The Front Office and Settling For Mediocrity

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You sound more like you're wishcasting that something good will happen with Murphy and the Twins. 

Wait. So I point that that Murphy is younger, has accumulated more WAR per PA than Hicks both in 2015 and for their careers, and I'm the guy who is wish-casting?

 

I don't particularly like Murphy. The difference between you and me is that I'm realistic about Hicks, too. They're both flawed, underwhelming players with upside (I'd argue Hicks' ceiling is higher but his floor is also lower). Feel free to not like the trade. I don't particularly like the trade myself but when objectively looking at the deal, it is not a terrible deal for the Twins (or the Yankees).

 

JR Murphy is younger than Hicks and has accumulated more fWAR per PA in his career. That's what I pointed out. That cannot be argued, as the numbers are clear as day.

 

Which brings up the question... Given the reality of those numbers, what WAR projection system would give Hicks a significant enough advantage to matter and why don't you question the accuracy of such a system?

 

FTR, BB-Ref has Murphy sporting a higher 2016 OPS than Hicks while FG's Steamer projection has Murphy rocking all of one PA in 2016.

 

Obviously, that single plate appearance is going to... uh... skew the WAR projection just a bit.

[jokin]

 

Wait. So I point that that Murphy is younger, has accumulated more WAR per PA than Hicks both in 2015 and for their careers, and I'm the guy who is wish-casting?

 

I don't particularly like Murphy. The difference between you and me is that I'm realistic about Hicks, too. They're both flawed, underwhelming players with upside (I'd argue Hicks' ceiling is higher but his floor is also lower). Feel free to not like the trade. I don't particularly like the trade myself but when objectively looking at the deal, it is not a terrible deal for the Twins (or the Yankees).

 

 

 

What???? There is absolutely zero difference in our opinion about Hicks.  I've probably been his biggest critic on TD. And I have been doing nothing but strictly "objectively looking at the deal."  Which is why I don't like it. 

 

And I've repeatedly listed the reasons why.  I'll do it yet again:

 

1) The Twins did not solve their problems at the catcher position. We all know that Suzuki is going to get the majority of the reps.

 

2) The Twins will most likely not get a fair value exchange in terms of WAR in 2016.

 

3) The Twins in all likelihood hurt their OF defense for at least the first couple of months of 2016. Assuming they do plan on being part of the postseason run, a few early season losses could again prove costly, like they did in 2015. 

 

4) The Twins quite possibly sold too low on Hicks, when there were other ways to acquire their needs elsewhere. 

 

5) And if the Twins didn't sell too low, so what? They at least would have retained some stability and flexibility in maintaining a level of competence in the OF defense. Now, for the short-term at least, the Twins are forced to turn to Rosario, Santana or an aging veteran to man CF.

 

6) The Twins have a horrible history in dealing starting-level CFers. Why do they always use them as their main source of currency with such a bad history in doing so?

 

7) One less candidate (on a team already very thin with lead-off types) to place at the top of the batting order when he was seeing the ball well.

 

8) You're right in agreeing to what I already stated.  The Twins got younger by two years, acquiring two more years of a minimum wage player on the 25-man. IOW- Business as usual.

 

9) You're also right in agreeing to what I already stated. Both players have a lot of question marks attached to their player personas. But Hicks has the physical tools to blossom into something quite a bit better than Murphy can ever hope to aspire to. Given that, why settle for a hope and wishes that Murphy will pan out, when the need at his position needed more drastic action yielding more predictable chances for a successful upgrade?

 

 

 

 

 

[lukeduke1980]

Wow if trading Hicks (for a part time catcher) garners 17 pages of posts what will happen when Plouffe is traded for a AA control-type pitcher no one has heard of?

[jokin]

 

Wow if trading Hicks (for a part time catcher) garners 17 pages of posts what will happen when Plouffe is traded for a AA control-type pitcher no one has heard of?

 

TD immolation

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

What???? There is absolutely zero difference in our opinion about Hicks.  I've probably been his biggest critic on TD. And I have been doing nothing but strictly "objectively looking at the deal."  Which is why I don't like it. 

 

And I've repeatedly listed the reasons why.  I'll do it yet again:

 

1) The Twins did not solve their problems at the catcher position. We all know that Suzuki is going to get the majority of the reps.

 

2) The Twins will most likely not get a fair value exchange in terms of WAR in 2016.

