Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Front Page: Official Twins Winter Meetings Day 2 Thread

stephen strasburg dallas keuchel madison bumgarner hyun-jin ryu rocco baldelli
  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#81 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Moderator
  • 17,673 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 08:37 AM

 

I wanted Wheeler badly too. To be honest, I typed out a very simple response saying Brodie Van wagenen was on MLB radio and he did not think Wheeler was worth that kind of money because the premise we should have just spent whatever it takes is fanatical and nothing I say will be acceptable. However, I am going to tell you why I don’t have the same response to losing Wheeler as others here.

 

Wheeler wanted to go to Philly. In this type of negotiation, the agent is going to bounce back in forth between the clubs driving up the price but in the end the agent is going to give Philly the shot. The assumption here is that 118 was Philly’s final offer. Who is to say they should not be equally motivated.This is not Falvine’s first rodeo. At some point they probably realized they were being played and the only way they were getting Wheeler was at a price that no longer made sense at which point they probably dropped out.

 

Even if the assumption that 118 was a high as the Philly’s were willing to go, the premise that if he is worth 105 he is worth 125 is also fanatical. We all make this sort of judgment call in our own lives on a frequent basis. I would guess everyone here has seen a vehicle that interested them only to find out it have every gadget known to man and carried a price they were not willing to pay. I can assure you the team has a far more sophisticated methodology for establishing value that we have as fans. When they stop bidding, profit may have some weight but the primary emphasis is the most effective utilization of the dollars. In other words, they believed the best way to produce wins was to invest elsewhere. Fans of sports with a salary cap embrace this premise. They despise bad contracts because it hinders building a winner. Posters here must have heard the grumbling of Wolves fans over Wiggins getting a max contract.

 

There is an also an absolutely indisputable premise that gets ignored here. As a matter of fact people make fun of the value premise. However, the reality is that the Minnesota Twins have to produce more wins per dollar spent than half the teams in this league. Therefore, some players make much more sense for teams that have enough revenue to pay for a player and still have the Twin’s budget left over. Philly's incremental revenue covers wheeler 3X. Some teams can sign several Wheelers and still have the Twins budget left over. The problem here is that many people refuse to recognize this reality so they take the stance the Twins are just interested in profit.

 

Two-thirds of the people who read this will not stop for 10 seconds to consider if this is reasonable. They will be busy thinking up something to blast me with as they read it.

I read it, and considered it, so don't blast me in reply. :)

 

I get that $118 mil may not have been the Phillies best offer, or it may have already represented an overpay, etc. I still think it could have been worth making such an offer -- no offense to the White Sox, but I don't think they were much of a test for Wheeler's off-field preferences, and it may have been worth overpaying if he was their #1 target, and to avoid getting shut out. Much depends on what the Twins do the rest of the offseason, of course, but I really did not like hearing that the Twins were prepared to offer more but didn't get a chance.

 

As far as 105 not also being worth 125, obviously that was the Twins judgement but it remains to be seen whether it was correct. The FA market in pro sports is nothing like an individual shopping for a car. Car shopping, it is perfectly acceptable (and admirable, even) for people to err on the side of frugality and utility every single time. That's not really the nature of running a pro sports franchise -- it's competitive by nature, and some risks have to be taken. Additionally, the FA market has many more variables than car shopping, and is much harder to predict -- what one sees as the upper limit price on a FA might change dramatically over a short period of time, based on competition and scarcity of resources.

 

Now, it is better that the Twins have failed to sign a big contract so far than to have signed the wrong big contract, but it would be better still if we were able to sign the *right* big contract. That's part of my expectation for this front office too -- not the only part, but a big enough part that I'm following their offseason moves.

  • Mike Sixel, 70charger and Battle ur tail off like this

#82 ChrisKnutson

ChrisKnutson

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • 663 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 08:43 AM

If we’re gonna pivot from Bumgarner as the “impact” pitcher we’re supposedly in search of, it better not be towards Ryu or Keuchel.

Really not a fan of Price, Smith, or Archer for various reasons, so if it’s not Ray or Boyd, the FO should go hard after younger options with potential like Marquez, E-Rod, Alcantara, and Montas.

