Article: Hardball, the Twins, and Byron Buxton

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Tongue-in-cheek jab at those that are obsessing on how Buxton will react to this down the road.  He won't.  (If he becomes the player we all hope he becomes)...he'll end up going to a team that offers the best package of $ and winning.  Period.

I agree that I don't think it will be a huge issue down the road, but it's got the potential to linger for a bit. It's not even ultimately about the money (which renders the Correa joke irrelevant). Seems to be that the front office said his bat needs to warm up at AAA before he would be recalled, and by all accounts Buxton worked hard to get to that point -- but then the front office suddenly changed the requirements for his recall on Sep. 1. They are totally within their rights to do that, it might even be the smart course of action for the franchise -- but it's also their job to communicate these things better. It's not surprising that Buxton and other players would be frustrated by this, as well as fans.

Edited September 4, 2018 by spycake

[jkcarew]

They are totally within their rights to do that, it might even be the smart course of action for the franchise -- but it's also their job to communicate these things better. It's not surprising that Buxton and other players would be frustrated by this, as well as fans.

For the record, I wanted Buxton up and playing in September. To me, if that had moved the needle on his 2019 even a little...I would have valued that more than 2023.

[Mike Sixel]

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/byron-buxton-and-september-service-time-manipulations/

 

[Squirrel]

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/byron-buxton-and-september-service-time-manipulations/

Thanks. Good article.

[ewen21]

Who said otherwise?

You seemed very concerned about losing him so that's why Chief listed the date.

 

Not sure why we are looking long on him right now. There are a lot of things he needs to clean up just so he can be in an everyday lineup in the majors.

 

And with his migraine issues, his daredevil-like play and propensity for injuries the picture is even more clouded. You seem to have supreme confidence in his potential and that is all well and good. While you're believing in that don't forget to acknowledge the current reality.

[Don Walcott]

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/byron-buxton-and-september-service-time-manipulations/

This is a good article, and a similar sentiment is being expressed in several other national publications. None of it looks good for the reputation of our FO. I hope they make "amends" with Buxton and his agents a soon as possible.

[Don Walcott]

 

 

You seemed very concerned about losing him so that's why Chief listed the date.

Not sure why we are looking long on him right now. There are a lot of things he needs to clean up just so he can be in an everyday lineup in the majors.

And with his migraine issues, his daredevil-like play and propensity for injuries the picture is even more clouded. You seem to have supreme confidence in his potential and that is all well and good. While you're believing in that don't forget to acknowledge the current reality.

We're looking at Buxton long-term right now because of what the FO has done to him long-term. Obviously, the FO believes he's important enough to think about controlling him for an extra year four years from now. That's the whole context of this conversation -- on both sides.

[Jim Hahn]

My opinion is that the only good reason for not bringing Buxton up is if he is hurt. Since his recent performance and apparent lack of evidence of a doctor's confirmation of any lingering medical issues tend to confirm this discision is largely based on service time considerations,I am not impressed.

 

It is clearly in the best interest of Buxton AND the Twins organization for him to be in the majors and playing baseball, if he is healthy. Anything that brings him closer to realizing his vast potential should be done. I don't see how sending him home helps that.

 

Suggesting that the Twins need to play other guys this fall to find out what they have is rather silly. None of these guys have anything like the upside of Buxton, getting him as close to that upside as soon as possible should be the goal.

 

While service time considerations are a real thing for mid market teams, there are ways to work around them. Potentially delaying Buxton' s emergence as a true impact player seems a bit shortsighted to me.

[USAFChief]

We're looking at Buxton long-term right now because of what the FO has done to him long-term. Obviously, the FO believes he's important enough to think about controlling him for an extra year four years from now. That's the whole context of this conversation -- on both sides.

The post I responded to stated, “If he has an MVP year, he walks.”

 

Which isn’t true. He’s under team control through 2022, no matter how well he does.

 

He could be under team control even longer, where he to spend 2019 in the minors, for example. He has an option left.

 

But in no case can he “walk” begore the 2023 season. That’s the entire reason they didn’t recall him.

