Twins' Beat Writers Laying the Groundwork for a Smaller Payroll

[Vanimal46]

Souhan and Reusse, who recently renewed their Pohlad Wallet Watcher credentials, wrote separate articles that spending money on free agents is bad.

 

Souhan focusing on the slow ramp up of free agents this last winter such as Cobb, Lynn, and Morrison. And throwing money at a problem is bad.

 

Reusse focused on the last two times the Twins had a record payroll, they failed. So why spend money?

 

http://m.startribune.com/just-maybe-the-twins-are-better-off-not-spending-any-money/487577121/

 

http://m.startribune.com/free-agents-at-target-field-throw-water-on-collusion-talk/487617461/

[Monkeypaws]

 

Souhan and Reusse, who recently renewed their Pohlad Wallet Watcher credentials, wrote separate articles that spending money on free agents is bad.

Souhan focusing on the slow ramp up of free agents this last winter such as Cobb, Lynn, and Morrison. And throwing money at a problem is bad.

Reusse focused on the last two times the Twins had a record payroll, they failed. So why spend money?

http://m.startribune.com/just-maybe-the-twins-are-better-off-not-spending-any-money/487577121/

http://m.startribune.com/free-agents-at-target-field-throw-water-on-collusion-talk/487617461/

 

Thanks for the summaries - saved me the trouble of reading the articles.

[Mike Sixel]

Did they look at the 1991 team?

 

And, super. But, hey, selling that draft pick for money they won't spend was an awesome move!

 

Let's hope it isn't going this way. If it is, they really need to trade off the assets they have, and reboot.

 

edit to add:

This is, imo, the issue with acquiring "meh" players, and not elite players.....

[Vanimal46]

Did they look at the 1991 team?

 

And, super. But, hey, selling that draft pick for money they won't spend was an awesome move!

 

Let's hope it isn't going this way. If it is, they really need to trade off the assets they have, and reboot.

 

edit to add:

This is, imo, the issue with acquiring "meh" players, and not elite players.....

I don't believe it's coincidence that two tenured beat writers wrote about this subject within days of each other....

[jorgenswest]

They need to better than 3 good seasons out of 14 for the ~150 million they spent on Hughes, Santana and Nolasco.

[Mike Sixel]

Had they not spent money on those pitchers....would they have won more games with cheaper alternatives from their minor league system? If not, then really, the argument is that it is better for the business not to sign FAs, than the fans....

[TheLeviathan]

I don't think either author is wrong that spending in FA is fraught with peril.  More often than not it's not a good use of resources.

 

It's also necessary.

[Riverbrian]

I think the future of free agent paydays as we know it is in trouble.

 

The numbers don't lie... It's hard to justify a 12 Million Dollar deal for a player that barely out performs (or doesn't out perform) a 600K guy and this happens frequently... Way too frequently. 

 

I also don't believe that the size of a teams payroll indicates the size of on the field success so I don't think $130 Million is guaranteed better than $100 million. 

 

With that said... Free Agency is a door that has to always remain open because a General Manager needs to keep every available door open when it comes to staffing a roster for competition. GM's need every available avenue. 

 

In the future... The price for a Logan Morrison type is going to go down but the need for a Logan Morrison type is going to remain unchanged. While many are not working as planned... SOME DO and as long as some do... you must keep the door open to fill in those gaps. 

 

What GM's need to stop doing (especially the Twins)... is assuming that the free agent you just signed has just fixed your problem before he has fixed your problem. GM's need to bake the salary into the payroll as the cost of doing business and have a plan B in case Logan Morrison becomes our Logan Morrison. 

 

Yes... I'm gonna pick on Logan Morrison as an example:

 

I was OK with the team signing Logan Morrison. Signing him shows a good faith effort by the front office to improve the team. Even if he struggles as badly as he has... I'm ok with it. 

 

I'm not OK with playing Logan Morrison on a regular basis all the way into July when he is playing as poorly as he has.

 

4 wrongs do not make a right.:

 

Wrong 1 - Spending 6 Million on a player that would easily be out performed by AAAA guy for 600K is a wrong. But a survivable wrong. It's only Money and if you simply bake the salary into the recipe, the results won't kill you. 

