Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
9 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Are you confident they will replace his production of 3 WAR through FA? I don’t. 

Have you, and others who are amongst the "trading Berrios automatically means you'll have worse pitching next year" crowd, seen Moneyball? If so, do you remember the scene where they're talking about replacing Giambi? If not, the scene is basically FO personnel, scouts, etc. discussing their chances of competing the following season and how screwed they are cuz they can't get anyone better than Giambi. Billy Beane straight up says "we can't replace him," and he's right, just like you're right the Twins likely can't replace Berrios' production at his price tag in 1 signing or with 1 callup. But they can improve the staff as a whole.

The entire offense is back (minus Cruz who wasn't a sure thing resign with the NL likely getting the DH, and can still be resigned anyways). If you believe, as I do, that this offense can compete for a division title you're really only worried about the pitching. So the Twins have gone from Berrios, Maeda, Rogers, Duffey, Alcala, their incumbent prospects, and about 40M to spend to Maeda, Rogers, Duffey, Alcala, their incumbent prospects, 2 pitching prospects that should debut in the next couple weeks from the Rays, SWR, and about 50M to spend (plus Martin for the offense). The question is what's the difference in those 2 situations and are the Twins in a better position to build a staff for 2022 now than 2 weeks ago.

Replacing Berrios with 1 other 3 WAR pitcher for 10M is going to be real hard to do. (I'm not going to look up the actual Twins pitcher's WAR numbers for this exercise, sorry) But replacing the negative (presumably) WAR from many others on the staff with significantly better options is more than reasonable. The goal isn't it replace Berrios 1 for 1, it's to build a better staff. Take them from a 0 WAR staff to a 5 WAR staff (numbers completely made up, but the point remains). The Twins have given themselves more ways to improve for next year (and the future) now than they had 2 weeks ago. Not sure why that wouldn't have been the goal for everyone who cares about the Twins.

It sucks seeing Berrios leave. But if the pitching staff as a whole is able to be improved by a couple of the prospects filling some minor roles (mid-relief, #5 starter type roles) and the Twins can sign some veteran arms with their 50M I don't see any reason why they couldn't be a significantly better staff next year even without Berrios. Just like the A's replacing Giambi, the Twins can't replace Berrios 1 for 1, but they can in the aggregate. Now the FO just has to not screw it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@chpettit19 Moneyball was a worthy strategy when they were the only ones doing it. Now every team emulates each other, minus Colorado and St. Louis I suppose. 

In this mini contention window, we needed someone better than Berrios to put us over the top. Now we don’t have him, and still need someone better than him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

@chpettit19 Moneyball was a worthy strategy when they were the only ones doing it. Now every team emulates each other, minus Colorado and St. Louis I suppose. 

In this mini contention window, we needed someone better than Berrios to put us over the top. Now we don’t have him, and still need someone better than him. 

So improving the team as a whole instead of focusing on replacing an individual player 1 for 1 no longer works you're saying? The Twins were 1 pitcher away from being pushed "over the top?" What do you consider the top? The World Series? If we'd traded for Clevinger last year when he went to SD we would've won the World Series? We'll have to agree to disagree there.

Why do you think every team emulates each other? Why do you think the Yankees and Dodgers build the same way as the Rays and Indians (but then keep veterans on huge deals cuz of the $ difference)? Your stance seems to be "every major league org (other than Colorado and St Louis) are doing it wrong." Do you think 1 starter better than Berrios would've made this 2021 Twins team a contender? Or do you think the pitching staff as a whole was subpar and they need to improve the overall talent, not just replace Shoemaker with FA Stud X? Because that's all I'm saying. It's not about replacing Berrios 1 for 1, it's about improving the aggregate performance of the pitching staff. Not sure why that's a crazy idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

I think ashbury and mike answered this well,...

1. Berrios has made it abundantly clear he isn't interested in an extension.  Short of "Pay me 5 years and 200M or

Imagine having a pitcher so good that he’s confident in making a lot of money in free agency a year and a half down the road.

But I hadn’t heard what you guys are hearing about Berrios asking for $40 million a year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

You really think that last part? That we don't understand winning matters? 

Not all commenters here, but some, yes.

Pitchers and players are instead though of as assets and resources (which is fine for fans on a discussion board) and even Thad Levine used the phrase “expiring assets” in an interview I heard recently.

So I do get the sense that what happens on the field is secondary for some people. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

Imagine having a pitcher so good that he’s confident in making a lot of money in free agency a year and a half down the road.

