Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Dear Twins: Don't Sell!


    Steven BUHR

    Like a lot of Twins fans, I think, I’ve been coasting a bit with my fandom. The results on the field have been disappointing.

    Ervin Santana, Miguel Sano, Byron Buxton and Jorge Polanco hadn’t even been on the field much, if at all, during most of the first half of the season.

    The expected two-team competition for the American League Central Division title quickly became no race at all, with Cleveland outpacing the pack.

    So, I fell in line with the expectation that the Minnesota front office should and would be sellers at the July non-waiver trade deadline.

    But a funny thing happens to me when I start to hear so many voices saying, “Sell!” in unison. I start looking for reasons to buy.

    Image courtesy of SD Buhr (photo of Byron Buxton)

    Twins Video

    Yeah, my portfolio took a hit Thursday when Facebook shares dropped almost 20%. But I didn’t sell. I’m holding onto my Facebook stock. In fact, I’m probably going to add to my existing position after letting the dust settle for a few days.

    I think that’s what the Twins should do, too.

    No, I don’t mean they should invest in Facebook (though it wouldn’t be the worst investment the Twins have made over the years), I mean they should hold and maybe even buy.

    When the chorus grew so loud in support of the Twins being a seller at the deadline that there was support for not only trading players with expiring contracts and/or little expectation that they’d be part of the 2019 roster, but also for sending Kyle Gibson and Ryan Pressly packing, I took a step back from the cliff.

    If so many people were that convinced it was time to not only trade spare parts, but important 2019 cogs in the machinery, I wondered if maybe it’s time to do the opposite.

    After all, a year ago, the front office gave up and started selling about this time (though it turned out they didn’t have a ton of guys that other teams were interested in buying). As we all know, the Twins overcame that lack of faith, forcing their way into the one-and-done AL Wild Card game.

    But this is not 2017, obviously.

    At the end of July a year ago, Minnesota trailed Cleveland by 6 ½ games in AL Central. This year, they trail by 7 after Thursday night’s win over Boston.

    Last year, the Royals also stood between the Twins and the top of the Division. Not so this year. If Minnesota doesn’t mount a challenge, Cleveland will stroll to the Division title.

    A year ago, not only were the Twins well off the pace being set by Cleveland, they were going the wrong direction. They had started the month of July three games above .500, tied for the second AL Wild Card spot and just two games behind the Indians in the Division race. They finished the month tied with Baltimore, 4 ½ games behind the Royals in the race for the second Wild Card and two games behind Seattle and Tampa.

    Whatever momentum they had was moving them in the wrong direction so, of course, you sell.

    But this is not 2017.

    First of all, unlike a season ago, Minnesota will not be contending for an AL Wild Card spot.

    A year ago, there was one very good AL team in Houston and a lot of mediocrity after that. This year, there are a pair of teams in the East and three in the West that are leaving pretty much everyone else, including the Twins (and Cleveland, for that matter), in the dust.

    Entering July this season, the Twins at 35-44, were nine games under .500, eight games behind Cleveland in the standings and 15 ½ games back of the second WC spot.

    That’s not ideal, I grant. They’ve gone 13-9 this month and only managed to trim one game off their deficit to the Division leaders. That being the case, nobody can be blamed for advocating that the Twins replace player surnames with “FOR SALE” on back of most players’ jerseys.

    Unlike a year ago, however, Minnesota doesn’t need to claw their way through a crowded field in the hopes of earning a single play-in game at Yankee Stadium. They’re chasing one team and, if they should catch them, the reward is at least one full postseason series.

    And, unlike a year ago, their momentum is moving them in the right direction, notwithstanding last weekend’s debacle in Kansas City.

    The Twins also will face Cleveland ten times between now and the end of August. And it’s not like Minnesota has been beaten up by the Tribe this season, either. On the contrary. The Twins have won six of the nine games the two teams have completed this year.

    Everyone seems to think this is the same Cleveland team that went to the World Series a couple years ago. It isn’t. Yes, they have three guys at the top of their batting order that are very good. You want to include Edwin Encarnacion, I’ll let you. But after that? Who are you really afraid of?

    They have some pitching, yes. But that pitching hasn’t translated into as many wins in July as the Twins have notched and the Twins just added Ervin Santana, who didn’t look too rusty in his season debut this week.

    Yes, the Minnesota front office could throw in the towel now. It appears that not a lot of fans would blame them. It has been a disappointing year, to this point.