 

3) The Twins in all likelihood hurt their OF defense for at least the first couple of months of 2016. Assuming they do plan on being part of the postseason run, a few early season losses could again prove costly, like they did in 2015. 

 

4) The Twins quite possibly sold too low on Hicks, when there were other ways to acquire their needs elsewhere. 

 

5) And if the Twins didn't sell too low, so what? They at least would have retained some stability and flexibility in maintaining a level of competence in the OF defense. Now, for the short-term at least, the Twins are forced to turn to Rosario, Santana or an aging veteran to man CF.

 

6) The Twins have a horrible history in dealing starting-level CFers. Why do they always use them as their main source of currency with such a bad history in doing so?

 

7) One less candidate (on a team already very thin with lead-off types) to place at the top of the batting order when he was seeing the ball well.

 

8) You're right in agreeing to what I already stated.  The Twins got younger by two years, acquiring two more years of a minimum wage player on the 25-man. IOW- Business as usual.

 

9) You're also right in agreeing to what I already stated. Both players have a lot of question marks attached to their player personas. But Hicks has the physical tools to blossom into something quite a bit better than Murphy can ever hope to aspire to. Given that, why settle for a hope and wishes that Murphy will pan out, when the need at his position needed more drastic action yielding more predictable chances for a successful upgrade?

Fair enough but I think you're underrating Murphy a bit by assuming Hicks will be more valuable going forward. Murphy didn't exactly light up MiLB but he posted a respectable .733 OPS while graduating to MLB as a 22 year old and never received consistent playing time in New York. The last time the Twins traded for a "role player who graduated to MLB at a young age but never received consistent playing time" and made most of us groan (I didn't really mind that trade either), his name was Eduardo Escobar.

 

But if Murphy gets

 

The guy has enough upside to be above replacement level as a regular every day player, which is a pretty big step forward at the position. Will he do that with the Twins? I don't know but I'd certainly give him the opportunity to play over Suzuki to find out.

 

All in all, this trade looks a lot like the Liriano or Jepsen trade. It's a shuffling of underwhelming players and not worth half the vitriol it's receiving in this thread. Do I *like* the trade? No, not really... I didn't care for the Jepsen trade much, either... Or the Liriano trade, though I accepted Francisco's value was nearly non-existent at that point.

 

I just don't see the point in getting that riled up about it, either. This is one of those trades that make me say "meh" and sit back to see how it unfolds. In the case of the Liriano and Jepsen trades, it worked out pretty well for the Twins. Hopefully, their scouting department came through again and Murphy will be a solid contributor to the 2016-2019 squads.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Not true, nobody has said that. Ryan is a very smart baseball man, he just is far too conservative and unwilling to change to adapt to current market conditions to create a championship caliber team.

 

As has been stated multiple times, I would want a new every day GM with Ryan taking over the President role.

 

I would suggest the start of this offseason is certainly a change.  Ryan is pushing himself out there as someone that wants to get things moving early, when typically he'd sit back until the winter meetings.

 

You don't have to like the moves, but this certainly hasn't been the "same old Terry Ryan".  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I would suggest the start of this offseason is certainly a change.  Ryan is pushing himself out there as someone that wants to get things moving early, when typically he'd sit back until the winter meetings.

 

You don't have to like the moves, but this certainly hasn't been the "same old Terry Ryan".  

Yeah. The guy has been the most active GM in baseball this offseason. Now, that still kinda plays to Ryan's conservative nature a bit (I'd call this offseason "passive-aggressive") because he's getting out in front of everything and shoring up the holes he wants to fill before anyone else does anything (which allows him to sleep comfortably through January) but at least he's trying something.

 

It's like we've forgotten what the "bad" Terry Ryan looks like in just two offseasons. He's picking up wild card players and ignoring the Kevin Correias, Tim Stauffers, and Mike Pelfreys of the baseball world. Both of the major moves this offseason have been for players with some kind of upside in them (one more than the other, obviously).

 

While it's not exactly the progress I see in my dream scenario, I'm not going to shake my fist at the sky about it, either.

[Squirrel]

 

Wow if trading Hicks (for a part time catcher) garners 17 pages of posts what will happen when Plouffe is traded for a AA control-type pitcher no one has heard of?

A lot of warning points and bans, I suspect.

[Platoon]

Is it possible that Jokins #1 in his most recent post touches on a factor in all this angst. The Twins often lean so heavily on beloved and admired veterans that they have a very hard time reducing their playing time regardless of the vets performance. It tends to distort the actual pros and cons of a trade, or delays if not diminishes the improvement of a rookie player. There is not a doubt that Suzuli is a FO and managers favorite. Murphy just outperforming Kurt will not get him significant playing time, it's going to have to be by a considerable margin.

