Derek Falvey's Offseason Trade History Might be Better than You Think

I'd be curious how many of those trades, especially those that turned out well for the Twins, Falvey actually initiated. It's easy to just say yes on a good deal another FO came up with.

CIN was heavily shopping Sonny Gray & they liked Chase Petty. Same with TB they were shopping Odorizzi, Palacio, he was a promising SS prospect that was hitting then. The big advantage came from tweaking them. Lugumina was protected from the Rule 5 draft because CIN wanted him. 

I wouldn't have traded for Cave in the 1st place nevertheless Gil wasn't a big prospect & Cave was the kind of hitter that the Twins liked. The Cave/ Gil deficit has just begun & looks like it'll be tremendous by the time Gil will be done at NYY.

Thank you for working on this series.

A couple of things jump out to the reader, which you are already aware of, but others may overlook.

1. The paucity of offseason transactions is pretty telling. Seven offseason trades during the Falvey era seems small. Were the Twins really only one trade away each year? Only two of the trades, Odorizzi and Gray, brought in players who could be considered regulars. The others are all 12th and 13th depth pieces, which are also important to a team but not difference makers. These trades are needed but hardly shake the win column.

2. In consideration of the success of trading for Odo and Gray, why have the Twins been so resistant to further transactions of this type? In reverse, where are the trades of good players for better hopes, similar to the Cruz for Ryan trade?

I guess one must be clear about stating that there has been some success in the transactions in the past 7-8 years but the hesitancy to go further and take some gambles seems to be a barrier.

I'm not totally down on  the front office but while most see the current roster as capable of winning the AL Central, I see the Twins fighting to keep their record around .500 unless a few trades are completed to improve the team.

14 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Especially during the 162 game marathon, depth matters a lot.

Uh, I specifically stated that depth is important and acknowledged its importance. Depth should not be the only criteria for making trades. Filling weaknesses in the regular lineup is also possible.

I wouldn’t say Gil at 19 was a non prospect. Unknown as a Dominican player who already missed a year.. As I recall he was a flamethrower even then 

Did you conveniently forget the LaMonte Wade for Shaun Alexander 6.2 out for -0.5 back. Wade had not yet reached 130 AB   Still should have had rookie status

I think a more interesting analysis would be a look at all the trades that Falvey has made.  Wins such as Pablo and Joe Ryan, as well as clunkers like Tyler Mahle.   It seems like all conversations around the trading history start with using particular parameters to shade the perception in defense of a pro or con bias.  
I am amused by the commenter who attached importance to whether or not the trade was initiated by Falvey.  An unknowable element of zero relevance. Yes, let’s grade the FO on who first made the phone call. 🙄

28 minutes ago, Wizard11 said:

I think a more interesting analysis would be a look at all the trades that Falvey has made.  Wins such as Pablo and Joe Ryan, as well as clunkers like Tyler Mahle.

I could be incorrect, but I believe that the author(s) of these posts tackle the trades in chunks. The entire collection may make for a cumbersome entry due to its length. Bias may exist, but it is at least worth noting that us readers commonly bring a bias to the articles just as easily as the writers. I will say there are times when a writer clearly states their opinion, which seems fair. The reader is always free to disagree.

3 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

The Twins ended 2024 with the 4th most runs scored in the AL, but cratered down the stretch as injuries all mounted at once. Especially during the 162 game marathon, depth matters a lot.

Yes we needed depth but where we didn't need depth they added, where they needed depth they did not. FO added a lot of depth in the BP, no one they added amounted to anything. They added to the OF and we didn't even use our untapped CFer Keirsey, who was chomping at the bit to come up but Margot blocked him. Buxton also boasted of his healthiest season for a long time. We got Santana we hardly used Miranda & Kiriloff. Correa was hurt for a while but we had Castro, Farmer & Lee to fill in. The biggest hole from the start of the season was SP that Gray left & they never rationally addressed that. Because of that hole we had to depend too much on our BP & rookies SPs that couldn't hold up. Later a hole at LHRP developed & they never really addressed that need. IMO we cratered at the end because we didn't have enough veteran leadership & chemistry to sustain us through that time besides our needs in pitching.

