Royce Lewis, Trevor Larnach, and the Two-Step Arbitration Shuffle

[bjorks]

5 hours ago, mluebker said:

Keaschall at first. If he’s going to have to learn a position to keep his bat in the lineup, it might as well be there. And I don’t buy the whole “a first baseman must be a power hitter” line of thinking. He’s a solid hitter who creates excitement on the basepaths, two things Lewis has demonstrated he isn’t.

As for Lewis’s hypothetical upside, how many years are we going to talk about that before acknowledging that he’s showed us who he is already? If they can’t trade him, DFA him and let both him and the Twins move on.

Theres 1%> Keaschall will ever play at 1B. 

As mentioned yesterday if the Cards actually would be open to trading Burleson, who's in Y2 of arb, can you attach Lewis, w/Zebby, ERod, and a lower level Top 30 guy? The (oh please lord) new owner, who may want to make a splash move, or Tom will have to decide if Burleson is eventually a $30+ AAV type player? And if he is are you OK if he regresses to what he was, which was closer to Josh Bell? 

[LA Vikes Fan]

5 hours ago, Linus said:

To me, money is not the issue. Neither arbitration amount is that onerous. The question is - do you want the player?  I would probably bring Lewis back but only with the caveat that he earns playing time and might end up as a utility player. Larnach shouldn’t play in the field but I want to shoot higher if I’m going to have a full time DH. It’s complicated by the fact that EmRod has a substantial chance of being a bust and has no options. If he thrives we have no use for Larnach; if he busts Larnachs OPS+ of 121 looks pretty good as a safety net. 

This, and it applies to both players. Larnach is a problem to have if EmRod and to a lesser extent Roden are healthy and showing promise. Lewis "clogs up" the infield if Houston is ready to take over SS or 2B, or we trade for a 2B, and need 1B for Clemens because we don't want him to be a super utility. On the other hand, if what we saw in the small 50 AB tryout we gave to EMRod is who he really is and Roden is the guy he was in 2025 and not the guy he showed in his 100 AB tryout in 2026, it sure would be nice to have Laranach around. 

In other words, there are a lot of moving pieces here. Both Lewis and Larnach could have value on the roster or be completely redundant. That's true you before you consider who we might get in a trade or trade away, which adds even more uncertainty. That's why you don't make a decision now or at some arbitrary deadline like the tender deadline. You grow some cojones and wait on that decision until you have to make it because the circumstances are likely to change in a way that could impact that decision. Tender them both, come to terms with them both if you have to. Try to trade them from the day after the World Series ends until the last day of Spring Training if you have to wait that long. The only way you lose that bet is if you have players for their positions that you like better and you can't get anything in a trade for one or both, and I mean not even a decent AA player or high upside A ball lottery ticket. You go in with a competitive mindset and that you lose one or both guys if you have better players even if you have to eat their salary. It's a $5 million or $6 million bet per player. I think it's worth making that bet given the cost of player acquisition and development. The conservative cost certain approach would be to try to trade them before the tender deadline and then nontender them if you can't get a return. That's a lousy bet. Pay the money and take your chances. Go big or go home, don't hide your checkbook when it's time to take some risk to make some money. You can't reach your ceiling if you don't jump so grab your balls and jump for a change.

[Linus]

34 minutes ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

This, and it applies to both players. Larnach is a problem to have if EmRod and to a lesser extent Roden are healthy and showing promise. Lewis "clogs up" the infield if Houston is ready to take over SS or 2B, or we trade for a 2B, and need 1B for Clemens because we don't want him to be a super utility. On the other hand, if what we saw in the small 50 AB tryout we gave to EMRod is who he really is and Roden is the guy he was in 2025 and not the guy he showed in his 100 AB tryout in 2026, it sure would be nice to have Laranach around. 

