Jump to content

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

I'm Yawning...

  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

#141 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,637 posts

Posted 06 October 2018 - 01:31 AM

 

You have a response to everything but continue to refuse to respond when any specifics as to to what they could have realistically done or should have done to avoid the failure of 2018. say nothing when asked what they should have done.

 

They did not need to pick at the very top. They needed to pick well like Houston or Boston. Kirilloff was the 15th pick. They could have taken Benindendi instead of Jay and they could have taken Nola instead of Gordon. You make it seem impossible to trade for players in the low minors who become great. That basically how Cleveland got their entire staff.

 

Yes, I am saying get better at identifying international prospects. You want instant gratification. Building a winner in a mid-market like Cleveland has is the product of crafting and implementing best practices and processes. You and Chief can scream show me the results all you want. You simply do not understand the results are directly related to leadership, process, and practices that were not in place previously. I don't know that they are know without complete access but it appears from the outside looking in that Levine is building the requisite infrastructure.

Naw, I've reiterated what I would've done to strengthen the team ad nauseam. Whether you choose to acknowledge that is up to you. 

 

It's obviously not impossible, but if you're expecting to match Cleveland's success my guess is you'll be sorely disappointed. 

 

No, what I want is for the current talent on the major league roster to be supplemented with other high quality major league talent. The Twins are devoid of good players; the organization is wasting cost controlled years of the current core if they aren't actively trying to get better. Chief already pointed out that there's literally no reason the FO can't be implementing their own processes while simultaneously adding to this roster. I understand that the poor results are a lack of production that starts with the FO and moves all the way down to the playing field. Part of the solution to the problem is filling in holes with individuals better suited to produce positive results, hence the new manager and likely (hopefully) other new faces on the field. 

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#142 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,698 posts

Posted 06 October 2018 - 07:52 AM

 

Naw, I've reiterated what I would've done to strengthen the team ad nauseam. Whether you choose to acknowledge that is up to you. 

 

It's obviously not impossible, but if you're expecting to match Cleveland's success my guess is you'll be sorely disappointed. 

 

No, what I want is for the current talent on the major league roster to be supplemented with other high quality major league talent. The Twins are devoid of good players; the organization is wasting cost controlled years of the current core if they aren't actively trying to get better. Chief already pointed out that there's literally no reason the FO can't be implementing their own processes while simultaneously adding to this roster. I understand that the poor results are a lack of production that starts with the FO and moves all the way down to the playing field. Part of the solution to the problem is filling in holes with individuals better suited to produce positive results, hence the new manager and likely (hopefully) other new faces on the field. 

 

What core? Two weeks ago the conversation was that the current roster was a disaster. Now we are wasting our core? The Twins top 4 position players in WAR were Rosario / Kepler / Escobar & Dozier with a combined WAR of 9.4. Two of them were free agents this year. Cleveland’s top 4 had a combined WAR of 21.3. Of course, where Cleveland’s core is immensely better than the Twins is starting pitching. Our top 4 SPs had a WAR of 8.8. Cleveland’s top 4 had a WAR of 21.3.

 

We have one very good but not elite SP. We have one BP guy (Rogers) that emerged this year. Rosario was our best position player and he is not a guy I want to rely on in the playoffs or in general for that matter. He might have the worst plate discipline in the league. Our 2nd best position player was Kepler who is an average player that still could improve. Beyond that we have a bunch of question marks. What core. To trade away key assets building around this core would be the height of incompetence.

 

I must have missed the post where you provided specific free agents and trade candidates with their salaries and prospects required to acquire them. Just give the numbers of the post(s) and I will sincerely apologize for suggesting your complaint regarding the approach the team took was the typical ramblings of fans that think this is fantasy baseball and they can just go get any player they want in free agency or trade depth for superstars. Let’s not waist any more time on this. Give the post numbers with the specifics.


#143 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,637 posts

Posted 06 October 2018 - 09:18 AM

**Aren't devoid of good players


#144 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,637 posts

Posted 06 October 2018 - 02:15 PM

 

What core? Two weeks ago the conversation was that the current roster was a disaster. Now we are wasting our core? The Twins top 4 position players in WAR were Rosario / Kepler / Escobar & Dozier with a combined WAR of 9.4. Two of them were free agents this year. Cleveland’s top 4 had a combined WAR of 21.3. Of course, where Cleveland’s core is immensely better than the Twins is starting pitching. Our top 4 SPs had a WAR of 8.8. Cleveland’s top 4 had a WAR of 21.3.