1 hour ago, tony&rodney said:

I could be incorrect, but I believe that the author(s) of these posts tackle the trades in chunks. The entire collection may make for a cumbersome entry due to its length. Bias may exist, but it is at least worth noting that us readers commonly bring a bias to the articles just as easily as the writers. I will say there are times when a writer clearly states their opinion, which seems fair. The reader is always free to disagree.

IMO you're correct. Gregory is tackling every aspect in chunks. IMO it's a good way to look at & evaluate each aspect.

7 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

I'd be curious how many of those trades, especially those that turned out well for the Twins, Falvey actually initiated. It's easy to just say yes on a good deal another FO came up with.

CIN was heavily shopping Sonny Gray & they liked Chase Petty. Same with TB they were shopping Odorizzi, Palacio, he was a promising SS prospect that was hitting then. The big advantage came from tweaking them. Lugumina was protected from the Rule 5 draft because CIN wanted him. 

I wouldn't have traded for Cave in the 1st place nevertheless Gil wasn't a big prospect & Cave was the kind of hitter that the Twins liked. The Cave/ Gil deficit has just begun & looks like it'll be tremendous by the time Gil will be done at NYY.

I would guess he initiated zero. Probably because the modern front office doesn’t consist of one person sitting in his office tabulating all 6000 players in professional baseball and all their different scouting reports looking for a diamond in the rough. Between numerous scouts, managers, interns, coaches, assistant GM’s and the top brass. He probably has almost nothing to do with the whole scope of any single trade at all. Exactly just like any move made by any large corporation ever. 

6 minutes ago, FargoFanMan said:

I would guess he initiated zero. Probably because the modern front office doesn’t consist of one person sitting in his office tabulating all 6000 players in professional baseball and all their different scouting reports looking for a diamond in the rough. Between numerous scouts, managers, interns, coaches, assistant GM’s and the top brass. He probably has almost nothing to do with the whole scope of any single trade at all. Exactly just like any move made by any large corporation ever. 

So you are telling me all these guys except the GM contact these other guys except the GM & they work out a trade w/o any actions from the GM? Of course not, Yes, GMs have all these guys doing all the leg work. But the trade is the negotiations between the GMs. These other guys have nothing to do with the actual negotiations, although he might have an assistant sit-in. That's what I'm referring to, please don't detract from the meaning of what I said.

57 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

So you are telling me all these guys except the GM contact these other guys except the GM & they work out a trade w/o any actions from the GM? Of course not, Yes, GMs have all these guys doing all the leg work. But the trade is the negotiations between the GMs. These other guys have nothing to do with the actual negotiations, although he might have an assistant sit-in. That's what I'm referring to, please don't detract from the meaning of what I said.

It seems somewhat unlikely to me that YOU would have any more inside knowledge of the inner workings of big league front offices than anyone else reading this article.  Just sayin

7 minutes ago, Eris said:

Many years go, I was able to attend a presentation by Sandy Alderson when he was GM with the Mets. He was asked how the Mets assessed trades. He indicated there was an ongoing continuous effort where employees (including interns) propose trade ideas with different organizations and these are presented and discussed at weekly meetings (more frequent approaching the trade deadline). In a way it is probably not much different than the discussions on TD regarding proposed trades (except they have internal data). 

that and a quarter will get you a cup of coffee

11 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

It seems somewhat unlikely to me that YOU would have any more inside knowledge of the inner workings of big league front offices than anyone else reading this article.  Just sayin

I'm not talking about some weird "inner workings" of a MLB FO. I'm talking about the basic function of a GM or whatever you want to call him. A GM picks people under him who can abide by his ideas & he sets what his ideals should be. They do the analytics, scouting, evaluations & etc. into this format & bring them before the GM. The GM then decides what he wants to do with the information. The GM in trades (negotiations), people under him see a need & they send that info up the chain of command. The GM again decides whether to respond to that info & approach another GM to initiate a trade or to sit on it. It's not rocket science.

