Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Article: Tyler Austin Traded to San Francisco

tyler austin
  • Please log in to reply
182 replies to this topic

#161 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 02:34 PM

When you have a surplus of talent at one position and a weakness at another I agree pretty much every GM is going to trade that surplus talent for talent that can potentially make the team better as a whole right now. So I agree with you on that.

While I think most GM's would agree with your thoughts on position player value ( i.e. right fielder more valuable than 1st base) it seems short sighted to me in some ways. Let's say for the sake of argument we believe that our weakness is 1st base and we have a player who plays in the outfield but his bat and defense will play at 1st base. Why wouldn't we use them there if he makes the team stronger as a whole? Even though that player has more value in right or left field they still provide more value at your current weak 1st base position. I just think there are more ways to think about a players positional value when they have the flexibility to play multiple roles. They can still make your team stronger even if they aren't maximizing their skill set at their strongest position.

While I understand your position and it makes sense to me I just think that being more flexible about defining player value can be valuable as well.


Sure, I'm not saying it's possible to play 162 games with every player maximized perfectly.

For me though, my plan would be that Kiriloff is an outfielder, and if circumstances dictate that I MUST play him at 1B to get him in the lineup, then I will.
I won't plan for Kiriloff (one example, could be Raley,etc) to be a 1B though. When Mike says dump Austin because Kiriloff can play 1B, that to me is planning for Kiriloff to play 1B.

It's the same argument I have for Astudillo and Garver. I'd rather have them at 1B or DH than on the bench, but I'd really rather have them at 3B or C, where their bat actually gives you an edge over the league.
  • Dman likes this

#162 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 30,554 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 03:02 PM

Sure, I'm not saying it's possible to play 162 games with every player maximized perfectly.

For me though, my plan would be that Kiriloff is an outfielder, and if circumstances dictate that I MUST play him at 1B to get him in the lineup, then I will.
I won't plan for Kiriloff (one example, could be Raley,etc) to be a 1B though. When Mike says dump Austin because Kiriloff can play 1B, that to me is planning for Kiriloff to play 1B.

It's the same argument I have for Astudillo and Garver. I'd rather have them at 1B or DH than on the bench, but I'd really rather have them at 3B or C, where their bat actually gives you an edge over the league.


Where did I say that, ever? I never did. I said once they signed Cron and Cruz, the writing was on the wall. I also said at the time, I'd have rolled with Austin, and used the money on pitching.

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#163 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,671 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 03:04 PM

 

Sure, I'm not saying it's possible to play 162 games with every player maximized perfectly.

For me though, my plan would be that Kiriloff is an outfielder, and if circumstances dictate that I MUST play him at 1B to get him in the lineup, then I will.
I won't plan for Kiriloff (one example, could be Raley,etc) to be a 1B though. When Mike says dump Austin because Kiriloff can play 1B, that to me is planning for Kiriloff to play 1B.

It's the same argument I have for Astudillo and Garver. I'd rather have them at 1B or DH than on the bench, but I'd really rather have them at 3B or C, where their bat actually gives you an edge over the league.

 

Yeah we pretty much agree then.I want to maximize value as much as possible as well but will sacrifice where it makes sense.  

 

I hope Austin decreases his K rate and does well.Maybe he will prove me wrong but at the same time I think we will be just fine without him.

  • LA VIkes Fan likes this

#164 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 03:43 PM

Where did I say that, ever? I never did. I said once they signed Cron and Cruz, the writing was on the wall. I also said at the time, I'd have rolled with Austin, and used the money on pitching.


You keep listing outfielders and catchers as reasons they don't need Austin. That's literally planning for his replacement with an outfielder.

#165 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 03:47 PM

Yeah we pretty much agree then. I want to maximize value as much as possible as well but will sacrifice where it makes sense.

I hope Austin decreases his K rate and does well. Maybe he will prove me wrong but at the same time I think we will be just fine without him.


We most likely will be fine without him.
I just don't like dumping assets until/unless you absolutely have to.
The FO and many posters obviously disagree with me, either by thinking he's not an asset, or that they had no other choice. I don't agree on either count. I think he is an asset, one that could have either given value or netted a real return later. And I think they could have found a way to keep him.
Those are just my opinions though. Doesn't mean they are right, and ultimately, of course, the FO's opinion trumps mine.