[Don Walcott]

 

The post I responded to stated, “If he has an MVP year, he walks.”

Which isn’t true. He’s under team control through 2022, no matter how well he does.

He could be under team control even longer, where he to spend 2019 in the minors, for example. He has an option left.

But in no case can he “walk” begore the 2023 season. That’s the entire reason they didn’t recall him.

The post I responded to asked why we were looking at Buxton long-term. I did not dispute the number of years of control in that or any other post. And I assume Doomtints was saying that if he has an MVP year, he'll walk as soon as he can. But you'd have to ask Doomtints about that.

[TheLeviathan]

The value of team control is that Buxton cannot walk no matter how good he is.  We all hope he becomes an MVP player, but we're a long way off from that.

 

We had two MVP months, let's expand that to 3 or 4 or 5 before we get too far down those roads.  Most of Buxton's time in the big leagues has been closer to AAAA player than MVP.

 

And that isn't even discussing the recurring migraines, wrist injuries, and other health concerns that seem to really debilitate his progress.  And despite all those concerns, the FO still chose to give up a meaningless September because they believe 2022 Byron Buxton is valuable to the Twins.  That's a belief in his future.

 

It's too bad they didn't spend more time saying that.

Edited September 4, 2018 by TheLeviathan

[Vanimal46]

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/byron-buxton-and-september-service-time-manipulations/

Great read. Thanks for sharing. Hopefully it's a hard lesson learned for the front office.

[Twodogs]

It's an extra year of control, but, he has also hit .156 for the twins this year. What if he came up in Sept and raked and was able to get his average up to .200 - .220 or so, how would that affect his arbitration case? When he does go into arbitration the team can say he hit .156 in 2018, of he had improved on that then they wouldn't be able to say that anymore?

[Otto von Ballpark]

It's an extra year of control, but, he has also hit .156 for the twins this year. What if he came up in Sept and raked and was able to get his average up to .200 - .220 or so, how would that affect his arbitration case? When he does go into arbitration the team can say he hit .156 in 2018, of he had improved on that then they wouldn't be able to say that anymore?

His arb award was probably going to be in the $1 mil range regardless, so any change really wouldn't be significant anyway.

[adorduan]

 

No only the best defensive player in all of major league baseball. 

Yeah, too bad there's that part of the game called hitting.......

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yeah, too bad there's that part of the game called hitting.......

 

Buxton is angling to be the league's first Designated Defender.

[Platoon]

Like i said CONSISTENCYYYYY.....2017 he hit .147 in March / April, .254 in May, .184 in June, .387 July (10 games), .324 in August (great month), .270 in Sept. / Oct. 2018 In April/March .192 and May .122.

Need to see consistency, until then Cave.

I fully agree! Consistency is what made Dozier so valuable. :)

[mngopherguy]

 

Buxton is angling to be the league's first Designated Defender.

 

I think with the way he is struggled in April, we need an "opener" for him.

 

 

[Doomtints]

 

You seemed very concerned about losing him so that's why Chief listed the date.

 

I'm not concerned at all about losing him.

 

I pointed out the following:

 

1) If he is good, the Twins want that extra year so they won't have to pay him.  Then he leaves because they will claim they can't afford him.

2) If he is bad, they can cut him without having to pay him.

 

I made the (rather clear, if you read everything I wrote instead of reacting to a snippet), that the Twins argument is bunk because the result is the same either way. Buxton won't be a career Twin.

 

Since the Twins don't want to pay him, the only thing they gain by sending him home is slowing down his development, and thus slowing down the Twins playoff chances. Basing a decision now on a money issue that won't actually exist in five years is daft.

 

[USAFChief]

I'm not concerned at all about losing him.

 

I pointed out the following:

 

1) If he is good, the Twins want that extra year so they won't have to pay him.  Then he leaves because they will claim they can't afford him.

2) If he is bad, they can cut him without having to pay him.

 

I made the (rather clear, if you read everything I wrote instead of reacting to a snippet), that the Twins argument is bunk because the result is the same either way. Buxton won't be a career Twin.