[sane]

"

What???? There is absolutely zero difference in our opinion about Hicks.  I've probably been his biggest critic on TD. And I have been doing nothing but strictly "objectively looking at the deal."  Which is why I don't like it. 

 

And I've repeatedly listed the reasons why.  I'll do it yet again:

 

1) The Twins did not solve their problems at the catcher position. We all know that Suzuki is going to get the majority of the reps.

 

2) The Twins will most likely not get a fair value exchange in terms of WAR in 2016.

 

3) The Twins in all likelihood hurt their OF defense for at least the first couple of months of 2016. Assuming they do plan on being part of the postseason run, a few early season losses could again prove costly, like they did in 2015. 

 

4) The Twins quite possibly sold too low on Hicks, when there were other ways to acquire their needs elsewhere. 

 

5) And if the Twins didn't sell too low, so what? They at least would have retained some stability and flexibility in maintaining a level of competence in the OF defense. Now, for the short-term at least, the Twins are forced to turn to Rosario, Santana or an aging veteran to man CF.

 

6) The Twins have a horrible history in dealing starting-level CFers. Why do they always use them as their main source of currency with such a bad history in doing so?

 

7) One less candidate (on a team already very thin with lead-off types) to place at the top of the batting order when he was seeing the ball well.

Some good, legitimate concerns, but

1) We all know nothing of the kind. Right or wrong, the Twins "say" they want Murphy to start or platoon at catcher.

2) If Murphy plays regularly, WAR could go either way.

3) Buxton, Rosario and Sano will upgrade OF offense, but you are correct about OF defense

4)"quite possibly" otherwise.

5) Twins "say" that Buxton will start the season as their MLB CF.

6) History is not hard-wired to repeat itself.

7) True, but academic if Buxton succeeds in CF and leadoff.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Wait. So I point that that Murphy is younger, has accumulated more WAR per PA than Hicks both in 2015 and for their careers, and I'm the guy who is wish-casting?

Brock, you don't "accumulate" "WAR per PA" -- at that point, it's a rate stat, and sample size absolutely matters.

 

A marginal advantage in 2015 WAR per PA, in a sample less than half the size, probably isn't terribly meaningful.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Brock, you don't "accumulate" "WAR per PA" -- at that point, it's a rate stat, and sample size absolutely matters.

 

A marginal advantage in 2015 WAR per PA, in a sample less than half the size, probably isn't terribly meaningful.

Oh, I fully realize that... But given how WAR projections are tied to projected PAs - which are wildly inaccurate for former part-time players - it's really the only way to break down the player's season (and I'm not the one who first brought up WAR as a measuring stick for these two players).

 

My point isn't that Murphy is leaps and bounds better than Hicks, it was simply "they're pretty close once you adjust for one guy's dearth of playing time".

 

It's akin to blasting a guy for only driving in 50 runs in 80 games while applauding the guy who drove in 100 in 160 games. It's a counting stat; you need to adjust for the team sitting one guy on the bench, especially if that guy isn't expected to sit the following season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

1) The Twins did not solve their problems at the catcher position. We all know that Suzuki is going to get the majority of the reps.

That is a concern from me too.  Over at MLB.com, I found this:

 

http://m.twins.mlb.com/news/article/157073666/twins-acquire-john-ryan-murphy-from-yankees

 

 

"We think he's going to hit," Antony said. "He's got some power and he has a strong arm behind the plate. He has all the skills and traits to potentially be a starting Major League catcher. It was a priority of ours to upgrade our catching situation. Kurt played so much last year, I think he wore down. So we're hoping Ryan wins a job out of Spring Training and we can divide the catching a little bit more."

 

Emphasis mine, but I don't think you have to micro-parse this statement to generally support our fear.  For 2016, they're looking to lessen the burden on Suzuki with a more viable backup, not find a new starter.  (I suspect any possible entreaties to FA catchers went nowhere because of that too.)

 

(Incidentally, I wonder if Antony actually called Murphy "Ryan" or if that's a typo. I don't like being reminded that he is still second in command either...)