In other words, there are a lot of moving pieces here. Both Lewis and Larnach could have value on the roster or be completely redundant. That's true you before you consider who we might get in a trade or trade away, which adds even more uncertainty. That's why you don't make a decision now or at some arbitrary deadline like the tender deadline. You grow some cojones and wait on that decision until you have to make it because the circumstances are likely to change in a way that could impact that decision. Tender them both, come to terms with them both if you have to. Try to trade them from the day after the World Series ends until the last day of Spring Training if you have to wait that long. The only way you lose that bet is if you have players for their positions that you like better and you can't get anything in a trade for one or both, and I mean not even a decent AA player or high upside A ball lottery ticket. You go in with a competitive mindset and that you lose one or both guys if you have better players even if you have to eat their salary. It's a $5 million or $6 million bet per player. I think it's worth making that bet given the cost of player acquisition and development. The conservative cost certain approach would be to try to trade them before the tender deadline and then nontender them if you can't get a return. That's a lousy bet. Pay the money and take your chances. Go big or go home, don't hide your checkbook when it's time to take some risk to make some money. You can't reach your ceiling if you don't jump so grab your balls and jump for a change.

I really agree with your “lots of moving pieces” description. It’s kind of been that way for the last several years which is why this concerns me some. 

[ziggy]

6 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

If the player wins, they are obligated to sign him. They aren't obligated to keep him. But they still have to pay them. Losing arbitration and then just releasing the player is awful roster management. You're suggesting dropping 12+ million for absolutely nothing.

It's my understanding that if the team loses arbitration they do not have to sign the player.

[soyouresayingtheresachance]

Non Tender both. If you're sure you can make a deal, then sign and trade 

[tony&rodney]

23 minutes ago, ziggy said:

It's my understanding that if the team loses arbitration they do not have to sign the player.

When a team agrees to go to arbitration they have agreed to a contract. Clubs may sign the player before a hearing and a player may be traded but the contract is done, except for the amount, once the team makes the decision to go to arbitration.

[TheLeviathan]

6 hours ago, Twins GFP said:

Another article where the bulk of the comments suggest the Twins throw away viable big league assets for nothing.

 

We have very different definitions of "viable" and "assets"

[chpettit19]

40 minutes ago, ziggy said:

It's my understanding that if the team loses arbitration they do not have to sign the player.

They 100% do. The arbitration decision is a binding agreement. Once the arbitrators pick the number, (team or player) that is the contract that has to be signed by both parties and the player is guaranteed that salary. There's no backing out once you offer arbitration. Once it's offered, you either agree to a number before your hearing, or you're bound by the result of the hearing.

[old nurse]

3 hours ago, MeleMouth said:

The Rays would trade Larnach for a 40 prospect pitcher who they thought they could tweak.

Even the Rays couldn’t get a 40 prospect for Larnach. They would find a pitcher they could teak and then trade that player after a successful year

[MeleMouth]

5 minutes ago, old nurse said:

Even the Rays couldn’t get a 40 prospect for Larnach. They would find a pitcher they could teak and then trade that player after a successful year

The Rays got a 40 prospect pitcher for Orze. You'd think Larnach could fetch at least the same. Of course, the Rays got the 40 prospect from the Twins.

[old nurse]

38 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

We have very different definitions of "viable" and "assets"

If there was a team out there that had a need for a LF platoon and as a stopgap player and ignores the previous years of hitting he is viable.  There is also a needle in a haystack somewhere 

[TheLeviathan]

1 minute ago, old nurse said:

If there was a team out there that had a need for a LF platoon and as a stopgap player and ignores the previous years of hitting he is viable.  There is also a needle in a haystack somewhere 

By all means we should ask around.  I'm willing to take on the castaway of another franchise too, but that's what we're talking about here:  castaway for castaway swaps where you believe you can squeeze more out of a player than the last team.

Those aren't assets I'm sweating over losing, but I'll absolutely explore if I can squeeze one last drop of value out of them.

[Cris E]

1 hour ago, tony&rodney said:

When a team agrees to go to arbitration they have agreed to a contract. Clubs may sign the player before a hearing and a player may be traded but the contract is done, except for the amount, once the team makes the decision to go to arbitration.

It's worth noting that the Twins rarely go to arbitration with their players. They almost always split the difference on the submitted numbers to avoid nasty hearings and the players almost always sign for the same reason. Of course we haven't had a lot of Skubal-like arbitration cases so there's no saying what would happen if they did run into one where they had to dig their heels in a bit.