Why the Twins should stick to the 4/48 bin in free agency

[gunnarthor]

Santana and Nolasco both got roughly the 4/48m deal from the Twins in free agency.  Here's a list of all the pitchers who got bigger deals from 13-16.

 

In 2013 the big three deals were for Grienke, Edwin Jackson and Anibal Sanchez. Grienke's been great although his contract had an opt out that he used to sign with the Dbacks. Sanchez and Jackson were horrible.  Both contracts are now over and they combined for 9 years, about 1000 innings, nearly $125m and 3 WAR.  The Cubs and Tigers, of course, could afford that.

 

In 2014- Tanaka, Garza and Ubaldo Jimenz. Tanaka was a bit special as a FA from Japan and younger than most. The Yankees gave him a 7/155 deal which hasn't been bad so far although this was a bit of down year. Garza, Jiminez and Nolasco all got about the same deal and Nolasco was probably the best of them.

 

In 2015 Scherzer, Lester and Shields got signed for more than Santana. Lester had two good years but was not good this year and is trending down. He'll be 34 next year and owed 85m over the next three seasons (counting the buy out). Scherzer got a 7/210 deal and has been awesome so far. Shields, 25/year, has been a disaster.

 

And before the 2016 season the big deals were David Price, Grienke, Johnny Cueto, Jordan Zimmerman, Jeff Samardzija, Wei-Yin Chen, Mike Leake, Ian Kennedy and Scott Kazmir. All nine of those guys got bigger deals than Ervin. Price had a great first year but was injured and feuding with the media and is still owed nearly 160m. Greinke is good. Cueto put up a 93 ERA+ and is injured. Zimmerman was worse than Kyle Gibson this year. He'll be 32 next year and still owed 75m. Shark's been serviceable but he's never been as good as his rep. Chen's been a disaster (Miami would trade him to us for nothing). Leake was already traded for nothing and two teams are dividing his salary. Kazmir missed the entire season and Kennedy sucks.

 

That's 18 deals and a heck of a lot of misses. Unsurprisingly, older pitchers are worse bets. And the best deals were the absolute most expensive ones as guys like Grienke and Scherzer can command a lot more than Darvish money, and there is no Grienke in this FA class.  Pitchers with past injury history or limited innings tended to be bad gambles (and pitchers with good track records of innings and performance were good, until they went bad). And Tanaka, a young arm from Japan, was a different kind of gamble.  If the Twins get someone like Alex Cobb at 4/48 and he busts, we can probably work around it. If the Twins get Darvish at 6/150 and he busts, we probably can't.

 

If the Twins can get someone like Alex Cobb or, even better, trade for a younger pitcher than those eligible for free agency, it would probably be a safer way to improve the rotation.

[slash129]

Not to mention Darvish doesn't look like he can handle the big stage, so why would you want him as your #1 (if you're planning on getting there)?

[beckmt]

 

Not to mention Darvish doesn't look like he can handle the big stage, so why would you want him as your #1 (if you're planning on getting there)?

Admit this is a risk, but you need to get invited to the dance, before you can dance.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Both contracts are now over and they combined for 9 years, about 1000 innings, nearly $125m and 3 WAR.

*winces*

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not to mention Darvish doesn't look like he can handle the big stage, so why would you want him as your #1 (if you're planning on getting there)?

You're reading too much into 3.1 World Series innings. Darvish was very good in both the NLCS and NLDS.

 

Small sample sizes abound, naturally.

[drjim]

Definitely agree with the premise and a plan that reflects it. They can get a solid pitcher in the 4/48 bin.

 

For the Twins to get an ace, they either need Berrios to take a step (probably not happening), or they'll have to make a trade, which strikes me as more possible. High end starters on short deals come available at the deadline, and the Twins system has enough depth that they will likely have enough development that they can make a move midseason.

 

A plan of solidifying the staff with a starter in this bucket and a reliever or two, and then being in position to strike midseason is prudent.

 

Darvish and Arrieta seem much more likely to continue the trend laid out than buck it.

[mikelink45]

 

You're reading too much into 3.1 World Series innings. Darvish was very good in both the NLCS and NLDS.

 

Small sample sizes abound, naturally.

Darvish had less than a stellar year and sometimes small samples can be quite enlightening.  I think this essay is essential reading for all who want to fall into the trap of big contracts that pay for past performances and not future potential.  I will take the younger pitchers.

[mikelink45]

I really enjoyed this essay - it could be expanded to show all the bad contracts for past their prime hitters.  Someone in charge has to recognize that you should not pay for past greatness.  

 

Stay young, take on potential.  The Astos did not trade for Verlander until they were ready for the last step.  

 

[butterspud]

Can we even get Cobb with 4/48??

[laloesch]

Definitely agree with the premise and a plan that reflects it. They can get a solid pitcher in the 4/48 bin.

For the Twins to get an ace, they either need Berrios to take a step (probably not happening), or they'll have to make a trade, which strikes me as more possible. High end starters on short deals come available at the deadline, and the Twins system has enough depth that they will likely have enough development that they can make a move midseason.

