Three Teams

[DaveW]

 

Billy Beane's teams suck in the playoffs and we don't say he's a bad GM. The playoffs aren't exactly a crapshoot but you can't judge a GM by them - getting there is the battle. The Twins consistently got there last decade and it looks like they'll be in the running for a long while here after a relatively short rebuild. That's good work by TR (and Bill Smith).

Billy Beane isn't a GM anymore.

[DaveW]

 

 

See below. That $10 million gap this year will be nowhere near as close as the Cubs spending on pitching continues this offseason.

There's a difference between three short term mid-range deals and the massive contracts the Cubs can offer (which buy elite pitching for the first half and are awful the back half). The Twins don't have the luxury to do that. And of those three, the Twins seem to have gone 2 for 3 (with the caveat that you obviously don't know until the contract expires, Hughes could implode, Santana too). That's pretty good GMing by TR there.

The Twins could mirror the Cubs strategy but it would be disastrously short sighted. If Lester had sucked for the Cubs, they would have been able to go and sign another elite guy this offseason and slot Lester into the 5 spot. The Twins would be paralyzed as a club. TR is smart not to roll the dice on huge contracts to guys in their 30s - no amount of Sano/Buxton/Rosario magic would be able to make up for that albatross - especially if the Twins traded assets to get a guy like Cole Hamels as the poster advocated.

The Twins could have gotten Hamels and not given up any of their top prospects like Kepler and Berrios.

 

Source:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbenjamin/2015/07/30/texas-rangers-made-out-like-bandits-in-cole-hamels-trade/

[ThejacKmp]

 

The Astros started the rebuild one year before the Twins. The two teams are basically in lock-step once you adjust the timelines.

 

I won't argue the Twins front office should have been smarter about aspects of the rebuild. If they wanted starting pitching, it makes more sense to acquire one higher tier pitcher and one lower tier guy than it does to acquire a slew of #3 upside guys.

 

The Astros are a very fair comparison to the Twins. The Cubs not so much.

 

But I disagree about the high tier guys. You can't sign those guys for 4 years and if you sign them for 7, you hinder your efforts to sign Sano and Buxton and Co. Way too big a gamble.

Also, Hughes and Santana have looked like solid #2 upside guys thus far - you're selling them short. If you want to draw a difference between the Nolasco signing and the Hughes/Santana it would be that Nolasco's upside was maybe a #3 (but likely a #4) while Hughes and Santana both had a higher ceiling (heck, last year Hughes was a #1 starter). You can absolutely criticize TR for Nolasco but the other two were smart signings that had no chance of weighing down the Twins future. Any signing of a 7 year deal until a guy is 36 or 37 can do that. Not worth the risk.

 

[DaveW]

 

 

 

 

If we're talking about the rebuild - and that's what the thread is about - this was Ryan's fourth season and and the Twins were over .500. That's on par with the Astros and faster than the Royals, Pirates, and several other recent postseason teams. He's doing an acceptable - though in my opinion, unspectacular job - with the rebuilding process.

 

edit: my bad, I thought the Astros were close to .500 last season. They were an abysmal 70-92. So, in essence, Ryan is ahead of everyone but the Cubs.

.500 isn't the goal and never should be a goal, when 33% of teams make the playoffs, the goal should be playoffs or bust every single year. Not "oh well we are on pace to MAYBE have a shot next year"

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The Astros are a very fair comparison to the Twins. The Cubs not so much.

 

But I disagree about the high tier guys. You can't sign those guys for 4 years and if you sign them for 7, you hinder your efforts to sign Sano and Buxton and Co. Way too big a gamble.

Also, Hughes and Santana have looked like solid #2 upside guys thus far - you're selling them short. If you want to draw a difference between the Nolasco signing and the Hughes/Santana it would be that Nolasco's upside was maybe a #3 (but likely a #4) while Hughes and Santana both had a higher ceiling (heck, last year Hughes was a #1 starter). You can absolutely criticize TR for Nolasco but the other two were smart signings that had no chance of weighing down the Twins future. Any signing of a 7 year deal until a guy is 36 or 37 can do that. Not worth the risk.