#166 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,671 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 04:09 PM

 

We most likely will be fine without him.
I just don't like dumping assets until/unless you absolutely have to.
The FO and many posters obviously disagree with me, either by thinking he's not an asset, or that they had no other choice. I don't agree on either count. I think he is an asset, one that could have either given value or netted a real return later. And I think they could have found a way to keep him.
Those are just my opinions though. Doesn't mean they are right, and ultimately, of course, the FO's opinion trumps mine

 

I think a lot of us were hoping they would hang onto Austin longer but I am not sure I ever felt he would be a long term fit for this team.I agree there was a decent chance for his value to increase if we kept him longer and I think the Giants got themselves a deal.If he does make progress they might be able to flip him for something decent or hang onto him and have a nice power hitter on the cheap for a while.IMO I think he makes it but I question how good he will be based on K rate.I mean he just needs to hit around 250 or 260 with his slugging that will be a good deal for the team he is on.He is close to that right now but pitchers will adjust and can he adjust back I just don't have the confidence he will.  

 

If 30% to 35% of your outs are automatic (i.e. K's) and the BABIP average is 300 you are losing 30 to 40 points of batting average to the average hitter and the average hitter has trouble hitting 300 because they likely have a 10 to 15% K rate or higher.So if Austin does manage to hit the BABIP average of 300 the best his batting average can be is something like .240 and it will most likely be less than that if continues to strike out at those rates.He has to bring that down to put more balls in play so that he can bring up his average and OPS and create more value.I hope he does and like you said we only have a small sample size.He hasn't been given much time to adjust but looking back at his MiLB numbers he looks kind of like the same strike out prone player to me.Palka made it why not Austin?I just question how good either of them will be in the end.


#167 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 30,554 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 04:12 PM

You keep listing outfielders and catchers as reasons they don't need Austin. That's literally planning for his replacement with an outfielder.


At some point next year, one of those guys will be ready, if they don't re-sign Cron and Cruz, yes. In the context of this team, they can't afford Austin and those two. I'm sure they look at the minors and feel someone can take his place. But they aren't cutting Austin because of any one of them, they are cutting Austin because of Cron and Cruz.
  • Dman likes this

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#168 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 04:33 PM

At some point next year, one of those guys will be ready, if they don't re-sign Cron and Cruz, yes. In the context of this team, they can't afford Austin and those two. I'm sure they look at the minors and feel someone can take his place. But they aren't cutting Austin because of any one of them, they are cutting Austin because of Cron and Cruz.


And my concern is that Cron gets injured (or ineffective) before one of those guys is ready. Now who plays 1B? Someone whose bat doesn't really play there. Which is interesting considering how you felt about Mauer's bat playing there.

Edited by Mr. Brooks, 12 April 2019 - 04:34 PM.


#169 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 30,554 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 04:54 PM

And my concern is that Cron gets injured (or ineffective) before one of those guys is ready. Now who plays 1B? Someone whose bat doesn't really play there. Which is interesting considering how you felt about Mauer's bat playing there.


I worry about the starters first. IMO, no team can carry three DH / 1B types on a 25 man roster. You can't live in fear of injury to the detriment of the people that will actually play.

So, sure, if Garver and Astudillo and Cron all get hurt, that would weaken the position. But you can't carry a guy that never plays just in case three guys so get hurt. IMO.
  • Brock Beauchamp and Major League Ready like this

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#170 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 04:58 PM

I worry about the starters first. IMO, no team can carry three DH / 1B types on a 25 man roster. You can't live in fear of injury to the detriment of the people that will actually play.

So, sure, if Garver and Astudillo and Cron all get hurt, that would weaken the position. But you can't carry a guy that never plays just in case three guys so get hurt. IMO.


Again, I don't want catchers and third basemen playing first base. Fundamental disagreement. That's fine, but no point banging our heads against a wall.

#171 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 30,554 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 05:01 PM

Again, I don't want catchers and third basemen playing first base. Fundamental disagreement. That's fine, but no point banging our heads against a wall.