I was a big fan of Flavine when I joined TD. Shortly after I joined, I slightly criticized Flavine, & some here made a big deal out of it, twisted what I said. & said shut up & sit down you have no idea what you are talking about. From that time forward I started to smell something fishy on why are people running interference for Flavine & started to scrutinize Flavey by seeking out viable, nontainted articles & podcasts. 

Flavey has done a good job of finally getting the pitching pipeline flowing & tweaking some pitchers. But I disagree with his focus on analytics based on weird philosophy. I agree that analytics have a valuable place in MLB but I agree more with many true baseball people that say this modern day analytics has sucked the heart & soul out of baseball. IMO a GM with a good staff behind him would be great if he only was good at initiating necessary trades (negotiations). This area Falvey has failed 

Now that we finally have a top 5 farm system with a lot of infield depth but no salary to sign players, I'd think now would be the time to try to move some of our prospects to fill the several holes on our big league club. Mainly a first baseman, a RH outfielder and a LHRP for our bullpen.

23 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

I'd be curious how many of those trades, especially those that turned out well for the Twins, Falvey actually initiated. It's easy to just say yes on a good deal another FO came up with.

CIN was heavily shopping Sonny Gray & they liked Chase Petty. Same with TB they were shopping Odorizzi, Palacio, he was a promising SS prospect that was hitting then. The big advantage came from tweaking them. Lugumina was protected from the Rule 5 draft because CIN wanted him. 

I wouldn't have traded for Cave in the 1st place nevertheless Gil wasn't a big prospect & Cave was the kind of hitter that the Twins liked. The Cave/ Gil deficit has just begun & looks like it'll be tremendous by the time Gil will be done at NYY.

It's as if you're looking for any reason to discount successes that occurred for the Twins in the trade market and ensure that the leader of the Twins front office does not get credit for success.

I think you seriously discount how "easy" it is to complete a trade regardless of who initiates the offer. I'll take your word that Cincy was heavily shopping Gray, but we still don't know (and will probably never know) who proposed Petty as an option. Same with Odorizzi/Palacios. For all we know, TB might have been calling about Luis Arraez or Brent Rooker and Falvey sold them on Palacios.

While this is a fair analysis of how much value the Twins FO has gained as of TODAY for offseason trades, I think it is going to get significantly worse over the next few years. Unless injuries totally derail both Gil's and Petty's careers I would bet both of those guys add plenty of value for their current teams.

I also think the combination of Cruz and Sisk together could overtake Taylor's value over 1 year but that's still TBD.

When you look at the ledgers, the Twins side of value is basically already maxed out. I personally would count DeBarge on the plus side of the ledger for the Gray trade even if he wasn't actually part of the trade. Outside of that, it's only Rayne Doncon, a decent prospect, but no sure bet to make the majors.

If Petty and Gil both have decently long successful careers that 13.9 overall WAR figure could easily become a negative WAR total before too long...

That's the problem in trying to assess trades of prospects for established veterans. 1 side of the ledger is frequently still TBD and creates a mistaken impression of the trade until that side is resolved.

3 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

Flavey has done a good job of finally getting the pitching pipeline flowing & tweaking some pitchers. But I disagree with his focus on analytics based on weird philosophy. I agree that analytics have a valuable place in MLB but I agree more with many true baseball people that say this modern day analytics has sucked the heart & soul out of baseball. IMO a GM with a good staff behind him would be great if he only was good at initiating necessary trades (negotiations). This area Falvey has failed 

There is often an assumption here that the key to “getting over the hump” / contend is to trade for established players.  It certainly can help but this theory does not align in general with history, at least not for teams in the bottom half of revenue.  If we look at playoff teams and the organizations that have made the playoffs most often, trading for established players played a very small role.  In the past 20 years, the Guardians have had the most 90 win seasons (9) among teams in the bottom half of revenue.  They have acquired a total of 3 established players that contributed 1.5 WAR or more in those 20 seasons.  None of them were acquired in off-season deals.  They were all acquired at the deadline.