But I hadn’t heard what you guys are hearing about Berrios asking for $40 million a year.

 

He has said everything but that.  He has made it crystal clear he simply isn't interested in an extension.  That is a factual, vital part of evaluating the situation.

I love Jose.  I'm sad our situation forced these choices.  But I can't remove the context and then judge the move fairly.  Not once in this thread has it felt like you fairly weighed the context/realities of the situation.  It's ok to be pissed or worn down or sad....but it's leading to completely unfair arguments born of fantasy rather than reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

You really think that last part? That we don't understand winning matters? 

Oh not all commenters, but some, yes definitely I do feel downplay the winning aspect, and what winning can do for the fan base, and what two back to back losing seasons might also do. Thanks for asking.

Pitchers and players are thought of as assets and resources (and I don’t mind when fans on a discussion board do this) but I heard Thad Levine call some players “expiring assets” in a radio interview last week. So I have to wonder if that’s how they actually think about the players on the roster up there in the executive offices. 

It’s as if what happens on the field and in the clubhouse is secondary. Yes that is the impression I get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

He has said everything but that.  He has made it crystal clear he simply isn't interested in an extension.  That is a factual, vital part of evaluating the situation.

I love Jose.  I'm sad our situation forced these choices.  But I can't remove the context and then judge the move fairly.  Not once in this thread has it felt like you fairly weighed the context/realities of the situation.  It's ok to be pissed or worn down or sad....but it's leading to completely unfair arguments born of fantasy rather than reality.

I have weighed the pros and cons of both sides, even if it looks like I am only playing one side. There is plenty of support for your side being expressed in this thread. 

This is a tough situation, and one entirely of their own making. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

You’re missing my point. Trading Berrios eliminates 2022 from any potential of being enjoyable and competitive. We’re now multiple years away from being good. 

You could be every bit as wrong as my take on the situation.  You have NO IDEA, NONE.  Making alot of assumptions, all negative.   Ohh and the team I love and follow has never been about ONE player.  If that's the case, become a Blue Jays fan.  In essence, that is what you are saying. Berrios is more important than the rest of the team.  He is an above average starting pitcher, he is not Johan Santana, not even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

That’s my concern right now… 2022. Sports is an entertainment first business, and the team won’t be competitive/entertaining for the foreseeable future. The next 2 months for sure are going to be unwatchable. 

Competitive and Entertaining may be synonyms for you, but they aren't for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Twinsoholic said:

La Z Boy noted above about “getting Big Mike locked up” in a new contract. The other day I read that Pineda hoped he would not be trade—said he liked pitching as a Twins player. I wonder if his agent and Falvine have an understanding about a new contract for him. That could explain why he was not traded. Of course, other reasons could be he is hurt or teams were trying to low-ball the Twins. I am glad Mike is still on the Twins. I like players, particularly starting pitchers, who want to stay on the team. 

Of course, he can still be traded (unless MLB changed the non-waiver rules in the past year too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shaitan said:

Of course, he can still be traded (unless MLB changed the non-waiver rules in the past year too).

There is no more august revocable waiver wire trade period anymore if that is what you’re referring to. Pineda will be with the Twins for the rest off the year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Oxtung said:

There is no more august revocable waiver wire trade period anymore if that is what you’re referring to. Pineda will be with the Twins for the rest off the year. 

Oh, wow. Missed that. Felt like it was weird and confusing, but also Manfred has to change everything, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 1:32 PM, Vanimal46 said:

That’s my concern right now… 2022. Sports is an entertainment first business, and the team won’t be competitive/entertaining for the foreseeable future. The next 2 months for sure are going to be unwatchable. 

Many here don't understand this move because they are asking the wrong question.  They are asking how can we be better in 2022 when they should be asking what is the most effective / highest probability strategy to get back to contention for as may years as possible.  Would you assess the relative merit of an investment strategy or business opportunity based only one the first year?

Players are quite commonly out for half or all of a year.  Do those teams become unwatchable?  Are there no possible replacements for Berrios in free agency next year.  Do I need to go through the list of equivalent or higher profile free agents that were not retained by their teams in the past decade?   

