3 Reasons the Twins Keep Trading for Injured Pitchers

[SF Twins Fan]

25 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

They can't just expense something to zero out NOI.  They have to follow IRS regulations.  You also make it sound like depreciation is some sort of a trick.  The expense is no less real because it's recognized over the course of more than a year.

I'm not saying they trick anyone or the IRS.  But a company can decide to expense a project, system update, software change, etc. at the end of the year vs let it go into the following year if they're profitable to bring down their NOI.  It happens all the time. 

[Rod Carews Birthday]

1 hour ago, SF Twins Fan said:

Is this public information?  Can you provide me with a link that shows the Twins have lost money because I'd love to see a breakdown of their revenue vs operating expenses?

Yes, the payroll was over $150 million last year, and for the 1st time in 20 years the Twins finally won a single playoff game and also won a playoff series.  What do they do next? Slash payroll by $30 million when you have the chance to finally be a playoff contender.  The best way to increase revenue is to continually produce a quality product, which the BILLIONAIRES promised to do when receiving taxpayer money to build a new stadium.  In the 14 seasons since Target Field opened, they have fielded TWO 90 + win teams.  Not good enough.

 

I am absolutely with you on taxpayer money being used for a new stadium.  That's a no for me too, but I don't think that is going away anytime soon.  However, you lose me on complaining about the BILLIONAIRES needing to cough up more money because fans don't like the way the roster looks.  Let's play that out.  Elon Musk owns Tesla.  Should he make his cars only cost $10K because he can afford it?  Should Apple make the iphones only cost $50 because they have plenty of cash on hand to do so?  Whether we like it or not, the Pohlad family is running a private business that they are trying to make money with.  They get to do whatever they wish to do, and since only two clubs in the majors have real transparency (not the Twins) we can kick and scream about it, but it only makes us sweaty and tired.  I'm going to choose to enjoy the baseball and leave the business to the people with more money than me. 

[Major League Ready]

22 minutes ago, SF Twins Fan said:

I'm not saying they trick anyone or the IRS.  But a company can decide to expense a project, system update, software change, etc. at the end of the year vs let it go into the following year if they're profitable to bring down their NOI.  It happens all the time. 

How much do you think this kind of expense is going to impact NOI?   Any significant added expense is going to be a depreciable asset.  I doubt they can impact NOI much by recognizing certain expenses.

[chpettit19]

2 hours ago, Cris E said:

Sonny Grey was not a healthy pitcher, and just because he wasn't on the DL when we signed him does nothing to change that.

September 20, 2022     Minnesota Twins placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list.      
June 2, 2022     Minnesota Twins placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 15-day injured list retroactive to May 30, 2022. 
April 17, 2022     Minnesota Twins placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list.
March 13, 2022     Minnesota Twins placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list.
     July 8, 2021     Cincinnati Reds placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list.
June 9, 2021     Cincinnati Reds placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list.
April 1, 2021     Cincinnati Reds placed P Sonny Gray on the 10 day disabled list.    
September 13, 2020     Cincinnati Reds placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day injured list retroactive to September 11, 2020.
April 1, 2017     Oakland Athletics placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 10-day disabled list retroactive to March 30, 2017.     
August 7, 2016     Oakland Athletics placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 15-day disabled list.
May 22, 2016     Oakland Athletics placed RHP Sonny Gray on the 15-day disabled list retroactive to May 21, 2016.

Maeda was similar with four DL trips in 2017-19, but Mahle between 2017-2122 was on the Reds DL once in 2019 and again in 2022.  As a strategy it mostly worked with Grey and Maeda but it didn't with Mahle, 

But I got to tell you, this is not an unusual plan.  Texas won the WS last year with a rotation of injured pickups DeGrom (ha), Scherzer (8 DL trips), Eovaldi (9 trips), Heaney (7 trips) and Montgomery (4 trips including a TJ surgery). It doesn't always work, but it can, especially if you continue to develop pitching on your own. 

You're probably hoping the Twins develop what PHI, HOU, AZ and ATL have been doing the past few years, where they have largely young, homegrown pitching staffs that stay healthy. it certainly looks awesome, but it's really hard to sustain. After this year the Braves are probably going to let Fried (10 Dl trips) walk, and they are still counting on Charlie Morton (12 maybe?) and they had to bring in Chris Sale (1000 DL trips since 2016) to carry their success forward.  The Dodgers have always been good at cranking out solid to excellent pitchers, though they do get hurt a lot (current 60 day DL includes Buehuler (5 Dl trips) Kershaw (14), Golsolin (6) and May (5) and when they do get hurt the team adds from outside, recently picking up Glasnow (5 trips) and Lynn (6 trips, plus three bereavement trips in the last couple years,) 

The common trait those teams have is that once they identify a reliable pitcher they sign him and keep him. If you want to complain about the Twins' front office then complain about them letting Berrios walk. But don't be too loud, as he's been kind of a mixed bag at the new $20m rate. And that gets to the heart of the acquisition strategy: they're only available if they're flawed or crazy expensive. And even the expensive ones are often flawed. But you still have to dip into that well to compete. With how hard these guys throw today they will get hurt and you will need a long and deep roster to get through a season. Any time you have a surplus of 2B or whatever you are almost obliged to trade them for arms. The closer players are to the majors the less uncertain they are, so you need to mix in both MLB/AAA guys and the 19 year olds to keep a solid stream going. I think they are doing that in MN, so grabbing Mahle at a high cost and Paddack at a lower cost and Ryan for a departing Nelson Cruz all show good sense even if they didn't all work out. 