    They could get what they can for the guys with expiring contracts. Discard Lance Lynn, Brian Dozier, Eduardo Escobar, Zach Duke, even Joe Mauer if he’s inclined to approve of a deal to a contender. Probably add Jake Odorizzi to the list if you’re not of a mind to offer him arbitration for 2019. Likewise, maybe get someone interested in Santana if you don’t think you’ll pick up his $14 million club option for 2019.

    Make way for the next round of young talent that’s stewing in Rochester and Chattanooga. Let them get their feet wet in August and September, then be ready to re-engage the battle for AL Central supremacy in 2019.

    But is this really what we’ve come to? Baseball seasons are just four months long? If you’re a few games out of the top spot in your Division at the end of July, you pack it in and, “wait ‘til next year?”

    I’m sure the folks running Cleveland’s club are hoping that’s what the Twins will do. If so, they can virtually coast through the final two months and prepare for the postseason.

    I get that trading some (or all) of those players would potentially add a few pretty decent young prospects. And if the Twins’ farm system was in dire straights without much talent in the pipeline, maybe I’d go along with a fire sale right now. But that is not the case.

    The Twins have some really good talent at every level of their minor league organization right now. Sure, you always want more because some guys with high ceilings just don’t pan out, but as much as I enjoy watching minor league baseball, let’s not lose sight of the fact that the purpose in all of this is to win at the Major League level.

    As things stand, the Twins have a rotation of Santana, Berrios, Gibson, Lynn and Odorizzi. It may not be the equal of Cleveland’s, but it ain’t bad.

    If you think Fernando Romero, Aaron Slegers or Stephen Gonsalves would perform better in the fifth spot than Odorizzi, then make that move. But do it because you think it not only will make your team better in 2019 but will also improve their chances to catch and pass Cleveland this year.

    Or, here’s a thought – if you think you could improve your rotation, maybe trade FOR a better pitcher (ideally, one with at least another year of control left after this season), rather than selling off the ones you’ve got.

    And please, just stop the talk about trading Kyle Gibson already. This is not a rebuild. If you really have given up on 2018, fine, but don’t give up on 2019, too.

    With all of the problems this organization has had finding really good starting pitching, why would you trade a guy just when it looks like he’s becoming a really good starting pitcher and still has a year of team control left?

    Just because you could get somewhat better prospects in return? They’re still prospects and you’re probably just going to hope that one of them ends up developing into a pitcher as good as Gibson.

    As a fan base, we’ve been lulled into this never-ending routine that emphasizes acquisition and development of quality minor league talent. That’s all well and good until it takes over the organization’s mentality to the extent that they let a few games’ deficit in the standings in July keep them from even bothering to try to compete through the rest of the season.

    I say let’s go for it!

    What are you afraid of? If it doesn't work out, you still have all the quality young talent waiting to fill in where needed next season and so much payroll money coming off the books that you won't be able to figure out how to spend it all.

    If you don’t take advantage of those 10 head-to-head meetings with Cleveland, there are still likely to be waiver deals to be made before the end of August. No, the returns may not be as good as they would be right now, but I’m pretty satisfied with where the Twins’ farm system sits now. I don’t need more.

    I don’t want my baseball season to keep being four months long. I want the full six months.

    I want to see if Santana, Buxton and Sano can overcome their personal setbacks and help turn the Twins into the kind of team nobody wants to have to face in September.

    I want to see if this team, that was supposed to be a contender, can get some traction and do something to make Cleveland sweat a little bit. Don’t just hand them the Division. Let’s make things interesting for them.

    That’s what competing is all about, isn’t it?

    (This article was originally posted at Knuckleballsblog.com)

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    I am sympathetic to this, somewhat; the story of KC and Houston was losing 100 games a year in order to get high draft picks.

    But we already have those top picks. Royce Lewis, Rooker, and Larnach (or Kirilloff), are already in the organization. We don't need to "re-blow it up." I don't see how retaining Escobar would have interfered with their development.

     

    But I don't think they are re-blowing it up. Cashing out your rental players in a losing season is what all teams do. Pressly is a bit of a different story, but the Twins are looking at about $80M in available free agent money with Kimbrel, Familia, Herrera, Britton, Allen and Matt Belisle available on the free agent market. 

     

    The players they got back are lotto tickets, they can keep them and see if the multitude of them produce some good players in the future, or they might use them to go get JT Realmuto in the off season. Or a starting pitcher. Or a shortstop. They're just giving themselves so many more avenues to make the team better in the next couple of years.

