Why Didn’t the Twins Sign Sonny Gray or Kenta Maeda?

[DJL44]

16 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

Atlanta also follows this path

Atlanta had legitimate bids for both Gray and Nola. The Twins didn't.

[tony&rodney]

1 minute ago, DJL44 said:

Atlanta had legitimate bids for both Gray and Nola. The Twins didn't.

Why does that remind of when the Twins were in on Wheeler? 

[Johnny Ringo]

Gray wanted to be a free agent and by all reports wanted to pitch in the south/closer to home. (I realize that St. Louis only checks Box B.) The only way the Twins were going to retain him was to outbid others and they are in no position to do that.  (I think the implications of the RSN implosion is greater than people think and the hangover will last longer. But that is probably a discussion for another day. )

Maeda, at this point in his career, I think inarguably is only pretty good. Pretty good can be replaced.

Of course, human nature is to yell at the FO for their inactivity to date. Let's wait for the dust to settle. We can decide in the spring if we really want to grouse.   

[Woof Bronzer]

13 hours ago, arby58 said:

Players talk all the time, and they certainly have the right to change their minds, That said, I wouldn't put much stock in the comment you refer to - unless you believe he was flat out 'untruth-telling' here (Sports Illustrated):

“I do truly believe there is something special going on in this clubhouse," Gray said. "It’s definitely going in the right direction. But at the same time, it’s something we’re going to have to take a look at as a family and see what is the next step for us, not only as a baseball player, but where are the next three to four years of our lives going and what direction is that going to go in. I do know it’s going to be playing baseball, I just don’t know exactly where. But we’ve enjoyed every single moment that we’ve had since we got traded over here, not only the people in the clubhouse, the fans, the city, the organization — everyone has been as much as you can ask. It’s been an incredible experience.”

I suspect the Twins announcing they are cutting payroll and planning on being worse this year took some of the "special" out of it for Sonny.  

[Otaknam]

Sonny Gray is a bulldog pitcher, but he isn’t an ace. I’m not surprised he went elsewhere, as Rocco didn’t trust usually  him to pitch more than five innings. Of course Rocco and the FO are mired in analytics and don’t trust anyone to pitch more than five innings with an occasional exception. That means a starter will pitch 150 innings (5 x 30 starts), and I don’t think the bulldog Gray is onboard with that, and he shouldn’t be. Hopefully the St. Louis FO allows the manager to trust his instincts and intuition and show confidence in their starters, unlike the Twins. That said, I think St. Louis overpaid because Gray is likely to regress at his age.

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, Otaknam said:

Rocco didn’t trust usually  him to pitch more than five innings.

This year Sonny completed 6 or more innings 19 times out of 32 starts.  He pitched into the 6th 3 other times.  No, Rocco didn't "usually" fail to trust him for more than five.

 But, but, but, the other pitchers.  The Twins in 2023 were tied for third most innings per start.  They led the majors in the number of Quality Starts, which can't happen unless the starter goes 6; Sonny contributed 17 of those, more than half his starts.

This narrative about Rocco pulling his starters died, once he had good pitchers to work with.

[LastOnePicked]

18 hours ago, Fatbat said:

He just proved in ‘23 that he can still pitch to his career averages.  Paying him $13M/yr is about half as we would pay a #1 SP.  I fail to see the risk because 2 years removed from TJ, he will probably improve his stats and durability. 

 

For the record, I mostly agree with you. I think Maeda is a smart pitcher, and I would have liked to have him back. 

I'm just maybe not convinced that the arm is exactly "shiny" at this point. Or all that reliable. We'll see.

[arby58]

4 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I suspect the Twins announcing they are cutting payroll and planning on being worse this year took some of the "special" out of it for Sonny.  

Please provide the quote where the Twins are 'planning to be worse.' You don't like them cutting payroll, fine - but you're falling into the same old same old trap if you think just spending more money will yield more success. The top three salaried teams in baseball last year all missed the play-offs, and none of them even had a sniff of them.

[arby58]

On 11/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Otaknam said:

Sonny Gray is a bulldog pitcher, but he isn’t an ace. I’m not surprised he went elsewhere, as Rocco didn’t trust usually  him to pitch more than five innings. Of course Rocco and the FO are mired in analytics and don’t trust anyone to pitch more than five innings with an occasional exception. That means a starter will pitch 150 innings (5 x 30 starts), and I don’t think the bulldog Gray is onboard with that, and he shouldn’t be. Hopefully the St. Louis FO allows the manager to trust his instincts and intuition and show confidence in their starters, unlike the Twins. That said, I think St. Louis overpaid because Gray is likely to regress at his age.