This was a very good week for the Twins in terms of getting back to contention.  Hell, what's to say they don't sign him in 2022.  As I said, I doubt the odds of that happening changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Have you, and others who are amongst the "trading Berrios automatically means you'll have worse pitching next year" crowd, seen Moneyball? If so, do you remember the scene where they're talking about replacing Giambi? If not, the scene is basically FO personnel, scouts, etc. discussing their chances of competing the following season and how screwed they are cuz they can't get anyone better than Giambi. Billy Beane straight up says "we can't replace him," and he's right, just like you're right the Twins likely can't replace Berrios' production at his price tag in 1 signing or with 1 callup. But they can improve the staff as a whole.

The entire offense is back (minus Cruz who wasn't a sure thing resign with the NL likely getting the DH, and can still be resigned anyways). If you believe, as I do, that this offense can compete for a division title you're really only worried about the pitching. So the Twins have gone from Berrios, Maeda, Rogers, Duffey, Alcala, their incumbent prospects, and about 40M to spend to Maeda, Rogers, Duffey, Alcala, their incumbent prospects, 2 pitching prospects that should debut in the next couple weeks from the Rays, SWR, and about 50M to spend (plus Martin for the offense). The question is what's the difference in those 2 situations and are the Twins in a better position to build a staff for 2022 now than 2 weeks ago.

Replacing Berrios with 1 other 3 WAR pitcher for 10M is going to be real hard to do. (I'm not going to look up the actual Twins pitcher's WAR numbers for this exercise, sorry) But replacing the negative (presumably) WAR from many others on the staff with significantly better options is more than reasonable. The goal isn't it replace Berrios 1 for 1, it's to build a better staff. Take them from a 0 WAR staff to a 5 WAR staff (numbers completely made up, but the point remains). The Twins have given themselves more ways to improve for next year (and the future) now than they had 2 weeks ago. Not sure why that wouldn't have been the goal for everyone who cares about the Twins.

It sucks seeing Berrios leave. But if the pitching staff as a whole is able to be improved by a couple of the prospects filling some minor roles (mid-relief, #5 starter type roles) and the Twins can sign some veteran arms with their 50M I don't see any reason why they couldn't be a significantly better staff next year even without Berrios. Just like the A's replacing Giambi, the Twins can't replace Berrios 1 for 1, but they can in the aggregate. Now the FO just has to not screw it up.

I’ve seen Moneyball, and read the book, many times. Both are A+ baseball stories, but the movie comes at the book in a slightly different way. For example, Jeremy Brown is a pretty big part of the book, but only really appears in the film at the very end. 

The irony of the Moneyball franchise, both book and film, is that Oakland’s great starting rotation of those years isn’t really discussed.

Starting pitching is more art than science. Let’s hope Falvey and Levine have brought back some scouts with an innate talent for evaluating pitching, and that they start listening to those scouts. Without Berríos now, that’s the way this team becomes competitive again in 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shaitan said:

Oh, wow. Missed that. Felt like it was weird and confusing, but also Manfred has to change everything, I suppose.

In this case, Manfred did it right, IMO. Yesterday was so much more exciting and intense than most deadlines, as GMs had their safety nets of the waiver wire deadline taken away from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Sure, but that's why we were discussing a 1 year deal, which was your question......that's all they were getting for sure. Like I said, I'm not sure I'd have dealt him....but a 1 year deal was it.

Ok, but I also said in my OP that moving him today wasn't their only option. 

 

47 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Outbidding the Yankees and Dodgers on a free agent is your plan of action? Or, getting less for him at the next trading deadline than we got now?

It didn't stop this FO from supposedly making a serious bid for Darvish in '17. The alternative to that being a 4th roster spot that now has to be filled and committing to, at minimum, one more poor season. Look, I said in my OP that this might've been the best move to salvage the situation, but this isn't a W for the Twins, and it shouldn't be framed that way. That's the overarching criticism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

I think ashbury and mike answered this well, but I don't understand why it was a question at all.  So much of the discord in here feels like people are tailoring the context of this trade in strange ways that omit key reasons why it makes so much sense to pull this trigger.  Take just a few:

1. Berrios has made it abundantly clear he isn't interested in an extension.  Short of "Pay me 5 years and 200M or I'm going to let the Yanks wine and dine me"....there isn't much mystery about his intentions.  That means in one season and two months you have as much control over who he pitches for as every other MLB team.

2. Trading him at the next deadline will dramatically reduce the return.  I can't emphasize dramatically hard enough.  

3. If your plan is to outbid the Yankees....you get your shot in 2022 I guess.  Plus the guys we just got!

4. Jose Berrios and a bunch of question marks is not a contending caliber staff.  2022 doesn't have enough ready starting pitchers to supplement Jose.

