Avoiding disaster

[Vanimal46]

34 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

No one is saying don't try. No one. There seems to be very little nuance in the world anymore. 

How should it be interpreted expressing a desire to lose more games than win? 

[Dodecahedron]

19 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Some teams have absolutely decided not to invest in chasing marginal MLB wins, with improved draft position as one of the benefits. Of course, this is a longer-range strategy, over a several year period, in the face of a longer-range negative outlook. Not a switch you'd throw (or even be able to throw) after a disappointing half-season like the 2021 Twins.

Maybe a front office has decided that, but the last I checked "teams" are the guys on the field.  If you are Taylor Rogers, what do you get by tanking a year for the team to get a higher draft pick?  That's right, a lower market value for yourself, a lower salary for yourself.  The players on this team get nothing by coasting through the rest of the year.  Draft pick order means nothing to them, they have no skin in that game.

[TheLeviathan]

Just now, Vanimal46 said:

How should it be interpreted expressing a desire to lose more games than win? 

The desire is to have the right mindset where wins are extremely insignificant compared to other things better inclined towards the future.  And no, I won't be complaining.  They already stink and stink to watch, I want some hope that they won't next year.  Not empty wins from JA Happ.

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

Maybe a front office has decided that, but the last I checked "teams" are the guys on the field.  If you are Taylor Rogers, what do you get by tanking a year for the team to get a higher draft pick?  That's right, a lower market value for yourself, a lower salary for yourself.  The players on this team get nothing by coasting through the rest of the year.  Draft pick order means nothing to them, they have no skin in that game.

Again, NO ONE is saying the players shouldn't try. Good straw man though.....

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

How should it be interpreted expressing a desire to lose more games than win? 

The season should be used for developing Winder and other younger players so that next year is kick ass, that's how. Give Gordon a legit shot to show if he's finally living up to his draft spot. Give every chance to AK, Larnah, and Jeffers. Bring up some RPs from AAA. The point, imo, is not to play mediocre veterans with no future here, just to win an extra game or two. IF it was, I assume some would argue they Twins should deal prospects for veterans to eke out more wins this year, no?

[Mike Sixel]

To be clear, I don't think they should bench every veteran (and they can't anyway). And I don't think they should call up guys that are not ready. No one is arguing that either.

Indeed, I'd like Celestino and Rortverdt to be in the minors, because they are not ready. 

[a-wan]

49 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

The difference between 73 wins and 80 losses can literally be the difference in 6th and 12th.  Being a 73 win and a 78 win team is also not nearly tangible enough to decide anything for a free agent if we're being blunt.  That point isn't a variable that is going to matter.

It's about mentality.  "All out" and "finish strong" are bad ideas.  "Emphasize player development" and "let players struggle and work through it" and "sell what makes sense to sell" are good ideas.  The disaster already happened.  This about rebuilding, not trying to decorate our burned out condo so we feel better about ourselves.

This year the idea of developing is even more important. With almost every prospect not playing a real game in a calendar year. Getting through the year without massive injury numbers in the minors will be huge for next year. Trading Berrios is the marker about what the front office thinks about next year. He goes good sign the FO thinks next year is sunk too. Or someone gives up the moon for Berios...

[Otto von Ballpark]

5 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

The difference between 73 wins and 80 losses can literally be the difference in 6th and 12th.  Being a 73 win and a 78 win team is also not nearly tangible enough to decide anything for a free agent if we're being blunt.  That point isn't a variable that is going to matter.

It's about mentality.  "All out" and "finish strong" are bad ideas.  "Emphasize player development" and "let players struggle and work through it" and "sell what makes sense to sell" are good ideas.  The disaster already happened.  This about rebuilding, not trying to decorate our burned out condo so we feel better about ourselves.

