Twinkie Town: Win now, Win later

[Brock Beauchamp]

Here's a study of the 30 MLB teams and where they stack up in regards to age and competitiveness both now and later... All bundled into a nice graph so everyone can laugh at the Phillies.

 

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2015/1/14/7546735/baseball-predictions-math-hella-graphs

[Mike Sixel]

Twins are 2nd farthest from "win now" on that graph.....

[nytwinsfan]

Haha, sucks to be Phillies fans.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'll be the optimist and say that I think the Twins are a lot closer to winning now than people realize.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Twins are 2nd farthest from "win now" on that graph.....

Actually third farthest but yeah...

[Mike Sixel]

ah, right.....it is so hard to see the Phillies.....

 

Not sure the Rockies should be as far left as the Phillies too.

[beckmt]

Twins have improved, so have the club closest to them.  It may be harder for them next year than last year, because of the improvement of the clubs in the division.  They still have a good starting rotation that may be the worst in the division and if Kansas City is worse, they have a much better bullpen.    I am still seeing 70-75 wins in 2015  Could be better if bullpen is great, but  not likely at this time.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think a lot of this boils down to young teams either break out or they don't. The Cubs and Twins are rated as the youngest teams, though the Cubs are quite a bit further along in the process.

 

Teams like the Twins tend to be rated *really* lowly until a bunch of young players break out in the same season... If it happens at all. The Twins are poised to go big at any moment but they also have a decent chance of stumbling badly because prospect development is a fickle beast.

 

There's as good a chance the Twins win 75 games this year as they win 85, IMO. There are just too many variables on this team right now to make an accurate prediction (Gibson, May, Vargas, Santana... and that's not even throwing Buxton, Meyer, or Sano into the ring). If two of those guys suddenly turn into All-Stars, the Twins are a pretty good team in 2015... But, again, one can't bank on that happening in any particular year so until things gel, the Twins are considered far from contention going into every season.

[James]

This was a fun article.  I enjoyed his equation that he used to figure this all out as well.  I also think that the Twins are closer, but I'm not going to put too much stock into this, especially after reading the super mathematical equation used to determine these graph position.

 

What's even better is the comments section where one poster is going through the lineups of every team and trying to show why the Reds are ranked too low on the scale and are apparently the best team in baseball.  He didn't compare the Twins to the Reds, but I would love to see it.  According to him, comparing Jose Abreu to Votto is "Unrelevant" because he is a DH and not a 1B.    

 

It.Is.Brilliant.

[Seth Stohs]

I mean, I think the Twins could be a little further to the right, though I don't see them contending for a division title in 2015, so I guess it doesn't matter whether they're at the midpoint of the vertical line or where they are left of it.

 

But, if the pitching comes around, and there should be reasons for optimism on that front, they should be much improved. 

[Mike Sixel]

i do agree they are likely to be better, I do also agree they aren't likely to contend.....

[Major League Ready]

I am surprised there has not been any comment on the authors thoughts on the timing of spending which is very much in contrast to the opinion of many here.   The concept of timing investment tends to downright irritate quite a few people here but I have to agree.  Signing Hughes was a great move because the term covered his prime years.  Nolasco and Santana were both signed to deals that statically extend into diminished performance and increased chance of injury.  Worst of all they committed those funds into the years when this team SHOULD be ready to compete and the likely benefit of these moves is that they might get to 500.  This team just does not understand the concept of rebuilding and that most likely means the mediocrity will be extended. 

[Willihammer]

The Twins' success or failure in the coming years isn't totally dependent on Buxton and Sano. There are other talents in the system. You don't put an entire professional baseball team on hold for two lousy prospects.

[ashbury]

two lousy prospects.

Least optimistic scouting report I've seen on them to date.

[beckmt]

Do not expect many prospects to arrive until 2016.  Pitching should be better in 2015, but I believe the owner feels the need to have improvement to around .500 to show the Twins are moving in the correct direction(witness Cleveland, now the Indians are better, but do not draw much in Cleveland).  