#83 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Moderator
  • 25,755 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 11 December 2019 - 08:48 AM

I read it, and considered it, so don't blast me in reply. :)

I get that $118 mil may not have been the Phillies best offer, or it may have already represented an overpay, etc. I still think it could have been worth making such an offer -- no offense to the White Sox, but I don't think they were much of a test for Wheeler's off-field preferences, and it may have been worth overpaying if he was their #1 target, and to avoid getting shut out. Much depends on what the Twins do the rest of the offseason, of course, but I really did not like hearing that the Twins were prepared to offer more but didn't get a chance.

As far as 105 not also being worth 125, obviously that was the Twins judgement but it remains to be seen whether it was correct. The FA market in pro sports is nothing like an individual shopping for a car. Car shopping, it is perfectly acceptable (and admirable, even) for people to err on the side of frugality and utility every single time. That's not really the nature of running a pro sports franchise -- it's competitive by nature, and some risks have to be taken. Additionally, the FA market has many more variables than car shopping, and is much harder to predict -- what one sees as the upper limit price on a FA might change dramatically over a short period of time, based on competition and scarcity of resources.

Now, it is better that the Twins have failed to sign a big contract so far than to have signed the wrong big contract, but it would be better still if we were able to sign the *right* big contract. That's part of my expectation for this front office too -- not the only part, but a big enough part that I'm following their offseason moves.


The car analogy also falls apart due to the reason you're buying a car in the first place.

This is MLB we're talking about. You're not buying a car to commute back and forth to work, where any car will perform the job, it's just aesthetics.

You're buying a car for a race against 29 other car owners, and your chances of winning that race get pretty low when you're driving a used 2011 Prius. Great value, not much performance.

If your goal is to keep stocking your 401k, and not spend much on gas, great car.

If your goal is to win the race, not so much.
  • Mike Sixel and Sconnie like this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#84 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,158 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 08:49 AM

 

Good response, though as I read back, I see you dodged my question: What is a World Series worth to you? What is a World Series worth to this organization? Fans want to win, and I think that is why fans here will always disagree with you. The value premise does not mix well with winning. I’m not saying you don’t want the team to win, but winning does seem to come across as secondary.

 

We will just have to agree to disagree on the value premise. The value premise is essential to winning for teams with lower revenue. It's basically a linear relationship. The less revenue you have compared to the top revenue teams, the more value per dollar spent you MUST achieve in order to win as many games as said competitor with more revenue.IE. The Yankees can spend twice as much as the Twins. Therefore, the Twins have to have double the production per dollar to win an equal number of games. We seem to understand this with the Rays and As but refuse to acknowledge it with our team. Fans of teams where a spending cap exists tend to be rather sophisticated where spending is concerned. There are people who literally make fun of this premise here when it is literally a mathematical certainty.

 

Honestly, it bugs me because fans are mad for no good reason. The FO is following practices that are proving to be successful around the league. They are acting in the fans best interest. We had 100 wins last year and are positioned to win for the next several seasons. I agree with everyone else we need another good SP and I really don't know if Bumgarner, Ryu or someone else is the best candidate but I am not going to hate the FO because they did not sign a free agent who wanted to be someone else, especially given that team can pay for 3 players like him and still have the Twin's budget leftover. It's just not reasonable to expect to win that battle.

 

We have to find other ways to win. The Rays got better production out of Charlie Morton at 2/30 than the national got out of Corbin for 6/140. The Yankees got better production out of LeMahieu for 2/24 thanthe Padres got out of Machado for 10/300 or we can use the 1 yr example of Donaldson in Atlanta or Mustakis producing similar WAR for 1/3 of the price in Milwaukee. Brantley (2/32) produced almost the same WAR has Harper.

  • 70charger and chpettit19 like this

#85 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,158 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 09:43 AM

 

The car analogy also falls apart due to the reason you're buying a car in the first place.

This is MLB we're talking about. You're not buying a car to commute back and forth to work, where any car will perform the job, it's just aesthetics.

You're buying a car for a race against 29 other car owners, and your chances of winning that race get pretty low when you're driving a used 2011 Prius. Great value, not much performance.

If your goal is to keep stocking your 401k, and not spend much on gas, great car.

If your goal is to win the race, not so much.

 

I was going to say I am not sure how you missed value equals wins until I realized I just got done saying that I presumed just such a response. I made it clear in the post that the FO was seeking value per dollar spent. Of course, if we could spend infinitely, the amount spent would be meaningless and your position would have merit. Of course, that is not the case which is why I bothered to address productivity per dollar spent and the concept that the amount of wins per dollar spent eventually equates to the most wins for the team.

