Is there value in winning a playoff round?

[jorgenswest]

I get the argument that there is a too significant gap to close to contend against the Yankees and Astros. The argument follows that the Twins should not trade off the future chasing a dream that isn’t reasonably attained. I am not posting to debate that argument.

I would argue there is significant value in pursuing the central division and winning a playoff series. I think that is attainable. To have a fighting chance they will need to add a starter at the top of the rotation and two back end relievers. The prospect cost will hurt particularly to get that starter (Winder, Larnach, Woods Richardson plus other marginal prospects?). A generation of fans have not seen a playoff series win and many haven’t seen a win in a playoff game. They need to see a playoff series win. It has to start there. Doesn’t it?

 

[farmerguychris]

It has to start with winning one playoff game!

But yes - to win a series would (i believe) do a great service to the fan base who has been patient during this rebuild. Time for some results as our reward.

[Major League Ready]

45 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

I get the argument that there is a too significant gap to close to contend against the Yankees and Astros. The argument follows that the Twins should not trade off the future chasing a dream that isn’t reasonably attained. I am not posting to debate that argument.

I would argue there is significant value in pursuing the central division and winning a playoff series. I think that is attainable. To have a fighting chance they will need to add a starter at the top of the rotation and two back end relievers. The prospect cost will hurt particularly to get that starter. A generation of fans have not seen a playoff series win and many haven’t seen a win in a playoff game. They need to see a playoff series win. It has to start there. Doesn’t it?

 

There would be value if they could achieve this without giving up the players that will needed to become a legit contender.  They can't trade Brooks or Prielipp so I don't believe it's possible.  Fans quite often believe they are going to acquire these high impact players without impacting the future of the team.   Was it worth it for the Rays to trade Ryan for Cruz?  The likely result is that they trade away 2 or 3 players that would be instrumental in contender for the next several years to have a better shot at a 1st round win this year.   That would be short-sighted but the trade deadline often promotes a fair amount of short-sightedness.  Such a trade would be of service to fans that want instant gratification.  It would not be of service to those of us who are going to watch every year, not just the good years, and want to see the best possible product year in and year out.

[Nine of twelve]

Of course there is value in winning, whether a game or a series or a division or whatever. But the value that is generated comes at a cost. It's analogous to comparing gross income and net income. So the more precise question is this: what would be the net value of winning a playoff round this season?

[Riverbrian]

The value is the opportunity to win the next series. 

 

[mnfireman]

Can't win the WS if you don't......

[dxpavelka]

Absolutely.  You can't anything if you don't win a first series.  I understand, we got no shot at winning it all.  We didn't in 87 either.  Yankees are on an all time pace and Astros are not far behind.  Three of the four teams that have won 111 games in a season have NOT won the World Series.  Get in and see what happens.

[ashbury]

56 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

Of course there is value in winning, whether a game or a series or a division or whatever. But the value that is generated comes at a cost. It's analogous to comparing gross income and net income. So the more precise question is this: what would be the net value of winning a playoff round this season?

Renowned baseball fan* Oscar Wilde nailed it back in 1892:  "[A cynic is] a man who knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing."  A lot of these discussions have that feel.

OTOH people don't remember the immediate rejoinder that Wilde offered: "And a sentimentalist... is a man who sees an absurd value in everything and doesn’t know the market price of any single thing.”  There's a lot of that here too.

Balance is the key.

But I'm on the side of thinking the value increases sharply when considering the spectrum of fringe contention through actually winning it all, and the sharpest inflection point is at breaking through in that first round and winning it  The cost is also high, compared to achieving mere competitiveness.  The OP raised a very good question, couched indirectly in terms of franchise health.

 

* I'm guessing **

** I mean, they played a lot of baseball in Ireland back then, didn't they?

[jorgenswest]

1 hour ago, Nine of twelve said:

Of course there is value in winning, whether a game or a series or a division or whatever. But the value that is generated comes at a cost. It's analogous to comparing gross income and net income. So the more precise question is this: what would be the net value of winning a playoff round this season?