Eh, signing a six year contract last season wouldn't impact Sano or any of the other guys. Mauer is coming off the books before any of them get a real raise.

 

Signing Hughes was a brilliant move. Extending Hughes... Probably not. I understand why they did it but it wasn't terribly bright.

 

Santana isn't a #2 any way you shake it. The guy has consistently been a #3-4 guy with a smattering of #2 type seasons. Given his age, he can't be expected to routinely post #2 numbers going forward.

[DaveW]

 

 

The Astros are a very fair comparison to the Twins. The Cubs not so much.

 

But I disagree about the high tier guys. You can't sign those guys for 4 years and if you sign them for 7, you hinder your efforts to sign Sano and Buxton and Co. Way too big a gamble.

Also, Hughes and Santana have looked like solid #2 upside guys thus far - you're selling them short. If you want to draw a difference between the Nolasco signing and the Hughes/Santana it would be that Nolasco's upside was maybe a #3 (but likely a #4) while Hughes and Santana both had a higher ceiling (heck, last year Hughes was a #1 starter). You can absolutely criticize TR for Nolasco but the other two were smart signings that had no chance of weighing down the Twins future. Any signing of a 7 year deal until a guy is 36 or 37 can do that. Not worth the risk.

 

Phil Hughes is 29 years old, has pitched for 8 seasons and has a carer 4.33 ERA, I'm sorry, that isn't #2 upside. At this stage, baring an arm transplant he is what he is.

 

Ditto with Santana.

[DaveW]

 

 

 

 

Signing Hughes was a brilliant move. Extending Hughes... Probably not.

Yup.

[DaveW]

 

 

The Twins are just one year away from being the Cubs with the right moves and they probably don't have to include a Lester-type signing at all.

Two front of the rotation starters, a legit catcher and another legit bat or two. Those are some pretty big "moves" to fill.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

.500 isn't the goal and never should be a goal, when 33% of teams make the playoffs, the goal should be playoffs or bust every single year. Not "oh well we are on pace to MAYBE have a shot next year"

I agree the playoffs should be the goal but very few teams jump 15+ wins in a single season, which is what it would have required to make the postseason. The Astros did it, but barely. They also had a year leg-up on the Twins, graduating many of their young players in 2014 and letting them take their lumps in a lost season. Meanwhile, the Twins had their two best prospects spend the season in and out of doctors' offices.

 

I don't like the way Ryan handled this deadline. More could have been done to get the Twins the 2-3 more wins required to challenge for the WC until the final day of the season.

 

But that doesn't negate all the progress that was made this season. The Twins made huge strides forward and were competitive far longer than anyone predicted.

[ThejacKmp]

 

The Twins could have gotten Hamels and not given up any of their top prospects like Kepler and Berrios.

 

Source:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbenjamin/2015/07/30/texas-rangers-made-out-like-bandits-in-cole-hamels-trade/

 

I mean, you're always going to get different perspectives on trades.  This guy makes specific arguments against prospects. But read this:

 

http://deadspin.com/cole-hamels-traded-to-rangers-phillies-get-top-prospec-1721008071

 

The key part is:

 

·SP Matt Harrison ($28.4 million guaranteed left on his contract)

·C Jorge Alfaro (Top-3 prospect within the Rangers organization, consensus top-5o prospect overall)
·SP Jake Thompson (Top-5 prospect within the Rangers, top-100 prospect overall in most publications)
·OF Nick Williams (71st best prospect in baseball, according to Baseball Prospectus)
·SP Alec Asher

·SP Jerad Eickhoff

 

So how did I translate it?

 

- I made Harrison Gibson. They aren't really the same but it's the closest comparison and I think decent. If anything, Harrison has a longer track record.

- For a top 3 prospect and top 50 overall (midway through the season) we might even be selling Kepler too high. In fact, he's rated #96 at http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2015, an up to ranking.  Kepler was a guy with half an elite season, I'm not sure he's even close as a comp.

- For Thompson I went with Gonsalves.  Gonsalves is unlikely to be top 100.  Once again, I inflated the Twins prospect.

