Crickets chirping

[jay]

Except that you put an almost entirely positive spin on your projections. How often does everything go right?

 

The number of "ifs" in your projection are precisely the problem. When you have that many question marks, it's fairly likely that a decent percentage of them will not be answered with a surprise positive outcome.

 

Your point is absolutely right if you're looking at the 26-27 upside. I think the 17 out there with Steamer right now is too low -- Mauer (falsely low on defense at 1B, come on), Willingham (can't see he played injured), and Dozier (even if the league adjusts, I don't think he'll regress that far) specifically. I'm taking the over on 17, what about you?

[TheLeviathan]

Your point is absolutely right if you're looking at the 26-27 upside. I think the 17 out there with Steamer right now is too low -- Mauer (falsely low on defense at 1B, come on), Willingham (can't see he played injured), and Dozier (even if the league adjusts, I don't think he'll regress that far) specifically. I'm taking the over on 17, what about you?

 

I'd probably look at a push. I think give or take that's about right.

[jay]

I'd probably look at a push. I think give or take that's about right.

 

If you use the exact same playing time distribution that FG is using and simply use Oliver instead of Steamer, you end up with 19.7. That's a pretty significant difference. You're welcome to take 17, but 20 feels a little closer to me. It doesn't take much going right from there to reach the 22 that I originally mentioned.

[jay]

The real value of Drew is not this year. He might push their 82-win season to 85. Still, they don't make the playoffs, and likely slip at least two slots in the draft.

 

The real value of Drew is next year and the year after. The difference between 90 and 92 wins could mean the difference between going to the postseason or not.

 

This is spot on. I'd be happy to see the Twins sign Drew. It would feel good to fix it NOW and keep money out of Pohlad's pocket at the same time. I'm just not convinced we can't get to that same conclusion when it counts by getting one of the guys that will be available next year if still needed without committing years and dollars to Drew today. Considering Drew's shortfalls, it might even be the better option.

[jokin]

That's certainly possible, but definitely not as written in stone as you're making it out to be. As I'm sure you know (and may even be referencing), FG introduced a new feature that provides depth charts and projections for 2014 using Steamer. The Twins are projected to pick up 17.1 WAR from their non-pitchers which, as you mentioned (cited?), would be bottom quintile.

 

Go through it position by position though and tell me there isn't significantly more upside than downside:

C - 3.0 WAR, feels about right

1B - Mauer projected for only 3 WAR with a lower wOBA than we've seen from him in a longgg time and a lot of negative defensive value. Look at Oliver... 2.3 WAR higher based on basically just defensive value. Mauer could be +2 WAR above the Steamer projection very easily, +3 with a good year.

2B - Dozier projected for just 1.3 WAR after putting up 2.8 last year, including his dismal start. Again, Oliver disagrees significantly here pegging him to match last year (still including that start). He can easily be +1.5 here by only matching all of last year, as high as +2.5 if he maintains his June-Sept pace from this year when we saw his mechanics and plate discipline change.

SS - Still no bat value, but Florimon brings the D. Steamer has him regressing there while Oliver doesn't. Very easy to be +.5 here, +1 with even the slightest offensive improvement at all.

3B - Relatively upbeat on Plouffe, but keep Sano in mind here and the possibility of what he could bring relatively early on.

LF - If Hammer is healthy, these projections have to be his floor. Their models can't tell that he played injured last year. They see an aging slugger who declined badly last year. Wouldn't be tough to be +1 here, +1.5 if he rebounds a bit more than I think he will.

CF - Presley projects decently from what we've seen. Can't ignore chance of Hicks breaking out or even Buxton coming up later in the year.

RF - Arcia also projects out decently, but plenty of room for him to blossom beyond those numbers as well.

DH - Kubel gets zero love here. Twins can easily pick up .5 here, +1 if Kubel shows up.

 

So, extremely easy to see the Twins closer to 22 WAR on offense with upside for even as much as 26-27. 22 would put them right at league average. I don't think we're as bad off as you're making it sound. If 17 and bottom quintile is the over/under, I'm betting heavy on the over.

 

The problem with your excellent analysis- on which we both can agree is in the realm of the possible- is that so much is based on hope and defiance of the probable. All the teams that finished below them on offense, in the AL at least, with the exception of the Astros, have significantly upgraded their offense. The Twins are hoping that Kubel somehow ressurrects himself to his 2012 form, and that's it, thus far, that is their only outside "upgrade", and Kubel's contact % and K% have completely imploded over the last 3 years.