[whydidnt]

I just read through most of this thread. It seems to me, there is way more focus on Hicks on this topic than there should be. While I think Hicks has potential, I'm not sure that this trade on it's surface is awful. For me, the point is that bringing in Murphy, if that's your only move at C, is another example of the organization settling for average. THAT is my frustration with Ryan. Whenever he deals, signs a FA, etc. the guys he brings in almost all have a low ceiling. The best they will be is above average. Maybe Park changes that, but when we see the final cost for him, I'm not convinced it's that big of an investment. In any event, Ryan's history is of settling for mediocrity, and that's why I am not optimistic about our chances to win a Championship under this regime. 

 

Oh and for the Hicks conversation. His K% declined significantly last year. To me that shows he figured "something" out and may be poised to finally break out in the coming year. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Oh, I fully realize that... But given how WAR projections are tied to projected PAs - which are wildly inaccurate for former part-time players - it's really the only way to break down the player's season (and I'm not the one who first brought up WAR as a measuring stick for these two players).

No, it's not the only way at all.  You have rate stats which you can adjust for small sample component outliers.  (I too didn't bring up WAR, and haven't actually seen the WAR projections you refer to, but that's what they should be doing behind the scenes on a player level.)

 

I think some player's counting stat projections at Fangraphs are a little messed up right now, but the rate stat projections look accurate.  Steamer projected wRC+ is 84 for Murphy, and 97 for Hicks.  If they are full-time average defenders at their positions, they are probably pretty close, which means we are probably in agreement on whatever points we were making but I sure enjoy typing.

 

See my post above, though, that expecting Murphy to be anything close to a full-time catcher in 2016 might be optimistic, unfortunately...

[jokin]

 

That is a concern from me too.  Over at MLB.com, I found this:

 

http://m.twins.mlb.com/news/article/157073666/twins-acquire-john-ryan-murphy-from-yankees

 

 

Emphasis mine, but I don't think you have to micro-parse this statement to generally support our fear.  For 2016, they're looking to lessen the burden on Suzuki with a more viable backup, not find a new starter.  (I suspect any possible entreaties to FA catchers went nowhere because of that too.)

 

(Incidentally, I wonder if Antony actually called Murphy "Ryan" or if that's a typo. I don't like being reminded that he is still second in command either...)

 

He did say it, it disturbed me too, and that comment actually caused many to discuss the "Ryan" acquisition in the blogosphere. (And really, isn't it time for Pohlad to bring in a long-time baseball man from outside the organization to come in, evaluate, and make specific sweeping recommendations ahead of the inevitable transition away from the Terry Ryan era. God help this team if Antony becomes the next GM).`

[bird]

 

So taking a risk on a replacement level 40 year old RF (for a huge overpay to boot) is ok, but taking a risk on a guy (AJ) coming off a 2.1 WAR year where you could get him for a few million is too big a risk?

 

I would have preferred Wieters, Lucroy, Norris etc as well over AJ, but I prefer AJ for a couple million EASILY over giving up Hicks for Murphy dawg.

 

Hunter and AJ is a deeply flawed analogy on a number of levels. The most relevant one is Hunter joined a 72-win team that was yet to get production from its best prospects. I know that some discount the "intangible" story that gets reinforced constantly (Cashman most recently), but the risks are not at all similar now with Murphy. And the risks with AJ are very much greater than they were with Hunter if for no other reason than where the team is now in the cycle.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think some player's counting stat projections at Fangraphs are a little messed up right now, but the rate stat projections look accurate.  Steamer projected wRC+ is 84 for Murphy, and 97 for Hicks.  If they are full-time average defenders at their positions, they are probably pretty close, which means we are probably in agreement on whatever points we were making but I sure enjoy typing.

Good point on wRC+. Though it's a bit odd Murphy has two part time seasons with a wRC+ of 94, 99... And the Steamer projection is 84.

 

I just can't fully support projections, no matter whether they agree or disagree with my personal feelings on the player. I think they have a use in the team aggregate but player-by-player, I think they're limited and not much more than a statistical shot in the dark.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And really, isn't it time for Pohlad to bring in a long-time baseball man from outside the organization to come in, evaluate, and make specific sweeping recommendations ahead of the inevitable transition away from the Terry Ryan era. God help this team if Antony becomes the next GM.

On this, I think we can all agree.

[bird]

What a meandering thread. First we have Shane Robinson becoming the starting CF, and now we have Rob Antony becoming the GM at the start of a new era. And all because the Yanks traded some guy not named Ryan. 

[Physics Guy]

 

A lot of warning points and bans, I suspect.

Now who is over-exaggerating? 