 

We have one very good but not elite SP. We have one BP guy (Rogers) that emerged this year. Rosario was our best position player and he is not a guy I want to rely on in the playoffs or in general for that matter. He might have the worst plate discipline in the league. Our 2nd best position player was Kepler who is an average player that still could improve. Beyond that we have a bunch of question marks. What core. To trade away key assets building around this core would be the height of incompetence.

 

I must have missed the post where you provided specific free agents and trade candidates with their salaries and prospects required to acquire them. Just give the numbers of the post(s) and I will sincerely apologize for suggesting your complaint regarding the approach the team took was the typical ramblings of fans that think this is fantasy baseball and they can just go get any player they want in free agency or trade depth for superstars. Let’s not waist any more time on this. Give the post numbers with the specifics.

Berrios, Rosario and Polanco don't look promising? Kepler doesn't look like he can be a solid corner OFer? Have you thrown in the towel on Buxton and Sano? Some of those names might be included in trade packages, and others might fall off, but right now that's a good group of young, cost controlled players to add pieces too. I missed the posts calling the entire roster a disaster. There certainly are holes and some are more glaring than others. FWIW Dozier finished 11th on the team in fWAR, behind Polanco, Garver, and Cave....

 

All of those players were highly regarded minor leaguers at one point. If the Twins are never willing to "trade key assets," then you're asking them to hit on an unreasonably high number of draft picks all within a few years of each other in order to field a team capable of competing. I'll pass on those odds. 

 

Just stop for a moment and consider what you're saying. Moving marginal prospects to solidify backup OF and C positions as well as adding better bullpen arms is "fantasy baseball," but "draft like Houston," "trade for a Kluber & Carrasco while they're in the minors," and "trade for a pitcher like Verlander," is somehow practical? One can be reasonably accomplished, the other is a pipe dream. 

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#145 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,698 posts

Posted 06 October 2018 - 03:17 PM

 

Berrios, Rosario and Polanco don't look promising? Kepler doesn't look like he can be a solid corner OFer? Have you thrown in the towel on Buxton and Sano? Some of those names might be included in trade packages, and others might fall off, but right now that's a good group of young, cost controlled players to add pieces too. I missed the posts calling the entire roster a disaster. There certainly are holes and some are more glaring than others. FWIW Dozier finished 11th on the team in fWAR, behind Polanco, Garver, and Cave....

 

All of those players were highly regarded minor leaguers at one point. If the Twins are never willing to "trade key assets," then you're asking them to hit on an unreasonably high number of draft picks all within a few years of each other in order to field a team capable of competing. I'll pass on those odds. 

 

Just stop for a moment and consider what you're saying. Moving marginal prospects to solidify backup OF and C positions as well as adding better bullpen arms is "fantasy baseball," but "draft like Houston," "trade for a Kluber & Carrasco while they're in the minors," and "trade for a pitcher like Verlander," is somehow practical? One can be reasonably accomplished, the other is a pipe dream. 

 

I noticed you still have not provided the post number(s) where you specified players and cost. Does it or does it not exist?

 

Sure those players have promise and no I have not thrown in the towel. That is an entirely different frame of mine from trading top prospects in the hope the guys that have not yet shown after 3 years that they can play with any consistency. I am not sure that's what you are suggesting because you refuse to respond with any specificity. However, I can only assume you are suggesting trading away most of our best prospects because that's what it would take to get the type of players we need to actually become contenders.

 

I would done very similar to what the F/O did last year, add without levering the future. Had Buxton and Sano proved themselves last year, we still would not have contended in a meaningful way but we would be in great shape this year with salaries coming off the books. Had they made this step forward it might have even made sense to trade some of our better prospects this off-season. However, the core of this team as compared to Houston, Boston, NY, and Cleveland is not in the same stratosphere and to bet the future with such a large gap and depending on massive improvement from multiple players would have been gross incompetence. 

 

DO the posts exist where you say you provided specific players and cost or are you simply refusing to admit that you were complaining about the incompetence of the FO when you know there really was no realistic plan to put a contender on the field given the injuries to Saantana and Castro, the Polanco suspension, and poor play from several players?


#146 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,637 posts

Posted 07 October 2018 - 01:42 AM

 

I noticed you still have not provided the post number(s) where you specified players and cost. Does it or does it not exist?

 

Sure those players have promise and no I have not thrown in the towel. That is an entirely different frame of mine from trading top prospects in the hope the guys that have not yet shown after 3 years that they can play with any consistency. I am not sure that's what you are suggesting because you refuse to respond with any specificity. However, I can only assume you are suggesting trading away most of our best prospects because that's what it would take to get the type of players we need to actually become contenders.