I suppose you'd only trade for healthy pitchers? That means you're paying more and the risk is greater if/when they don't turn out. Everyone was screaming for Miami's Cabrera if we couldn't afford Luzardo, but Luzardo has had his own injury history and Cabrera is nursing a sore shoulder today. Where are these available young healthy stars and how many of our players are you farming out to get them? We had great results last year doing things this way, so your answer has to clear a high bar.

 

 

Again, there is a difference between having an injury history and having just been hurt, or even being actively hurt at the time. Paddack had a known UCL tear, comparing that to general IL trip 3 seasons before isn't the same thing. Mahle had shoulder issues less than a month before they traded for him. DeSclafani ended the season with elbow and forearm problems. You can list all the random IL stints you want, but it simply isn't the same as trading for guys with active injury problems. It just isn't. 

And the strategy of trading for guys with known, current injury problems wasn't what lead them to succeed last year. In fact, the 2 guys they did that with (Mahle and Paddack) had virtually 0 impact on their season at all. Trading for guys with known, current injury problems has provided 0 value, but has cost multiple, legitimate MLB players for no return. It's a bad strategy. 

[chpettit19]

2 hours ago, DJL44 said:

DeSclafani was pitching depth. All teams need 8 starters to get through a season. They were willing to put the better pitcher in AAA (Varland) in order to stockpile depth at the beginning of the season. They did it the previous season with Ober. I see trading for DeSclafani the same as adding Keuchel down the stretch last season. Nobody expected Keuchel to contribute in the postseason but he ate innings and gave Ober and Ryan each a chance to rest and recover.

The Polanco trade was not a short-term move to improve the team in 2024. If Topa is a flash in the pan they're going to lose the trade. He was the 2nd most valuable asset.

Then they need to quit saying they're trying to win this year. If they're trading a heart of the order hitter for a reliever and bad pitching depth because they're hoping a no glove, no discipline A ball hitter figures it out in 2 or 3 years they aren't trying to win. 

And who says Varland is better? People hope he's better but the reason he was slated for AAA is because he wasn't good enough to be a big league starter last year. The Twins needed real major league pitching this offseason, not depth. They've said as much themselves. Even if the only thing they were going for was depth he's still a bad target as an injured pitcher isn't actually depth at all. 

[DJL44]

32 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

If they're trading a heart of the order hitter for a reliever and bad pitching depth because they're hoping a no glove, no discipline A ball hitter figures it out in 2 or 3 years they aren't trying to win. 

An expensive heart of the order hitter for a cheap, good reliever and cheap, bad pitching depth. Cutting salary was the top priority in the Polanco trade, not getting better. Cutting payroll was the priority of the whole offseason. The only reason they exercised Polanco's option at all was to trade him. Julien is clearly their choice for 2B.

If Topa is actually a cheap, bad reliever then they messed up big time.

[Parfigliano]

7 hours ago, bean5302 said:

The owners have fielded a team that's lost money 3 of the past 4 years. Their payroll was over $150MM last year. If the Twins spent $300MM, there'd be complaints they didn't spend $310MM.

Fielded a team that has lost money....says them.  

[Jocko87]

57 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Then they need to quit saying they're trying to win this year.

That's an insane statement when we actually have a real time example of the Oakland As.  

The stated goal of being a sustained winner is a pretty tough line to balance with going all in in any particular year.  They are currently doing a pretty good job of that, now that they own every player in the organization we shall see if they can maintain.

I haven't seen the most simple explanation of the stated question of the article.  The one and only reason they keep trading for injured pitchers is that that's what is avaliable. That's it. That's the entire answer.

Even Pablo, our beloved white whale, had arm issues still after a Tommy John.  It's a good thing they traded for that injured pitcher.  

Pitchers are damaged goods, almost by definition. It's not an exact science.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

An expensive heart of the order hitter for a cheap, good reliever and cheap, bad pitching depth. Cutting salary was the top priority in the Polanco trade, not getting better. Cutting payroll was the priority of the whole offseason. The only reason they exercised Polanco's option at all was to trade him. Julien is clearly their choice for 2B.

If Topa is actually a cheap, bad reliever then they messed up big time.

Expensive? Jorge Polanco cost 4 million more than Kyle freaking Farmer and 5 million more than 38 year Carlos Santana. If all they were trying to do was cut payroll there were far easier ways to do it without trading him. Farmer and Santana make more together than Polanco does. How about they just don't tender Farmer or sign Santana and they can find a cheap reliever and pitching depth for the same cost of Topa and DeSclafani's deals.

I agree cutting salary was the top priority for the offseason and in that trade, but even taking that into account it wasn't a good deal. If they paid 4 million for DeSclafani as a throw in they should've just given it to Michael Lorenzen as the extra 500k he's going to make this year is probably well spent since he's likely to actually throw a pitch.

[chpettit19]

57 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

That's an insane statement when we actually have a real time example of the Oakland As.  

The stated goal of being a sustained winner is a pretty tough line to balance with going all in in any particular year.  They are currently doing a pretty good job of that, now that they own every player in the organization we shall see if they can maintain.

I haven't seen the most simple explanation of the stated question of the article.  The one and only reason they keep trading for injured pitchers is that that's what is avaliable. That's it. That's the entire answer.

Even Pablo, our beloved white whale, had arm issues still after a Tommy John.  It's a good thing they traded for that injured pitcher.  

Pitchers are damaged goods, almost by definition. It's not an exact science.

Insane? So if you're not the absolute worst then it's ok?

