Front Page: The Royals Problem: Just How Much Are You Willing to Give Up to Win a World Series?

[Matthew Taylor]

In 2015, the Kansas City Royals mortgaged away their future in order to win their first World Series in 30 years. Heading into 2020, the Minnesota Twins have to face a similar question. Is it worth selling away the future in order to capitalize on the present?After coming off of a Cinderella season in 2014 which saw them come one game shy of winning the World Series, the Royals made the conscious decision to push all of their chips to the middle of the table in 2015 and gun for a title. Let’s dive into how the Royals were aggressive in pushing for short-term success and how it impacted them in the long run.

 

The first way that the Royals were extremely aggressive in pushing for short-term success was through their free agency spending. The Royals upped their opening day payroll from 2014 to 2015 by $21.6MM after signing the likes of 34-year old Álex Ríos, 32-year old Kendrys Morales and 31-year old Edinson Vólquez to sizeable contracts. While Morales and Vólquez were instrumental in their championship run, all three players aged quickly and did not contribute to the club past 2015. The jump in short-term spending also hampered their ability to keep some of their young stars like Lorenzo Cain, Mike Moustakas and Eric Hosmer who all left in free agency just two years later.

 

Additionally, the Royals mortgaged away much of their long-term success via the trade route at the deadline in 2015. If you’ll remember, this is the deadline where the Royals acquired Johnny Cueto and Ben Zobrist, who were both rentals and left in free agency at the end of that season. In both of these moves the Royals gave up blue-chip prospects in Brandon Finnegan and Sean Manaea.

 

While they were successful in their goal of winning a World Championship, it’s fair to ask if it was worth it for the Royals. Just four short years later, the Royals now find themselves in one of the worst situations in baseball. They are coming off back-to-back 100-loss seasons with little room for optimism as they have the fifth-worst farm system in baseball, per Fangraphs.

 

But winning the World Series reinvigorated the Kansas City fanbase and they’re all about this team that won a title just four years ago, right? Well, not exactly. After winning the World Series in 2015, the Royals’ attendance numbers have dropped each season, culminating in the fifth-lowest attendance in baseball in 2019, averaging just 18,500 fans/game.

 

Heading into the 2020 season, the Minnesota Twins are at a crossroads. Do they go all in now like the Royals and throw big money at aging stars like Josh Donaldson and Hyun-Jin Ryu who may hamper their cap situation down the line? Do they trade away their top prospects in order to get an ace pitcher? Doing this might get them to the ALCS or World Series in the next year or two, but could put their long-term future in jeopardy. Or do they make some savvy mid-tier free agency moves and trade for a low-cost high-upside player who won’t require the prospect capital of an ace pitcher? Doing so might put a title more in doubt but will extend this window that is just opening for the Twins and provide five to ten more years of excitement like was provided by the Bomba Squad in 2019.

 

What do you think the Twins should do? Do you care if the Twins are irrelevant in five years as long as they win a title in the next two years? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments below!

 

MORE FROM TWINS DAILY

— Latest Twins coverage from our writers

— Recent Twins discussion in our forums

— Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email

 

Click here to view the article

[4twinsJA]

As in most things in life moderation is the answer. The Twins have difficulty attracking high level free agents. But should not overreact and sign aging stars to ovepriced contracts that extend beyond the player's effectiveness. Keep signing midlevel FAs like Cruz, Gonzolez, Pineda, to shorter contracts. Look for Twins to add one midrotation pitcher by trade and take a chance on an end of rotation starter. 

[theBOMisthebomb]

Give me a title no matter what the cost. If only it was guaranteed, unfortunately, real life doesn't work like that. Winning the Central or getting a wild card, then getting rocked in the playoffs immediately is not a satisfying season. I want another magical World Series victory ride, I don't care if they slip into oblivion for 5-10 years after that, give me the title. If they are terrible after hanging a championship banner, I don't care. I would still go to the games at Target Field and enjoy the atmosphere.

[adorduan]

They don't give parades for winning the AL central....  Ask a Vikings fan what they would give to win a Super bowl....