     

    And for what it's worth, La Velle has reported that the Twins tried to extend Escobar prior to trading him.

     

    Mlb put one new guy at eleven, and one at fifteen, with the others all in the top thirty. It made the system better. Did it give them a future mlb player? We don't know yet, but it increased the odds.

    How much? And how much does that affect a future contending Twins season? I understand it's hard to put numbers on that, but honestly, when you look at prospect odds and the uncertainty inherent in long-term projections in general, I think it's actually pretty comparable to our odds of catching Cleveland in 2018. (And if the market is working like it should, then they should be pretty close, no?)

     

    That's not to say, my way (play it out) is right and your way (sell) is wrong. But neither is the reverse true. It's just different preferences at this particular juncture. Heck, I'm not even that stridently on the "play it out" side -- I'm much closer to a fence straddler that was simply leaning that way on that particular day. Had we sold after the Cubs series, or the Milwaukee series, or the KC sweep, I probably would have been leaning in your direction.

     

     

     

    Although a 2% drop, on 8% odds to begin with, is a 25% drop relative to where we were before. (And frankly, I'd also disagree with that limited drop in the odds. Sano doesn't look ready to take anyone's place right now, much less Escobar's, and Prospectus just compared Pressly favorably to Chapman, Hader, and Diaz -- the downgrade for the next 2 months to Moya, a guy who apparently couldn't beat out Belisle for mop-up duty all summer, is perhaps not captured well by the projections. For a team in a position where we need every marginal win we can get to actually pull off the upset, this was more than a 2% drop. It was a bigger sell-off than Kintzler and Garcia, for sure.)

     

    2% is 2%, 2 out of 100. You are intentionally being disingenuous with numbers when you try to say "25%". 

     

    Presley had 8 "shut down" performances for the Twins this year, and 11 "meltdowns".  So because a website compared him to Chapman, Hader or Diaz are you ignoring the actual performance he's provided this year, and his entire career?

    They now have a losing record against Boston (3-4) and they're 2-1 against Houston, so that doesn't mean a whole lot. It is odd how they haven't played their best against the AL Central outside of Cleveland...

    Yeah and that Boston record would probably be 4 - 3 in favor of the Twins had they still had Pressly in game 2 of that series. Nonetheless, it does seem weird how they have played against good teams and then they have just crumbled against the poor teams in the AL Central. Maybe they get all pumped up for Cleveland and then they go into KC and just assume they are going to win?? That's all I can think of??

     

    No one against selling was ignoring that, not any more than your side is ignoring the sweep in Toronto, win in Boston, and the upcoming games against Cleveland. Right?

     

    My side? I said pick a side, either trade for more MLB talent, or trade off impending FAs. My only "side" was not to sit in the middle.

     

    How much? And how much does that affect a future contending Twins season? I understand it's hard to put numbers on that, but honestly, when you look at prospect odds and the uncertainty inherent in long-term projections in general, I think it's actually pretty comparable to our odds of catching Cleveland in 2018. (And if the market is working like it should, then they should be pretty close, no?)

     

    That's not to say, my way (play it out) is right and your way (sell) is wrong. But neither is the reverse true. It's just different preferences at this particular juncture. Heck, I'm not even that stridently on the "play it out" side -- I'm much closer to a fence straddler that was simply leaning that way on that particular day. Had we sold after the Cubs series, or the Milwaukee series, or the KC sweep, I probably would have been leaning in your direction.

     

    I agree with that first sentence in teh last paragraph. But, the ONLY thing I didn't want was fence straddling, though.

    Edited by Mike Sixel

     

    You should rethink which side that angst is coming from. The original poster acknowledged that the players have failed to this point. But, there were signs, like last year, that the players were starting to turn it around. The original poster wanted the front office to let the season play out. I agreed completely.

    That's basically it.

     

    Last year the games to be made up were far less, and the team that was being chased was FAR worse

     

    nitpic: Getting to the big leagues does not guarantee they "will contribute for 6 years or more." Lots of players make it to the big leagues, but do not have 6 yr careers.

     

    https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/sports/baseball/15careers.html

     

    And there is the very real possibility, of course, that they won't make it to the big leagues at all, the fate suffered by most minor league players.

     

    If we're talking odds, you're ignoring lots of information here.

     

    I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star.

     

    If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series.