[diehardtwinsfan]

I really think the Sano/Buxton injuries hurt the Twins in that aspect. I expected the 2015 Twins to behave like the 2001 Twins, where they surprised a lot of people early, but the rookies struggled as the season went on. I still think that's possible, but Buxton and Sano will be starting in the minors instead of the majors for 2015. That said, Plouffe has shown to be a pretty decent stop gap and could have quite a bit of trade value when Sano is ready, which I think is good for the long term prospects of the franchise.

 

But even with that in mind, they had a top 5 offense last season (and that's with a dreadful first half). The offense has some regression candidates in Vargas and Santana in particular (though it's got some of the good kind of regression in Arcia and Mauer too), but on the other side, the pitching has some regression candidates in a good way (May, Nolasco, and Gibson in particular). I'm not expecting playoffs, but I do think that the team could easily turn out to be a pretender that makes things interesting well into August. I'm not happy with them defensively (particularly in the OF), but with Rosario and Buxton being right around the corner and quite possibly playing in 2015, I think this problem will take care of itself.

[Mike Sixel]

I am surprised there has not been any comment on the authors thoughts on the timing of spending which is very much in contrast to the opinion of many here.   The concept of timing investment tends to downright irritate quite a few people here but I have to agree.  Signing Hughes was a great move because the term covered his prime years.  Nolasco and Santana were both signed to deals that statically extend into diminished performance and increased chance of injury.  Worst of all they committed those funds into the years when this team SHOULD be ready to compete and the likely benefit of these moves is that they might get to 500.  This team just does not understand the concept of rebuilding and that most likely means the mediocrity will be extended. 

 

Well, I do think people on here have questioned the timing and approach to the "rebuild". Many people here have wondered why not May and Meyer and Berrios this year, to see what you have, and then spend money next year if needed......

 

I do think that many people do, however, put too little emphasis on the need to sell tickets and "be competitive".....and only emphasize "winning it all" by timing things. I think the owner doesn't want the rapid decline in fans in the seats to continue. My hope, hope for sure not expectation, is that they are willing to eat some of these deals if they don't work out, rather than ride mediocrity (my concern is that these guys are mediocre enough "not to replace") for some time.

[Steven Buhr]

This team just does not understand the concept of rebuilding and that most likely means the mediocrity will be extended. 

Unfortunately, it's not about "extending" the mediocrity. This team needs to REACH mediocrity first. The moves that some are questioning are arguably necessary in order to avoid extending the putrid-ity of the past 4 years. As Mike opines above, the business side of this game required moves that went beyond simply planning for the next cycle of contention. If they allowed fan interest to slide even further, there would be a real risk that money necessary to add pieces to contend in the future might not be there.

[nicksaviking]

"Oh, the Twins are spending like they're winning now. While the Phil Hughes deal might be wise and proactive, their decision to give scores of millions to Ervin Santana and Ricky Nolasco before Miguel Sano and Byron Buxton are ready was bizarre. I don't blame them for not wanting to get caught with a half-team, like the Padres did last year with their good pitching and woof hitting, but go for the reasonable options, man. Leave some money for when Sano and Buxton actually get there, and get the pitchers who are good then."

 

Those were my thoughts this offseason.

[Major League Ready]

The article does oversimplify the Twins situation.  We should not plan everything around Buxton and Sano.  That is risky and a reach.  The fact that we have Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Polanco, Meyer, May, Berrios, Milone, Burdi, and others who should be ready soon makes a far more compelling case for avoiding long-term contracts on players past their prime.

 

I am not sure if those who are advocates of timing FA additions are solely focus on winning at all.  That definitely is not my focus in terms of timing additions.   The focus should be on developing young players and retaining flexibility.  In addition, when you are signing players to 4+ year contracts, the implications need to be considered for the duration of the contract.  Next year we are going to have one spot available for May, Meyer, Milone, and Berrios.  Yes, you can never have enough pitching but that needs to be put in context.  We are not going to contend so what is the benefit of having Santana and Nolasco over someone like Hammel or Volquez who would not be on the payroll come 2017.  These guys just might be better than Nolasco this year. 