[Highabove]

Unspent payroll money is not carried over from one season to the next. It's not saved for a rainy day. The Twins have stated that yearly payroll is determined by the projected revenue for the upcoming season. This years unspent money will ether go to a player(s) contract or Mr. Pohlad's pocket. Which should it be??

[jay]

The problem with your excellent analysis- on which we both can agree is in the realm of the possible- is that so much is based on hope and defiance of the probabilities. All the teams that finished below them on offense, in the AL at least, with the exception of the Astros, have significantly upgraded their offense. The Twins are hoping that Kubel resurrets himself to his 2012 form, and that's it, thus far, that is their only "upgrade".

 

First, thanks. As I tried to illustrate, I really don't think 20-22 WAR is anywhere near all rosy and statistically defiant. However, even at that number, the offense is average at best and still needs help. Unfortunately, I think it's more likely to come from within or via trade.

 

The 2014 projections show some big changes compared to 2013's totals... very commonly not due to big FA signings. I think we're seeing some regression in both directions in the following numbers, but it doesn't really fit your argument that everyone is better except the Twins and Astros. The projections do mostly ignore the biggest wildcard of all -- injuries.

 

2014 WAR Projection for Batters (FG) subtracted by 2013 WAR Actuals for Batters --

AL Upgrades: Angels (+4), Royals (+3), Indians (+5), Rangers (+1), Blue Jays (+8), Yankees (+8), Twins (+8), Mariners (+16!), White Sox (+9), Astros (+17!)

AL Downgrades: Red Sox (-10), Rays (-2), A's (-1), Orioles (-5), Tigers (-3)

 

Drew, Morales, and Cruz are really the last 3 FAs that could change a team's numbers much at all. For the Twins, Cruz and Morales would be something like overpriced, 1-win upgrades -- no thanks. Drew is projected as the exact same level of an upgrade. You have to get in to "hope and defiance" territory to see him as more.

[TheLeviathan]

If you use the exact same playing time distribution that FG is using and simply use Oliver instead of Steamer, you end up with 19.7. That's a pretty significant difference. You're welcome to take 17, but 20 feels a little closer to me. It doesn't take much going right from there to reach the 22 that I originally mentioned.

 

If you've noticed, you have slid back with every post.

[diehardtwinsfan]

"they should not spend more because we aren't close to winning"

"they should not spend money because in 3 years there might be a SS ready"

"they should not spend money because the player is not "worth it"" even though he is better than what they have...

 

Neither of those is about who is available, are they? They are about money, and whether or not the money is worth is, or about prospects that don't exist or are years away. Maybe I'm reading peopel wrong, but I don't care if a player is worth the money, if that contract does not keep them from signing another player or block a player that is less than a year away. Not sure why anyone else cares if the contracts are good or not, frankly.

 

You'll care when you are getting replacement level production for millions of dollars with an untradeable contract. We've all heard that complaint before.

 

But that said, the "who is available" is a pretty big problem here. Sure, they could give me 5M dollars to play SS for them on a 1 year deal. I'd gladly take it, and I'd be booed out of the stadium on during spring training. The bottom line is that there has to be something good available worth committing that kind of money too, and the long term viability of that contract is something they need to strongly consider as well. The guys we are talking about won't be signing one year deals, and I don't think it's unreasonable to target guys that they think will fulfill the value of that contract.

 

At the end of the day, this is still a business, whether or not you or I like it. I'm not going to disagree with you in that the lack of spending by the Twins has been maddeningly frustrating at times, but this offseason, they seem to have put that to bed. They went and got two good pitchers and resigned a 3rd guy. They've added depth at C and grabbed lottery tickets in Bartlett and Kubel. They are making moves that most of us recognize need to be made. What the overall payroll looks like when that is done is hardly the reason to condemn them.

[Otto von Ballpark]

People who are thrifty bargain basement shoppers don't turn over a new leaf because all of a sudden they have money to spend. My 84 year old mother who grew up during the depression just sold her house for $100,000, her out of pocket expenses per month are < $500, she'll never spend all her money, yet she'll run across town to the second grocery store to save 49 cents on soap.

 

Don't tease us -- tell us the store! Or are you trying to keep this amazing soap deal to yourself?

[thetank]

The real value of Drew is not this year. He might push their 82-win season to 85. Still, they don't make the playoffs, and likely slip at least two slots in the draft.

 

The real value of Drew is next year and the year after. The difference between 90 and 92 wins could mean the difference between going to the postseason or not.

 

The question should not be how much better is he than Florimon? but how much better will he be than Santana? I don't think it's 2 wins. I think Santana will be at least a win above replacement. I'm not sure Drew at his age will continue to be above 2 WAR over the life of his contract. Now you're talking really thin margins for your investment.