[SwainZag]

I'm curious to know if the Royals would have lost the 2nd year would it have been worth it? 2 trips to the WS and zero titles?  Since you cannot guarantee a championship, I would rather have a sustainable winning team who has a shot at the playoffs year in and year out without mortgaging the future.  It takes more than adding a whole bunch of talent in 1 year to win a title.

[Mike Sixel]

The Royals have drafted terribly. They aren't this bad because of a few trades. If they still had those players, they probably aren't great right now anyway. Is that better?

[Brandon]

I don't think signing those veterans I FA kept the Royals from resigning their core at free agency. The 5 year 80 million from the Brewers go Cain to leave, didn't Moustakas resign then get traded? They resigned Gordon and tried to resign their 1B to sizable contracts. Also you only name two prospects the Royals traded that won't make a team either. They went over 140 million in payroll to win. Shields also got a lot of money as a free agent.

 

If the Twins max out their payroll this year, cruz and Gonzales comes off the books freeing up 22 million. We also can trade or nontender Rosario. And Odorizzi 17.8 million is also off the books. And we have multiple prospects ready to step in. So signing an aging free agent can hurt, it shouldn't criple us from making moves and shortening our competitive window.

[NatteringNabob]

I think you go all in when you have a window open. Sustained mediocrity doesn’t really work and will eventually leave fans disenchanted and disengaged. A roster of Cain, Moustakas, Hosmer, Finnegan, and Manaea would have certainly done better than what Kansas City threw out last year but would it have even gotten a wild card or advanced into the playoffs? Perhaps, but it seems unlikely. It’s unavoidable that run would come to an end resulting in a rebuilding phase and some bad teams. It’s bound to happen to everyone sooner or later, it seems only the Yankees and Dodgers ilk can avoid the crash and rebuild. Take your chances and go for it when the window is open because you’ll be back to the rebuild sooner (probably much sooner) than later no matter how hard you try to avoid it.

[Dantes929]

I would prefer 10 seasons of 10% chance of winning it all to two seasons of 50% chance of winning it all.   I know it doesn't work that way wither but you get the idea.     If we signed Wheeler, Strasburg, Cole and Ryu for two years I think I would lose interest.    If we had drafted and retained them all I would probably feel differently.  

[sweetmusicviola16]

Lets just stand pat. Because, well we're already pretty good right?

[mikelink45]

I remember the series of one and out playoffs and all the anguish that was posted.  Would people have preferred one championship instead of all the playoffs?  Not me, but it sure seemed like it by what was written.

[D.C Twins]

A lot more than the current FO or ownership is apparently willing to give up and....spoiler alert!.....what I'm willing to give up doesn't matter

[Brandon Brooks]

There's every possibility that the Royals don't win anything in 2015, and plummet to where they are now without anything to show for it. That's the risk of going "all-in" -- nothing is guaranteed.

 

The Nationals had a worse record than all but two of last year's playoff teams, and they beat the 107-win Astros. Every time you get into the postseason, you have a chance to do something. More postseason appearances = more opportunities for the chips to fall your way.

 

An extended run of success would make Minnesota a much more attractive free agent destination than it is now. Which brings in higher-profile talent, which (theoretically) turns into higher-quality playoff showings.

 

I like our odds of winning the World Series more if we have five good division-winning teams next decade than if we have a 116-win team next season.

[D.C Twins]

 

 

I'm curious to know if the Royals would have lost the 2nd year would it have been worth it? 2 trips to the WS and zero titles?  Since you cannot guarantee a championship, I would rather have a sustainable winning team who has a shot at the playoffs year in and year out without mortgaging the future.  It takes more than adding a whole bunch of talent in 1 year to win a title.

My official, highly researched,advanced metrics based response.....

 

Booooooooriiiiiiiiiing

[Jham]

It's absurd to suggest that you can't balance the 2. We could make several moves and still be well within budget now and down the line.

 

Imagine if Taylor Rogers suddenly needed Tommy John (Greg Holland). Then Sano tore his ACL. (moose) Now imagine Berrios throwing 102 mph and building your rotation around that, but then he dies in a car crash. (Ventura). We probably trade everyone away and lose 100 too.