     

    This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

    Edited by Major Leauge Ready

     

    4 of the 5 prospects we acquired were rated by Fangraphs preseason at 40 FV, and the other was not rated. We already had 30 prospects rated at 40 FV or better, before the latest draft.

     

    Fangraphs had this to say before the season: "The Twins have a deep system with promising players at all levels, featuring a variety of profiles and pedigrees. They’re positioned well, with a competitive, mostly young big-league team and a farm system that has at least one solid contributor emerging each year to fill holes."

     

    How much did that really change with these 2 trades?

    Probably not much.  But does having Escobar and Pressly guarantee this team makes run to the playoffs?   I loved Eduardo, he was my favorite player on the team, but now they have added to their minor league system, and they can go ahead and re-sign Eduardo in the off-season of both sides want that.  

     

    There are no guarantees in baseball, the one guarantee the Twins had is Escobar's contact expired this year and he didn't sign an extension before he was traded.  That shows me the Twins like him enough to try to sign him again in the offseason, the question now is will he come back?  If not, they at least received a consolation prize of prospects.

     

    They didn't turn anything around. They played Baltimore and Kansas City..... Baltimore is historically bad. I really think people are ignoring that, when looking at the recent record.

    But in MLB, even historically bad teams can win 30% of the time. Baltimore is 5-5 versus the Yankees this season, KC has beaten them twice too in 7 tries. (Heck, the Twins are 6-3 versus Cleveland so far :) ) Going 9-2 in any MLB stretch, even with 7 games against those two squads, isn't something to dismiss entirely.

     

    Not that I am basing my opinion on that stretch alone, or just the Toronto series, or just the Gibson gem vs Boston. They had a rotten few months, absolutely. But perhaps getting Polanco back helped? Garver getting comfortable, maybe Cave too. The return of Erv. And I'm not totally sold on Cleveland either, they still have some weak spots -- their lineup is pretty top-heavy, they are still missing Miller, a guy named Bieber is starting tonight. :)

    I agree with that first sentence in teh last paragraph. But, the ONLY thing I didn't want was fence straddling, though.

    At this point it's fence straddling if they do not go whole hog and trade Dozier, Morrison, Rodney and Lynn.

     

    2% is 2%, 2 out of 100. You are intentionally being disingenuous with numbers when you try to say "25%". 

    Just saying that 2%, relative to 8%, is more significant than the same 2% relative to, say, 50%. I thought that was clear. No intent to be disingenuous at all, I thought I was pretty clear about my position in the rest of my post.

     

    Presley had 8 "shut down" performances for the Twins this year, and 11 "meltdowns".  So because a website compared him to Chapman, Hader or Diaz are you ignoring the actual performance he's provided this year, and his entire career?

    No, just that if we're going to go for that 8% or whatever, or even try to improve on it, trying to leverage Pressly might have been our best bet. His presence made me feel better about that 8% than, say, if Casey Fien was in his spot providing that performance. I too was surprised by that BP article, it's an interesting piece if you haven't seen it:

     

    https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41401/rubbing-mud-cant-help-falling-in-love-with-ryan-pressly/

     

    (Interestingly, I too cited Pressly's shutdowns/meltdowns in a recent TD thread about Pressly's trade value. The Astros were apparently intrigued enough beyond that, though?)

    Edited by spycake

     

    No, just that if we're going to go for that 8% or whatever, or even try to improve on it, trying to leverage Pressly might have been our best bet. His presence made me feel better about that 8% than, say, if Casey Fien was in his spot providing that performance. I too was surprised by that BP article, it's an interesting piece if you haven't seen it:

     

    https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41401/rubbing-mud-cant-help-falling-in-love-with-ryan-pressly/

     

    (Interestingly, I too cited Pressly's shutdowns/meltdowns in a recent TD thread about Pressly's trade value. The Astros were apparently intrigued enough beyond that, though?)

     

    You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

     

    The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

     

    Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

    But in MLB, even historically bad teams can win 30% of the time. Baltimore is 5-5 versus the Yankees this season, KC has beaten them twice too in 7 tries. (Heck, the Twins are 6-3 versus Cleveland so far :) ) Going 9-2 in any MLB stretch, even with 7 games against those two squads, isn't something to dismiss entirely.