I feel like the parameters here are morphing around. Has 73 wins gotten the 6th overall pick recently? It's taken 70 or fewer wins every full year dating back to 2015 (and 4 of those 5 were under 70). Current pace for 2021 would require no more than 70 wins from the Twins since they lose any tiebreaker, but that assumes none of Miami, Colorado, or Detroit loses any ground over their remaining games too. I think it's safe to expect the Twins would need to finish with 68 wins or fewer to have a good shot at picking 6th in 2022. You can still sign FA coming off 68 wins but the difference between 68 and 78 wins could be pretty big to the most desirable FA -- they probably have similar offers from teams who don't need a 20+ win turnaround to be competitive in 2022.

If we don't want to talk about the 6th pick anymore, that's fine too, but that was the discussion upthread that I was responding to.

I don't disagree with the rest of your take, although I'd point out those ideas are far from mutually exclusive. For example, I don't know that anyone is particularly set on keeping Simmons, even though the alternative (Gordon) is unlikely to start in 2022 regardless. But similar fresh SP opportunities might exist without trading both Happ and Pineda. And Cruz is in a weird spot --  would it be terrible to ask him about an extension, if trade offers are underwhelming? That's less about going "all out" for 2021 and more about setting us up for 2022.

[Otto von Ballpark]

32 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

Maybe a front office has decided that, but the last I checked "teams" are the guys on the field.

And I don't think you'd get any disagreement there. No one here (or anywhere, to my knowlege) has suggested that individual players have tanked or should tank.

[TheLeviathan]

10 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

I feel like the parameters here are morphing around. Has 73 wins gotten the 6th overall pick recently? It's taken 70 or fewer wins every full year dating back to 2015 (and 4 of those 5 were under 70). Current pace for 2021 would require no more than 70 wins from the Twins since they lose any tiebreaker, but that assumes none of Miami, Colorado, or Detroit loses any ground over their remaining games too. I think it's safe to expect the Twins would need to finish with 68 wins or fewer to have a good shot at picking 6th in 2022. You can still sign FA coming off 68 wins but the difference between 68 and 78 wins could be pretty big to the most desirable FA -- they probably have similar offers from teams who don't need a 20+ win turnaround to be competitive in 2022.

If we don't want to talk about the 6th pick anymore, that's fine too, but that was the discussion upthread that I was responding to.

I don't disagree with the rest of your take, although I'd point out those ideas are far from mutually exclusive. For example, I don't know that anyone is particularly set on keeping Simmons, even though the alternative (Gordon) is unlikely to start in 2022 regardless. But similar fresh SP opportunities might exist without trading both Happ and Pineda. And Cruz is in a weird spot --  would it be terrible to ask him about an extension, if trade offers are underwhelming? That's less about going "all out" for 2021 and more about setting us up for 2022.

That difference in wins and where you pick is rarely dramatic.  In 2019 the team who picked 4th and 9th were separated by 3 losses.  5 losses between 6th and 11th in 2018.  In 2017 it was 6 losses between 6th and 11th.  So my point stands - a handful of losses can cause you to topple a handful of spots in draft position.  

And no, a 78 win team does not have some FA advantage.  That's silly, let's stop that completely unprovable idea.  If a FA is considering offers from two teams that couldn't hit .500, the actual number of wins they had the year previously is utterly irrelevant compared to much more impactful variables.  If it even registers at all.

[Dodecahedron]

19 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

And I don't think you'd get any disagreement there. No one here (or anywhere, to my knowlege) has suggested that individual players have tanked or should tank.

Yes, I see Mike pointing this out as well, even pulling the Straw Man out of the closet.  It's good to see him again.  

We can agree that no one is using the words, "The Twins players should stop playing to win."  Yet, this is precisely what is being advocated.  I agree you're not saying it, but this is the only way to vie, opine, or work toward a last place finish.  There is no Professor Snape in the stands who can cast spells to cause the Twins to lose whenever they try to win*.  If the Twins want to shoot for a last place finish, you and I know what it takes to make that happen.

If we are talking theoretically (ha), then fine, but let's say that, but hey ... why do we need to discuss what happens if the Twins finish last?  We all know the draft pick implications already.