- For Williams I went Rosario. Like Gibson not a direct comp but the twins don't have one (ABW is not there). Seeing as Harrison had more MLB experience than Gibson, I felt okay going with Rosario, who before the season was probably ranked around that line.
- I didn't bother figuring out who the other two were.  I just said low level Twins prospects.
 

I think this is a very fair comparison to what the Twins would have given up. Disagree?


 

[bluechipper]

 

Phil Hughes is 29 years old, has pitched for 8 seasons and has a carer 4.33 ERA, I'm sorry, that isn't #2 upside. At this stage, baring an arm transplant he is what he is.

 

Ditto with Santana.

I understand what you're saying, but Jake Arrieta had a 5.46 ERA over 4 years in Baltimore, and now he's Cy Young, so some amount of luck has played into the Cubs quicker rise.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Eh, signing a six year contract last season wouldn't impact Sano or any of the other guys. Mauer is coming off the books before any of them get a real raise.

 

Signing Hughes was a brilliant move. Extending Hughes... Probably not. I understand why they did it but it wasn't terribly bright.

 

Santana isn't a #2 any way you shake it. The guy has consistently been a #3-4 guy with a smattering of #2 type seasons. Given his age, he can't be expected to routinely post #2 numbers going forward.

 

It's not just Sano.  It's Buxton and Kepler and Berrios and Rosario and Hicks and all the other guys who come up. The Twins can't take that risk - some of those contracts are going to be big.

Agreed on Hughes. Not a bad move but sideways.  They locked down a guy who looks like a solid #3 starter and who has excelled in the pen in the past (if you want a doomsday scenario).

No he can't but we were talking upside. He has #2 upside as he showed the last half of last year.  Hopefully he won't be the Twins #2 when we achieve glory (we have young pitchers coming up who can hopefully pass him) but he's not farfetched starting a game #2 (but better a #3, agreed). 



 

[ThejacKmp]

 

I agree the playoffs should be the goal but very few teams jump 15+ wins in a single season, which is what it would have required to make the postseason. The Astros did it, but barely. They also had a year leg-up on the Twins, graduating many of their young players in 2014 and letting them take their lumps in a lost season. Meanwhile, the Twins had their two best prospects spend the season in and out of doctors' offices.

 

I don't like the way Ryan handled this deadline. More could have been done to get the Twins the 2-3 more wins required to challenge for the WC until the final day of the season.

 

But that doesn't negate all the progress that was made this season. The Twins made huge strides forward and were competitive far longer than anyone predicted.

 

At the time I though TR didn't do the deadline well but as time passes . . .

 

There doesn't appear to have been a catcher out there who wasn't going to cost an arm and a leg.  They bet on Suzuki regressing up to the mean, which he did. Can't fault them there.

 

They didn't panic and replace SS.  Well done, Escobar looks league average at worst.

They made an astute trade for Jepsen and Cotts wasn't bad.  You could argue they needed more but who knew that Perkins was going to crap the bed like he did?  With an effective Perkins their bullpen would have been okay. 

 

I'm glad they didn't trade away too much. At the time hated the deadline moves but in hindsight, hard to see where there were too many trades that don't involve elite prospects that would have changed things. The Twins problems (bullpen, catcher) will be much easier to solve in the offseason, when the prices are cheaper since there aren't three sellers driving prices up with 12 suitors. 


 

[DaveW]

 

I agree the playoffs should be the goal but very few teams jump 15+ wins in a single season, which is what it would have required to make the postseason. The Astros did it, but barely. They also had a year leg-up on the Twins, graduating many of their young players in 2014 and letting them take their lumps in a lost season. Meanwhile, the Twins had their two best prospects spend the season in and out of doctors' offices.

 

I don't like the way Ryan handled this deadline. More could have been done to get the Twins the 2-3 more wins required to challenge for the WC until the final day of the season.

 

But that doesn't negate all the progress that was made this season. The Twins made huge strides forward and were competitive far longer than anyone predicted.

Yeah, it's hard to go 15+

 

 

I think this is a very fair comparison to what the Twins would have given up. Disagree?


 

 

Highly, highly disagree.