Not trading Jorge Polanco isn't a "going all in" move. Doing a pretty good job of what? Cuz it's not sustaining winning. They won an historically bad division last year with 87 wins. They lost a nearly as bad division the 2 previous seasons. Most projection systems, or betting lines, have them in the mid-80s for wins again. If not even being able to get to 90 wins in a division where none of your competition even breaks .500 is what they're going for I'm not impressed.

100% disagree with that simple explanation. It's what's available for them on the cheap. Or hoped for cheap when it comes to trade costs. Dylan Cease was available instead of DeSclafani. Michael Lorenzen just signed for 500k more than DeSclafani and they wouldn't have had to trade anything at all for him. He was available. Corbin Burnes was available. Glasnow was available. Castillo was available when they traded for Mahle. There's far more guys available than just guys with current injury concerns. But those guys take more of an investment. So I think your simple explanation is missing the most important piece, cheapness. They go after these guys because they believe it won't cost as much and they hope it'll turn into a nice, cheap value move. Instead they've turned into bad, expensive loss moves.

Pablo Lopez threw 180 innings in 2022. People need to stop comparing guys who've been hurt to guys who are hurt. It's not the same thing. His Tommy John surgery was in 2014. That's far more insane of a statement than anything I've said on here.

There is a difference between "pitchers are damaged goods, almost by definition" and "Chris Paddack as an actually torn UCL and we're trading for him anyways." There are different levels of injury risks. The Twins have very clearly decided that they're going to try to save by taking on extra injury risk. Their highest paid player failed physicals with 2 other teams for goodness sake. 

[jkcarew]

I don’t think payroll constraints (real or imagined) necessarily needs to lead to acquisition of broken pitchers.

IMO, it’s simply poor management. Either poor scouting, poor due diligence, poor risk assessment, poor strategy, poor drafting/development…or some combination thereof. Of course it can happen. But no excuses for how often it’s happened to this FO.

[Major League Ready]

48 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

That's an insane statement when we actually have a real time example of the Oakland As.  

The stated goal of being a sustained winner is a pretty tough line to balance with going all in in any particular year.  They are currently doing a pretty good job of that, now that they own every player in the organization we shall see if they can maintain.

I haven't seen the most simple explanation of the stated question of the article.  The one and only reason they keep trading for injured pitchers is that that's what is avaliable. That's it. That's the entire answer.

Even Pablo, our beloved white whale, had arm issues still after a Tommy John.  It's a good thing they traded for that injured pitcher.  

Pitchers are damaged goods, almost by definition. It's not an exact science.

While we would all like sustained success, many TDers place overwhelmingly more importance on the current year and very much favor asset management focused on the present.  That emphasis will assure less sustained success and that's why we see a disconnect with many fans when someone like Polanco is traded.   He was no longer a starter.  The most successful mid/small market teams have done a great job trading that type of player for prospects.  Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and Oakland produce more WAR by trading for prospects or unproven ML talent than they do drafting.   We talk about Cleveland producing pitching but don't stop to realize that Corey Kluber, Mike Clevinger, Carlos Carrasco, Trevor Bauer, Bryan Shaw, Justin Masterson, and Emmanuel Clase were acquired as prospects.  

[Jocko87]

52 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Insane? So if you're not the absolute worst then it's ok?

Not what I said but, anyway.  How about taking hyperbole to new heights?  It rhymes, I mean, rhythms.  Of the names you mentioned, there are some who have been injured and some who will be injured.  It's not cheap to avoid risky investments, its good risk management.

13 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

We talk about Cleveland producing pitching but don't stop to realize that Corey Kluber, Mike Clevinger, Carlos Carrasco, Trevor Bauer, Bryan Shaw, Justin Masterson, and Emmanuel Clase were acquired as prospects.  

I've been screaming that as loud as I can.  They have a specific strategy for pitching that does not include large free agent signings or spending prospects on fully developed guys.  It's quite smart, actually. 

[chpettit19]

35 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

Not what I said but, anyway.  How about taking hyperbole to new heights?  It rhymes, I mean, rhythms.  Of the names you mentioned, there are some who have been injured and some who will be injured.  It's not cheap to avoid risky investments, its good risk management.

The Twins haven't avoided risky investments, that's literally the point. The Twins have actively searched out risky investments because they're cheaper than ones with less risk. The least risky Carlos Correa cost 13 years and 350 million dollars. A slightly less risky Correa cost 12 years and 315 million. The Twins invested in the riskiest Correa at 6 years and 200 million. The Twins got Carlos Correa because he was a risky investment.

A pitcher who is fully healthy at the time of acquisition with no current, known health concerns costs more than a pitcher with known health concerns. The Twins have chosen to avoid "good risk management" in the name of cheap asset management. The names listed in this article are Anthony DeSclafani, Sam Dyson, Chris Paddack, Tyler Mahle, and Kenta Maeda. You, and others, are trying to add Sonny and Pablo and whoever else to the discussion, but it's not what the article and discussion is about. The Twins have chosen to take on extra risk because it's a cheaper investment. And it hasn't worked.

When they chose to invest in the less risky Pablo it cost them more and it turned out quite well. They've chosen to deploy the significantly less successful strategy significantly more. It's a bad strategy.

[Jocko87]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

The Twins haven't avoided risky investments, that's literally the point. The Twins have actively searched out risky investments because they're cheaper than ones with less risk. The least risky Carlos Correa cost 13 years and 350 million dollars. A slightly less risky Correa cost 12 years and 315 million. The Twins invested in the riskiest Correa at 6 years and 200 million. The Twins got Carlos Correa because he was a risky investment.