This canard that the Twins don't trust starting pitchers to pitch further into games has GOT to be put to rest. They were 3rd in all of MLB in average length of starts in 2023. It has nothing to do with analytics, it has to do with having good enough starting pitchers to let them pitch. They didn't have them in 2022, and the starts were short. They had them in 2023, and the starts were on average longer than all but 2 other teams of the 30 in MLB.

[DJL44]

24 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Please provide the quote where the Twins are 'planning to be worse.' You don't like them cutting payroll, fine - but you're falling into the same old same old trap if you think just spending more money will yield more success. The top three salaried teams in baseball last year all missed the play-offs, and none of them even had a sniff of them.

Spending more money does yield more success, if you know how to spend money. Are you saying the Twins are so bad at spending money that their team would be the same if they spend $160M as if they spend $125M? If that's true they need to fire Falvey and find a new POBO.

[KBJ1]

If we can trade Kepler/Polanco + some prospects for a good SP could we then fill our gaping hole in LF with Lourdes Gurriel on a 4yr $60M deal?

[Woof Bronzer]

19 hours ago, arby58 said:

Please provide the quote where the Twins are 'planning to be worse.' You don't like them cutting payroll, fine - but you're falling into the same old same old trap if you think just spending more money will yield more success. The top three salaried teams in baseball last year all missed the play-offs, and none of them even had a sniff of them.

Please provide an example of a team in the bottom half of market size cutting payroll coming off a division title and improving. 

Do you think a free agent hears "cutting payroll" and thinks, yep, this team is investing in success, they're definitely building on last year's season, sign me up?  (Of course it's irrelevant because the Twins won't sign any free agents due to their self-imposed salary cap.)

Better players cost more; with less money to spend, you'll end up with worse players.  By definition "cutting payroll" means "planning to be worse".  The Pohlads certainly don't think they'll be better by cutting payroll; they think they'll make more cash.  

I'm highly amused by the notion around TD these days that payroll has zero impact on the quality of the team on the field.  The extents some people go to defend this indefensible ownership group is just incredible.  Enjoy the endless mediocrity, I guess.  

I'll say it till I'm blue in the face.  Spending money does not guarantee a World Series.  Not spending money guarantees you won't win one.  The Twins should be building on last year to make a legitimate World Series push.  Instead they've made a conscious decision to go backwards.  

[arby58]

1 hour ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Please provide an example of a team in the bottom half of market size cutting payroll coming off a division title and improving. 

Do you think a free agent hears "cutting payroll" and thinks, yep, this team is investing in success, they're definitely building on last year's season, sign me up?  (Of course it's irrelevant because the Twins won't sign any free agents due to their self-imposed salary cap.)

Better players cost more; with less money to spend, you'll end up with worse players.  By definition "cutting payroll" means "planning to be worse".  The Pohlads certainly don't think they'll be better by cutting payroll; they think they'll make more cash.  

I'm highly amused by the notion around TD these days that payroll has zero impact on the quality of the team on the field.  The extents some people go to defend this indefensible ownership group is just incredible.  Enjoy the endless mediocrity, I guess.  

I'll say it till I'm blue in the face.  Spending money does not guarantee a World Series.  Not spending money guarantees you won't win one.  The Twins should be building on last year to make a legitimate World Series push.  Instead they've made a conscious decision to go backwards.  

Some growth will be tied to arbitration, some contraction can be tied to the baseball way of rookies and pre-arbitration players not getting much in ways of increases. Every team is different. Arizona can be good with its existing salary structure because they have so many good young players. The Twins benefit if Lewis, Julien, and Wallner take the salary places of, say, Polanco, Farmer, and Gallo. Just by those moves alone you about cut what the Twins say they want to cut to reduce payroll - and you can even replace last year's salary for Gray, for example.

The 'you can't cut and win' mantra is shallow.

[arby58]

10 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I'm highly amused by the notion around TD these days that payroll has zero impact on the quality of the team on the field.  The extents some people go to defend this indefensible ownership group is just incredible.  Enjoy the endless mediocrity, I guess.  

I'll say it till I'm blue in the face.  Spending money does not guarantee a World Series.  Not spending money guarantees you won't win one.  The Twins should be building on last year to make a legitimate World Series push.  Instead they've made a conscious decision to go backwards.  