     

    Not that I am basing my opinion on that stretch alone, or just the Toronto series, or just the Gibson gem vs Boston. They had a rotten few months, absolutely. But perhaps getting Polanco back helped? Garver getting comfortable, maybe Cave too. The return of Erv. And I'm not totally sold on Cleveland either, they still have some weak spots -- their lineup is pretty top-heavy, they are still missing Miller, a guy named Bieber is starting tonight. :)

    I felt that way most of the season in regards to Cleveland. They're not that good and Minnesota had a chance to make a run. I wish they were more aggressive and made the moves in June when there was more games remaining. Alas, here we are 104 games in and under .500 still.

     

    The FO made an honest assessment of the season, and I'm sure everything you're discussing was taken into account before selling off Pressly and Escobar.

     

    If your job was reliant on making a call this year to go for it or sell, you would go for it with those odds? Because know that if they did go for it and fail, you're most likely on thin ice with the person who signs your checks.

     

    You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

     

    The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

     

    Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

     

    Correct amundo.

     

    Last year the games to be made up were far less, and the team that was being chased was FAR worse

    There were also more teams between us and that goal last year.

     

    At the 2017 deadline, Fangraphs "season to date" projection mode gave us 7.3% chance of making the postseason. This season, at the time of the Escobar/Pressly trades, that figure was 8.4%.

     

    There is definitely some room for nuanced opinions around that, so please don't quote just a snippet of my post again and say I am being disingenuous or that I am claiming these numbers are "super meaningful". Please consider the context of my complete posts! Just saying there is room for two sides in this matter.

    The Twins will basically be remaking their entire bullpen in 2019.

     

    Hildenberger is the likely closer. Keep in mind there was some wonder if he should have made the team out of ST at all and he struggled the first couple weeks.

     

    He’s really the surest thing the Twins have. Rogers is a good loogy, but he hasn’t been as good against LHB as in previous years. After that there are a whole boatload of “if”s and “maybe”s.

     

    Sound like the bullpen of a legitimate contender to you?

     

    Free agency? How did that work out this year?

     

    Trades?

     

    Teams that are planning to contend aren’t going to trade bullpen arms. Non contenders probably have either kids they won’t trade or has beens no one wants.

     

    My side? I said pick a side, either trade for more MLB talent, or trade off impending FAs. My only "side" was not to sit in the middle.

    I totally get that. I would have liked to see some more changes earlier, even if just internal ones. We could have definitely auditioned new pitchers in the Belisle role -- maybe a starter coming up from the minors in a relief role? Maybe a bargain external buy -- Washington got Herrera pretty cheap last month. Venters and Brach were pretty cheap too. Asdrubal Cabrera at DH, maybe?

     

    I wasn't necessarily opposed to a "soft sell" either -- Rodney, like Kintzler before him? Lynn, like Garcia? Especially paired with a interesting minor league promotion.

     

    I liked getting Polanco and Erv back, calling up Cave, but yeah, I could see a desire for more, if we weren't going to sell.

     

    At this point it's fence straddling if they do not go whole hog and trade Dozier, Morrison, Rodney and Lynn.

     

    My assumption is they will unless no one wants them. I can't see anyone wanting Morrison, Rodney and Lynn are probably borderline and might need the Twins to eat their salary; possibly August trade guys. But Dozier and Duke should be moved by tomorrow at the very least to avoid fence straddling. 

     

    I totally get that. I would have liked to see some more changes earlier, even if just internal ones. We could have definitely auditioned new pitchers in the Belisle role -- maybe a starter coming up from the minors in a relief role? Maybe a bargain external buy -- Washington got Herrera pretty cheap last month. Venters and Brach were pretty cheap too. Asdrubal Cabrera at DH, maybe?

     

    I wasn't necessarily opposed to a "soft sell" either -- Rodney, like Kintzler before him? Lynn, like Garcia? Especially paired with a interesting minor league promotion.

     

    I liked getting Polanco and Erv back, calling up Cave, but yeah, I could see a desire for more, if we weren't going to sell.

     

    I know I'd move more starters in the minors to the bullpen faster than this org has......Taylor Rodgers being an obvious recent example. That's an area I'd have liked to see explored more earlier this year. IF the manager would, you know, let them pitch. And, imo, Cave should have been up sooner too, but they finally got that one right (not that he's great, but he's better than Grossman, if you include defense, and maybe even just offense).

     

    Trevor May should be here, in MN, as a RP right now. 

     

    One of the new prospects they got could be a RP in a year or two, but he's much further away as a starter, from what I read.

     

    You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

     

    The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

     

    Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

    You are wrong. :) No worries, though, I have referenced a couple different figures.