A pitcher who is fully healthy at the time of acquisition with no current, known health concerns costs more than a pitcher with known health concerns. The Twins have chosen to avoid "good risk management" in the name of cheap asset management. The names listed in this article are Anthony DeSclafani, Sam Dyson, Chris Paddack, Tyler Mahle, and Kenta Maeda. You, and others, are trying to add Sonny and Pablo and whoever else to the discussion, but it's not what the article and discussion is about. The Twins have chosen to take on extra risk because it's a cheaper investment. And it hasn't worked.

When they chose to invest in the less risky Pablo it cost them more and it turned out quite well. They've chosen to deploy the significantly less successful strategy significantly more. It's a bad strategy.

You see bad strategy and failure, I see top 5 staff in the game last year and projected top 5 staff in the game this year.  It's not luck.  Volume is a central part of the strategy. 

Correa only failed one physical that mattered. Steve Cohen took all the risk out of that deal. 

I never mentioned Sonny, but man I hated that Brock Stewart injury pickup. 

[Cris E]

6 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Again, there is a difference between having an injury history and having just been hurt, or even being actively hurt at the time. Paddack had a known UCL tear, comparing that to general IL trip 3 seasons before isn't the same thing. Mahle had shoulder issues less than a month before they traded for him. DeSclafani ended the season with elbow and forearm problems. You can list all the random IL stints you want, but it simply isn't the same as trading for guys with active injury problems. It just isn't. 

And the strategy of trading for guys with known, current injury problems wasn't what lead them to succeed last year. In fact, the 2 guys they did that with (Mahle and Paddack) had virtually 0 impact on their season at all. Trading for guys with known, current injury problems has provided 0 value, but has cost multiple, legitimate MLB players for no return. It's a bad strategy. 

PIneda was signed while recovering from TJ surgery and then threw 282 innings of sub-4.00 ERA ball in 53 starts for the Twins in 2019-21. That was the exact same type of deal that Paddack was signed to and you're just going to have to wait a few months to see how it turns out.

Sonny Grey was on the DL three separate times in 2021 and then we picked him up and babied him through 2022 and he still hit the DL four times. You can't just hand-wave that away just because it wasn't a twelve month elbow recovery.  You want to pretend he was healthy or something because he was inconvenient to your argument, but that's no good: Grey threw only 135 and 119 innings in 2021 and 2022. The 50 innings he missed each of those years had to be covered by someone significantly worse than him. Injuries are not binary: Grey was both good and unavailable those years and we felt having as much of him as  possible was better than a worse healthy guy.

Meanwhile Mahle had a sore arm that might have been nothing or might have been Pineda, It turned out to be a Pineda elbow, but they didn't re-sign him through the TJ process for some reason, which I feel was a mistake. If you are buying despite the risks then you accept the injuries and stay the course with the truly talented guys until they prove they really can't stay healthy. I think Mahle is going to be pretty good and we should have easily been there at 2/$22m.

I think we agree that not all injuries are created equal, but I (and I think the Twins front office) believe elbows are pretty simple these days, so if you can get a deal on the recovery years then those guys can be solid investments. We took a flyer on Grey and it worked. We took on Maeda and it worked half way. We tried Mahle and bailed before it worked and we'll have to see how he turns out in Texas to know the final truth. Descalfani has never had a solid healthy stretch and was passed around several times last season because no one expected him to perform. We added him to the bottom of the list in case he was OK, not as a building block. Paddack was Pineda and could be very good. 

I'm not sure who you think we should have picked up last winter, but right now we have the makings of a very good staff. Some were injury dice rolls and some were pickups and others were home grown, but I think mixing in some injured guys has been fruitful for us enough of the time for it to remain a viable strategy. It seems we disagree.

 

[Doc Munson]

NONE of these 3 points speak to why the Twins trade for injured pitchers like stated in title.  1) The "all pitchers have injuries" an dincluding pitchers who are currently injured such as Cole has ZERO legit comparison. PLUS all of the Twins trade targets had injury histories as recently as the previous year that they had been battling, and never fully recovered from, it is not like Cole who has been reliable and now suddenly having an injury. Every one of our pitchers have come with KNOWN, and RECENT  injury histories.

2) The front office refusing to leverage the farm for frontline starting pitching is pointless as well.  First it takes two to make a deal, Miami has more frontline pitching and they traded none of it.  am sure others were interested as well. Chicago was never going to trade us Cease in the division. You mentioned the Mahle trade, they gave up top prospects there (but again for an injured pitcher) so they ARE willing to move prospects.  Also you seem to ignore trading away the recent 1st rounder in Chase Pety who is now a top 100 prospect and still just 20, Finally the trade to get Pablo while not trading prospects, they traded the reigning batting champion which shows even MORE of a willingness to trade quality. So basically they ARE willing to trade when the deal is right, 

3) Giving large contracts to pitchers just doesn't always work???  um well DUH!!!  but that is not the supposed point of this article. giving big contracts has nothing to do with why the Twins would trade for injured pitchers,

 

[Brandon]

19 hours ago, killertwinfan said:

Issue number 1 is they are cheap.  They do not spend at the level most teams do relative to market size.  So new ownership would help more than anything else. I understand the strategy, you know the player can perform if healthy.  They are buying cheap because the player is hurt.  Unfortunately this strategy has not returned the results they desired. 

New revenue streams will also help.  Probably more than new owners.  Maybe you can focus on helping the Twins generate an extra 60-80-100 million a season so they can add to payroll.  

[Brandon]

13 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

 The alternative, to me, is that they feel a market inefficiency is to take on extra injury risk to save money and possibly trade capital, and have been wrong. It hasn't worked at all to this point as they have spent significant trade capital and haven't gotten any results from the injured players.