Nobody says payroll 'has zero impact on the quality of the team on the field.' Of course it does - but it is far from the only factor. I've explained how teams with young star players can do very well with a limited payroll (that was the Diamondbacks and to some extent the Twins last year). To suggest, however, that if you don't increase your payroll you cannot be a winning and competing team - that's also not true. 

It's all about smart spending. There are plenty of examples, recent and past, of teams overpaying for players based on past results, and then when they regress - well, you know.

The thing I dislike about your comment is this 'endless mediocrity' claim - which I guess depends on your definition of mediocrity. The Twins have won their share of division titles, and this year they won a play-off series and were very competitive with the ultimately World Series winner. Funny thing - the pitcher who let them down against Houston was Sonny Gray, who lots of people think they should have shelled out big bucks to secure.

The other thing is this 'conscious decision to go backwards.' Nobody in their job does that. You really think Falvey and the rest of the crew are consciously working to fail? If so, you're unlike any other private sector person I ever worked with - it sort of effects your way of making a living, right?

Living within a budget and doing the best you can - yeah, I get that, I have lived that as a budget director for a $16 billion operation. Sometimes we had to cut budgets - we never went into that process expecting to fail. I doubt the Twins do either.

[arby58]

On 11/29/2023 at 9:54 AM, Woof Bronzer said:

I suspect the Twins announcing they are cutting payroll and planning on being worse this year took some of the "special" out of it for Sonny.  

If so, what was so 'special' for Sonny about St. Louis? They were a last place team in 2023, 20 games under .500. They have added two starting pitchers with ERAs near or above 5.00 (Gibson and Lynn) and nothing else, really, other than Gray. Their MVP last year (Goldschmidt) is 36. Why would that look more 'special' to him? The answer, of course, is $75m/3. The Twins weren't going to give him that - it had nothing to do with where the team is going. I'd make a straight up bet right now that the Cardinals have a worse record than the Twins next year.

[Woof Bronzer]

14 hours ago, arby58 said:

If so, what was so 'special' for Sonny about St. Louis? They were a last place team in 2023, 20 games under .500. They have added two starting pitchers with ERAs near or above 5.00 (Gibson and Lynn) and nothing else, really, other than Gray. Their MVP last year (Goldschmidt) is 36. Why would that look more 'special' to him? The answer, of course, is $75m/3. The Twins weren't going to give him that - it had nothing to do with where the team is going. I'd make a straight up bet right now that the Cardinals have a worse record than the Twins next year.

Are you seriously comparing the Cardinals franchise to the Twins?  St Louis is about the same market size as MSP yet consistently spends money on its product.  They've won 2 World Series in the past 2 decades and have had far more playoff success than the Twins.  They are a model franchise and yes, they are not afraid to spend FA dollars.  You're right in that the Twins were not attractive to Sonny because they decided that they didn't want to pay him.  That's the point.  

[Woof Bronzer]

14 hours ago, arby58 said:

The thing I dislike about your comment is this 'endless mediocrity' claim - which I guess depends on your definition of mediocrity. The Twins have won their share of division titles, and this year they won a play-off series and were very competitive with the ultimately World Series winner. Funny thing - the pitcher who let them down against Houston was Sonny Gray, who lots of people think they should have shelled out big bucks to secure.

The other thing is this 'conscious decision to go backwards.' Nobody in their job does that. You really think Falvey and the rest of the crew are consciously working to fail? If so, you're unlike any other private sector person I ever worked with - it sort of effects your way of making a living, right?

 

Well, I think 1 ALDS series win in 30 years is mediocre, but you might disagree.  Since nearly every team in the league has had more success than that over the same time frame, I'd be curious to know what your definition of "mediocrity" is.  

The conscious decision was made by the Pohlads.  They decided, like they always do, to emphasize profits over on the field success.  They know cutting payroll will hamper the team, and they don't care, because the product on the field is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is making money.  This cannot be controversial at this point.  We know who the Pohlads are; they've operated this way since taking over for the old man.      

Payroll cuts probably weren't Falvey's decision, but his job performance probably isn't evaluated in wins and losses, it's evaluated in dollars and cents.  Like in any business he's just the guy who has to deal with top-down budget cuts.  I'm sure he's pretty frustrated but his job will be safe as long as the team continues to rake in cash.  

