Article: To Tank Or Not To Tank?

[glunn]

It seems to me that the focus should be on playing the younger players, which will likely result in more losses in the short run, while giving them experience that will likely result in more wins next year.

[Jham]

Personally, i feel a winning culture is really important to player development. Young players tend to have fragile confidence and take losses too hard/ blame themselves for losses. If you take losses too hard, and lose alot, eventually your head tells you to stop caring so you aren't mad all the time.

 

Losing also brings out the worst in personalities and often causes conflict in the club house. Kids also eventually learn that they get paid win or lose, so why get frustrated over mounting losses. I think Hunter tipped to that when he returned to a changed twins culture. Other than prospect scouting and development, i think our biggest problem is the perpetuation of a culture that emphasizes that players are paid to play, not paid to win.

[old nurse]

There is a lot of season left. When clubs get done selling assets it might be hard for a team to tank when Atlanta, the Reds, Brewers, Rays are done. The White Sox, Angels, Arizona and San Diego could also implode.  That would be a lot of bad teams.   I seem to recall a lot of past Twins teams  giving hope for the future with a strong second half .  I also think Molitor is too much of a competitor to tank

[SarasotaBill]

Tanking = trading away your veteran players.

Trading E.Santana, Nunez, and Suzuki will make the Twins worse this year.

Playing D.Santana will make the Twins worse.

Picking at 1 or 2 provides the extra money to get another top ten pick in the top of the 2nd round. Look at the Astros draft of Correa and McCullers. 

The MLB draft and int'l budgets are set up now to provide a significant advantage to the bottom teams.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I *hate* the notion of tanking for tanking's sake, especially at this point in the rebuild cycle.

 

The Twins should move any player who can be traded and likely won't contribute to 2017 or even 2018. Abad, Nolasco, Suzuki, Kintzler, Plouffe, Milone, etc.

 

The Twins should consider moving Santana, Nunez, and Dozier but only if the offer is right.

 

You put your best young players on the field and let them play. If those players rally and assemble a competent baseball team, great. You're in a good position going into the offseason. If those young players collapse and tank the season, well okay. Now you have more information how to proceed in the offseason.

 

This should be about your best and brightest young players in Major League Baseball, not draft picks. The draft is correlated to the performance of your young players and wishing those players to do poorly is shooting yourself in the foot.

[DocBauer]

Nothing wrong with removing players who don't fit and/or blocking youngsters who are ready to audition. Play them and try to win. Winning helps breed winning and a winning culture.

 

Still thinking of keeping both Santana and the younger Dozier for 2017.

[Eris]

Every player, the manager, even the interim GM is playing for a position next year or the following years or for more $$ in arbitration. Don't expect any of them to go out and not try their best.

[kab21]

No

 

Trade veterans if the return is decent but start teaching the youngsters how to win. I think if the team goes .500+ in the 2nd half it would have a benefit on the team in 2017/2018.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'm opposed to tanking in all sports. Wrong message to send, besides the bad product on the field.

 

Plus, with the unpredictability of baseball drafts, it just seems silly.

Sure, any individual baseball draft pick is a crap shoot.

 

But, with the modern draft bonus pools, the top 1 or 2 teams get so much more money than even the 5th team, they can leverage them into more good picks.

 

So it's not just the #1 pick vs the #5 pick, it's more likely a below slot #1 pick, plus an above slot second and third rounders, vs that #5 pick.

 

Not that the Twins have yet been creative enough to try this approach...

[h2oface]

....... I seem to recall a lot of past Twins teams giving hope for the future with a strong second half. ........

Not this decade. That is some time ago. But it would be nice. The decade MO is to lose massively after the all-star break.

[h2oface]

I *hate* the notion of tanking for tanking's sake, especially at this point in the rebuild cycle.

 

The Twins should move any player who can be traded and likely won't contribute to 2017 or even 2018. Abad, Nolasco, Suzuki, Kintzler, Plouffe, Milone, etc.

 

The Twins should consider moving Santana, Nunez, and Dozier but only if the offer is right.

 

You put your best young players on the field and let them play. If those players rally and assemble a competent baseball team, great. You're in a good position going into the offseason. If those young players collapse and tank the season, well okay. Now you have more information how to proceed in the offseason.

 

This should be about your best and brightest young players in Major League Baseball, not draft picks. The draft is correlated to the performance of your young players and wishing those players to do poorly is shooting yourself in the foot.

You lost me at "rebuild".

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You lost me at "rebuild".

Eh, I'm tired of this argument... Not necessarily by you but the general consensus "the Twins haven't rebuilt".

