going down this road again (in a Rodney thread), I will say, again, that I disagree completely with just about everything above :)

The key with Darvish/Arrieta/Cobb/Lynn was signing them in the normal period. The front office used Twins Fest (mid-late-January) as a target for trading Dozier the year before, so that would have worked as a good deadline for signing a free agent starter. I would have signed Cobb but during the normal signing period.

And no, I would not have signed Rodney. What about closer, then? Dunno. These guys are supposed to have "the data." Maybe Reed or Pressley. Reed was a good signing. I would have hung on to Burdi and Chaggy, too.

Edited by Hosken Bombo Disco, 10 August 2018 - 10:27 AM.


#109 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 549 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 10:38 AM

 

I was responding to the notion that we'd have 5 more wins in the bag if not for Rodney. I'd rather have had a better closer too, but that overstates it.

Agreed.It doesn't work like that.

 

I will say the Rodney signing seems more and more strange in retrospect.If you liked him going into 2018, what don't you like about him going into 2019?Did they actually expect him to be better than he was?They shouldn't have.Seemed like a hedge signing at the time."We'll get someone better at the deadline if we look to be serious contenders."To me, this trade is changing their mind...admitting mistakes. It's not like anyone else in the bullpen has stepped up to make Rodney redundant (at least yet).Although...I agree with the changing of the mind.Never like the signing in the first place.

  • Mike Sixel, wavedog, Dman and 1 other like this

#110 wavedog

wavedog

    Twins fan since 1969

  • Members
  • 738 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:16 AM

I'll summarize my thoughts on the FRE era.I was puzzled why we signed him in the first place along with some of our other Rule 5 bullpen moves- despite all the anxious moments he performed better than I thought he would so I would have to say I was a bit pleasantly surprised by his performance as a Twin.Figured he would be traded but thought we might get back a little more than we did- the front office must have decided they didn't want him around.Be real interesting what our bullpen looks like next year - hope these guys have a plan other than waiver wires and Rule 5 picks. Winning is the best entertainment but I will say FRE sure brought excitement to the 9th inning by how much trouble could he get into before either pulling it out of the fire or losing it - and since we are not playing for anythinganymore I am slightly going to miss that. 

  • Mike Sixel, ThejacKmp, LA VIkes Fan and 1 other like this

#111 ThejacKmp

ThejacKmp

    Wing Commander

  • Members
  • 2,021 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:20 AM

 

Since you are going down this road again (in a Rodney thread), I will say, again, that I disagree completely with just about everything above :)

The key with Darvish/Arrieta/Cobb/Lynn was signing them in the normal period. The front office used Twins Fest (mid-late-January) as a target for trading Dozier the year before, so that would have worked as a good deadline for signing a free agent starter. I would have signed Cobb but during the normal signing period.

And no, I would not have signed Rodney. What about closer, then? Dunno. These guys are supposed to have "the data." Maybe Reed or Pressley. Reed was a good signing. I would have hung on to Burdi and Chaggy, too.

 

It’s nice to have that arbitrary deadline but that wasn’t the way the market was working. Other teams were stalling and the market was very slow developing because the top players weren’t signing. Guys don’t just sign with someone during that period, they wait and see what the market will be. You’re not going to get movement unless someone thinks “Yeah, this is the best I’m going to get.” So you have to overpay (like the Rockies with Holland, a bad contract no matter what he did this year).

 

You would have paid exceptionally more for Cobb had you signed him early because you’d be paying against what people thought the market would be, not what it was. His contract looks rough now at four years and $57 million. Think what you would’ve had to pay if you’d moved quickly. Another year? Another $20 million?

  • Dman, howieramone2 and SF Twins Fan like this

#112 ThejacKmp

ThejacKmp

    Wing Commander

  • Members
  • 2,021 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:22 AM

 

Agreed.It doesn't work like that.

 

I will say the Rodney signing seems more and more strange in retrospect.If you liked him going into 2018, what don't you like about him going into 2019?Did they actually expect him to be better than he was?They shouldn't have.Seemed like a hedge signing at the time."We'll get someone better at the deadline if we look to be serious contenders."To me, this trade is changing their mind...admitting mistakes. It's not like anyone else in the bullpen has stepped up to make Rodney redundant (at least yet).Although...I agree with the changing of the mind.Never like the signing in the first place.