*Not trying to spoil anything.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Dodecahedron said:

Yes, I see Mike pointing this out as well, even pulling the Straw Man out of the closet.  It's good to see him again.  

We can agree that no one is using the words, "The Twins players should stop playing to win."  Yet, this is precisely what is being advocated.  I agree you're not saying it, but this is the only way to vie, opine, or work toward for a last place finish.  There is Professor Snape in the stands who can cast spells to cause the Twins to lose whenever they try to win.

No. No one is saying the players shouldn't try. No one. Not one person. We are actually very clear what we mean. 

Are you suggesting that the Twins deal every prospect in an effort to win every game they can this year, when you say they shouldn't "tank"? Of course not, and no one is saying you are.....just as we are not saying the players shouldn't try. 

[Dodecahedron]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

No. No one is saying the players shouldn't try. No one. Not one person. We are actually very clear what we mean. 

Are you suggesting that the Twins deal every prospect in an effort to win every game they can this year, when you say they shouldn't "tank"? Of course not, and no one is saying you are.....just as we are not saying the players shouldn't try. 

Yes, the Twins should continue to try hard, but they should also work for that top draft pick.  Wink-wink, I guess?

Also, driving the speed limit is what we should all do at all times -- never break the law! -- but I want you here in 5 minutes and you are 15 minutes away.  Wink-wink.

[nicksaviking]

21 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Yeah, if we had a shot at a top 5 pick I say go for it and tank. Mid 70s wins probably gets us in 10-15 range so might as well try to win instead. 

Also, top five pick at minimum puts people on notice. 

My mind is still not made up on who, if anyone should be retained, but the W/L record the past two years wasn't without red flags. I don't want a second half rebound that puts the team close too .500 just so the guys who should be scrutinized instead get a pat on the back.

[Number3]

If nothing else they can play the rest of this season by trying to get used to winning again. If they can't make the playoffs themselves I hope they can mess up a couple of other team's aspirations. Being a spoiler can be fun and helps looking forward to 2022. Everyone do their best to improve their individual play.

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, Dodecahedron said:

Yes, the Twins should continue to try hard, but they should also work for that top draft pick.  Wink-wink, I guess?

Also, driving the speed limit is what we should all do at all times -- never break the law! -- but I want you here in 5 minutes and you are 15 minutes away.  Wink-wink.

Or, more accurately, I'm going to make it to your house safely either way but I don't care if I get there in 5 minutes or 15 minutes because there is no real urgency.  The urgency is gone.  I can't get there in 5 minutes if you gave me a warp engine.  The damage is already done.  So I'm going to get some errands done that could help me save some time next time we're in an urgent situation.  

I'll still drive safely and responsibly.  I'm not stripping the tires for wagon wheels and cutting the brake line, I'm simply resetting the priorities because there is no more urgency.  I can't be ready this time, but I might next time if I take some steps towards it rather than driving like a bat out of hell when it's already too late.

Also, it sorta makes me (the driver) a little more cognizant about how I got myself in a situation where I couldn't get to your house in 5 minutes when it was urgent.  Hopefully next time you want me there in 5 minutes I'll be better prepared for it.  No better time to be working at that than now!  You know, rather than rushing off after something that was already a failure/disaster.

[Otto von Ballpark]

29 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

That difference in wins and where you pick is rarely dramatic.  In 2019 the team who picked 4th and 9th were separated by 3 losses.  5 losses between 6th and 11th in 2018.  In 2017 it was 6 losses between 6th and 11th.  So my point stands - a handful of losses can cause you to topple a handful of spots in draft position.  

Certainly team records can finish close together. But where they bunch up can be different in different years (note you cited a different range for the 2018 season / 2019 draft -- and actually I think it was 4th and 8th separated by 3.5 games, as the 9th worst team was actually 9.5 ahead of the 4th worst in 2018). And that bunching is obviously outside any individual team's control. I doubt 2022 draft position is on the Twins radar right now, in terms of influencing 2021 decisions in either direction.