Do you not question the idea of a team preaching deep playoff run aspirations dedicating a rotation spot to a "throw in?" I'd argue suggesting DeSclafani is a throw in is suggesting the Twins front office is "stupid." But maybe others think throw in rotation spots are how championship teams are built.

I agree the Twins are looking for market in efficiency.  Maeda elbow was deemed a prime candidate for tommy John surgery when he came over from Japan.  That is how the Dodgers signed him to the 3 million guarantee with 10 million per year incentives.  He was moved to the pen to save on the incentives.  The Twins did well in this injury acquisition.  Mahle was returning from a dead arm / tired shoulder when we traded for him.  He seemed fine otherwise.  That is why the high cost in prospects he wasn’t deemed the big injury risk.  He just got hurt.  The Twins won the Pineda signing and that became a new trend thus taking away the inefficiency bonus we got.  Gray was just a straight up trade.  And with what I read in the papers it seemed the Mariners were trying to trade prospects for Polanco but the Twins publicly said any trade would have to help the current team.  I bet that is how Descafani ant Topa ended up in the trade.  The Mariners were probably trying to trade other prospects while Minnesota was trying to trade for one of their better young starters.  The trade we got looks like a compromise to get a deal done.  I think the Twins were hoping for 10-20 starts before he went down.  Everyone is complaining that the Twins haven’t developed pitching but don’t take into account how much 2020 hurt development.  It happened right at a pivotal point.  Enlow among others missed a key season of development.  The pitching pipeline seems to be filling now as we have quite a few pitching prospects at AA and AAA this season.  I for one am happy with the job this front office did this offseason with the resources they had.  

[chpettit19]

9 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

You see bad strategy and failure, I see top 5 staff in the game last year and projected top 5 staff in the game this year.  It's not luck.  Volume is a central part of the strategy. 

Correa only failed one physical that mattered. Steve Cohen took all the risk out of that deal. 

I never mentioned Sonny, but man I hated that Brock Stewart injury pickup. 

The trades for injured pitchers isn't what lead to the top 5 staffs. The injured pitchers didn't provide any value. You're still not discussing the topic at hand. Mahle didn't help. Paddack didn't help. DeSclafani isn't going to help this year. You're talking about different things.

The strategy of trading for pitchers with active injury concerns hasn't worked. There's no argument that it has.

And Brock Stewart was a minor league signing before 2022. Again, that is simply not the same thing as trading for an injured pitcher. You're moving the goalposts on this article. The article is about "trading for injured pitchers."

[chpettit19]

7 hours ago, Cris E said:

PIneda was signed while recovering from TJ surgery and then threw 282 innings of sub-4.00 ERA ball in 53 starts for the Twins in 2019-21. That was the exact same type of deal that Paddack was signed to and you're just going to have to wait a few months to see how it turns out.

Sonny Grey was on the DL three separate times in 2021 and then we picked him up and babied him through 2022 and he still hit the DL four times. You can't just hand-wave that away just because it wasn't a twelve month elbow recovery.  You want to pretend he was healthy or something because he was inconvenient to your argument, but that's no good: Grey threw only 135 and 119 innings in 2021 and 2022. The 50 innings he missed each of those years had to be covered by someone significantly worse than him. Injuries are not binary: Grey was both good and unavailable those years and we felt having as much of him as  possible was better than a worse healthy guy.

Meanwhile Mahle had a sore arm that might have been nothing or might have been Pineda, It turned out to be a Pineda elbow, but they didn't re-sign him through the TJ process for some reason, which I feel was a mistake. If you are buying despite the risks then you accept the injuries and stay the course with the truly talented guys until they prove they really can't stay healthy. I think Mahle is going to be pretty good and we should have easily been there at 2/$22m.

I think we agree that not all injuries are created equal, but I (and I think the Twins front office) believe elbows are pretty simple these days, so if you can get a deal on the recovery years then those guys can be solid investments. We took a flyer on Grey and it worked. We took on Maeda and it worked half way. We tried Mahle and bailed before it worked and we'll have to see how he turns out in Texas to know the final truth. Descalfani has never had a solid healthy stretch and was passed around several times last season because no one expected him to perform. We added him to the bottom of the list in case he was OK, not as a building block. Paddack was Pineda and could be very good. 

I'm not sure who you think we should have picked up last winter, but right now we have the makings of a very good staff. Some were injury dice rolls and some were pickups and others were home grown, but I think mixing in some injured guys has been fruitful for us enough of the time for it to remain a viable strategy. It seems we disagree.

 

Pineda was signed, not traded for. He didn't cost anything in trade capital while also being signed to a deal with the full knowledge that he wouldn't be pitching the first year. Paddack was traded for with the hope that he'd be a rotation piece in 2022 and moving forward. Yes, after their bet blew up on them they signed him to a cheap extension to gain another year, but that wasn't the plan. Those aren't the same thing.

Sonny Gray didn't have an active, known injury concern. There's a reason he wasn't listed on the article that you're now commenting on. You're trying to move the goalposts of this discussion. The players named in the article about "injured pitchers," not pitchers who had been injured before, are guys who had active, known raised injury concerns at the time of the trade. Sonny doesn't fit that bill no matter how many times you want to bring him up. You're the one actively changing the rules of somebody else's article because they aren't convenient for your argument. 