 

I would done very similar to what the F/O did last year, add without levering the future. Had Buxton and Sano proved themselves last year, we still would not have contended in a meaningful way but we would be in great shape this year with salaries coming off the books. Had they made this step forward it might have even made sense to trade some of our better prospects this off-season. However, the core of this team as compared to Houston, Boston, NY, and Cleveland is not in the same stratosphere and to bet the future with such a large gap and depending on massive improvement from multiple players would have been gross incompetence. 

 

DO the posts exist where you say you provided specific players and cost or are you simply refusing to admit that you were complaining about the incompetence of the FO when you know there really was no realistic plan to put a contender on the field given the injuries to Saantana and Castro, the Polanco suspension, and poor play from several players?

I'm not sure if it's selective understanding, reading, or some combination of both at play here. Again, I've already stated what I thought this team could've done prior to the beginning of last season to compete within the division. Salary numbers and names are irrelevant. We're dealing in hypothetical scenarios here. Your insistence on "specifics," is a straw man. It doesn't invalidate any part of how those weaknesses could've been addressed. Like I said before, if you need names feel free to dig through 40 man rosters and to find a 4th OFer, C, and a few bullpen arms. It's comical that you're demanding "specificity," from others and at the same time your solution is "draft like Houston and trade for talent like Cleveland." 

 

It's no secret that the Twins aren't on the level of Houston, Boston, or NY. It wasn't that long ago that Buxton and Sano headlined a farm system that was one of, if not the best, in baseball. We've seen firsthand how inconsistent prospect development can be. Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now? I'll also reiterate, in the hopes that this time it sinks in, that none of what I suggested the Twins do prior to the season would've required giving up high level prospects. Those teams you listed above didn't get better by simply waiting for prospects to reach the major league level. They all moved young players for proven talent. Part of getting to that "stratosphere," requires making similar moves. 

 

If it bothers you that posters question decisions made by the Twins organization then a forum probably isn't the best place to frequent.


#147 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,698 posts

Posted 07 October 2018 - 08:15 AM

 

I'm not sure if it's selective understanding, reading, or some combination of both at play here. Again, I've already stated what I thought this team could've done prior to the beginning of last season to compete within the division. Salary numbers and names are irrelevant. We're dealing in hypothetical scenarios here. Your insistence on "specifics," is a straw man. It doesn't invalidate any part of how those weaknesses could've been addressed. Like I said before, if you need names feel free to dig through 40 man rosters and to find a 4th OFer, C, and a few bullpen arms. It's comical that you're demanding "specificity," from others and at the same time your solution is "draft like Houston and trade for talent like Cleveland." 

 

It's no secret that the Twins aren't on the level of Houston, Boston, or NY. It wasn't that long ago that Buxton and Sano headlined a farm system that was one of, if not the best, in baseball. We've seen firsthand how inconsistent prospect development can be. Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now? I'll also reiterate, in the hopes that this time it sinks in, that none of what I suggested the Twins do prior to the season would've required giving up high level prospects. Those teams you listed above didn't get better by simply waiting for prospects to reach the major league level. They all moved young players for proven talent. Part of getting to that "stratosphere," requires making similar moves. 

 

If it bothers you that posters question decisions made by the Twins organization then a forum probably isn't the best place to frequent.

 

Let’s start with the suggestion this is a strawman argument. My argument is based on your post that the FO could have done much better last off-season. Is this not your belief? Asking for specifics is anything but a strawman argument. Unless you provide specifics, we can’t possibly measure the relative merit or impact of what you are suggesting. There are also many cases where fan insist on solutions that are not really available. You need to demonstrate viable solutions were available and at least estimate the impact. For example, had the signed a different catcher, what could have we anticipated in terms of WAR, for example. The Twins needed to improve by 14 games to win the division. I would love to see the transactions that would have gotten us to that point.

 

Why do you ask “Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now”? How did you possibly conclude this is my position? That would be a good example of a strawman. This argument can only be made while convenientlyignoring most of what I wrote given we have been debating the merit of savvy trades, usage of international bonus pool, drafting and development, as well as free agent signings. I also framed my position with two elements. One is that the context was top prospects as opposed to "Royce Lewis". The other is the timing of trading top prospects. GMs don't trade top prospects until they have a proven core in place. Our core is not only unproven, they are quite suspect. It's ironic that you highlight the risk of prospects and then insist that it's a sound strategy to make long-term decision based on the assumption the current suspects are all going to emerge. That is anything but sound management practice, especially given they would need to emerge as superstar in order for us to contend.