 

The 2016 Royals had some of the worst luck I've ever seen for a team.

 

You should probably at least mention their young controllable ace and world series hero dying as a part of their fall off, just to be fair...

[howeda7]

It's a false choice, MSP is not KC. But even if this was the choice, give me the WS every time.

[Winger2765]

Basically we are shoe horned into two choices; leverage long term success for short term success or hope that an above average team can manage to win against excellent teams. Unfortunately this is one of the reasons I hate baseball. Teams like the Yankees, Dodgers and Red Sox can afford to take bad contracts and eat them. Mid market teams like the Twins have to try to be sneaky and depend on luck. I can't really say which path is the correct one but I will say as a avid Wild fan that if I had to choose between Chicago's "short term" success and the Wild's "sustained success" I would probably choose the former over the latter especially when the latter comes with an first round exit every year. 

 

[h2oface]

Interesting thoughts in the article. I don't see it comparable, the Royals gambit and the Twins choices now. The Twins don't have to follow the model. The Royals won with contact from the hitters and a bullpen that made the last 3 innings toast for the opposition. The key is to power up the pitching now. Do what it takes with the resources. They passed on the money (surprise suprise) and they still have the propects, and treating people like assets to be traded like they aren't human. 

 

One World Series victory is worth 9 horrible seasons. That would give you 10 a Century, one each decade. You win 10% of the time. I would take that every decade. Like the 60s and the 70s and the aughts, and the teens. Yup. Go all in. You might still lose, but chances are you will lose if you don't go all in anyway, so go all in.

 

The 80s and 90s was a good time to be 25 to 45 and gloat with winning 2 World Series, and in 1991, be able to sport 2 in 5 years! 40% of the time. Nothing like it. The rest of the 90s..... oh well. The aughts was fun though. In it almost every year just to be crushed. (2006 should have been a championship. If only Liriano wouldn't have gotten hurt.) But that was nothing compared to Sandy Koufax game 7 of the 1965 World Series as a 10 year old that memorized the back of baseball cards. That team was magic. The 80's and 90s were better. Nothing like the pinnacle. 

 

Go all in. Some of everything. But absolutely get the pitching. If we draw the Yankees again, we will certainly need it.

[Boom Boom]

I do not look forward to once again discussing the merits of going "all in" in 2026 after five more three-and-out playoff appearances.

 

 

And there's no guarantee that the Twins will stay relevant by being risk-averse.

[Blackjack]

Good article!!!!

 

Reading the comments is also interesting, it summarizes the continual debate here on TD, go all in, trade prospects, sign big $ free agents, gotta have that World Series vs. trying to build for continual success.  Its actually getting kind of amusing.  It goes round and round....

[old nurse]

The mortgage of the future to win in the present is not proven. The trade for Cueto cost them no future value. What they gave up for Davis and Shields may not equal the production of them as Royals  plus Soler.  The players cited as signed were gone before the star contracts came due. Sean Mamaea was not going to carry a team from bottom feeder to contender. 

[adorduan]

Very few teams, if any, with a 130 million dollar payroll or less are going to have sustained success. The good players get expensive and it's over. So somehow this FO is going to find a magic formula to avoid that?  BS.  Give my a championship. You know what sticks in my mind? Hrbek and Gladden hitting a grand slams.  Viola and Morris pitching great game 7's. Puckett's heroics in game 6. You know what i remember about the decade from 2000-2010?  not much....

[Darius]

Are we seriously having a conversation about whether a team should do what it can to attempt to win a World Series, or actively do the opposite?

 

And people actually advocating that the Twins shouldn’t make serious attempts at winning a World Series? Because they are worried about losing out on some marginal revenues 5 years from now because they traded a player?

 

My God, is this the culmination of a Twilight Zone-esque practical joke that this website has been setting up? I mean, as a fan of any team, this conversation is insane.