 

Let’s translate the analogy to an example. Last year, the Twins could have (theoretically) signed Harper for 10/300M ass ome suggested here or we could sign use the $30M to add Cruz, Gonsales, Cron, and Schoop. For an AAV of $31M. Collectively, they produced 7 WAR. I will eagerly await your explanation as to how 7 is not greater than 3.1?


#86 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Moderator
  • 17,673 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 09:47 AM

 

We have to find other ways to win. The Rays got better production out of Charlie Morton at 2/30 than the national got out of Corbin for 6/140.

Did they? Morton had an edge in fWAR, 6.1 to 4.8, but by actual on-field results (RA9-WAR and bWAR) they were virtually the same. Better value in Morton, sure, but not meaningfully better production.

 

And we'd probably be ecstatic if the Twins had signed either one last winter, and we're hoping they can find another one this winter, even if it costs $140 mil. (I'll grant that we won't be signing any $300 mil guys soon, and that's fine.)

  • Mike Sixel likes this

#87 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Bad puns. That's how eye roll.

  • Moderator
  • 25,755 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 11 December 2019 - 09:55 AM

I was going to say I am not sure how you missed value equals wins until I realized I just got done saying that I presumed just such a response. I made it clear in the post that the FO was seeking value per dollar spent. Of course, if we could spend infinitely, the amount spent would be meaningless and your position would have merit. Of course, that is not the case which is why I bothered to address productivity per dollar spent and the concept that the amount of wins per dollar spent eventually equates to the most wins for the team.

Let’s translate the analogy to an example. Last year, the Twins could have (theoretically) signed Harper for 10/300M ass ome suggested here or we could sign use the $30M to add Cruz, Gonsales, Cron, and Schoop. For an AAV of $31M. Collectively, they produced 7 WAR. I will eagerly await your explanation as to how 7 is not greater than 3.1?

how about 7 + 3.1?

Greater than 7?

Besides which...we didn't win the race.

Your goal seems to be asset preservation.

That's not mine.

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#88 Battle ur tail off

Battle ur tail off

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Member
  • 655 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 10:22 AM

 

We will just have to agree to disagree on the value premise. The value premise is essential to winning for teams with lower revenue. It's basically a linear relationship. The less revenue you have compared to the top revenue teams, the more value per dollar spent you MUST achieve in order to win as many games as said competitor with more revenue.IE. The Yankees can spend twice as much as the Twins. Therefore, the Twins have to have double the production per dollar to win an equal number of games. We seem to understand this with the Rays and As but refuse to acknowledge it with our team. Fans of teams where a spending cap exists tend to be rather sophisticated where spending is concerned. There are people who literally make fun of this premise here when it is literally a mathematical certainty.

 

This as a philosophy is just fine, and actually what most here realize is the case. We also realize that, as you say, we must get more per dollar than larger market teams do. 

 

That said, you can't be 100% rigid with any philosophy and expect to win the big one. Twins are in dire need of starting pitching right now. They are not really in need of position players as a whole. They have lots of money available to use, and lots of high end prospects as capital. 

 

Does it not make sense to utilize all the capital you have in order to produce the best team you can? Or can winning only happen here when you stick to the "value" philosopy of roster construction. 

 

My argument is that it takes both. It does no good to carry that money with you, nor does it do any good to carry prospects in areas where you already have young guys manning their positions. By spending what you can, and using your prospect capital, my opinion is then and only then are you actually maximizing the potential of those assets.


#89 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 31,605 posts

Posted 11 December 2019 - 12:29 PM

 

Did they? Morton had an edge in fWAR, 6.1 to 4.8, but by actual on-field results (RA9-WAR and bWAR) they were virtually the same. Better value in Morton, sure, but not meaningfully better production.

 

And we'd probably be ecstatic if the Twins had signed either one last winter, and we're hoping they can find another one this winter, even if it costs $140 mil. (I'll grant that we won't be signing any $300 mil guys soon, and that's fine.)

 

But they didn't, they signed Perez......

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




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: stephen strasburg, dallas keuchel, madison bumgarner, hyun-jin ryu, rocco baldelli