Now, let me add a few personal contextual bits I think are worth noting:

1. The Twins just got more for Jose Berrios than the Nats got for Scherzer AND Trae Turner with a similar level of control.

2 I'd trade Berrios for Turner 102 times out of 100 straight up.  

3.  The Twins could, conceivably, turn around this offseason and make two separate deals with these guys as lead parts of the package and come back with two arms as good (or nearly as good) as Jose.  This is what could happen because now the Twins have more assets to make the 2022 team better than one guy who has made it his outward goal to bet on himself.

I understand the reduced value, but you're also likely punting on more than just one season by vacating his spot in the rotation. That cost of losing him needs to be acknowledged here as well.

C'mon, we both know that moving him now is the Twins saying "we don't ever intend to pay you market value." 

What's the plan to supplement Maeda + 4 question marks and be competitive beyond 2022? Woods doesn't profile near Berrios and there isn't an internal option that does either. Do we cross our fingers and hope somebody smashes through their ceiling?

I don't see any way Woods headlines a trade that brings back a pitcher at or above the caliber of Berrios, unless it's an extremely short rental, in which case what's the point? If these added assets are used to bring back a pitcher that outperforms Berrios, then sure, the '22 team is better, but I have serious doubts that we suddenly see a rash of high end prospects moved this winter for arms. To an extent I hope it happens, because the pitching situation is dire, but that doesn't exactly jive with what we've seen the last 5 years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shaitan said:

And, unless I'm mistaken here, the Twins used Cuddyer's supplemental pick on Berrios.

And the Cuddyer pick keeps on giving with our two new acquisitions from the Blue Jays.  1rst round pick from 1997.  This pick can easily impact our team for another 10 years now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I understand the reduced value, but you're also likely punting on more than just one season by vacating his spot in the rotation. That cost of losing him needs to be acknowledged here as well.

C'mon, we both know that moving him now is the Twins saying "we don't ever intend to pay you market value." 

What's the plan to supplement Maeda + 4 question marks and be competitive beyond 2022? Woods doesn't profile near Berrios and there isn't an internal option that does either. Do we cross our fingers and hope somebody smashes through their ceiling?

I don't see any way Woods headlines a trade that brings back a pitcher at or above the caliber of Berrios, unless it's an extremely short rental, in which case what's the point? If these added assets are used to bring back a pitcher that outperforms Berrios, then sure, the '22 team is better, but I have serious doubts that we suddenly see a rash of high end prospects moved this winter for arms. To an extent I hope it happens, because the pitching situation is dire, but that doesn't exactly jive with what we've seen the last 5 years.

 

I have heard multiple people lament hos loss.  I have done so no less than three times.  It has been acknowledged.

We just added two top 100 prospects who immediately slid into the top 3 in our organization.  Top 100 prospects hold a crap ton of value in trades. I don't know what the future holds in terms of how they will help the club....but I also haven't declared the next year, or two years, or decade a waste because we traded one pitcher.  Yeah...maybe 2022 sucks.  But it looked like it was bound to be a longshot with or without Berrios.

What I do know is waiting dramatically reduces his value in trade for a player we have zero chance to retain long term.  Deliberately tanking that value to buy in to 2022 seems like the kind idea you don't need hindsight to warn against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SanoMustGo said:

You could be every bit as wrong as my take on the situation.  You have NO IDEA, NONE.  Making alot of assumptions, all negative.   Ohh and the team I love and follow has never been about ONE player.  If that's the case, become a Blue Jays fan.  In essence, that is what you are saying. Berrios is more important than the rest of the team.  He is an above average starting pitcher, he is not Johan Santana, not even close.

Dohkay. See ya. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 8:02 PM, In My La Z boy said:

I don't see it this way. Giving up on 2022 would have looked like selling low on someone. Buxton, Kepler, Donaldson - moving pieces to dump salary - that would have looked like giving up on next year - and trading Cruz doesn't count, you could not plan on him being here next year. We kept everyone who matters to the offense for next year. We seem to signal that Big Mike will come back - we did what had to be done without giving in on next year in any way. Jose Berrios and our FO were looking at 2022 being a one and done. We blasted a grand slam in getting these 2 Top 100 prospects - and the 2 we got back for Cruz, another marvel to me. It is a lost season, but today's deals, and more importantly, todays no deals say we are definitely competing next year. Now sign Buxton - in the next week. That will say for sure.

