Poll: Vets vs. Futures

[Willihammer]

You're in Vegas and you must place a $10,000 bet. The league on which you're betting has two baseball teams - the Vets and the Future. They will play 162 games against each other. You're betting on the Vets' win total for the season.

 

 

Team Vets consists of the Minnesota Twins where Nolasco is chosen instead of Berrios, Pelfrey instead of May, Stauffer instead of Oliveros, Pressly instead of Burdi, Duensing instead of Meyer, Fryer instead of Pinto, Plouffe instead of Sano, Hunter instead of Rosario, and Schafer instead of Buxton.

 

Team Future consists of the Minnesota Twins where Berrios plays instead of Nolasco, May instead of Pelfrey, Oliveros instead of Stauffer, Burdi instead of Pressly, Meyer instead of Duensing, Pinto instead of Fryer, Sano instead of Plouffe, Rosario instead of Hunter, and Buxton instead of Schafer.

 

 

Which win total do you place your $10,000 bet on?

[whydidnt]

Tough concept to bet on because ideally the Twins would go with the best player in each of these battles, rather than an all or nothing thing. I think in total the vets would probably win more games this year, but if you could pick and chose the battles that a combo team would do better than either. It's much easier to see going with the young pitchers having a more positive impact this year, than the hitters. 

[Willihammer]

Tough concept to bet on because ideally the Twins would go with the best player in each of these battles, rather than an all or nothing thing. I think in total the vets would probably win more games this year, but if you could pick and chose the battles that a combo team would do better than either. It's much easier to see going with the young pitchers having a more positive impact this year, than the hitters.

I tend to agree, but to keep it simple I went with an all or nothing choice.

[iTwins]

A purely veteran team likely wins more in 2015, but cost 2016 some wins.

It's that constant debate - do you let the young guys play this year, take some lumps (and likely lose more games) - in order to be closer to contention in 2016 and beyond, or do you try to get the most out of the veteran crew, see if you can contend and then add the young guys to the mix late?

The past few years, the Twins have been rolling with the latter option - primarily (I'd guess) because Gardy's job was on the line over the past few seasons and he didn't want to suffer from a down season due to inexperienced players.

To direcly answer the question: I think that the veteran team the Twins have this year finish around 72-77 wins - where a team of Buxton, Sano, Berrios, Rosario - etc. likely end up around 60 to 65 wins.

(Obviously the preferred plan is to operate on a less "all or nothing scale" and slowly introduce the young guys during the year, but I get where you're coming from with the poll)

[Seth Stohs]

I put that the Vets would win 91-95 games... because they're vets. This is an interesting concept. The veterans are most likely better right now than the young guys, in most cases. I don't know if the switches are fair or realistic. I mean, Burdi or Duensing... they're not going to  be used in the same roles. 

 

I do think that the Veterans would dominate the first half, but the younger team would come on stronger in the second half. 

[Paul Pleiss]

I don't see a scenario where the Vets down win 90+ that doesn't involve considerable injury to key players.

 

Too many youngsters will be taking their lumps early in the season. And while they will improve as the season progresses, the Vets will have staked themselves to an impressive lead and coast to the title.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm not quite sure why it has to be an either or proposition. The Twins are moving rookies into the lineups, but they aren't doing it until they are ready.

[Paul Pleiss]

It has to be either or because it's a hypothetical question about a team playing itself. A young version and an old version. If it's a half young, half old team playing itself 162 times, it likely ends up being somewhere very near 81-81. No fun wagering fake money on equall matched teams (I pick team 1!), but since there's difference, it's fun to discuss why (or why not) the Vets will bash the kids day after day.

[Jham]

A team of seasoned major leaguers vs. a team of minor leaguers?  Not even a minor league all-star team?  I would hope the vets would win at least 100.  Some of the younger players might end up being good enough to play or even star for the veteran club, but others will prove themselves completely over-matched, but due to the parameters of the hypothetical, they'd have to keep running them out there anyway, and that's where the vets would absolutely throttle the youths.