 

Most likely case scenario is that the addition of Nolasco and Santana make a 4-5 win difference and the twins still finish below 500.  Big deal.   I would rather watch the prospects play and the sell tickets argument does not fly either.  It is highly unlikely attendance increase enough to pay for Nolasco and Santana in the best case scenario this year.  Anything less than best case scenario like Nolasco performing like last year or one of them getting hurt and it is a poor investment and that's this year.  The likelihood of this investment paying off goes down every year of these contracts. 

 

They caved and applied a short-sighted approach.  It still possible Nolasco and Santana beat the odds and perform well enough to be traded at some point over the course of their contracts.  Unfortunately, it is more likely that they will delay development of players that are part of the solution.  And, what are the odds that money could not be used far better elsewhere come 2017/2018? 

 

Winning it all is not at all the point but making the most of assets and building a team that is a legit contender requires more discipline, especially in a small to mid revenue market.

[Mike Sixel]

I agree with you, MLR.....I'd rather watch mediocre teams with young players than mediocre teams with old players. At least one way you have hope.....

[Willihammer]

Well you are going to see young players. With 6 or 7 exceptions everyone on the roster is going to be under 30. Thus the Twins standing at the bottom of the "lots of young talent" graph.

 

A while back in one of the minor league threads, someone suggested that a better way to gauge an organization's young talent was to look at all under-25 players including those that have graduated to the major league level  - names that would have been removed from the Baseball Prospectus, etc. organizational rankings.

 

Here's a question for the timing crowd then. How would you rank the top 10 under-25 talents in the Twins system?

[gunnarthor]

 

Here's a question for the timing crowd then. How would you rank the top 10 under-25 talents in the Twins system?

Ignoring guys below AA: Buxton, Sano, Arcia, Meyer, May, Santana, Hicks, Burdi, Berrios, Vargas, Polanco, Rosario.

 

That said, 25 is an arbitrary cut off.  

[Willihammer]

Ignoring guys below AA: Buxton, Sano, Arcia, Meyer, May, Santana, Hicks, Burdi, Berrios, Vargas, Polanco, Rosario.

 

That said, 25 is an arbitrary cut off.

I'd argue the prospect label is arbitrary. If you exclude young players because they put their rookie season behind them, then the target is always going to be 2-3 years down the road, or longer. But that doesn't describe the shape the Twins are in. Of the top 10 talents you mentioned, half have already put their rookie season behind them. When you look at it that way, would you say the window is 2017-2018, or sooner?

[Brandon]

I see the Twins as a playoff contender this next season.  Or more of an 85 win team.  With a top 5 offense that should continue to produce and now we have an abundance of starting options.  We have so many that no one even talks about Rogers or Duffy as potential starting pitcher candidates at some point next season.  Both put up good numbers in AA last year so why are they not in the discussion for roles in our rotation. 

 

Anyway with a top 5 offense a league average bullpen and a league average rotation is a winning team.  We have 4 starters capable of winning 12-15 games and a collection of pitchers capable of handling the 5th starter role if not for the season then for part of it. 

 

There were no extreme performances last season on offense that would regress so much to hurt the offense next season...maybe Santana maybe our CF situation doesn't get fixed and we have to go with our back up plan.  Putting Escobar at SS is still not going to hurt the offense. 

 

While last season we noticed how bad the OF defense was our 4th and 5th starters were terrible and Nolasco was injured.  I think those 3 spots will see some of the best improvement next year with Nolasco healthy, Santana in the fold, and May and Meyer 1 year more experienced.  We have more team depth then we know what to do with.  We will be an 85 or better win team next season. 

[gunnarthor]

. Of the top 10 talents you mentioned, half have already put their rookie season behind them. When you look at it that way, would you say the window is 2017-2018, or sooner?

No, I think the Twins can be .500 this year and a playoff team next year.  They've got a loaded farm system but people forget they've already graduated 4 top 100 prospects already.

 

I think this years team will have a lot of similarities to the 2001 team.  Both teams came off of bad seasons (69 and 70 win teams).  When you look at the big jump in 2001, three things stand out:

1) Emergence of a couple former top 100 prospects - Guzman and Hunter had great years.

2) One surprisingly good player - Koskie was never a big time prospect but he was a 6 WAR player

3) No really sucky players - Almost every player was at least 0 WAR or better.  The team had about negative 4 WAR total among all it's players and the worst was Hawkins (-0.7WAR).