 

Maybe they're looking at internal development and the free agent pool this year and think that Rodney isn't going to be a great value? They also might realy like Chalmers/

  • jkcarew likes this

#113 VATwinsFan

VATwinsFan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:23 AM

No more FRE®.

 

Sad.  

 

I guess closer tryouts for May (my choice), Moya, Busenitz, Mcgill, Duffey, Rogers.....

  • LA VIkes Fan likes this

#114 djvang

djvang

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:39 AM

Kind of a nothing deal. Rodney didn't figure in their future plans so get whatever you can get. On the plus side we don't have to watch his torturous outings anymore.


#115 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 549 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 11:44 AM

 

Maybe they're looking at internal development and the free agent pool this year and think that Rodney isn't going to be a great value? They also might realy like Chalmers/

But most of those reasons (to go somewhere other than Rodney) all existed when they originally signed him, IMO.Doesn't matter.We agree that there are many legitimate reasons to trade Rodney at this point.


#116 ThejacKmp

ThejacKmp

    Wing Commander

  • Members
  • 2,021 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 12:09 PM

 

But most of those reasons (to go somewhere other than Rodney) all existed when they originally signed him, IMO.Doesn't matter.We agree that there are many legitimate reasons to trade Rodney at this point.

 

Not really. They didn't know the 2019 reliever FA market (especially since reliever performance is so variable). They also don't know that internal guys will develop (though they certainly haven't rewarded any of those guys with MLB time so hard to see how they're so sure there).

 

Maybe they just didn't like Rodney as much once they had him for a year. He is 40+. It'll be fascinating to see what happens with Rodney this offseason. Is his option picked up by the A's? If he hits the FA market, what does he get? it will tell a lot about this decision I imagine.


#117 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,524 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 12:29 PM

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

Exactly, I haven't seen anybody say they expected the additions to make the team worse. They all came with concerns though, which IMO played a huge role in why they were available. Those question marks are often ignored when the moves are praised but then they resurface and they're used to laude the short term aspect of the deals. It's hard for me to applaud the Twins for scooping up players destined for short term deals in what was left of a down FA market, and then, after a bulk of the concerns over the signings come to fruition, commend them for only making short term commitments.

 

tl;dr The Twins should've been better this season. Regression by the core played the largest role, but the FO gambled on low risk/low reward FAs and they were burned. That isn't praise worthy IMO. 

 

As a side note, it worries me that they're in a position where they have more holes to fill via FA, trade, or internal options this coming offseason than the last. I know we each voiced concern about the success rate of reshuffling the deck season after season following short term commitments. Here's hoping round 2 goes a little more smoothly. 

  • USAFChief, Mike Sixel and Rigby like this

#118 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,297 posts
  • LocationThe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:06 PM

The picked up a high risk/high reward kid. Not sure what else we expected. I think this return is fine. 

  • howieramone2 likes this

#119 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,410 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:27 PM

 

I was surprised there wasn't a better bidder for Rodney before the deadline. Did Oakland pick up the remaining salary? The Twins need to recoup as much of this years' payroll excess as possible to sign "a big quantity of players next year..." (Although I prefer quality over quantity)

 

I agree with being surprised. The only assumption that I can make was they were not planning on trading Rodney or didn't get an offer they liked before the deadline. 

 

The other assumption is that they ran him through waivers like they do with most everyone. The A's put in a claim and they liked this kid they got back. They had to like the kid because they could have simply pulled Rodney back if they didn't. 

 

However... mainly my surprise is rooted in the fact that after he didn't go before the trade deadline... I assumed he would be in uniform for us on opening day 2019. 

 

Quantity over Quality... I'd be happy with either. We may have enough holes to fill that quantity may be the only possibility though. 

 

Between you and I and everybody else who reads this... I'm looking at baby steps... I'll just be happy if we are not forced to play players who are hitting less than .230 every single damn day.

 

So bring me quantity, flexibility and honest to god competition for playing time and a manager who knows what to do with it.  

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


#120 gocgo

gocgo

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,389 posts

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:22 PM

Whose closing?Who cares?We're all used to late inning heartbreak at this point.

Mind your own biscuits and life will be gravy.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fernando rodney, dakota chalmers