Mahle had a shoulder problem and that's what put him down in 2022 just after he came back. He had an active, known injury concern and these pages were full of people complaining about trading for him (I actually liked the trade at the time, but have since seen that taking on injury risk is their strategy and am now against it as that strategy hasn't paid any dividends yet while costing legitimate MLB talent) because he had that active, known injury concern. And it almost immediately sprang up and ended his season. I agree I would've signed that Mahle deal, but I don't think the Twins liked his communication about his arm and he was done here no matter what.

Paddack, DeSclafani, and Stewart were the injury dice rolls, right? Am I missing someone else? Paddack is going to be counted on. DeSclafani has already failed. And I'm going to need to see more than 27 successful innings out of Stewart before I deem him as fruitful. And Stewart was signed to a minor league deal so he required no real investment so still doesn't meet the criteria of this article about trading for injured pitchers.

We do seem to disagree some, but are also discussing different things. You seem to be standing on the staff as a whole while I'm discussing the trades for actively injured pitchers that this article is about. I think they've done a nice enough job of building their staff, but the trades for actively injured pitchers haven't been successful outside of Maeda. The rest have been horrible trades that made the team worse. We'll see if Paddack can finally put together a full season this year and maybe make up a little ground 2 years after he was acquired.

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

14 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Then they need to quit saying they're trying to win this year. If they're trading a heart of the order hitter for a reliever and bad pitching depth because they're hoping a no glove, no discipline A ball hitter figures it out in 2 or 3 years they aren't trying to win. 

And who says Varland is better? People hope he's better but the reason he was slated for AAA is because he wasn't good enough to be a big league starter last year. The Twins needed real major league pitching this offseason, not depth. They've said as much themselves. Even if the only thing they were going for was depth he's still a bad target as an injured pitcher isn't actually depth at all. 

I don't think you could have made this comment more doom and gloom if you tried.

Acting like Jorge is a big bopper and no comment on his recent injury history, downplaying a global top 100 prospect as some schlub, and Varland was slated for AAA for the same reason Bailey Ober was last year - DeSclafani doesn't have options and you know you're going to have to call up an MLB quality starter at some point in the season. 

[chpettit19]

12 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

I don't think you could have made this comment more doom and gloom if you tried.

Acting like Jorge is a big bopper and no comment on his recent injury history, downplaying a global top 100 prospect as some schlub, and Varland was slated for AAA for the same reason Bailey Ober was last year - DeSclafani doesn't have options and you know you're going to have to call up an MLB quality starter at some point in the season. 

Jorge Polanco is about to hit 3 hole for a playoff contender. He hit 2 hole in the playoffs for this very team last season. If that's not a "heart of the order hitter" I don't know what the definition of "heart of the order hitter" is. If the Twins have no place for him in their lineup this is going to be an incredibly fun season and we should be talking about them as a 100 win team, not somewhere in the mid-80s. Is Louis Varland an MLB quality starter? Because he got passed up by 35 year old Dallas Keuchel last year. I'm pretty sure that wasn't to keep an MLB quality starter in AAA as depth. We hope Varland is an MLB quality starter, but he hasn't proven to be yet. That's not doom and gloom it's reality. And top 100 prospects with no plate discipline fail constantly. That's just reality. And I'm not interested in top 100 prospects for the 2 hole hitter in a lineup coming off an ALDS trip.

It's not doom and gloom to point out that a team in an awful division predicted to win 85-87 games has some legitimate questions. People around here are acting like this is a 100 win team. The reality is that this is likely a solid team who should make the playoffs, but has real question marks, and wouldn't have a 30 for 30 made about the great collapse of the juggernaut 2024 Twins if they lose the division. If you're predicting 100 wins, sure, my post was doom and gloom. If you're like all the projection systems and betting lines and are looking at last year's results and predicting mid-80s for wins then you have questions, too. Not sure why me pointing out 2 of them is doom and gloom.

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

11 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Jorge Polanco is about to hit 3 hole for a playoff contender. He hit 2 hole in the playoffs for this very team last season. If that's not a "heart of the order hitter" I don't know what the definition of "heart of the order hitter" is. If the Twins have no place for him in their lineup this is going to be an incredibly fun season and we should be talking about them as a 100 win team, not somewhere in the mid-80s. Is Louis Varland an MLB quality starter? Because he got passed up by 35 year old Dallas Keuchel last year. I'm pretty sure that wasn't to keep an MLB quality starter in AAA as depth. We hope Varland is an MLB quality starter, but he hasn't proven to be yet. That's not doom and gloom it's reality. And top 100 prospects with no plate discipline fail constantly. That's just reality. And I'm not interested in top 100 prospects for the 2 hole hitter in a lineup coming off an ALDS trip.

It's not doom and gloom to point out that a team in an awful division predicted to win 85-87 games has some legitimate questions. People around here are acting like this is a 100 win team. The reality is that this is likely a solid team who should make the playoffs, but has real question marks, and wouldn't have a 30 for 30 made about the great collapse of the juggernaut 2024 Twins if they lose the division. If you're predicting 100 wins, sure, my post was doom and gloom. If you're like all the projection systems and betting lines and are looking at last year's results and predicting mid-80s for wins then you have questions, too. Not sure why me pointing out 2 of them is doom and gloom.

But putting words in peoples mouths like bolded above and only projecting negative isn't realism.

Polanco is a fine hitter who has had a ton of recent injuries and it would be silly to think he'll be completely healthy. He also is solidly below Royce/Correa/Julien on this team in terms of middle IF at bats. The Mariners famously had bad infield hitting outside of a blip season from JP Crawford, that's the entire reason why they traded for Polanco. Outside of JRod and Raleigh, the Mariners offense might well be a tough watch this season.