 

The Twins wouldn't have had to give up Rosario, Harrison and Gibson comparison makes no sense, he has pitched 44 innings the last 3 years with a 6.22 ERA to boot. Nolasco would be a much better comparison to the Harrison part.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Two front of the rotation starters, a legit catcher and another legit bat or two. Those are some pretty big "moves" to fill.

 

1) They need a catcher. They should be able to trade for that this offseason. Suzuki will then be a plus backup.

 

2) What position do you want to change besides catcher? The Twins have multiple options all over the outfield and the infield appears pretty well set.  They even have some fun options for DH (Vargas, Sano if you keep Plouffe, Arcia, Kepler).

3) Front of the rotation is where the Twins will struggle a bit. Berrios or May both have upside as do some guys coming up. But the Twins have a good amount of depth at pitching.  I like their 3, 4 and 5 better than Chicago's 3, 4 and 5.  They just need to have some of their many pitching prospects be elite. Not crazy to think they could.

 

[dbminn]

The Astros are not a fair comparison to the Twins. Their young starters have 2-3 years experience, except for Correa and McCullers. McHugh and Kuechel are entering their late 20s.

 

The Cubs are a year ahead of the Twins. They added two key components in the last year - Lester and Russell. Schwarber developed as a hitter. They have outpaced all of the experts' expectations and have had an incredible year, improving by 24 wins.

 

The Twins added three positional rookies this year and two played well. Two rookie pitchers (Duffey and May) showed promise. Torii Hunter served his purpose. Santana missed 80 games and Hughes pitched with back problems most of the year. The team won 13 more games, or better than most expected.

 

For 2016, the Twins have several prospects that could help: Buxton, Kepler, Polanco, Berrios and perhaps one of the young relievers. A full year of Santana and, hopefully, a healthier Hughes.

 

I'm looking forward to the coming season and not shedding any tears that the Twins only improved by 13 games.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

At the time I though TR didn't do the deadline well but as time passes . . .

To be clear, my opinion from mid-May forward was that Ryan shouldn't make a big splash at the deadline.

 

But that doesn't absolve him of all wrong-doing. The bullpen was a catastrophe in waiting from day one. Had the Twins simply made more aggressive promotions earlier in the year (Oliveros, Berrios, Duffey, etc.) or picked up a good reliever on July 1st instead of July 31st, the Twins are in the hunt until the closing day of the regular season.

 

I wasn't asking for much, just a bit more of a feeling the front office acknowledged the team's weaknesses and a little more haste in repairing those problems. By the time they got around to actually fixing the issues, the Twins were looking up in the standings instead of down.

 

I could have come up with a half dozen ways to make the team better without breaking open the farm but the front office basically sat on their hands until the end of July. More than anything, that's what frustrated me about this season.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Yeah, it's hard to go 15+

 

 

Highly, highly disagree.

 

The Twins wouldn't have had to give up Rosario, Harrison and Gibson comparison makes no sense, he has pitched 44 innings the last 3 years with a 6.22 ERA to boot. Nolasco would be a much better comparison to the Harrison part.

 

Nolasco is a fairer comparison. My bad. Nix Gibson.  I didn't look up Harrison and remembered a better pitcher.

 

They certainly would have had to give up Rosario. Rosario wasn't even top 100 before the 2015 season - I moved him up to that level because of what he did at the ML level up to midseason (and at that point he had no track record where you would expect him to continue so that may be dubious).  I think it's a very fair comp to what Texas gave up.

 

And I wouldn't trade Kepler, Nolasco, Rosario, Gonsalves and two low guys for Hamels either.  He's 32 next year with three more years at $23.5 million and a $6 million buy out for a 4th year that vests if he pitches 200 innings in 2017 and 2018. That could be really tough. 

[ThejacKmp]

 

To be clear, my opinion from mid-May forward was that Ryan shouldn't make a big splash at the deadline.

 

But that doesn't absolve him of all wrong-doing. The bullpen was a catastrophe in waiting from day one. Had the Twins simply made more aggressive promotions earlier in the year (Oliveros, Berrios, Duffey, etc.) or picked up a good reliever on July 1st instead of July 31st, the Twins are in the hunt until the closing day of the regular season.