 

The Pohlad Stockholm Syndrome has gotten so bad that I have to repeat this: People are now opposed to the Twins attempting to win a World Series because they are concerned about what revenue numbers a half-decade from now might look like because of it.

 

Why isn’t winning a World Series, then trying to win another an option? Why is the default, “well if we win a World Series we are required to slink back into a hole of futile payroll numbers for a couple of decades?

 

Seriously, what the hell is this website even doing here, if this is the point we’ve reached? Why do any of us even care anymore?

 

I have to Go back up to the top make sure I’m not being trolled by Randball....

[JDubs]

I get the calls for patience, but this article is really cherry-picking the data here. Sure, the Royals gave up two blue chip prospects, but let's check in and see how they're doing now. Manaea looks like he might be a good player, but Finnegan has a career ERA of 4.11 and a career WHIP of 1.393, building up 2.7 WAR in 5 seasons. That's not a trade that hurt the Royals, but screams to me of another case of Twins fans way overestimating the value of prospects.

 

But the bigger problem is that this article posits you have to go on an extended losing streak if you trade for high-impact talent (not at all a given) and ignores how often the Twins go on extended losing streaks without ever acquiring high-impact talent or winning anything of importance. Perhaps you missed the past decade of Twins baseball? You know, when they lost 99, 96, 96, and 103 games in various seasons? I'd sure rather go all in and win something real and then become a basement dweller for years than go just in enough to win the Central and get swept out of the playoffs and then become a basement dweller for years.

[USAFChief]

The Twins have developed a handful of effective starters in 3 decades, but if we hold on with clenched fingers to THIS set of prospects, we'll be set up for long term success!! We're going to have top notch pitching coming out of our ears, and it'll line up perfectly with the endless supply of highly successful position players!

 

And the money saved now will allow a splash or two THEN...maybe when we're coming off a 100 win season, and have obvious needs!!

 

Slow and steady!

[cardsfan]

I'm curious to know if the Royals would have lost the 2nd year would it have been worth it? 2 trips to the WS and zero titles? Since you cannot guarantee a championship, I would rather have a sustainable winning team who has a shot at the playoffs year in and year out without mortgaging the future. It takes more than adding a whole bunch of talent in 1 year to win a title.

As a Cards fan I agree. The Cards have 1 losing season since 2000 and in that season on Sept. 7, 2007 they were one game out before fading badly.

 

What the secret of the Cardinals success? Managing starting pitching turnover. Overcoming pitching injuries. Depth. No other division team when on sustained run until the zvubs did recently.

 

Luck is important as well. Cards could have been more lucky they would have won another title and championship. Look how bad luck has kept the Dodgers without a championship since 1988.

[lukeduke1980]

This FO should be able to rebuild quicker because of their ability to identify and develop pitching talent. 

 

If you give up some top talent in a trade there should likely be a plethora ready at Single A ready to bubble up and over. 

[Number3]

Not only did the Washington Nationals not go "all in" in 2019, but they went "all out" when they let Harper go. The Phillies  went "all in" and I don't think they made the playoffs. Or maybe they did win the World Series and the Nationals winning it was a mirage. I would be very happy to see the Twins win the Central again in 2020 and then not go into a coma just because a team has NY on its unis in the playoffs.

[Tomj14]

 

I'm curious to know if the Royals would have lost the 2nd year would it have been worth it? 2 trips to the WS and zero titles?  Since you cannot guarantee a championship, I would rather have a sustainable winning team who has a shot at the playoffs year in and year out without mortgaging the future.  It takes more than adding a whole bunch of talent in 1 year to win a title.

You don't have to be curious, the Royals won, there is no if they would have lost, because they didn't.

The Cubs won trading away Torres, the Houston won trading away prospects, The Red Sox won trading away Moncada, the Nats won spending over 75 million on three pitchers.

[mikelink45]

I am a prospect guy.  My only frustration with the free agent market is that the FO gave us false expectations.  I am fine with 1B or 3B coming from the minor leagues and the same with the rotation spots.  Who among those young players has the best chance, the highest upside, the most immediate impact?  Time for a new set of essays.