[arby58]

4 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Are you seriously comparing the Cardinals franchise to the Twins?  St Louis is about the same market size as MSP yet consistently spends money on its product.  They've won 2 World Series in the past 2 decades and have had far more playoff success than the Twins.  They are a model franchise and yes, they are not afraid to spend FA dollars.  You're right in that the Twins were not attractive to Sonny because they decided that they didn't want to pay him.  That's the point.  

Players are in the here and now, not 'how many world series have they won in the past?' The closest here and now is last year, when the Cardinals were a last place team that lost 91 games. Speaking of which, St. Louis ranked 16th in payroll last year, the Twins 17th - and yet the Twins won 16 more games. Payroll is everything, right?

[Nine of twelve]

7 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Are you seriously comparing the Cardinals franchise to the Twins?  St Louis is about the same market size as MSP yet consistently spends money on its product.  They've won 2 World Series in the past 2 decades and have had far more playoff success than the Twins.  They are a model franchise and yes, they are not afraid to spend FA dollars.  You're right in that the Twins were not attractive to Sonny because they decided that they didn't want to pay him.  That's the point.  

This has been posted before but apparently it doesn't always register.

The St. Louis Cardinals franchise can't be compared to other teams based on market size. St. Louis is a baseball-first market. Always has been. This goes back to the earliest years of the major leagues. There were two major league teams there for 52 years (!) in a city smaller than Chicago, New York, Boston, or Philadelphia. The Cardinals were the primary team of probably half of the geographical United States before teams moved and expansion occurred. This is why NBA and NFL franchises have not succeeded there. The Cardinals have a significantly higher level of revenue than other teams in markets of similar population. Comparing the Cardinals with other teams based on market population is working from a false premise. Apples and oranges, if you will.

[Fatbat]

@Nine of twelveThe Twins could be St. louis Cards in 50-80 years but it takes actual investment in marketing/production of a winning team. 

[ashbury]

9 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

This has been posted before but apparently it doesn't always register.

The St. Louis Cardinals franchise can't be compared to other teams based on market size. St. Louis is a baseball-first market. Always has been. This goes back to the earliest years of the major leagues. There were two major league teams there for 52 years (!) in a city smaller than Chicago, New York, Boston, or Philadelphia. The Cardinals were the primary team of probably half of the geographical United States before teams moved and expansion occurred. This is why NBA and NFL franchises have not succeeded there. The Cardinals have a significantly higher level of revenue than other teams in markets of similar population. Comparing the Cardinals with other teams based on market population is working from a false premise. Apples and oranges, if you will.

History is important, but no team can ride nostalgia forever.  The AL Browns have been gone from St Loo for longer than they were there.  Stories of those days don't carry relevance now.

Keeping a place a "good baseball town" is not automatic.  The Cards are doing something right, and their accomplishments in a market comparable to the Twin Cities should not be dismissed out of hand.

[Nine of twelve]

52 minutes ago, ashbury said:

History is important, but no team can ride nostalgia forever.  The AL Browns have been gone from St Loo for longer than they were there.  Stories of those days don't carry relevance now.

Keeping a place a "good baseball town" is not automatic.  The Cards are doing something right, and their accomplishments in a market comparable to the Twin Cities should not be dismissed out of hand.

You're right of course; it's not automatic but having a strong baseball culture as a base to work from is very helpful. It also helps to have neither the NFL nor the NBA to compete with for money and attention.

[Woof Bronzer]

On 12/1/2023 at 6:53 PM, Nine of twelve said:

This has been posted before but apparently it doesn't always register.

The St. Louis Cardinals franchise can't be compared to other teams based on market size. St. Louis is a baseball-first market. Always has been. This goes back to the earliest years of the major leagues. There were two major league teams there for 52 years (!) in a city smaller than Chicago, New York, Boston, or Philadelphia. The Cardinals were the primary team of probably half of the geographical United States before teams moved and expansion occurred. This is why NBA and NFL franchises have not succeeded there. The Cardinals have a significantly higher level of revenue than other teams in markets of similar population. Comparing the Cardinals with other teams based on market population is working from a false premise. Apples and oranges, if you will.

The excuse making is just astounding.  

The Twins could be as successful as the Cardinals, a team in a very similar market.  The Cardinals organization understands that if you invest in the team, fans will follow, and revenues will too.  

The Twins organization treats the team like another business in the portfolio, refuses to consistently invest in the team, and when fans understandably lose interest, the team blames fans for losing and punishes fans for their own business ineptitude by slashing payroll and making the team worse.  

You're right about one thing:  the Cardinals as an organization are nothing like the Twins.  Apples and oranges indeed.