The Twins in 2013 scored 614 runs and allowed 788. I don't know with this offense and Morneau traded last Sept. that their offense is going score more runs at the same time the new FA SP signed give up less runs to get to .500.

 

Bullpens could spring a leak as well. Everything would have to come into alignment in order to get to .500.

[twinsfanstl]

here is my prediction for 5 remaining offseason moves:

1) Mark Reynolds- gets announced tomorrow- 1 year/$3 million + incentives

2) Suk-Min Yoon- 3yr/$8 per

3) Johan to a minor league contract with mucho incentives

4) Corriea moved before ST- salary dump and B level prospect

5) Swarzak starts season in SR, Worley in long relief, Deduno on DL and we left it tride with Diamond

[tobi0040]

The Twins in 2013 scored 614 runs and allowed 788. I don't know with this offense and Morneau traded last Sept. that their offense is going score more runs at the same time the new FA SP signed give up less runs to get to .500.

 

Bullpens could spring a leak as well. Everything would have to come into alignment in order to get to .500.

 

I agree with this. You can paint a real rosy picture and still not get these runs scored and allowed to even.

 

For example, if you get 200 IP from Nolasco, 160 from Hughes, 120 from Meyer, and 175 from Pelfrey and they average out to a 4.25 ERA, you only cut 72 runs allowed out (versus the starter ERA of 5.25 last year). Now you have scored 614 runs and allowed 716.

 

We can probably expect better play out of CF and if Sano comes up in June and is healthy, more production out of 3B. Potentially better output out of Willingham and the DH rule if Kubel bounces back, but it is hard to close the 100 run gap with the lack of moves we had made on the offense. If we close that gap, we are a .500 team.

[tobi0040]

here is my prediction for 5 remaining offseason moves:

1) Mark Reynolds- gets announced tomorrow- 1 year/$3 million + incentives

2) Suk-Min Yoon- 3yr/$8 per

3) Johan to a minor league contract with mucho incentives

4) Corriea moved before ST- salary dump and B level prospect

5) Swarzak starts season in SR, Worley in long relief, Deduno on DL and we left it tride with Diamond

 

It is unfortunate we have been linked to Reynolds and I would hate to see that signing.

 

You can pencil him in for .230, 20-25 HR, and 180-220K. He will K about 3 x as much as BB. And he grades out as a poor defensive 3B. I see very little upgrade over Plouffe, if any and Sano could be here out of spring training or in June.

[cmathewson]

The Twins in 2013 scored 614 runs and allowed 788. I don't know with this offense and Morneau traded last Sept. that their offense is going score more runs at the same time the new FA SP signed give up less runs to get to .500.

 

Bullpens could spring a leak as well. Everything would have to come into alignment in order to get to .500.

 

If you haven't noticed, Morneau was a 0 WAR player last year. He hasn't put up a 1+ WAR since 2010. The thought is, moving Mauer to first will enhance his offense. It should Even if he stays steady state, a Pinto/Suzuki platoon should produce more WAR than Morneau.

 

The other thing is regression to the mean for several of Twins payers. Willingham, Plouffe, whoever occupies CF, and hte RF position with Arcia, all will likely have better years than last year. So I expect at least 50 more runs out of this offense.

 

Of course, when you go from -0.2 WAR (Worley) to 3.0 WAR (Nolasco) and -0.2 (Diamond) to 1.3 WAR (Hughes), you substantially reduce the number of runs allowed. That's how you get to 82 wins.

[DaveW]

It is unfortunate we have been linked to Reynolds and I would hate to see that signing.

 

You can pencil him in for .230, 20-25 HR, and 180-220K. He will K about 3 x as much as BB. And he grades out as a poor defensive 3B. I see very little upgrade over Plouffe, if any and Sano could be here out of spring training or in June.

 

Sano won't be playing opening day. It would be foolish, and I can't see it happening. I think Reynolds is a fine low dollar signing. Yeah, his defense is brutal, but at least provides some "push" to Plouffe, additionally you can platoon him at DH with Kubel. I don't really mind the strike outs, the guy still has put up some pretty nice numbers (127, 97, 117, 116, 96) OPS+ the last five years, and he has legit power. You could do worse for a back up 3B/1B platoon DH/PH.

[cmathewson]

Sano won't be playing opening day. It would be foolish, and I can't see it happening. I think Reynolds is a fine low dollar signing. Yeah, his defense is brutal, but at least provides some "push" to Plouffe, additionally you can platoon him at DH with Kubel. I don't really mind the strike outs, the guy still has put up some pretty nice numbers (127, 97, 117, 116, 96) OPS+ the last five years, and he has legit power. You could do worse for a back up 3B/1B platoon DH/PH.