Oh I agree fully on Cruz. He was an obvious one to trade. I'm not referring to Cruz being traded. What I'm saying is that trading Berrios makes contending a lot harder next year. I don't know what kind of moves they will make to bolster the rotation this offseason, but replacing Jose in the rotation will not be an easy, or cheap, task.

 

As for Buxton, I would be surprised to see him accept an offer unless the Twins overpay. I would have to think that his trade market was suppressed due to being injured. Maybe the Twins think that if he comes back this year yet and plays well, his value will be higher in the offseason? Certainly dealing him now would not be peak value given the length of time he has been out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

I have heard multiple people lament hos loss.  I have done so no less than three times.  It has been acknowledged.

We just added two top 100 prospects who immediately slid into the top 3 in our organization.  Top 100 prospects hold a crap ton of value in trades. I don't know what the future holds in terms of how they will help the club....but I also haven't declared the next year, or two years, or decade a waste because we traded one pitcher.  Yeah...maybe 2022 sucks.  But it looked like it was bound to be a longshot with or without Berrios.

What I do know is waiting dramatically reduces his value in trade for a player we have zero chance to retain long term.  Deliberately tanking that value to buy in to 2022 seems like the kind idea you don't need hindsight to warn against.

That wasn't aimed directly at you. I do agree with Hosken though, there's a sort of prospect lust that has shown up in these threads, to the point where the deal is being spun as a W for the Twins. 

Our farm system only had two top 100 prospects prior to the trade, with Balazovich squeaking in at 98. Prospect lists aren't the end all be all, but we knew the farm wasn't top heavy prior to the deal. It should be expected that a return for Berrios would slot in above most prospects already in the organization. If part of the justification for the trade was "2022 was a long shot even if Berrios was here," I don't understand the "who knows how 2022 will play out," sentiment I've seen from multiple posters. 

Sure, which is why I said it might've been the best way to salvage the situation, but the 0% chance to retain him is entirely of the Twins' own doing. Again, that's the overarching criticism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

That wasn't aimed directly at you. I do agree with Hosken though, there's a sort of prospect lust that has shown up in these threads, to the point where the deal is being spun as a W for the Twins. 

Our farm system only had two top 100 prospects prior to the trade, with Balazovich squeaking in at 98. Prospect lists aren't the end all be all, but we knew the farm wasn't top heavy prior to the deal. It should be expected that a return for Berrios would slot in above most prospects already in the organization. If part of the justification for the trade was "2022 was a long shot even if Berrios was here," I don't understand the "who knows how 2022 will play out," sentiment I've seen from multiple posters. 

Sure, which is why I said it might've been the best way to salvage the situation, but the 0% chance to retain him is entirely of the Twins' own doing. Again, that's the overarching criticism. 

It's a W in the sense that they got much more value than was expected.  And it was a W relative to other deals for other similar players who moved at the deadline.  It isn't mutually exclusive that the team also will suffer immediately from losing Berrios and that the Twins did very well given the circumstances.

0% chance is not entirely on the Twins either.  That's the marching orders Barreiro is preaching in the media market and he's mostly grasping for straws.  (Reusse too.  On the basis of haggling in arbitration....which happens ALL THE TIME.  It's literally what the process is: quibbling over thousands) Jose Berrios wants to experience FA.  He can't do that by signing an extension.  I'm sure if the Twins threw some absurd amount of money at him he might change his mind, but the money it'd take to do that is not what I think any Twins fan would agree to pay.  (Say....5 years, 150M) So, no, that's not on them.  That's how the system is built.  Good for Jose that he gets to set his terms and his valuation and let suitors come to him.  He has earned that privilege and there is nothing the Twins can do about that if he has his mind set to do so.

Given that's the case, you have to weigh the prospects of what 2022 looks like because keeping him guarantees you a vastly diminished return in a trade.  The 2022 staff is still a bad pitching staff with him and there are less tradeable assets and less money to improve.  Now they have more options because they chose to maximize his trade value.  

I don't think 2022 is a contention year, I think 2023 is more likely because of the state of their young talent and what 2020 did to delay that pipeline.  Is that a certainty?  No.  But no one gets to deal in certainties, only probabilities.  All the probabilities point to this series of decisions being the right ones. We seem to be trying to paint people as "lusting for prospects" when all that's really happening is a sober take on where we're at.  No one wants to be at this point, especially not with the expectations we set out with.  But this isn't a fantasy land where you can just will the team to success on the basis of your undying love of seeing them play right now.  Good teams, that retool quickly, don't double down on mistakes and hang on too long out of denial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...