 

I wasn't asking for much, just a bit more of a feeling the front office acknowledged the team's weaknesses and a little more haste in repairing those problems. By the time they got around to actually fixing the issues, the Twins were looking up in the standings instead of down.

 

They were in it up until the closing day of the regular season - that's the literal definition of where they were!

 

Agreed they could make some moves bringing guys up for the pen but I like that they're staying a bit cautious. They kept service time for Berrios, which I think is a nice move to the future. 

 

It seems like a minor issue with the front office - the trusted the guys they had to right the ship on their own and I'm never going to get too angry about that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

They were in it up until the closing day of the regular season - that's the literal definition of where they were!

They were eliminated in the first Royals game, which was three days from the end of the season. They finished the season three games out of the second WC.

[ThejacKmp]

 

They were eliminated in the first Royals game, which was three days from the end of the season. They finished the season three games out of the second WC.

 

Nope. Going into game #2, if the Astros lost their last two, the twins won their last two and the Angels only won once, they would all have been tied for the WC. The Twins were not eliminated until Saturday.

See this headline about Saturday's game:

 

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/kansas-city-royals-beat-minnesota-twins-eliminated-al-wild-card-yordano-ventura-100315

[TheLeviathan]

First, there are some here who mock Epstein for the praise he gets.  Yes, he has some advantages with the Cubs, but the guy is smart as hell.  

 

Second, Arrieta is not "just luck".  The Cubs went out and payed 6M to sign Scott Feldman (a pitcher with a lot of former sucess who fell on hard times) while the Twins spent about the same amount on Kevin freaking Correia.  A guy who had never even managed to hold Feldman's jock as a pitcher.  

 

We get what could've expected from Correia, while the Cubs gamble on Feldman came up aces.  They turned that profit into a flailing former Opening Day starter and top prospect and a hard throwing reliever.  (Strop and Arrieta were a huge return for a 6M gamble)  Sometimes a change in scenery is all the "luck" you need.  

 

But the real point is that when you're aggressive and take chances to hit big....you hit big sometimes.  When you always roll the dice not to lose, you rarely hit big.  It's Ryan's greatest flaw - the unwillingness to step out and take big chances.  The only time I can even think of him trying this is Span for Meyer and I still applaud him for trying, but let's keep things clear about Ryan and Epstein.  There is a reason one is a superior GM and it ain't luck.

[DaveW]

 

First, there are some here who mock Epstein for the praise he gets.  Yes, he has some advantages with the Cubs, but the guy is smart as hell.  

 

Second, Arrieta is not "just luck".  The Cubs went out and payed 6M to sign Scott Feldman (a pitcher with a lot of former sucess who fell on hard times) while the Twins spent about the same amount on Kevin freaking Correia.  A guy who had never even managed to hold Feldman's jock as a pitcher.  

 

We get what could've expected from Correia, while the Cubs gamble on Feldman came up aces.  They turned that profit into a flailing former Opening Day starter and top prospect and a hard throwing reliever.  (Strop and Arrieta were a huge return for a 6M gamble)  Sometimes a change in scenery is all the "luck" you need.  

 

But the real point is that when you're aggressive and take chances to hit big....you hit big sometimes.  When you always roll the dice not to lose, you rarely hit big.  It's Ryan's greatest flaw - the unwillingness to step out and take big chances.  The only time I can even think of him trying this is Span for Meyer and I still applaud him for trying, but let's keep things clear about Ryan and Epstein.  There is a reason one is a superior GM and it ain't luck.

Yup, the Arrieta move was a fantastic one because he always had good stuff, was still young (27) and was coming off frankly a poor luck season (4.05 FIP but a 6.20 ERA). He was the perfect "buy low", "change of scenery" and low risk high reward type of a target. Sort of like what the Pirates did with Liriano in a way...as Lev points out the Twins and Ryan much prefer to go with the non upside guys like Correia instead.

[DaveW]

 

 

They were eliminated in the first Royals game, which was three days from the end of the season. They finished the season three games out of the second WC.