Thanks for the focus. I should have said more than “the prospect cost will hurt”.

If the cost is Winder, Larnach, Woods Richardson and other marginal prospects is it worth putting yourself in a position to be favored to win that first post season series? The return would be a starter at the top of the rotation and two relievers to fit in behind Duran.

[cHawk]

Yes, I absolutely agree. This team needs to win a playoff series at some point in time. Remember that they aren’t guaranteed to play Houston or New York in Round One of the playoffs. Highly unlikely, infact. New York and Houston will probably both receive byes.

[Mike Sixel]

Imo, most people would be happier if they enjoyed the journey, including winning a playoff series. The focus on the end.... leads to unhappiness.

[Linus]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Imo, most people would be happier if they enjoyed the journey, including winning a playoff series. The focus on the end.... leads to unhappiness.

This. Each season is an experience you don’t get back. Enjoy the current one and go from there. It’s kind of like having Correa. I know he is likely gone next year. I don’t care I’m just enjoying watching him play this year. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

There’s absolutely value in winning a postseason series. Winning a series means more wins, which is literally the point of cheering on a sports team. If I didn’t care about watching wins and being entertained, why would I even care about a 162 game regular season?

[Azviking101]

There is value in just going to the playoffs because every team has a chance

[DJL44]

There is clearly value to the Twins in winning a round of playoffs. That's more revenue to the team selling expensive tickets and getting new season ticket holders to sign up. Each sellout playoff game brings in an extra $5-10M in revenue. It's also more tickets sold in September.

Realistically, no team has a good shot at winning the World Series, especially if they aren't the 1 or 2 seed. 3-6 seeds have at best a 6% chance of winning it all. No team should mortgage it's future for a 6% chance but it's definitely worth going to the playoffs for the extra $20M in revenue.

I'll put it another way - winning a playoff series 3 seasons in a row is nearly as lucrative as winning one World Series.

[USAFChief]

23 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

There would be value if they could achieve this without giving up the players that will needed to become a legit contender.  

I'm impressed you know today which players will be needed to become legitimate contenders.

Predicting next week is difficult in baseball, but here you are predicting 2024 and beyond! 

Amazing. 

[Nine of twelve]

28 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I'm impressed you know today which players will be needed to become legitimate contenders.

Predicting next week is difficult in baseball, but here you are predicting 2024 and beyond! 

Amazing. 

Of course 100% accurate predictions are not possible. Everyone here knows that. Which is why you have to rely on the best way you have of figuring out what the future may hold: probability. Trading away a prospect reduces the probability of future team success, especially if the prospect traded away is one with a relatively good probability of future individual success. The more of such prospects traded, the lower the probability of future success. The exception to this is when you have the financial wherewithal to frequently buy free agents with a high probability of future success. (Which the Twins do not have.) So one must evaluate the increased probability of immediate success that comes with gaining a player and contrast it with the decreased probability of future success that comes with losing a player. In deadline trades the former is almost always considerably less than the latter. Hence, the very reasonable conclusion that most such trades are not favorable.

Logical, not amazing.

[Lonestar]

Last year Atlanta was a mediocre team in a weak division when they addressed their needs in the outfield, turned things around, and won series after series, including the World Series.

[USAFChief]

35 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

 Hence, the very reasonable conclusion that most such trades are not favorable.

 

I don't agree such a conclusion is "very reasonable."

I'd say it's complete speculation, which flies in the face of this very reasonable conclusion: most prospects don't end up being worth what you could have gotten for them.

Got a Juan Soto? Ken Griffey Jr? Ronald Acuna Jr? A teenager tearing it up and quite obviously a couple levels above are competition? Don't trade that guy.

Anything else? Listen to offers, and take good MLB talent every time.

There'll be more prospects in your system in a month or a year. You'll have a draft soon where you'll be "thrilled" by your good fortune.

Spending decades waiting for your minor leagues to win you a WS is ... how you spend decades without winning a WS.

 

[Nine of twelve]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I don't agree such a conclusion is "very reasonable."