 

Wrong 2 - Playing that failing 6 million dollar player everyday compromises your chances to win. It does the exact opposite of your intention by signing him. Now you've essentially paid 6 million dollars for the privilege of making it hard to win. Everybody will make a wrong turn on occasion with the intention of going the right direction. Wrong turns are only major issues if you keep going the wrong direction. You've now taken one wrong and made it two wrongs and this makes the situation much much worse. 

 

Wrong 3 - Playing that failing 6 million dollar player everyday also blocks the opportunity for a Jake Cave at 600K to avail himself to the club as an option that wasn't considered previously. Now you've spent 6 Million for the privilege of making it harder to win with a player not producing. AND... And... you are now making it harder to identify a cheaper option that may become a club asset by not providing the necessary playing time because you are wasting his opportunity by playing the guy you made a mistake signing in the first place. By not identifying a cheaper asset, you force yourself to repeat wrong #1 in the future because you never gave that cheaper asset a chance to be considered in the future.

 

That becomes wrong #4... You didn't identify a cheaper option for the future... so now you have to go back to free agency to find the Logan Morrison replacement with a Logan Morrison type and possibly repeat Wrong #1 again. Now you are in a death spiral that you can't get out of. 

 

Not making wrong #2 will give you a chance to minimize wrong #1 and could provide you a chance to avoid repeating wrong #1 over and over again until we all die. 

 

I do not blame them for the signing of Logan Morrison... I blame them for letting him continue. 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

I don't think either author is wrong that spending in FA is fraught with peril.  More often than not it's not a good use of resources.

 

It's also necessary.

I think it's that last part that is all too often ignored. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think it's that last part that is all too often ignored. 

 

Right, a lot of people look at it as inefficient spending but the truth is that there are only so many ways to spend your revenues.  Even if it's inefficient, you sorta have to do it.

[DocBauer]

It should always be done to augment your roster, or fill a hole. It should never be used to BUILD your roster. History shows that doesn't work.

 

I believe history has also met logic and agree most of the big and long term FA deals are a thing of the past.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Right, a lot of people look at it as inefficient spending but the truth is that there are only so many ways to spend your revenues.  Even if it's inefficient, you sorta have to do it.

 

Started talking about this with Jeff Sullivan and some Athletic writers last night, but we got interrupted before I could finish my point.

 

It's most likely inefficient, sure....but who is the alternative to Morrison when the season started in AAA? Really? Or three RPs. Or Lance Lynn and Odorizzi (not sure how FA is worse than trades).

 

NO TEAM is built 100% from the farm. 

 

Imagine the TWins last year without ESAN.....and instead, Slegers.....or, um, who?

[mikelink45]

I feel like we are expected to immediately attack Souhan and Reusse, but I can't.  I agree.  I was against the pursuits we made this year and in favor of pushing the envelop on prospects.  I still am.  When we have a base team that projects to 90+ wins you can sign the difference maker.  When you are a flat 500 team (at best) you are better off investing in what you have and going from there.  If you have nothing in the minors you have to grab what is available.  

 

Anyone can say that sometimes the FA will fail, but my counter is that these are the days of the hyper statistical geniuses who only need to look at the advanced stats.  

 

We know that no team can only build from its farm system but Houston did a good job and when they raised the bar they went for difference makers like Verlander and Cole.  

Something is wrong in the Minnesota system and I am not sure what it is.  When both FA and Top prospects fail where do we turn?

[ewen21]

 

Started talking about this with Jeff Sullivan and some Athletic writers last night, but we got interrupted before I could finish my point.

 

It's most likely inefficient, sure....but who is the alternative to Morrison when the season started in AAA? Really? Or three RPs. Or Lance Lynn and Odorizzi (not sure how FA is worse than trades).

 

NO TEAM is built 100% from the farm. 

 

Imagine the TWins last year with ESAN.....and instead, Slegers.....or, um, who?

ESPECIALLY not us right now.

[Thrylos]

 

I don't believe it's coincidence that two tenured beat writers wrote about this subject within days of each other....

 

Neither is a beat writer.  They are columnists.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Neither is a beat writer.  They are columnists.