A plan of solidifying the staff with a starter in this bucket and a reliever or two, and then being in position to strike midseason is prudent.

Darvish and Arrieta seem much more likely to continue the trend laid out than buck it.

Keep an eye on thorpe.

[drjim]

Keep an eye on thorpe.

I'm a big Thorpe guy, but he is probably not reaching these levels until 2020 at the earliest. He might be the pop up guy they can trade midseason for a legit top of the rotation guy tho.

[drjim]

Can we even get Cobb with 4/48??

That's the mlbtraderumors prediction, but does seem light. The key for this "bucket" is probably more about total years than a couple million either way in aav.

[ashbury]

You're reading too much into 3.1 World Series innings.

There is a reason the innings weren't more.

[nicksaviking]

The nature of the 4/48M pitchers almost guarantees they'll never be the kind of guy who could lead a WS contender though.

 

If they were already good enough to do so they'd be getting a bigger free agent deal, but the solid deal they received is just reinforcement that they don't and won't have to change their game in effort to become that guy.

 

If the Twins can't or shouldn't sign the big shots, they should get the guys who have the ability to become a big shot but still have something to prove.

[jimmer]

So we should just follow Ryan's plan cause even though we didn't get much out of it, and haven't had an elite type pitcher in 10 years, at least the Pohlad's didn't lose big on the huge FA busts other teams did?

 

Now, some of us have pushed to trade quality veterans to try and get young quality pitching, but then people balk at that too.  So, I mean, we can't trade quality aging veteran's for young pitching (cause we might not pick the right guy), and we can't buy quality pitching (cause we should be scared of the wasted money), so our plan has to be about developing quality pitching which I am for but which we've failed miserably at for so long.

 

The Twins won't go get high priced FA pitchers/players anyway, so hopefully this new regime will figure out how to get the system to develop quality pitchers cause if we are just pushing to keep the status quo on FA, we better figure out a better pitching philosophy to teach the guys we draft.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

As far as Alex Cobb specifically, here is an article that is sure to confuse and delight the reader:

 

https://www.draysbay.com/2017/10/3/16411606/alex-cobb-qualifying-offer-tampa-bay-rays

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

So we should just follow Ryan's plan cause even though we didn't get much out of it, and haven't had an elite type pitcher in 10 years, at least the Pohlad's didn't lose big on the huge FA busts other teams did?

 

It's all hypothetical anyway. The Twins won't go get high priced FA pitchers/players anyway.  Hopefully this new regime will figure out how to get the system to develop quality pitchers cause if we are just pushing to keep the status quo on FA, we better figure out a better pitching philosophy to teach the guys we draft.

I am bullish on Berrios, and I think he has an outside shot to be the #1 we are all hoping to see.

[gunnarthor]

 

So we should just follow Ryan's plan cause even though we didn't get much out of it, and haven't had an elite type pitcher in 10 years, at least the Pohlad's didn't lose big on the huge FA busts other teams did?

 

.

Ryan's plan got us a couple elite pitchers and kept a small market team in contention for basically a decade. So it does seem likley that a guy who came from Cleveland would follow the ideas of Ryan and try and do them better.

 

So far that's more or less what we've seen. Whether Falvey and Levine will be more willing to trade minor league assests is to be determined but small free agent deals, rule v pickups, waiver claims, cheap bullpen arms - the current FO's first year looked a lot like a Ryan year.

[jimmer]

 

I am bullish on Berrios, and I think he has an outside shot to be the #1 we are all hoping to see.

If he can find some consistency, yeah.  I think he'll be more of a high 3 when it's all said and done which is absolutely a quality pitcher, but which leaves us two of those (Santana and him).

[mazeville]

 

So we should just follow Ryan's plan cause even though we didn't get much out of it, and haven't had an elite type pitcher in 10 years, at least the Pohlad's didn't lose big on the huge FA busts other teams did?

 

You don't go to "Ryan's plan." You build from within. Collect as many assets as possible during your down years. When you are ready to compete, you find a free agent or a trade to supplement what you have.

 

Ryan's two biggest problems were poor drafting, failed trades and poor preparation due to his failure to keep up with the times. But he was right in that free agency isn't a way to build a pitching staff, it's only a way to supplement your pitching staff because the available pitchers are usually older and more expensive than they should be. 

 

Theoretically, Jose Berrios takes a step forward to lead the staff next year (his stuff is ridiculous). And then perhaps Gonsalves and Romero do well once they get called up. 

 

Perhaps the new regime will let a few of those assets go to get a guy who would be better than any of the free agent options. 

[Winston Smith]

I'm afraid 4 for 60 is the new 4 for 48. Prices aren't staying the same as they were 3-4 years ago. With most teams needing pitching the group of mid rotation guys (Lynn and Cobb) is very thin so the demand will be high.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Darvish had less than a stellar year and sometimes small samples can be quite enlightening.

Eh, I disagree. Small sample sizes almost always lead to bad decisions when they override piles of more substantial data.