53 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

And no, a 78 win team does not have some FA advantage.  That's silly, let's stop that completely unprovable idea.  If a FA is considering offers from two teams that couldn't hit .500, the actual number of wins they had the year previously is utterly irrelevant compared to much more impactful variables.  If it even registers at all.

No, a 78 win team won't have a noticeable advantage in free agency over a 75 win team, or a 73 win team, etc. That's why I was specifically comparing it to 68, since that was the likely target for the 6th pick, while Fangraphs projects us at 77 wins.

It's difficult to isolate most variables in free agency but that doesn't mean they don't exist. There's no bright line, but approaching a 10-win gap will be something that free agents notice -- nothing unique to Nelson Cruz about that. The lesser team can still land FA, but perhaps they have to overpay, or settle for a lesser choice, and/or make a compelling case as a team on the rise.

Of course wooing free agents isn't a reason to start Happ over a ready Winder. Those kind of moves can't even cause a 10 win gap at this point -- Fangraphs suggests more like 3 if we trade all of our pending FA and insert replacement level guys in their place. But as a fan, it's among the reasons I don't mind a balanced approach to the remaining 2021 season -- looking at our roster, there's no reason we can't develop talent and set ourselves up best for 2022 while simultaneously improving our 2021 record.

 

[LA Vikes Fan]

I have to say I don't think this thread is really focusing on the most important thing the Twins should be doing for the rest of 2021 - Developing Players To Contribute In 2022.  The rest of this year shouldn't be about the overall won/loss record. It should be about developing players that are MLB ready and identifying whether certain players fit into that category. Wins and losses will be what they will be. Developing players is really the way to evaluate whether the 2nd half of 2020 was successful. The way to make that evaluation is to look at the end of the year and see who has developed enough to be considered a solid contributor for the next season. Winning 65, 70, 75, 80 or whatever games just doesn't matter.

So what you do? You definitely trade Simmons, Happ, Pineda, and Robles. I would trade Donaldson and Cruz if we can get an appropriate return and, in Donaldson's case, we need to be willing to add a hitting prospect and/or cash to cover his salary so that we can get a good pitching prospect. I would trade Colome if anyone will take him, but I don't think anyone will. I would not trade Berrios, Buxton or Rogers unless the return is huge. Try to re-sign them and, if you can't, trade them over the winter.  I know that means a lesser return but I think keeping at least 2 of those 3 (one being Berrios) is key to this team being able to contend for the next 2 to 5 years.

The other thing you do is play the guys you think are ready or close tp being ready. That means Kirilloff and Larnach play essentially every day. Jeffers and Gordon get significant playing time and at bats,  same for Miranda if we trade Donaldson. On the pitching side, Ober, Winder and I think Barnes pitch every 5th day unless they really stink for 3 or 4 starts in a row. Vasquez, Hamilton and Cano (and maybe Moran) get put in the MLB bullpen and used like regular middle relievers to see what they can do. No babying the young pitching, they pitch like they're expected to contribute. Trading the guys above should open up enough slots to allow playing time for these guys.  

That's with this year should be all about. To tank not to tank, that really isn't the question.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

I have to say I don't think this thread is really focusing on the most important thing the Twins should be doing for the rest of 2021 - Developing Pl.........

That's with this year should be all about. To tank not to tank, that really isn't the question.

Which is all I'm saying.....concentrate on preparing for next year, not on getting to 78 instead of 72 wins.....

[TheLeviathan]

22 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Certainly team records can finish close together. But where they bunch up can be different in different years (note you cited a different range for the 2018 season / 2019 draft -- and actually I think it was 4th and 8th separated by 3.5 games, as the 9th worst team was actually 9.5 ahead of the 4th worst in 2018). And that bunching is obviously outside any individual team's control. I doubt 2022 draft position is on the Twins radar right now, in terms of influencing 2021 decisions in either direction.