 

not sure how that matters at all......does it matter at all in your mind?

[nicksaviking]

I don't completely disagree with the theory, but perhaps just once they could try the quality over quantity approach. Yeah, they got a lot of free agents, but every time a new one was reported, the word "bargain" was in the headline.

 

If the Twins aren't or shouldn't spend money on free agents, then they should do something completely game changing. Piss off the whole league by over paying for the best managers and coaches, the best GM, the best scouts, the best analytical minds and the best developmental personnel. Upgrading those positions would cost peanuts compared to the typical free agent spends.

 

Walk into Fenway flashing the $60M they aren't going to spend on players and say, "Who's coming with me?"

[yarnivek1972]

I think the future of free agent paydays as we know it is in trouble.

 

The numbers don't lie... It's hard to justify a 12 Million Dollar deal for a player that barely out performs (or doesn't out perform) a 600K guy and this happens frequently... Way too frequently.

 

I also don't believe that the size of a teams payroll indicates the size of on the field success so I don't think $130 Million is guaranteed better than $100 million.

 

With that said... Free Agency is a door that has to always remain open because a General Manager needs to keep every available door open when it comes to staffing a roster for competition. GM's need every available avenue.

 

In the future... The price for a Logan Morrison type is going to go down but the need for a Logan Morrison type is going to remain unchanged. While many are not working as planned... SOME DO and as long as some do... you must keep the door open to fill in those gaps.

 

What GM's need to stop doing (especially the Twins)... is assuming that the free agent you just signed has just fixed your problem before he has fixed your problem. GM's need to bake the salary into the payroll as the cost of doing business and have a plan B in case Logan Morrison becomes our Logan Morrison.

 

Yes... I'm gonna pick on Logan Morrison as an example:

 

I was OK with the team signing Logan Morrison. Signing him shows a good faith effort by the front office to improve the team. Even if he struggles as badly as he has... I'm ok with it.

 

I'm not OK with playing Logan Morrison on a regular basis all the way into July when he is playing as poorly as he has.

 

4 wrongs do not make a right.:

 

Wrong 1 - Spending 6 Million on a player that would easily be out performed by AAAA guy for 600K is a wrong. But a survivable wrong. It's only Money and if you simply bake the salary into the recipe, the results won't kill you.

 

Wrong 2 - Playing that failing 6 million dollar player everyday compromises your chances to win. It does the exact opposite of your intention by signing him. Now you've essentially paid 6 million dollars for the privilege of making it hard to win. Everybody will make a wrong turn on occasion with the intention of going the right direction. Wrong turns are only major issues if you keep going the wrong direction. You've now taken one wrong and made it two wrongs and this makes the situation much much worse.

 

Wrong 3 - Playing that failing 6 million dollar player everyday also blocks the opportunity for a Jake Cave at 600K to avail himself to the club as an option that wasn't considered previously. Now you've spent 6 Million for the privilege of making it harder to win with a player not producing. AND... And... you are now making it harder to identify a cheaper option that may become a club asset by not providing the necessary playing time because you are wasting his opportunity by playing the guy you made a mistake signing in the first place. By not identifying a cheaper asset, you force yourself to repeat wrong #1 in the future because you never gave that cheaper asset a chance to be considered in the future.

 

That becomes wrong #4... You didn't identify a cheaper option for the future... so now you have to go back to free agency to find the Logan Morrison replacement with a Logan Morrison type and possibly repeat Wrong #1 again. Now you are in a death spiral that you can't get out of.

 

Not making wrong #2 will give you a chance to minimize wrong #1 and could provide you a chance to avoid repeating wrong #1 over and over again until we all die.

 

I do not blame them for the signing of Logan Morrison... I blame them for letting him continue.

Basically, the Twins need to do a better job evaluating the players they have. Something this FO has been frustratingly reluctant to do.

[jkcarew]

 

I don't believe it's coincidence that two tenured beat writers wrote about this subject within days of each other....