Brad Hand: Acquired at the 2018 deadline and was good in Cleveland for 2 ½ years.
Andrew Miller: Was acquired at the trade deadline in 2016 and helped the Guardians achieve a 94 win season.  He was also good in 2017 but he was hurt and ineffective in 2018.  Ubaldo Jiménez: Was bad in 2012 but was quite good in 2013 and Cleveland had 94 wins.  We are talking about a contribution of about 14 WAR collectively in (9) 90-win seasons.  

Now let’s look at players acquired as prospects.  The 2024 Guardians had the following players acquired as prospects.  Prospects being defined as a player that had never produced 1.5 WAR in a season.  Andrés Giménez / Josh Naylor / David Fry / Bo Naylor / Emmanuel Clase and Cade Smith.  Previous 90+ win teams included the following players acquired as prospects. Amed Rosario / Myles Straw / Mike Clevinger / Trevor Bauer / Yan Gomes / Corey Kluber / Carlos Carrasco.

The 96 win 2005 Guardians had the following players that we acquired as prospects. 
Grady Sizemore (5.6 war) / Travis Hafner (5.3 war) / Coco Crisp (5.2 war) / Cliff Lee (3.8 war) / and Jake Westbrook @ 2.9 war.
 

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

There is often an assumption here that the key to “getting over the hump” / contend is to trade for established players.  It certainly can help but this theory does not align in general with history, at least not for teams in the bottom half of revenue.  If we look at playoff teams and the organizations that have made the playoffs most often, trading for established players played a very small role.  In the past 20 years, the Guardians have had the most 90 win seasons (9) among teams in the bottom half of revenue.  They have acquired a total of 3 established players that contributed 1.5 WAR or more in those 20 seasons.  None of them were acquired in off-season deals.  They were all acquired at the deadline.

Brad Hand: Acquired at the 2018 deadline and was good in Cleveland for 2 ½ years.
Andrew Miller: Was acquired at the trade deadline in 2016 and helped the Guardians achieve a 94 win season.  He was also good in 2017 but he was hurt and ineffective in 2018.  Ubaldo Jiménez: Was bad in 2012 but was quite good in 2013 and Cleveland had 94 wins.  We are talking about a contribution of about 14 WAR collectively in (9) 90-win seasons.  

Now let’s look at players acquired as prospects.  The 2024 Guardians had the following players acquired as prospects.  Prospects being defined as a player that had never produced 1.5 WAR in a season.  Andrés Giménez / Josh Naylor / David Fry / Bo Naylor / Emmanuel Clase and Cade Smith.  Previous 90+ win teams included the following players acquired as prospects. Amed Rosario / Myles Straw / Mike Clevinger / Trevor Bauer / Yan Gomes / Corey Kluber / Carlos Carrasco.

The 96 win 2005 Guardians had the following players that we acquired as prospects. 
Grady Sizemore (5.6 war) / Travis Hafner (5.3 war) / Coco Crisp (5.2 war) / Cliff Lee (3.8 war) / and Jake Westbrook @ 2.9 war.
 

There is without a doubt for a GM priority is to put together a great group below him that can do great unbiased & individual player evaluations & development. To keep everything internal, especially for smaller markets is a very good goal. I'm also all in for all viable in-house young players to get a chance to prove themselves. Any team is bound to have weak points that needs to be strengthen especially if there is a competitive window.  IMO & pertaining to this thread the best way to do that is via trade using the surplus expendable young players we have opposed to expensive FA. IMO it makes much more sense to develop a top defensive catcher opposed to signing one in FA.

1 hour ago, DocBauer said:

Payroll won't allow much for trades this offseason, barring opening up some financial room somewhere. I do think it's possible youth may be traded for youth in the form of a young catcher, possibly a young 1B. That makes sense on paper in regard to the roster and the payroll. Were they able to acquire a young catcher in such a move, it makes moving Vazquez easier. Followed possibly/probably moving Paddack. Then they'd have some $ to play with and maybe grab a 1B and LHRP to "finish" the roster.

The Twins can make a number of trades. Money is not an issue unless we are talking about big contracts. There could be numerous moves to improve the roster and reduce the payroll simultaneously. The real question is - will the Twins attempt to make any changes or real improvements to the team? Falvey has specifically stated that the Twins may need to get "creative'. Well then, let's get creative Derek.