 

There is more than one way to execute an organizational rebuild.

 

The end goal of a rebuild is to have a bunch of young players with upside as the core of your team. The Twins have done that. Roughly half of their position players are under 25 years old and project to be every day regulars. The other half of the position players are under 30 years old and have multiple years of control remaining.

 

Did the Twins screw up along the way? Sure, that's pretty obvious. Lots of bad contracts, several bad roster decisions.

 

But that doesn't mean they haven't executed a rebuild, albeit in a less-than-optimal manner (in my opinion).

[h2oface]

No waves. No ripples. Just normal drafting and tired mediocre pitching added to dumpster diving waiver cast-offs. Call it a special rebuild if you like. I would say more posters post about a rebuild than no rebuild, and the consensus is the opposite, but it would need a poll to make either statement true. So we will keep our opinions and disagree.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No waves. No ripples. Just normal drafting and tired mediocre pitching added to dumpster diving waiver cast-offs. Call it a special rebuild if you like. I would say more posters post about a rebuild than no rebuild, and the consensus is the opposite, but it would need a poll to make either statement true. So we will keep our opinions and disagree.

The Twins haven't rebuilt in the manner you'd prefer. Hell, I agree with you.

 

But that's not the argument you made, is it? You took umbrage with the use of the word "rebuild" at all.

 

The Twins have rebuilt... Well, maybe not "rebuilt"... They're still in the process.

 

Notice I'm not claiming the Twins have done the best job possible with the rebuild. Hell, I won't even claim they've done a good job because there are soooooo many bad contracts that hinder the future, stuff that simply did not need to happen.

 

But the Twins have one of the youngest rosters in baseball and a handful of young, good players that only look to get better in time. That's a rebuild.

[Mr. Brooks]

Simply building the farm system through your normal draft picks does not constitute a rebuild.

 

With a true rebuild, Perkins would have been traded at his peak. Willingham would have been traded after his first season.

We would have had more make good 1 year deals hoping to flip, instead of multiple year deals like Nolasco, Hughes and Santana.

 

Suzuki would have been traded at some point. Fien would have been traded after he showed that 1 or 2 ok years.

 

And, Terry never shied away from saying he intended to compete. Other GMs admit when they are rebuilding. San Diego just did, so don't tell me it was a lie he had to tell.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Simply building the farm system through your normal draft picks does not constitute a rebuild.

With a true rebuild, Perkins would have been traded at his peak. Willingham would have been traded after his first season.

We would have had more make good 1 year deals hoping to flip, instead of multiple year deals like Nolasco, Hughes and Santana.

Suzuki would have been traded at some point. Fien would have been traded after he showed that 1 or 2 ok years.

And, Terry never shied away from saying he intended to compete. Other GMs admit when they are rebuilding. San Diego just did, so don't tell me it was a lie he had to tell.

Everyone here continues to argue "the way I want a team to rebuild is the only approach that meets the definition of the word".

 

Rebuilding a team is to turn it over to young players that are cost-controlled and living or dying by the results they provide. However the Twins got there - and it was an ugly, frustrating ride - that's what they're doing.

[Monkeypaws]

Watching what the Twins have done in July vs. Boston, Cleveland, Texas, Detroit leads me to believe they have some game. They aren't gonna tank intentionally.

 

Growing pains are the best way to go about this - give your youth a chance to play, let them learn at the major league level. They hopefully improve, and set the stage for future winning ways, but quite possibly deliver the coveted top 5 draft pick along the way.

 

Win-win, with a lot of losses along the way

 

edit: I will acknowledge tho, that the oposition, some of the best in the AL, probably isn't really taking the Twins seriously, if quotes in the media are to be believed.

Edited July 24, 2016 by Monkeypaws

[Mr. Brooks]

Everyone here continues to argue "the way I want a team to rebuild is the only approach that meets the definition of the word".

 

Rebuilding a team is to turn it over to young players that are cost-controlled and living or dying by the results they provide. However the Twins got there - and it was an ugly, frustrating ride - that's what they're doing.

We'll have to agree to disagree I guess. I see rebuilding as a process, you insist it is only a destination.

I don't think they intended to get where they are, I think they were sincerely surprised every single one of these years that they were bad.

Aside from trading Span ( I don't count Revere because I think that was a "baseball trade", I think they thought Worley made them better right away) I don't think they made a single move that pointed to rebuild.