Are you saying that Reusse chooses to be pawn on behalf of the Pohlads/FO?....or, simply that something was deliberately leaked to him that he, in this case, happens to agree with.  I'd buy the latter, but I'm not buying Reusse as pawn to any owners or front offices in this town.  He's not Sid, and especially not at this stage of his career.  (I'm not taking his side in the argument at hand.)

[jorgenswest]

not sure how that matters at all......does it matter at all in your mind?

It should.

 

Reporters report. They are with the team daily.

 

Columnists give opinion. They try persuade and draw out emotions.

[Vanimal46]

Are you saying that Reusse chooses to be pawn on behalf of the Pohlads/FO?....or, simply that something was deliberately leaked to him that he, in this case, happens to agree with. I'd buy the latter, but I'm not buying Reusse as pawn to any owners or front offices in this town. He's not Sid, and especially not at this stage of his career. (I'm not taking his side in the argument at hand.)

I also agree with the latter too. Souhan and Reusse jumped on it because they agree with the premise.

[jkcarew]

My assumption as well.

[Mike Sixel]

 

It should.

Reporters report. They are with the team daily.

Columnists give opinion. They try persuade and draw out emotions.

 

you don't think the team feeds columnists at all? 

 

I know that other companies in MN do, having talked to them about it....

 

We don't know, but it does seem an odd coincidence. Like I said, I hope they don't sit out FA completely.

[Vanimal46]

It should.

 

Reporters report. They are with the team daily.

 

Columnists give opinion. They try persuade and draw out emotions.

You make it seem like Reusse and Souhan don't have seats in the press box.

[Don Walcott]

Souhan and Reusse, who recently renewed their Pohlad Wallet Watcher credentials, wrote separate articles that spending money on free agents is bad.

 

Souhan focusing on the slow ramp up of free agents this last winter such as Cobb, Lynn, and Morrison. And throwing money at a problem is bad.

 

Reusse focused on the last two times the Twins had a record payroll, they failed. So why spend money?

 

http://m.startribune.com/just-maybe-the-twins-are-better-off-not-spending-any-money/487577121/

 

http://m.startribune.com/free-agents-at-target-field-throw-water-on-collusion-talk/487617461/

These are both just terribly stated arguments. There are plenty of people on this site who would do a much better job with the same column length.

 

Reusse, in particular, argues that we “blew past” our previous high payroll, and then gives as examples of money wasted, Hughes and Santana. He also ignores the relative size of payroll considering the league-wide inflation over the past 8 years.

 

Souhan claims that because of analytics, every team knew that the free agents the Twins signed weren’t worth the money spent on them. But provides absolutely no evidence for this position.

 

This is why I generally don’t read these columnists, but come here for thoughtful and defendable opinions.

[jorgenswest]

You make it seem like Reusse and Souhan don't have seats in the press box.

I think it is important to discern the purpose of what I am reading whether it be sports or anything else. Reporters report facts. Columnists offer opinion and try to persuade or draw on emotions. It doesn’t matter where they are sitting. Purpose matters.

[Vanimal46]

I think it is important to discern the purpose of what I am reading whether it be sports or anything else. Reporters report facts. Columnists offer opinion and try to persuade or draw on emotions. It doesn’t matter where they are sitting. Purpose matters.

I wonder how they both came up with the same opinion. Maybe by speaking to people inside the Twins' organization?

 

I guess it's possible they had lunch together and decided they should both write articles about the Twins spending money.

[Don Walcott]

I wonder how they both came up with the same opinion. Maybe by speaking to people inside the Twins' organization?

 

I guess it's possible they had lunch together and decided they should both write articles about the Twins spending money.

Considering the quality of their arguments, I assume they did compare notes and decided they were covering two entirely different topics: “I’m writing an article about how the Twins were dumb to spend money on free agents.” “Well I’m writing an article on how all of the teams who wouldn’t sign free agents this past offseason were smarter than the Twins.” Cool, no redundancy there at all!

[gunnarthor]

 

I wonder how they both came up with the same opinion. Maybe by speaking to people inside the Twins' organization?

I guess it's possible they had lunch together and decided they should both write articles about the Twins spending money.

People on this site have pushed those opinions for years. It's not exactly a secret. 

[jun]

Spending money on free agents is good if the FO sign the right ones.