[Squirrel]

 

Now who is over-exaggerating? 

 

Or am I? ....

[jokin]

 

Good point on wRC+. Though it's a bit odd Murphy has two part time seasons with a wRC+ of 94, 99... And the Steamer projection is 84.

 

I just can't fully support projections, no matter whether they agree or disagree with my personal feelings on the player. I think they have a use in the team aggregate but player-by-player, I think they're limited and not much more than a statistical shot in the dark.

 

Of course, statistics are heavily based on regresion to the mean... for good reason.

[Physics Guy]

 

What???? There is absolutely zero difference in our opinion about Hicks.  I've probably been his biggest critic on TD. And I have been doing nothing but strictly "objectively looking at the deal."  Which is why I don't like it. 

 

And I've repeatedly listed the reasons why.  I'll do it yet again:

 

1) The Twins did not solve their problems at the catcher position. We all know that Suzuki is going to get the majority of the reps.

 

While I agree with most of what you've said, I'll have to chose to disagree with this.  I tend to think just the opposite.  I think the Murphy/Suzuki split will be 90/70 games or even 100/60.  I will be extremely disappointed if you are right.

[jokin]

 

What a meandering thread. First we have Shane Robinson becoming the starting CF, and now we have Rob Antony becoming the GM at the start of a new era. And all because the Yanks traded some guy not named Ryan. 

 

And yet, both things COULD actually happen, and both things came about, or are related to, the Hicks trade.

 

Funny that...

[jokin]

 

While I agree with most of what you've said, I'll have to chose to disagree with this.  I tend to think just the opposite.  I think the Murphy/Suzuki split will be 90/70 games or even 100/60.  I will be extremely disappointed if you are right.

 

Believe me, I hope I'm wrong and you're right, and Murphy maintains his .367 BABIP from the last two years, and ends up defensively far above where his current average-ish to mediocre numbers suggest he will be.  

 

But regardless , in either scenario or outcome, the net upgrade at catcher will not be sufficient to get the necessary upgrade at improving the Twins playoff fortunes- given the uncertainty created by once again throwing the OF defense into opening day upheaval.

[nicksaviking]

 

While I agree with most of what you've said, I'll have to chose to disagree with this.  I tend to think just the opposite.  I think the Murphy/Suzuki split will be 90/70 games or even 100/60.  I will be extremely disappointed if you are right.

 

The Twins have never been much for platoons.  I'd guess Suzuki gets the opening day gig and catches 4-5 games a week until he fails to perform, then it switches almost exclusively to Murphy.

 

Of course if Suzuki doesn't struggle for some reason, I guess there won't be a lot to complain about.

[jokin]

 

The Twins have never been much for platoons.  I'd guess Suzuki gets the opening day gig and catches 4-5 games a week until he fails to perform, then it switches almost exclusively to Murphy.

 

Of course if Suzuki doesn't struggle for some reason, I guess there won't be a lot to complain about.

 

Are we sure about that?  What if Hicks comes anywhere close to hitting his Steamer projection numbers?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Good point on wRC+. Though it's a bit odd Murphy has two part time seasons with a wRC+ of 94, 99... And the Steamer projection is 84.

I suspect it's about BABIP, pretty much.  Murphy's probably not a true talent .365 BABIP hitter (career minor league BABIP of .296), and significantly improving K% is very difficult in MLB (as we've witnessed  repeatedly on the Twins).

 

As it is, Steamer has him pegged for a steady BB%, a modest improvement in K%, and an uptick over his already decent power, and he still drops to an 84 wRC+ due to BABIP.

 

Remember, it's a projection, not a prediction.  Just an interesting way of quantifying expectations, maybe reflecting a bit of the teams' thinking on these guys as well.

[jokin]

 

I suspect it's about BABIP, pretty much.  Murphy's probably not a true talent .365 BABIP hitter (career minor league BABIP of .296), and significantly improving K% is very difficult in MLB (as we've witnessed  repeatedly on the Twins).

 

As it is, Steamer has him pegged for a steady BB%, a modest improvement in K%, and an uptick over his already decent power, and he still drops to an 84 wRC+ due to BABIP.

 

Remember, it's a projection, not a prediction.  Just an interesting way of quantifying expectations, maybe reflecting a bit of the teams' thinking on these guys as well.

 

Exactly.  Haven't we seen enough BABIP-skewed small sample results from untested young prospects of our own? To then go out and assume in this case that "this time it's different" is a dangerous limb to step out on.