 

BTW … If you don’t include cost, we can’t possibly determine if the solution is feasible. The statement that costs are not relevant is extremely naïve.

 

Draft like Houston was meant conceptually not literally tank and get several #1 and #2 picks. It means draft well. Mid-market teams must draft well that is no secret. The previous regime missed on some extremely important picks. How much better would last season and our future been had they taken Benintendi and Nola. I can’t blame them too much for Rodriguez but these are the decisions that you have to get right to contend with teams that have made great personnel decisions and have bigger budgets.

 

Trade like Cleveland does not literally mean go out acquire an entire staff of SPs as prospects and trade relatively little to get them. I would guess they believe some of the deadline acquisitions have this potential. Just one such acquisition is big. The success of teams outside the top revenue producers requires effective identification of potential and some savvy trades to acquire players that develop exceptionally well. 


#148 KirbyDome89

KirbyDome89

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,637 posts

Posted 07 October 2018 - 10:45 PM

 

Let’s start with the suggestion this is a strawman argument. My argument is based on your post that the FO could have done much better last off-season. Is this not your belief? Asking for specifics is anything but a strawman argument. Unless you provide specifics, we can’t possibly measure the relative merit or impact of what you are suggesting. There are also many cases where fan insist on solutions that are not really available. You need to demonstrate viable solutions were available and at least estimate the impact. For example, had the signed a different catcher, what could have we anticipated in terms of WAR, for example. The Twins needed to improve by 14 games to win the division. I would love to see the transactions that would have gotten us to that point.

 

Why do you ask “Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now”? How did you possibly conclude this is my position? That would be a good example of a strawman. This argument can only be made while convenientlyignoring most of what I wrote given we have been debating the merit of savvy trades, usage of international bonus pool, drafting and development, as well as free agent signings. I also framed my position with two elements. One is that the context was top prospects as opposed to "Royce Lewis". The other is the timing of trading top prospects. GMs don't trade top prospects until they have a proven core in place. Our core is not only unproven, they are quite suspect. It's ironic that you highlight the risk of prospects and then insist that it's a sound strategy to make long-term decision based on the assumption the current suspects are all going to emerge. That is anything but sound management practice, especially given they would need to emerge as superstar in order for us to contend.

 

BTW … If you don’t include cost, we can’t possibly determine if the solution is feasible. The statement that costs are not relevant is extremely naïve.

 

Draft like Houston was meant conceptually not literally tank and get several #1 and #2 picks. It means draft well. Mid-market teams must draft well that is no secret. The previous regime missed on some extremely important picks. How much better would last season and our future been had they taken Benintendi and Nola. I can’t blame them too much for Rodriguez but these are the decisions that you have to get right to contend with teams that have made great personnel decisions and have bigger budgets.

 

Trade like Cleveland does not literally mean go out acquire an entire staff of SPs as prospects and trade relatively little to get them. I would guess they believe some of the deadline acquisitions have this potential. Just one such acquisition is big. The success of teams outside the top revenue producers requires effective identification of potential and some savvy trades to acquire players that develop exceptionally well. 

You can't measure a hypothetical scenario involving the past. Does bringing in an actual major league catcher other than Bobby Wilson not improve the team? Does having a legitimate 4th OFer on the bench not improve the team? The answers should be fairly easy here. Comparing individual player WAR to team wins isn't apples to apples either. 

 

The Twins know they have talented major league players in Rosario, Berrios, Kepler, ect. They hope that's what they get from Lewis, Kiriloff, ect. There's no reason why this organization can't continue to surround those players with talent while also identifying young trade candidates, using the international pool, and drafting well.

 

What's naive about saying the team could afford to bring in backups at a couple positions and a few more bullpen arms? You can chill on the ad hominem btw....

 

Obviously I didn't take it literally. My point was, and continues to be, that their paths aren't ones that can simply be "followed." Finding a hidden gem via savvy trading is great. I'd love the Twins to find another Johan, but I'd never rely on it happening. Drafting an development could certainly be improved, but alone that's not enough. We've seen how fickle prospects can be. At some point teams have to become players in FA and make trades to fill out a roster that can seriously contend. That point isn't necessarily linear, i.e. there isn't a checklist where once a certain number of criteria have been met it's safe to dip into FA and trade prospects. The rise to contention is built through all those process working together. The notion that we need to have nearly an entire roster of young, solid players before the Twins can make an serious moves is why the "window of contention," has been continually pushed back.