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

    Dollars And Sense


    Nick Nelson

    As we close in on the month of February, the Twins have remained quiet on the Hot Stove front. In terms of spending, it has been one of the most conservative offseasons we have seen from this franchise in some time.

    Byung Ho Park is the only addition that has really cost them anything. Outside of a few escalating contracts and arbitration raises, they haven't added payroll anywhere. With Torii Hunter and a couple others coming off the books, that leaves them slightly short of last year's Opening Day mark of $108 million, barring further moves.

    Image courtesy of Brad Rempel, USA Today

    Twins Video

    Following a season in which the Twins finally turned the corner and set their long-awaited contention blueprint into motion, the lack of aggressiveness on the market this winter has left many fans scratching their heads. An article by Jack Moore for Baseball Prospectus this week discussing Minnesota's misapplied label as a "small market" rankled plenty of folks, as evidenced by the nine pages of discussion on the topic in our forums.

    Personally, while I have been critical of the front office's timid approach at times in the past, I'm not too riled up by the sparsity of moves, for a couple of reasons.

    For one thing, there was Park's posting fee. At $12.85 million, it was very large, in the contexts of both this organization's past and the Korean market standards. While you might not technically construe this as a payroll expense, for all intents and purposes it is. They spent many millions of dollars to add immediate talent to the major-league roster.

    So if you prorate that money over the four years of Park's contract, the 2016 payroll figure jumps to about the exact same level it was at a year ago. That number ranked the Twins 18th in baseball last season, and while it might rank a bit lower this time around, it'll still be fairly close to the middle of the pack. It's not unreasonable for a club that falls on the lower end of the mid-market category in terms of revenue.

    The other thing is that the Twins seem to be committing to a more youth-focused approach. While it's difficult to have absolute confidence in the present bullpen array, I'd much rather allow the younger internal options to take jobs and run with them, as opposed to seeing them blocked by mediocrities like Tim Stauffer. Last year, he came in and had just about the worst spring you could possibly imagine, but still made the club and received a relatively long leash, on the basis of his guaranteed contract and veteran status. No more of that.

    But while we're on the subject, let's talk about Stauffer for a moment. Last offseason, he was Minnesota's most expensive bullpen addition, with his $2.2 million commitment ranking as the 23rd-largest given to a free agent relief pitcher by an MLB club (per MLB Trade Rumors).

    There is a "you get what you pay for" dynamic in play here. Nearly every reliever who signed a bigger deal than Stauffer last offseason performed better than he did. Given that the Twins missed the playoffs by only a few games, and given that Stauffer performed miserably almost literally every time he took the mound, you could certainly argue that aiming a little higher with their veteran bullpen upgrade might have made a big difference.

    But instead of aiming higher here in an offseason where the bullpen is an obvious area of need, the Twins haven't so much as set their sights, at least not with any urgent intention of pulling the trigger.

    We're getting the same explanatory arguments as usual: Terry Ryan and the Twins simply don't like any of the free agents that much. Tony Sipp? Too many years. Antonio Bastardo? Overpaid. This is about evaluation, not spending. It's a line that's being echoed by media members.

    But of course this overlooks the fact that, so many times in the past, those players that the Twins "haven't liked" ended up having successful seasons in which they could have been difference-makers for the club. Meanwhile, many of the players that they liked enough to sign, who invariably ended up being on the second or third tier in terms of monetary commitments, panned out as poor investments.

    These payroll arguments that come up every year (usually around this time) are tedious and frustrating in part because they become so repetitive but even more so because people on opposite sides tend to cling to outrageous extremes.

    The fact that the team isn't spending aggressively and adding big contracts does not necessarily indicate a lack of desire to win, nor is it a surefire sign that ownership is interested only in hoarding cash.

    At the same time, nobody is arguing that the Twins should "spend money just to spend money," and to dismiss the reality that it costs more to acquire more established and coveted players is ridiculous.

    So if we're going to have these discussions, let's at least try to be reasonable and realistic. I'm on board with what the Twins seem to be doing, but I'm also running out of patience with watching the same conservative strategies come up short. If the front office's decision to eschew the open market and look inward while their competitors pile up relief talent backfires, there needs to be some accountability.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    Ha - if you think trading for a backup Catcher (that is what he will be this year, it is not the "Twins way" to sit a veteran in Suzuki down) and taking a flyer on a guy who may very well end up being the teams 3rd or 4th best option at DH ( I don't think that will be the case, but its very possible).. is 2 fairly big deals... i dont know what to tell you

    exactly.

    Nice article Nick.