One could argue they were eliminated from being a "legit" contender the minute they decided that Berrios was never coming up in 2015. A playoff rotation of Gibson, Duffey and ??,??? would have been eaten alive.

[bluechipper]

 

First, there are some here who mock Epstein for the praise he gets.  Yes, he has some advantages with the Cubs, but the guy is smart as hell.  

 

Second, Arrieta is not "just luck".  The Cubs went out and payed 6M to sign Scott Feldman (a pitcher with a lot of former sucess who fell on hard times) while the Twins spent about the same amount on Kevin freaking Correia.  A guy who had never even managed to hold Feldman's jock as a pitcher.  

 

We get what could've expected from Correia, while the Cubs gamble on Feldman came up aces.  They turned that profit into a flailing former Opening Day starter and top prospect and a hard throwing reliever.  (Strop and Arrieta were a huge return for a 6M gamble)  Sometimes a change in scenery is all the "luck" you need.  

 

But the real point is that when you're aggressive and take chances to hit big....you hit big sometimes.  When you always roll the dice not to lose, you rarely hit big.  It's Ryan's greatest flaw - the unwillingness to step out and take big chances.  The only time I can even think of him trying this is Span for Meyer and I still applaud him for trying, but let's keep things clear about Ryan and Epstein.  There is a reason one is a superior GM and it ain't luck.

A guy with a 5.46 ERA in 358 innings turning into Cy Young has to have something to do with luck. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

The Astros are a very fair comparison to the Twins. The Cubs not so much.

 

I believe the Twins are pretty set in their ways and unlikely to change. That doesnt make us a negative nelly and we can continue to love them.  

 

Not sure the Twins are capable any more of finding guys like Collin McHugh or Jake Arrieta, who were castoffs and magically turning them into dominant pitchers. But if J.R.Graham or Alex Meyer becomes that guy in a year or two I will gladly eat my words.

 

Molitor is a lone voice in the wilderness decrying the upward trend in strikeouts, while the Cubs and Astros lead the majors in strikeouts and wear it proudly. Win loss records are similar this year but organizational philosophies are completely different. 

 

[bluechipper]

 

Yup, the Arrieta move was a fantastic one because he always had good stuff, was still young (27) and was coming off frankly a poor luck season (4.05 FIP but a 6.20 ERA). He was the perfect "buy low", "change of scenery" and low risk high reward type of a target. Sort of like what the Pirates did with Liriano in a way...as Lev points out the Twins and Ryan much prefer to go with the non upside guys like Correia instead.

This is similar to what the Twins did with Phil Hughes. The only difference is that Hughes was already a better pitcher. This might have something to do with coaching on the Cubs part, but more likely is Arrieta just figured something out, which is pretty lucky.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Also if the Twins had somehow ended up with Kyle Schwarber in the 2014 draft, does anyone really believe he'd be starting in a playoff game the following season? More likely he'd be another top 10 prospect having a great year in the minors somewhere, ETA 2017.

 

Organizational philosophy.

[TheLeviathan]

 

A guy with a 5.46 ERA in 358 innings turning into Cy Young has to have something to do with luck. 

 

Some of it is luck, but a larger portion of it is putting yourself in a position to get lucky.  The Cubs and Astros have targeted players they felt had upside to their cause.  McHugh was targeted because they felt like his pitch repetoire could be adjusted and he'd flourish.  Arrieta was acquired because they took the gamble on upside over consistency.

 

Yeah, some of it is luck, but some of it is making your own luck.  And you can't do that if you won't even put yourself in that position.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Where would the Twins be right now if Buxton and Sano hadn't gotten hurt in 2014? They probably would've been on the MLB roster for the entire 2015 season. I (obviously) think that would have made a big difference.

 

I don't think we overrate our own prospects too much, and I am very confident that they will catch up to those two teams as early as next year.

 

Right, I feel like the Twins were one season behind the Cubs and Astros as their top prospect types came up late last year and early this year. As has been noted, Buxton and Sano lost a year due to injury or they would have both been up in 2014 and up most of this year, if not all.  We saw others come up this year, and Berrios and Kepler still to come. 

 

I think the Twins did way better than I would have thought this year and hope they can take another step next year.