 

Quote

Because he got passed up by 35 year old Dallas Keuchel last year.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Saying that Louie Varland is a worse pitcher than Dallas Keuchel is full-blown ridiculous. This isn't the first time a rookie has had a rough few games and gets sent down, and it won't be the last. It's just as ridiculous as saying "Bailey Ober was passed up by Tyler Mahle and Kenta Maeda" would be.

Quote

And I'm not interested in top 100 prospects for the 2 hole hitter in a lineup coming off an ALDS trip.

Since we're talking projections, Polanco is projected at a .322 wOBA which would be 8th of the Twins starters.

I have zero interest in letting a guy go for absolutely nothing after this season when he would maybe be the 6th best batter in the lineup and take away reps from young players when you can get a top 100 prospect plus some for him. 

 

I have no problem with asking questions about this team. I (obviously) don't think they're close to a 100 win team, but this division is shaping up to be a cakewalk yet again.

I do have problems with overexaggerating the players and moves made in search of pure negativity. 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

22 hours ago, KBJ1 said:

This team needs to sign Jordan Montgomery right now! I agree with let the kids play. Would much rather see Austin Martin flourish than signing a utility backup like Margot. Margot DeSclafani & Santana is $15M they could have spent elsewhere. I hope these players contribute, but it's starting to look like we got an also ran, and injury and a has been for that money.

 

 What a waste of money to have signed Margot and DeSclafani. Santana is a healthy, professional hitter, who is a good fielding first baseman.

[chpettit19]

21 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

But putting words in peoples mouths like bolded above and only projecting negative isn't realism.

Polanco is a fine hitter who has had a ton of recent injuries and it would be silly to think he'll be completely healthy. He also is solidly below Royce/Correa/Julien on this team in terms of middle IF at bats. The Mariners famously had bad infield hitting outside of a blip season from JP Crawford, that's the entire reason why they traded for Polanco. Outside of JRod and Raleigh, the Mariners offense might well be a tough watch this season.

 

This is exactly what I am talking about. Saying that Louie Varland is a worse pitcher than Dallas Keuchel is full-blown ridiculous. This isn't the first time a rookie has had a rough few games and gets sent down, and it won't be the last. It's just as ridiculous as saying "Bailey Ober was passed up by Tyler Mahle and Kenta Maeda" would be.

Since we're talking projections, Polanco is projected at a .322 wOBA which would be 8th of the Twins starters.

I have zero interest in letting a guy go for absolutely nothing after this season when he would maybe be the 6th best batter in the lineup and take away reps from young players when you can get a top 100 prospect plus some for him. 

 

I have no problem with asking questions about this team. I (obviously) don't think they're close to a 100 win team, but this division is shaping up to be a cakewalk yet again.

I do have problems with overexaggerating the players and moves made in search of pure negativity. 

I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. There have been hundreds of posts on this site stating that Jorge Polanco was no longer a starter in MN. There's actually one on this very thread. That's not me putting words in people's mouths, people are literally saying Jorge Polanco wouldn't be in this lineup. He would play everyday for the Twins (assuming health, like you have to do with Lewis and Correa and Buxton and Kirilloff). And people are acting like this is a 100 win team. I didn't say they're saying that (although there have been a few posts here and there that do say that), but they are acting like there's no concerns and this team is loaded.

Full-blown ridiculous? Am I wrong? Was Louis Varland not passed up by Dallas Keuchel last year? Louis Varland was already down in AAA with Dallas Keuchel, and had been there since June. The Twins needed a starting pitcher on August 6th (2 months after Louis got demoted) when they had a 4 game lead in the division with 2 months to go in the season and they chose Dallas Keuchel over Louis Varland. Louis Varland was deemed not good enough to be a starting pitcher on a team fighting for the division. Going into September they knew they didn't fully trust either Bailey Ober or Joe Ryan and they still didn't give Louis Varland starts. Those are the facts of the situation. That was what the Twins decided. Louis Varland was deemed a lesser option than Dallas Keuchel to make starts for a team that still hadn't locked up an historically bad division.

Which young player would Jorge take ABs from? Carlos Santana? Because that's who's taking the ABs from young guys now, and who replaced him in the lineup. Do you think they're just going to drop Santana for a young guy to give them ABs?

Is it shaping up to be a cake walk? The Tigers jumped 12 wins last year. If they do it again they win 90 games. They only need to improve 7 games to be right in the Twins win area. They've got some awfully big name young players expected to be really good, too. Twins aren't the only ones. You sure Cleveland's rotation is going to be as hurt as it was last year? Also a team loaded with young talent that is expected to be good. They were supposed to walk away with the cake walk central in 2023. Maybe the central isn't just a given for a team that is likely to not top 87 wins.

I'm not searching for pure negativity I'm laying out the realities of the situation. Jorge Polanco did hit 2 hole for the Twins in the playoffs when the only lineup regular who was out was Byron Buxton. Louis Varland was passed up by Dallas Keuchel when the Twins needed a major league starter last year. That's not searching for negativity it's pointing out the facts.

[DJL44]

13 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Expensive? Jorge Polanco cost 4 million more than Kyle freaking Farmer and 5 million more than 38 year Carlos Santana. If all they were trying to do was cut payroll there were far easier ways to do it without trading him. Farmer and Santana make more together than Polanco does. How about they just don't tender Farmer or sign Santana and they can find a cheap reliever and pitching depth for the same cost of Topa and DeSclafani's deals.

I agree cutting salary was the top priority for the offseason and in that trade, but even taking that into account it wasn't a good deal. If they paid 4 million for DeSclafani as a throw in they should've just given it to Michael Lorenzen as the extra 500k he's going to make this year is probably well spent since he's likely to actually throw a pitch.