 

I think the Twins are more likely to scoop on Vernon Wells than Mark Reynolds. Wells could play LF against lefties, with Willingham moving to DH. He could also spell Arcia. He'd be no more than an emergency center fielder, but he'd be a better fit. Reynolds does nothing at third or the outfield and you really don't need a back-up at first much.

[thetank]

If you haven't noticed, Morneau was a 0 WAR player last year. He hasn't put up a 1+ WAR since 2010. The thought is, moving Mauer to first will enhance his offense. It should Even if he stays steady state, a Pinto/Suzuki platoon should produce more WAR than Morneau.

 

The other thing is regression to the mean for several of Twins payers. Willingham, Plouffe, whoever occupies CF, and hte RF position with Arcia, all will likely have better years than last year. So I expect at least 50 more runs out of this offense.

 

Of course, when you go from -0.2 WAR (Worley) to 3.0 WAR (Nolasco) and -0.2 (Diamond) to 1.3 WAR (Hughes), you substantially reduce the number of runs allowed. That's how you get to 82 wins.

Baseball-reference had Morneau's oWar at 1.8 when with the Twins in 2013. He was in a decline. Willingham isn't going back to the days of 35 HRs and 105 RBIs. Plouffe isn't likely to contribute much offensively. The only offensive player who excels is Mauer and he lost his HR power after signing a large contract.

[S.]

2) Suk-Min Yoon- 3yr/$8 per

No chance in hell he gets $8M per year. I'm doubtful if he'll even get 2 years, $8M total.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The only offensive player who excels is Mauer and he lost his HR power after signing a large contract.

 

More like "he got lucky with a bunch of barely-over-the-wall homers one year and then moved to a stadium that crushed his power numbers".

[Brock Beauchamp]

No chance in hell he gets $8M per year. I'm doubtful if he'll even get 2 years, $8M total.

 

It depends on if a team views him as starting material or not... But yeah, I don't see him getting a 3/$24m deal.

[jokin]

Are the Twins changing their obstinate stance on Drew? It is Doogie, but still interesting.

 

The Twins would take Stephen Drew and surrender that second round draft pick if he fell into the Twins lap, according to Wolfson. Wolfson threw out the numbers of 3-years and $30 million to when the Twins would bite.

 

http://puckettspond.com/2014/01/16/minnesota-twins-rumblings-stephen-drew-chone-figgins-bronson-arroyo/

[Guest USAFChief]

You'll care when you are getting replacement level production for millions of dollars with an untradeable contract. We've all heard that complaint before.

 

But that said, the "who is available" is a pretty big problem here. Sure, they could give me 5M dollars to play SS for them on a 1 year deal. I'd gladly take it, and I'd be booed out of the stadium on during spring training. The bottom line is that there has to be something good available worth committing that kind of money too, and the long term viability of that contract is something they need to strongly consider as well. The guys we are talking about won't be signing one year deals, and I don't think it's unreasonable to target guys that they think will fulfill the value of that contract.

 

At the end of the day, this is still a business, whether or not you or I like it. I'm not going to disagree with you in that the lack of spending by the Twins has been maddeningly frustrating at times, but this offseason, they seem to have put that to bed. They went and got two good pitchers and resigned a 3rd guy. They've added depth at C and grabbed lottery tickets in Bartlett and Kubel. They are making moves that most of us recognize need to be made. What the overall payroll looks like when that is done is hardly the reason to condemn them.

Nice post...but I disagree on several points:

 

I prefer not to watch replacement level production no matter the cost. Whether they're paying $10m or $500k, it's still replacement level production and we end up watching 290 losses over three years.

 

Some of us think "who is available" could be worth the investment, as they would improve the product above that replacement level. Drew, for example, seems to fit pretty well with where they need help and where they probably shouldn't expect to find it internally.

 

I think there's room to question the Twins spending, even this offseason. They have simply reallocated to last year's level, which in neither case is aggressive given revenues and their own past statements.

 

I may be in the minority, but I'm not very keen on watching 190 more losses over the next couple years while waiting for the minor leagues to provide every thing else this team needs.

[jay]

If you've noticed, you have slid back with every post.

 

No, I said 22 originally with upside as high as 26-27 if you want to get rosy. I referenced the difference between Steamer and Oliver saying the 20 that Oliver predicts feels closer to what I think will happen than 17. I'm still at 22...