 

Do you need more examples to show how a few games can move a team significantly in the draft order or are you just stuck in a perpetual state of missing the forest for the trees?  You pick a year and I can show how a few games, inside the top 15 picks, can make a significant difference in draft position.    2012 you say?  4 losses between pick 4 and pick 10.  5 losses between picks 5 and 10 in 2009.  You throw a dart and I'll make the point again and again: a handful of extra wins can be a significant disadvantage.  That is but one side effect of going "all out" to have a better last two months.  It's a bad priority with real side effects that can harm the team.

[Rosterman]

Are the Twins better off if they just let some potential free agents walk, via release, after August 1? Simmons, Colome, Happ? for example. Can they actually get anything for Cruz, Pineda? You have to judge the need to get innings and at bats for what you are and will be paying, and he need to see players for seasons to come. Will you end up being worse or better?

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

How should it be interpreted expressing a desire to lose more games than win? 

I honestly don’t see what’s so hard to understand on each side of this argument. No one I’ve seen is advocating for the Twins to be bad, they’re advocating for young players to play, which MAY result in the Twins being bad in the short term.

There’s a country mile of difference of putting an eye on the future and accepting the possibility of being bad versus “trying to be bad”. 

[TwinsDr2021]

28 minutes ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

The other thing you do is play the guys you think are ready or close tp being ready. That means Kirilloff and Larnach play essentially every day. Jeffers and Gordon get significant playing time and at bats,  same for Miranda if we trade Donaldson. On the pitching side, Ober, Winder and I think Barnes pitch every 5th day unless they really stink for 3 or 4 starts in a row. Vasquez, Hamilton and Cano (and maybe Moran) get put in the MLB bullpen and used like regular middle relievers to see what they can do. No babying the young pitching, they pitch like they're expected to contribute. Trading the guys above should open up enough slots to allow playing time for these guys.  

That's with this year should be all about. To tank not to tank, that really isn't the question.

To me trading Donaldson's is giving up on next year, unless some team offers a great prospect for him, trading him to save money or pretending because Miranda has somehow pushed him out isn't going to fly with the fans (at least the casual fans that go to the game with their family)

The other problem with running three rookie pitchers out there every 5th day is that you need relief pitchers to pitch 4 or 5 innings in each of those starts, that is a lot to ask a bunch of relief pitchers. Take Ober for example, all but one of his 8 starts has required 4 other pitchers and in 3 of them it has taken 6. (the one that only took 4 was the game shoemaker gave up 8 runs)

My thoughts are the FO and Rocco have to get together and design a game plan to get these minor league pitchers innings in the majors, Maybe something like Berrios, (Ober - 3, Barnes - 3), Maeda, (Happ - 4, Winder-3), Pineada. Or something that runs these guy back and forth to St. Paul.

Also is seems like Rocco manages the game like he wants the number 1 pick.

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

So what you do? You definitely trade Simmons, Happ, Pineda, and Robles. I would trade Donaldson and Cruz if we can get an appropriate return and, in Donaldson's case, we need to be willing to add a hitting prospect and/or cash to cover his salary so that we can get a good pitching prospect. I would trade Colome if anyone will take him, but I don't think anyone will. I would not trade Berrios, Buxton or Rogers unless the return is huge.

Interestingly though, by setting a higher threshold of return on Cruz (as well as players with 2022+ control), you're really only selling the worst-performing veterans.

Fangraphs rest-of-season WAR projections:

Simmons 1.1
Pineda 0.7
Happ 0.5
Robles 0.1
Colomé 0.0

That's only 2.4 WAR now, which could be less than 2 by trade deadline day.

That means impact on 2021 W-L record could be minimal, and improved W-L goals can still be achievable alongside 2022 development. Which gets to my point upthread, that our goals are not mutually exclusive!

1 hour ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

No babying the young pitching, they pitch like they're expected to contribute. Trading the guys above should open up enough slots to allow playing time for these guys.  

But why push the pitching in a lost season? Isn't the point of "babying" to evaluate and develop toward 2022? And with Ober's career innings, and the missed minor league season in 2020, I can't say I disagree. "Babying" could allow us to evaluate/develop more pitchers in MLB too -- could even be an opportunity for a 6-man rotation.

