Trade perkins, or not?

[spinowner]

 

The Twins use the "closer" position as a "cornerstone".  Everything is built around the concept of getting a lead to the 9th inning (bunting, "productive outs", aggressive base-running,etc.) and then turning the ball over to "the closer".  Trading Perkins would be like throwing away the rudder to a ship as far as the Twins are concerned.

This is how almost every major league team has managed its bullpen for a long time, probably for 30 years or more. The Royals of 2014 demonstrated that an extension of that strategy can succeed when you have the luxury of three relievers with closer stuff and mentality. Ahead in the 7th? Put in closer C, then closer B in the 8th and closer A in the 9th. Starters know they can give a little more if they only have to go 6. Use the other 3 relievers in your bully when you're behind or way ahead. It just illustrates further that the three most important things in baseball are pitching, pitching and pitching.

[USAFChief]

 

 

The 1987 Twins had the fifth best record in a 14-team league. In today's system they'd have been either the second wild card team or not in the postseason at all.

The 1987 Twins had to win 8 games against two opponents to be World Champions. In today's system they'd have to win 12 games against four opponents.

 

Your overall point about the path through the playoffs being tougher now is true.

 

But the "fifth best record automatically equals the second wild card" is not true.

 

Just like the Twins won the AL West in 87 with the 5th best record, the 2015 Twins (or any team) could win their division with the 5th best record in the league.  They wouldn't be a wild card.

 

For that matter, a team could technically have the 11th best record in a 15 team league and win their division.

[spinowner]

 

Your overall point about the path through the playoffs being tougher now is true.

 

But the "fifth best record automatically equals the second wild card" is not true.

 

Just like the Twins won the AL West in 87 with the 5th best record, the 2015 Twins (or any team) could win their division with the 5th best record in the league.  They wouldn't be a wild card.

 

For that matter, a team could technically have the 11th best record in a 15 team league and win their division.

To see how the 1987 Twins might have fared in today's system let's use the 3-division alignment that was put into place in 1994. In that scenario Detroit would have won the East, Milwaukee the Central and Oakland the West. Toronto and New York would have been the wild cards.

 

The Twins qualifying for the postseason in 1987 was the result of an alignment fluke. They weren't a bad team and they took full advantage of this very lucky break, but that team would almost certainly not be a postseason team in 2015.

 

So please, as has already been suggested, let's put 1987 to bed as a prototype for this year's team.

 

[USAFChief]

 

To see how the 1987 Twins might have fared in today's system let's use the 3-division alignment that was put into place in 1994. In that scenario Detroit would have won the East, Milwaukee the Central and Oakland the West. Toronto and New York would have been the wild cards.

 

The Twins qualifying for the postseason in 1987 was the result of an alignment fluke. They weren't a bad team and they took full advantage of this very lucky break, but that team would almost certainly not be a postseason team in 2015.

 

So please, as has already been suggested, let's put 1987 to bed as a prototype for this year's team.

The Twins were in the postseason by virtue of winning the AL West.  That's not an "alignment fluke."  They had to be better than 6 teams in their division to qualify.

 

 And if that's an alignment fluke, there's a bigger chance of an alignment fluke today.  In 1987, a team could not have worse than the 8th best record in the AL and win their division.  

 

Today they have to be better than 4 to win their division, or have the second or third best record among teams that don't win one of THREE divisions, not two.  As noted, a team could have the 11th best record in the AL and win thier division.

 

The Twins in 87 were no bigger fluke than SF winning the WS last year, KC making the WS last year, or StL in the WS with basically a .500 record a couple years ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The Twins were in the postseason by virtue of winning the AL West.  That's not an "alignment fluke."  They had to be better than 6 teams in their division to qualify.

 

 And if that's an alignment fluke, there's a bigger chance of an alignment fluke today.  In 1987, a team could not have worse than the 8th best record in the AL and win their division.  

 

Today they have to be better than 4 to win their division, or have the second or third best record among teams that don't win one of THREE divisions, not two.  As noted, a team could have the 11th best record in the AL and win thier division.

 

The Twins in 87 were no bigger fluke than SF winning the WS last year, KC making the WS last year, or StL in the WS with basically a .500 record a couple years ago.

Yep, the Padres made the playoffs with an 82-80 record some time in the mid to late 2000s. That's the worst full-season playoff record in history and would have been virtually impossible under the pre-WC alignments. That Padres team would have finished third in the 1987 AL West.

[Mike Sixel]

Anyone feel differently today?

 

They are losing ground, Toronto and Texas just added players, and Perkins isn't exactly awesome in the 2nd half, again.

 

I say if you can get a big time prospect, you deal him.

[drjim]

 

Anyone feel differently today?

 

They are losing ground, Toronto and Texas just added players, and Perkins isn't exactly awesome in the 2nd half, again.

 

I say if you can get a big time prospect, you deal him.

 

Not at all. Still a bad idea.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Not at all. Still a bad idea.

 

why? You are on the "they aren't that good this year" side, right? What value does he add if they aren't making the playoffs?

[drjim]

 

why? You are on the "they aren't that good this year" side, right? What value does he add if they aren't making the playoffs?

 

I'm on they are still in the lead for the wild card and should still go for it side. Just wouldn't give up great prospects for rentals.

 

And also on the side that expects them to be better next year too, so I wouldn't trade players that would help in that endeavor for prospects.

 

So bad idea all around.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I'm on they are still in the lead for the wild card and should still go for it side. Just wouldn't give up great prospects for rentals.

 

And also on the side that expects them to be better next year too, so I wouldn't trade players that would help in that endeavor for prospects.

 

So bad idea all around.

 

Fair, I misunderstood your stance.

 

I'd rather they deal for long term present/future assets, but I have my doubts that happens.

 

As for next year, also fair.

[HitInAPinch]

 

Anyone feel differently today?

 

They are losing ground, Toronto and Texas just added players, and Perkins isn't exactly awesome in the 2nd half, again.

 

I say if you can get a big time prospect, you deal him.

 

I haven't commented yet, can I still play

 

I really haven't thought that much of Perkins, although I admit it's because of the lame Save rules.  I guy that starts the 9th, no one on base, and a lead doesn't deserve a Save. 

 

Anyway, I find Perkins is a serviceable closer.  I'm not so sure that they could get a big return for Perkins alone.