[terrydactyls]

But, even picking as high as they have recently, the Twins have missed out on the opportunity to draft the likes of Carlos Correa , Kris Bryant, Carlos Rodon and Kyle Schwarber

 

All of these examples were picked prior to the Twins first pick.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

We'll have to agree to disagree I guess. I see rebuilding as a process, you insist it is only a destination.
I don't think they intended to get where they are, I think they were sincerely surprised every single one of these years that they were bad.
Aside from trading Span ( I don't count Revere because I think that was a "baseball trade", I think they thought Worley made them better right away) I don't think they made a single move that pointed to rebuild.

It's also partially a process and the Twins frequently met the requirements.

 

- They didn't trade prospects.

 

- They stockpiled the farm system.

 

- They traded some veterans.

 

- For multiple years, they didn't commit long-term money to expensive free agents.

 

Listen, I get that you don't like the way the Twins rebuilt and, again, I agree with you. They did a lot of stupid crap and I disagreed with them on many occasions.

 

But. It. Was. Still. A. Rebuild.

[h2oface]

Everyone here continues to argue "the way I want a team to rebuild is the only approach that meets the definition of the word".

 

Rebuilding a team is to turn it over to young players that are cost-controlled and living or dying by the results they provide. However the Twins got there - and it was an ugly, frustrating ride - that's what they're doing.

I think you have your own special definition. Gutting and starting over.... that would be the definition in my book, even if it means some of the pieces are new different veterans as part of the rebuild. Plus it happens all at once. If you rebuild a house, you tear it down and rebuild. But you can redefine it if you like. I would call what you are talking about as a slow remodel. By the time you get to the last pieces you already have to start replacing your first pieces. Teams are always looking to get young and utilize the farm, and that is all that has happened. Edited July 24, 2016 by h2oface

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think you have your own special definition. Gutting and starting over.... that would be the definition in my book, even if it means some of the pieces are new different veterans as part of the rebuild. Plus it happens all at once. If you rebuild a house, you tear it down and rebuild. But you can redefine it if you like. I would call what you are talking about as a slow remodel. By the time you get to the last pieces you already have to start replacing your first pieces. Teams are always looking to get young and utilize the farm, and that is all that has happened.

I'm not the one with the special definition. The Twins traded players for prospects. They held on to prospects. They didn't sign notable free agents for a few years.

 

That's a rebuild.

 

It wasn't a great rebuild but it fit the definition of the word.

[Mr. Brooks]

All of these examples were picked prior to the Twins first pick.

Read the rest of his post (or the thread title). He's saying you can give yourself the chance to pick those guys by tanking for the #1 overall pick.

[h2oface]

I'm not the one with the special definition. The Twins traded players for prospects. They held on to prospects. They didn't sign notable free agents for a few years.

 

That's a rebuild.

 

It wasn't a great rebuild but it fit the definition of the word.

..... and you lost me at...... "rebuild"... but I respect your commitment. ;-)

[Brock Beauchamp]

Stop posting throwaway comments. Seriously. I never should have taken the bait but you reduced a multi-paragraph post into an argument over a single ****ing word.

 

And with that, I'm done with this thread.

 

Carry on with the conversation and sorry for the disruption.

[h2oface]

Well it had come full circle, and I saw the humor in that. It really does revolve around the different views of the definition. What they have and haven't done is in the books and history.

[Primetime82]

TANK! I want the top pick!

[brvama]

This whole concept is offensive to me. Tanking a season, IMO, is an ethical crime. It cheats the fan who pays money to see players do their best to win. It cheats the players who pride themselves on their performance and the respect of their abilities. It cheats the other teams of the league who are playing to win and expect their opponents to give it there all every game. It cheats the integrity of the game.

 

Now, and I think this is what you're really asking Tom: Should the Twins FO take the approach toward next year and beyond on how they structure and adjust this team without concern about the won/loss record? To that, I say yes. But it should be done with integrity to the game, fans, and players intact. To strive for a higher draft pick is short-sighted and foolish. Making moves by calling up prospects or unloading veterans toward an eye on next year seems prudent and wise.

[Hrbek70]

The answer depends on the definition of tank. Should they purposely start their worst starters to help them lose? Heck no. Should they give ip on the season and sell off their assets? Heck yes. Suzuki, Kintzler, Abad, Plouffe, Nolasco and Millone need to be moved or DFAd. Bring up some kids that are deserving and offer hope for the future.

[terrydactyls]

Read the rest of his post (or the thread title). He's saying you can give yourself the chance to pick those guys by tanking for the #1 overall pick.

The paragraph I quoted said that even though the Twins had high picks, they missed out on the above named players. I just pointed out that the above named players were all gone before the Twins picked.