[LA Vikes Fan]

HI Otto, I agree that our goals are not mutually exclusive and I wouldn't trade Cruz or Donaldson unless there was some real upside in the return. I agree that we need some veteran presence to help the younger players improve and grow. To me, a big part of trading the guys I listed is to provide opportunities, not to get some great return. What I mean by not "babying" the pitchers is to let them pitch in stressful situations and not just use them for mop up and blowout duty. I actually like the idea of a 6 man rotation as long as Ober, Winder and Barnes are 3 of the 6.  That does put stress on the bullpen but I think it's manageable. Give Ober, Barnes and Winder the chance to go 6 innings a start if they can, and pitch the young bullpen guys in middle inning tight situations, not just when the score is lopsided.

I think you and I are not really very far apart. I would like to trade the guys on expiring contracts that aren't likely to be back next year and create opportunity. The return isn't irrelevant but it won't be much more than lottery tickets. I wouldn't trade the others unless the return is good and I wouldn't trade Berrios, Buxton or Rogers unless the return is outstanding. Donaldson is the toughest call for me because I can see that trading his contract might free up $$ to re-sign Berrios, Buxton and/or Rogers (and open up 3B for Arraez, Miranda and/or Sano), but I'm a little concerned that they trade him and then can't re-sign those three so the team is weaker as a result both short and medium term. The hardest decision is what to do with guys like Simmons, Colome, and Happ if there is no market and no one will take the contracts. To DFA or not to DFA? That would then be the question. I don't know the answer (probably no). 

[Brock Beauchamp]

25 minutes ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

Give Ober, Barnes and Winder the chance to go 6 innings a start if they can, and pitch the young bullpen guys in middle inning tight situations, not just when the score is lopsided.

You have to choose: Do you want 6-7 weeks of Ober going 5-7 innings or 8-10 weeks of Ober going 4-5 innings?

Because it has to be one or the other. The Twins are not going to run Ober up to 130+ IP in 2021. They're carefully managing his innings to keep him on the field longer. Perhaps you disagree but this isn't a situation where an oft-injured pitcher who didn't pitch in 2020 is going to be ramped up to an MLB workload in a single season, especially given the lack of contention. That would be wildly irresponsible to an arm we want to see contribute for several more years.

[Mike Sixel]

6 innings a start? That's more than most starts this year.....across the entire league.

[TheLeviathan]

2 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

You have to choose: Do you want 6-7 weeks of Ober going 5-7 innings or 8-10 weeks of Ober going 4-5 innings?

Because it has to be one or the other. The Twins are not going to run Ober up to 130+ IP in 2021. They're carefully managing his innings to keep him on the field longer. Perhaps you disagree but this isn't a situation where an oft-injured pitcher who didn't pitch in 2020 is going to be ramped up to an MLB workload in a single season, especially given the lack of contention. That would be wildly irresponsible to an arm we want to see contribute for several more years.

I agree on Ober's usage, but if we change "6" to "5" in his post does it significantly change the idea?  I think it was more just to let these kids pitch at some point.

(Assuming the club feels it developmentally ok of course)

[LA Vikes Fan]

3 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

I agree on Ober's usage, but if we change "6" to "5" in his post does it significantly change the idea?  I think it was more just to let these kids pitch at some point.

(Assuming the club feels it developmentally ok of course)

That really was the point. The idea is to let thee guys get into and (hopefully) work out of jams and not be pulled at the first sign of trouble. I understand the issue with Ober's innings; probably less of an issue with Barnes and Winder. Also, we can use the 10 day Dl properly to give breaks. The whole concept is to let these guys pitch as "real" MLB rotation or bullpen members to see what they can do. Some of it will be ugly but better to get through that this year than next year.  

[Greglw3]

On 7/12/2021 at 4:30 PM, Mike Sixel said:

Simmons has been below replacement level this year. I'm, frankly, shocked. 

He's been a huge disappointment. Better we hadn’t signed him and played Polanco at SS with Arraez at 2B.