 

Since the Twins don't want to pay him, the only thing they gain by sending him home is slowing down his development, and thus slowing down the Twins playoff chances. Basing a decision now on a money issue that won't actually exist in five years is daft.

The extra year isn’t about money. It’s about how long they own his rights.

 

Once again...if they had brought him up Sep 1st, and he never returned to the minors, he could have been a free agent following the 2021 season.

 

Now, he cant be until after the 2022 season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The extra year isn’t about money. It’s about how long they own his rights.

 

I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.

[USAFChief]

I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.

Possibly, although that’s an odd way to make that point.

 

In any case, This way there is no need to buy it...and hasn’t it been reported Buxton turned down an extension anyway?

[Don Walcott]

I think he is saying, the Twins could have bought the extra year regardless (in the form of an extension), but they weren't willing to pay the price.

And with the way they are treating him, unless they make “amends” quickly, there is no chance they have Buxton beyond four years (or three if they lose his grievance).

[Kelly Vance]

 

Honestly Carole... I want that world as well. But it ain't coming. 

 

Every single 25 and 40 man decision should be based on who the best players are period. But it ain't coming.

 

I get the ethics part of the discussion and I consider myself a pretty ethical guy but please keep in mind that those very same players are going to have their agents shoving bamboo under the fingernails of front offices in order to get the best deal they can for their client. 

 

The Angels have to pay Pujols 30 Million a Year as a free agent and Buxton is going to lose a year. It happens on both sides. 

 

I'm not going to hold my team to some ethical standard that no other team is holding themselves to. 

Nobody is shoving bamboo and saying you appreciate ethics while approving an ethical violation ....? Really?  And if you want to be as unethical as every other team,, then you don't get it.  What Ted and Me and Hoskem and a couple others have been saying is, if you want to attract stud players, don't act like you are going to treat  them like cattle. 

[TheLeviathan]

The best way to attract talent is with money.  Dave St. Peter said it himself - the vast majority of the time the dollars do the talking.  This will have zero impact on FA or any other contract negotiation outside of Buxton.

 

And with Buxton it only matters if he becomes a functional starting baseball player beyond his defensive game.

[Riverbrian]

 

Nobody is shoving bamboo and saying you appreciate ethics while approving an ethical violation ....? Really?  And if you want to be as unethical as every other team,, then you don't get it.  What Ted and Me and Hoskem and a couple others have been saying is, if you want to attract stud players, don't act like you are going to treat  them like cattle. 

 

Is this an ethics lesson that I'm receiving?

 

Give me an example of a team that doesn't treat them like cattle. Cattle being your definition not mine. 

 

 

 

 

 

[USAFChief]

The best way to attract talent is with money.  Dave St. Peter said it himself - the vast majority of the time the dollars do the talking.  This will have zero impact on FA or any other contract negotiation outside of Buxton.

 

And with Buxton it only matters if he becomes a functional starting baseball player beyond his defensive game.

Maybe not zero impact. Some, maybe. When you have options, wouldn’t you give some weight to picking an employer with a good reputation for employee relations?

 

And make no mistake, MLBPA members are aware of this.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Maybe not zero impact. Some, maybe. When you have options, wouldn’t you give some weight to picking an employer with a good reputation for employee relations?

And make no mistake, MLBPA members are aware of this.

 

Since every team is a bad actor in this regard, would it really matter?

 

Cubs did it with Kris Bryant, didn't seem to hurt them.  Just one example of many.

Edited September 5, 2018 by TheLeviathan

[USAFChief]

Since every team is a bad actor in this regard, would it really matter?

I’m doubtful every team would treat this situation the same.

 

Likewise, I’m willing to bet some organizations have better reputations than others.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I’m doubtful every team would treat this situation the same.

Likewise, I’m willing to bet some organizations have better reputations than others.

 

I think the only difference here was the Twins openly citing service time.  Otherwise I think this exactly what every other team would do.  Sox and Jays are doing it too.

 

Cubs might have the most glaring example ever.  Didn't impact them one bit in FA.

Edited September 5, 2018 by TheLeviathan