 

But I agree that it's easy to fall into the allure of paying exorbitant money for that One Pitcher To Rule Them All. It's possible, maybe even likely, that spending top dollar for a pitcher is a bad use of resources and that spreading money out over more middling free agents in hopes one of them clicks is the way to go (I'm not talking dumpster diving, though).

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

There is a reason the innings weren't more.

True, but even Clayton Kershaw had a kinda bad postseason in ~35 IP and I don't think there's anyone who will argue that he's not the best pitcher in baseball.

[USAFChief]

...small free agent deals, rule v pickups, waiver claims, cheap bullpen arms...

You don’t have to stop doing any of these things simply because you signed a top free agent.

 

An argument based around saving money on free agents is exactly that...a plan to save money. It’s not a plan for a “better” way to build a winner, it’s just cheaper.

 

And as in most things in life, you often get what you pay for.

 

Spend the money, shop at every level of free agency. There’s no reason not to try to find bargains, I agree. There’s also no argument, not based on only money, not to sign proven quality, either.

[drjim]

You don’t have to stop doing any of these things simply because you signed a top free agent.

 

An argument based around saving money on free agents is exactly that...a plan to save money. It’s not a plan for a “better” way to build a winner, it’s just cheaper.

 

And as in most things in life, you often get what you pay for.

 

Spend the money, shop at every level of free agency. There’s no reason not to try to find bargains, I agree. There’s also no argument, not based on only money, not to sign proven quality, either.

Just saying cheaper, while certainly part of the equation, really ignores how risk fits in, especially on the back end of the deal. It's years, not aav.

 

There are certainly times for big money, long year contracts, but as shown, you are almost certainly going to get crushed hard for multiple years of the contract. Question is how well your revenue structure can support large amounts of dead (or declining) money over mulitple seasons.

 

If this core is legit, it will start getting really expensive after 4 more years. Attaching dead or declining money beyond that is a massive risk.

 

A 4 year free agent deal for a pitcher right now fits about perfectly.

[gunnarthor]

 

You don’t have to stop doing any of these things simply because you signed a top free agent.

An argument based around saving money on free agents is exactly that...a plan to save money. It’s not a plan for a “better” way to build a winner, it’s just cheaper.

And as in most things in life, you often get what you pay for.

Spend the money, shop at every level of free agency. There’s no reason not to try to find bargains, I agree. There’s also no argument, not based on only money, not to sign proven quality, either.

That's really not true. If you sign Arrieta (for example) at 4/100 you are going to limit future options, regardless of how he pitches in the future. Would you trust that Arrieta would be worth twice what Cobb is going to be worth over the next four years?

 

I think you're really ignoring how bad a Sanchez like deal would affect the Twins in 2019 and beyond. On paper, it would be great to be able to spend whatever we wanted but since we have some of the worst owners in sports you have to take those limitations into consideration.  Misspent money is going to affect this team a lot more than it'll affect other teams.

[jimmer]

So are we saying that Ryan didn't spend like perhaps he could have because of the Pohlads, not because he was risk adverse and had a misguided/outdated belief of what players are actually worth and wouldn't go over that?

[Major League Ready]

 

You don’t have to stop doing any of these things simply because you signed a top free agent.

An argument based around saving money on free agents is exactly that...a plan to save money. It’s not a plan for a “better” way to build a winner, it’s just cheaper.

And as in most things in life, you often get what you pay for.

Spend the money, shop at every level of free agency. There’s no reason not to try to find bargains, I agree. There’s also no argument, not based on only money, not to sign proven quality, either.

 

I am not sure how the OP could have been anymore articulate.  That list CLEARLY shows just how bad of an investment a large percentage of these contract have been.  There are better ways to spend the money.   The rarity of mid and small market teams signing these type of contracts is not because those GMs don’t get it or their ownership is cheap.  It’s simply a really bad strategy if you don’t have lots of revenue to make up for the frequency in which they fail.

 

I would much rather see our team extend 2 03 3 members of our young core 2-4 years and extend the window of contention they should provide.  I would have to think has a much higher probability of success.  Add 2 or 3 bullpen pieces.  How about an aggressive approach with comeback candidates.  Pay more but get a couple options years for paying up in the comeback year.  Spend beyond our bonus pool on International players.

 

I also don't understand how this is not a really good example of FAs not being "what you pay for" more often than not..

[drjim]

So are we saying that Ryan didn't spend like perhaps he could have because of the Pohlads, not because he was risk adverse and had a misguided/outdated belief of what players are actually worth and wouldn't go over that?

I would say all of the above, if you replace "Pohlads" with "realities of franchise revenue streams".

 

And he still spent well over $125mil on free agent pitchers.

[jimmer]

 

And he still spent well over $125mil on free agent pitchers.

and that was on how many total pitchers?  What's his biggest signing?

 

Anyway, doesn't matter what he did anymore, though this whole thread seems to be about defending his course of action, so it's hard to stay on topic without mentioning him.

 

Hopefully the new FO finds a way to get some dominant pitching for this team.  Cause while we managed to get far with the pitching this year, the pitching was still horrible and it wouldn't be a good idea to just keep adding to the backend of the rotation.