Polanco is pretty expensive for the 80 games you can expect him to play. There isn't much excess value beyond his actual contract. That's why there was only one bidder. There's even less value to a team with Edouard Julien in the majors and Brooks Lee in the minors.

They added Gabriel Gonzalez which is a net improvement for the talent in the system and an improvement on your alternate scenario. You can find someone like Staumont for the money they're paying Topa - a reclamation project coming off injuries - but if you want someone who is healthy and was as effective as Topa was in 2023 (155 ERA+) they would need to pay more than $6M a season over multiple seasons. Topa would have been the 2nd best reliever on the Twins in 2023. That's the real value in the Polanco trade - 3 years of Topa and Gabriel Gonzalez.

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

19 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

And people are acting like this is a 100 win team. I didn't say they're saying that, but they are acting like there's no concerns and this team is loaded.

Full-blown ridiculous? Am I wrong? Was Louis Varland not passed up by Dallas Keuchel last year? Louis Varland was already down in AAA with Dallas Keuchel, and had been there since June. The Twins needed a starting pitcher on August 6th (2 months after Louis got demoted) when they had a 4 game lead in the division with 2 months to go in the season and they chose Dallas Keuchel over Louis Varland. Louis Varland was deemed not good enough to be a starting pitcher on a team fighting for the division. Going into September they knew they didn't fully trust either Bailey Ober or Joe Ryan and they still didn't give Louis Varland starts. Those are the facts of the situation. That was what the Twins decided. Louis Varland was deemed a lesser option than Dallas Keuchel to make starts for a team that still hadn't locked up an historically bad division.

Which young player would Jorge take ABs from? Carlos Santana? Because that's who's taking the ABs from young guys now, and who replaced him in the lineup. Do you think they're just going to drop Santana for a young guy to give them ABs?

Is it shaping up to be a cake walk? The Tigers jumped 12 wins last year. If they do it again they win 90 games. They only need to improve 7 games to be right in the Twins win area. They've got some awfully big name young players expected to be really good, too. Twins aren't the only ones. You sure Cleveland's rotation is going to be as hurt as it was last year? Also a team loaded with young talent that is expected to be good. They were supposed to walk away with the cake walk central in 2023. Maybe the central isn't just a given for a team that is likely to not top 87 wins.

I'm not searching for pure negativity I'm laying out the realities of the situation. Jorge Polanco did hit 2 hole for the Twins in the playoffs when the only lineup regular who was out was Byron Buxton. Louis Varland was passed up by Dallas Keuchel when the Twins needed a major league starter last year. That's not searching for negativity it's pointing out the facts.

"People aren't actually saying the thing I'm accusing them of saying" is wild. You're reading implications that aren't there and acting like that is some dominating sentiment here.

Not sure who "Louis" Varland is but.... They clearly had a plan for Louie to come out of the bullpen in the playoffs and that was discussed for much of the summer last year. Yes, any statement alluding to saying Dallas Keuchel is a better starter than Louie Varland is full-blown ridiculous. Not sure how many more times I'll have to say that he was a rookie last year. Completely disregarding age when discussing pitching is silly.

Polanco would take ABs from any young infielder. Julien, Kirilloff and eventually Brooks Lee. Santana plays a strong 1B, and will be a platoon RHB once Brooks Lee is called up, or just the 1B if Kirilloff is injured or stinks. 

Sorry, I just can't past the dichotomy of you saying the Tigers are going to win 12 more games than last year and getting mad at some boogeyman posters saying the Twins are a 100 win team. Neither of those things are close to reality, in the slightest.

Cleveland's rotation is already injured, FYI.

You are "laying out the facts" in the way that many people talk about "lies, damned lies and statistics". 

Here are some facts for you - Polanco is projected to be the Twins 8th most productive hitter and 90% of teams would kill to have Louie Varland as their 5th starter.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Polanco is pretty expensive for the 80 games you can expect him to play. There isn't much excess value beyond his actual contract. That's why there was only one bidder. There's even less value to a team with Edouard Julien in the majors and Brooks Lee in the minors.

They added Gabriel Gonzalez which is a net improvement for the talent in the system and an improvement on your alternate scenario. You can find someone like Staumont for the money they're paying Topa - a reclamation project coming off injuries - but if you want someone who is healthy and was as effective as Topa was in 2023 (155 ERA+) they would need to pay more than $6M a season over multiple seasons. Topa would have been the 2nd best reliever on the Twins in 2023. That's the real value in the Polanco trade - 3 years of Topa and Gabriel Gonzalez.

Jay Jackson signed for 1.3. Everyone loves Brock Stewart and he was signed on a minor league deal. Last year they let Hoffman walk out of a minor league deal and he was just as good as Topa, too. So we're just going to have to agree to disagree that 3 years of Topa had to cost Jorge Polanco.

You're more than welcome to like that trade. In terms of pure value I think they did nicely. I don't care about pure value when trading your 2 hole hitter from an ALDS team when the vast majority of that value comes from a prospect. I understand the idea of not letting guys go for nothing, especially on teams that don't spend, but that trade, in my opinion, made the 2024 Twins a less talented team. And I'm not interested in taking steps back from an ALDS team. I want steps forward. I don't believe that trade helped the 2024 Twins and I have a problem with that at this point of their team building cycle.

[DJL44]

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

that trade, in my opinion, made the 2024 Twins a less talented team

Cutting $25-30M out of the payroll was pretty certain to lead to a less talented team.