 

A .500 team should have a team WAR around 35 or so.  Last year the Twins were around 25 (the 2001 Twins jumped from 29 to 40).  So to get to .500 the team needs to improve by about 10 WAR.  That seems pretty doable.  

 

1) Emergence - they have a bunch of young former top 100 guys who could have a breakout season.  Gibson, Hicks, Arcia, May, Meyer, Pinto, Hughes, Schefer (and an older former top prospect in Mauer).  I think Gibson and Arcia will have big years, hopefully Mauer isn't sucky and Meyer will be a stud.  And I'm a big fan of May.  The rotation will be a lot better.

2) Surprise guys - they probably don't have two 6 WAR guys like the 2001 team did (Koskie and Mays) but Plouffe and Dozier have shown themselves to be pretty good and neither were ever top prospects.  Escobar and Santana could also join them.

3) No crappy players.  Fangraphs had a post about this the other day, Twins are (projected) to have the 3rd fewest number of low WAR guys next year.  They had nearly 9 negative WAR from players last year. This team has depth so they don't have any DeVries or Albers pitching this year.

 

So you can get to that improved 10 WAR by simply subtracting some negative WAR away (basically they got 600 PA and -4 WAR from Morales, Parm, Colabello and Kubel last year).  So if Vargas is even a 1 WAR player at DH this year, that's a 5 WAR improvement.  Ervin Santana replaces the Correa/May starts last year (combined -1.0 WAR) and is a 2 WAR guy.  That's a 3 WAR swing.  etc, etc.  

[Mike Sixel]

I'd argue the prospect label is arbitrary. If you exclude young players because they put their rookie season behind them, then the target is always going to be 2-3 years down the road, or longer. But that doesn't describe the shape the Twins are in. Of the top 10 talents you mentioned, half have already put their rookie season behind them. When you look at it that way, would you say the window is 2017-2018, or sooner?

I count 3 guys, not half.....unless you really think Hicks is a top 10 under 25 guy with a future......or you count Polanco last year, which seems a bit of a stretch....

[jimmer]

One has to look at where players are projected for WAR in 2015 when trying to determine if we are gaining enough to be competitive.  Even then, those are projections meaning what they should do, and doesn't account for players over and under-performing.   We also can't just assume every one who had a good WAR last year will maintain that and also expect improvements to make it show we've gained enough to have a chance at .500.  Can't look at last year's WARS and project them to next year. It's not really how it works and the guys at Fangraphs has stated this multiple times in chats and articles.  

 

I don't see how this team, with such a low amount of quality, experienced major leaguers, has a realistic chance for .500 this season.  If I'm reading Steamer projections right, for our 40 man, we're projected to a hair under 18 WAR for position players and a bit over 9.00 WAR from our pitching (and a bit over 6.00 if looking at at RA9-WAR). We may not have a lot of projected negative guys, but we have a lot hovering at zero and between zero and 1. That puts us in the low 70s win category

[DuluthFan]

Least optimistic scouting report I've seen on them to date.

But possibly the most accurate for the 2014 season.

Sano contributed NOTHING in 2014 since he was injured and sat out the entire season. Buxton's main contribution was a concussion causing highlight reel collision in the outfield.

But on the bright side, they didn't lose service time sitting on the DL while on the 40 man roster.

[Willihammer]

1) Emergence - they have a bunch of young former top 100 guys who could have a breakout season. Gibson, Hicks, Arcia, May, Meyer, Pinto, Hughes, Schefer (and an older former top prospect in Mauer). I think Gibson and Arcia will have big years, hopefully Mauer isn't sucky and Meyer will be a stud. And I'm a big fan of May. The rotation will be a lot better.

Right, many of the system's best talents are already graduated. Better yet, a few even look like players. If people want to talk about timing FA moves based around a window, then that target should account for these players too, not just the guys on the mlb.com top 100 list of minor leaguers. When you dtake the whole system into account, 2016 looks like a more reasonable target than 2017-2018 and therefore the wins we can expect from the Nolasco and Santana contracts project to be quite important and not just "extending mediocrity" or impeding the team in any way.