     

    8.4% odds was Fangraphs projections, weighted a bit more to "season to date stats" (what Fangraphs calls them, hence why I try to include that phrase when referencing them too). I think their "normal" projection uses preseason projections pretty heavily, which isn't necessarily bad, but it can obscure some new info and keep some old biases, so I try not to rely exclusively on that:

     

    https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds/season-to-date/div?date=2018-07-26

     

    "Coin flip" mode odds were actually 12.5%, and I also tried to include that phrase in those references. I cited that previously just as one illustration of how much we still control our destiny, comparable to San Fran, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh -- our record is worse, but we've only got one team to target and a lot of head-to-head games left:

     

    https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds/coin-flip/div?date=2018-07-26

     

    (Also, FYI, when you select a date on Fangraphs playoff odds page, it includes the results of games played that date. So to judge pre-Escobar trade, you'd want to select "7-26-2018" since the trade happened before the 7-27 game. Probably pre-Pressly trade too, since he apparently became unavailable during that night's game. Not that I'm putting a ton of stock in one day's difference or anything, just a best practice.)

    Edited by spycake

     

    The FO made an honest assessment of the season, and I'm sure everything you're discussing was taken into account before selling off Pressly and Escobar.

    If your job was reliant on making a call this year to go for it or sell, you would go for it with those odds? Because know that if they did go for it and fail, you're most likely on thin ice with the person who signs your checks.

    I absolutely agree the front office made an honest assessment. But I still think I can reasonably disagree.

     

    I don't think the front office was in too much danger in this instance. I mean, I don't think the assistants/scouts have much sway in the decision -- it's pretty much Falvey's and Levine's decision to make and own. And the Pohlads probably don't care too much either way, relative to the good will Falvey and Levine have bought so far (with 2017, and saving a few bucks on Hughes).

     

    Houston, Boston, New York, Cleveland, Seattle and Oakland are all between us and our goal.

    Hey now, the context of the post was postseason odds.

     

    If you want to move the discussion to pennant odds, fine, but please don't imply again that I am somehow being disingenuous in my posts.

     

    I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star.

     

    If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series.

     

    This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

    What is the cost benefit analysis of watching meaningful baseball games through August and September?

     

    I, too, want the Twins to win a WS. But I also want to watch meaningful regular seasons. And this season wasn't lost yet. 

     

    And for the record, as Spycake has pointed out "all of the GMs" in situations similar to, or worse than, the current Twins HAVEN'T sold yet. Do you suppose you're overestimating your particular expertise in the area of how MLB teams operate?

     

     

    I absolutely agree the front office made an honest assessment. But I still think I can reasonably disagree.

     

    I don't think the front office was in too much danger in this instance. I mean, I don't think the assistants/scouts have much sway in the decision -- it's pretty much Falvey's and Levine's decision to make and own. And the Pohlads probably don't care too much either way, relative to the good will Falvey and Levine have bought so far (with 2017, and saving a few bucks on Hughes).

    I think the Pohlads do care if their front office makes a call to go for it and they fail. The only example we can point to of a FO that goes for it was the brief Billy Smith regime. Made some aggressive signings and trades to go for it, fell victim to the injury bug, and was quickly demoted again.

     

    I think the Pohlads do care if their front office makes a call to go for it and they fail. The only example we can point to of a FO that goes for it was the brief Billy Smith regime. Made some aggressive signings and trades to go for it, fell victim to the injury bug, and was quickly demoted again.

    Maybe if we were big buyers, sure. Another Ramos for Capps would absolutely draw the spotlight of the ownership, or even another Delmon Young / aggressive challenge type trade. I was thinking more minor moves (like Smith did in 2009) or standing pat (like Smith did at the deadline in 2008). There would have been little or no risk to the front office's job standing in that.

     

    4 of the 5 prospects we acquired were rated by Fangraphs preseason at 40 FV, and the other was not rated. We already had 30 prospects rated at 40 FV or better, before the latest draft.

     

    Fangraphs had this to say before the season: "The Twins have a deep system with promising players at all levels, featuring a variety of profiles and pedigrees. They’re positioned well, with a competitive, mostly young big-league team and a farm system that has at least one solid contributor emerging each year to fill holes."

     

    How much did that really change with these 2 trades?

    Why would we want it to change? A deep system just got deeper. Last article I read had our farm system rated at #6. Could well be, we move up. I particularly liked we picked up 2 young starting pitching prospects. At some point in time, pitching becomes a numbers game. You can never have too many.

     

     




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments

×
×
  • Create New...