No one does. But you really think they should carry Cron and Cruz and Austin? Because those first two aren't going anywhere at this point, even if some of us would have used the Cron money as part of a payment on pitching....

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#172 ken

ken

    Cedar Rapids Kernels

  • Member
  • 176 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 05:04 PM

This is getting to Oswaldo Arcia level of concern.

Edited by ken, 12 April 2019 - 05:05 PM.

  • USAFChief, old nurse and snap4birds like this

#173 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 05:09 PM

No one does. But you really think they should carry Cron and Cruz and Austin? Because those first two aren't going anywhere at this point, even if some of us would have used the Cron money as part of a payment on pitching....


If I'm building a roster, no I'm not trying to carry an extra 1B/DH. But once that's the case, yes I am finding a way not to throw away an asset for essentially nothing.
Maybe Austin will never make any improvements and I'll be wrong. That's fine, I don't shy away from being wrong.
Sometimes when you hear a guy speak about his craft though, you just get a gut feeling that he has what it takes to make those improvements. That's where I'm at with Austin.
What's done is done now though, we'll just have to kick back and see who Austin becomes.

#174 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 05:12 PM

This is getting to Oswaldo Arcia level of concern.


Arcia was given 1000 PA's to see if he could turn the corner. He didn't. Maybe Austin wouldn't have either, we'll see.
  • Mike Sixel likes this

#175 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    A Little Teapot

  • Owner
  • 22,873 posts

Posted 12 April 2019 - 06:43 PM

Again, I don't want catchers and third basemen playing first base. Fundamental disagreement. That's fine, but no point banging our heads against a wall.

But that’s ignoring today’s bullpens. Teams simply cannot carry multiple first basemen for an entire season unless one of them is also the DH... which runs right back into your problem of “if one gets injured, you replace him with a bat that can’t carry that position”.

#176 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 13 April 2019 - 04:30 AM

But that’s ignoring today’s bullpens. Teams simply cannot carry multiple first basemen for an entire season unless one of them is also the DH... which runs right back into your problem of “if one gets injured, you replace him with a bat that can’t carry that position”.


I think with a guy like Gonzalez, who can back up both infield and corner outfield, and two starting corner outfielders both capable of backing up centerfield, that the Twins could have carried Austin this year.

#177 yarnivek1972

yarnivek1972

    Cooperstown

  • Member
  • 6,531 posts

Posted 13 April 2019 - 04:39 AM

I think with a guy like Gonzalez, who can back up both infield and corner outfield, and two starting corner outfielders both capable of backing up centerfield, that the Twins could have carried Austin this year.


Obviously they could not. Because they dropped him to add a pitcher. Also, if Sano is healthy from day one, Austin probably never makes the opening day roster.

#178 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 13 April 2019 - 04:42 AM

Obviously they could not. Because they dropped him to add a pitcher. Also, if Sano is healthy from day one, Austin probably never makes the opening day roster.


They could have, they chose not to. Big difference.

#179 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 4,471 posts

Posted 13 April 2019 - 08:06 AM

They chose to keep Adrianza and his infield glove instead of Austin. I would agree.

They chose to roster Cave and his ability to play across the OF though they could have optioned him. I would agree.

They chose to roster both Garver and Astudillo with their bats and versatility instead of optioning one of them. I would agree.

They chose to keep Castro. I would agree.

I don’t see enough at bats for a third right handed DH/1B and any of those at bats are best given to Garver or Astudillo to keep them sharp.

#180 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 13 April 2019 - 09:09 AM

They chose to keep Adrianza and his infield glove instead of Austin. I would agree.

They chose to roster Cave and his ability to play across the OF though they could have optioned him. I would agree.

They chose to roster both Garver and Astudillo with their bats and versatility instead of optioning one of them. I would agree.

They chose to keep Castro. I would agree.

I don’t see enough at bats for a third right handed DH/1B and any of those at bats are best given to Garver or Astudillo to keep them sharp.


I understand the FO's and other posters reasons. I just don't agree with them. Difference of opinion.
Great thing about sports is we get to find out if they were right or wrong.
  • Mike Sixel likes this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: tyler austin