I'd say it's complete speculation, which flies in the face of this very reasonable conclusion: most prospects don't end up being worth what you could have gotten for them.

 

There is just as much complete speculation in making a trade as there is in not making one.

[USAFChief]

2 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

There is just as much complete speculation in making a trade as there is in not making one.

Well not really. We're comparing proven MLB history with anticipated MLB success, no?

[Nine of twelve]

8 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Well not really. We're comparing proven MLB history with anticipated MLB success, no?

No.

We're comparing anticipated success of who is traded for and anticipated success of who is traded away.

Edited to add: Or, years later, we're retrospectively comparing actual success of who is traded for and actual success of who is traded away.

 

[jorgenswest]

Let’s assume some success from the players moved. The Twins might get 6 years of control each from Duran, Alcala, Celestino and Ryan. Even a marginal prospect like Smeltzer can be if more value than the rental Dozier.

I still make the deals even if I knew for certain that some I traded would be rostered for the 6 years of control.

Let’s get that starter and a few relievers. Let’s give this team a better chance for success in the playoffs. Winning a series is my bar for a successful season.

[Mill1634]

Yes. What a silly question for a team who has lost 18 straight playoff games. At this point I would be satisfied with one win. 

[Brandon]

“Damn the Torpedoes full speed ahead”. 
 

“Let’s win the whole F—-ing thing”

Do it,, Do it, Do it!

General MacArthur, Cleveland Catcher  Jake Taylor on Major League and Starsky and Hutch all know you can’t win if you don’t go for it.  The players on the team have to decide to win or cave. It’s all on them and the organization to create the environment to help lead the players to decide to win in the playoffs. Trades no trades who cares?  When we get to the playoffs there is no tomorrow so Damn the torpedoes full speed ahead!

 

[RpR]

There is value in winning any game at any time, period.

[tony&rodney]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Spending decades waiting for your minor leagues to win you a WS is ... how you spend decades without winning a WS.

Exactly. We could fill pages with "untouchable" Twins prospects (according to some) that never panned out. Sending 3-4 players for Castillo, 1-2 for Lopez, and maybe 4-5 guys for Soto are all unlikely but nothing will really hurt the Twins for 2023 to 2025 unless the guys they have on their current roster plus Lewis bomb/fail. 

Jeffers, Arraez, Kirilloff, Polanco, Miranda, Lewis, Buxton, Gordon, Celestino, and Kepler are a decent core. 

The Twins can afford to trade prospects.

36 minutes ago, RpR said:

There is value in winning any game at any time, period.

This is the perfect response to the post. Just win baby.

[wsnydes]

Is there value?  There's clearly absolutely none if you don't.  So yes, there is value in winning.

[Game7-91]

8 hours ago, Nine of twelve said:

years later, we're retrospectively comparing actual success of who is traded for and actual success of who is traded away.

To build on this point, how to value the loss of trading a MLB player in the season(s) immediately following the trade, while awaiting the progression of the new prospects.

I'm saying it badly, but an example is the Pressly trade July 2108. How much value is lost in the intervening years 2019/20, before Celestino/Alcala begin making ML contributions. What value would retaining Pressly have had on Twins regular season record and then chances for playoff wins in 2019/20? 

Not sure how it could be measured, or that it could be measured, but it should be accounted for in the overall evaluation of such a trade.

It's hard to say this clearly, but just thinking about how a MLB org must try to evaluate/anticipate the impact of selling ML talent in the seasons between when the guy traded continues to produce, and the org awaits initial ROI in those prospects still in minors. 

[Major League Ready]

20 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I'm impressed you know today which players will be needed to become legitimate contenders.

Predicting next week is difficult in baseball, but here you are predicting 2024 and beyond! 

Amazing. 

I'm sure you thought this was a clever response, but you apparently did not think this through.  I am not the person making these trades and my ability to predict which players will help a team contend is completely irrelevant.  Those predictions are done by a team of people in front offices led by people like Billy Beane.  The guy who got Semien and Bassit for 1 year of Samardzija. I would have to say Beane’s prediction for the six years following that trade were pretty darn good.