     

    The 4 or 5 people on here that actually ready anything I say... (OK, the 2 or 3)...know I'm more of an optimistic than not, and that I've been pretty supportive of the FO and field management over the years. To me, a competitive and winning team with a chance is what I'm looking for, I don't get all bent out of shape if we don't bring home the prize, (even $200M teams fail), and even the Twins 4 year death spiral was a very short time frame when compared to many, many teams in the league.

     

    I think I've also been very fair, however, when I've called out the Twins for such errors as blowing CF for what is borderline 3 years now, and blowing the bullpen situation last season; in each case seemingly banking on the early arrival of prospects.

     

    For the most part, I see the Twins STRONGLY moving toward prospects and younger players. Don't let the odd veteran signing fool you now, with their actions and inactions, along with guys already up, they are clearly focused on the youngsters. They simply don't wish to go the whole, "bring 'em up even if they stink now because they'll learn on the job" philosophy.

     

    But here is my problem with this roster, especially after wrong signings, no signings, and banking on youngsters not yet ready for the bullpen, or to save it last season. (Pun somewhat intentional)

    Didn't anyone learn their lesson yet? This team is not the Yankees, but they are not financially strapped either. You are telling me than a couple 1 or 2 year deals that would TOTAL $10-12M isn't affordable? You're telling me that a couple really solid, experienced bullpen pieces couldn't make this a better staff, a better team overall, and that those pieces would be valueless deadweight and untradeable assets when the Burdi's and MelotKis' of the system arrive?

     

    So what if we have so much young promote blessed talent at the all star break that we don't know what to do with it? What about the 3+ months before then?

     

    You could make various arguments concerning the Park acquisition and keeping Plouffe at this time, but they are nice players, and there are enough questions in the lineup to see the meritsame of both. At least initially. But to me, there is no fundamentally sound arguement for not taking a couple smart and non-bank breaking moves to fortify the bullpen this off season.

     

    I just wish the team would pick a direction they are going.  They are so bad at informing the fans at their plans when it comes to reasoning with personnel.  I doubt many would be upset if they broke spring training with Burdi, Chargois, May, Perkins, Jepsen, Fien, Meyer, Rodgers with others waiting in AAA.  The team just needs to let the fans who are uninformed know their could be some implosions and bumps in the road, but this is what the team will begin to look like in the future. 

     

    There will always be Duensings and Abads waiting on the scrap pile if some of the young guys need to get sent back down to AAA for some seasoning in May, no need to start with junk.

     

     

     

    I would rather have a rocky pen with young guys than implosions with scrap heapers to start the season.

     

     

    Someone is bound to step up this season from that group of bullpen prospects.  Last season was an anomaly.  There is way too much talent in AAA and AA for that to happen again this season unless the front office grows impatient and splurges on several rusty over the hill RP's.

    Isn't this just a natural progression of a rebuild?

     

    1) team is terrible, minors are terrible, 40-man is full of mediocrity with guaranteed contracts

    2) build low minors, 40-man stays bad/guaranteed

    3) prospects rise, 40-man gets cluttered

    3A) replace mediocrity with prospects in phases, inevitably there are some 40-man casualties

     

     

    Good article Nick, my issue with the approach has never really been so much about the overall amount the team spends but the approach & mentality.

     

    The team has notoriously spent on "reliable" veterans who you know what your getting from. I've always preferred an approach of spending a higher amount on a high quality FA and then placing young upside from the organization around them. Like having Stauffer, Fien, Boyer, Duensing types taking up 10 million sign a a couple higher end FA and don't be afraid to give your propsects a chance to fill out the rest of the bullpen.

     

    Also the part the bothers me with this FO is how EVERY YEAR Ryan will identify a weakness they need to fill and say we have $ to spend to fill this need. Then comes the sticker shock of OMG, these contracts are way out of line, I guess we aren't signing anyone. Why do they have such a difficult time predicting what the market will dictate? How are they so surprised EVERY YEAR! It's ridiculous they can't see what even the common fan can see coming.

    Good article Nick, my issue with the approach has never really been so much about the overall amount the team spends but the approach & mentality.

     

    The team has notoriously spent on "reliable" veterans who you know what your getting from. I've always preferred an approach of spending a higher amount on a high quality FA and then placing young upside from the organization around them. Like having Stauffer, Fien, Boyer, Duensing types taking up 10 million sign a a couple higher end FA and don't be afraid to give your propsects a chance to fill out the rest of the bullpen.

     

    Also the part the bothers me with this FO is how EVERY YEAR Ryan will identify a weakness they need to fill and say we have $ to spend to fill this need. Then comes the sticker shock of OMG, these contracts are way out of line, I guess we aren't signing anyone. Why do they have such a difficult time predicting what the market will dictate? How are they so surprised EVERY YEAR! It's ridiculous they can't see what even the common fan can see coming.

    I think your assumption might be wrong. Who said it was the price of FA's that stopped Ryan? Maybe he just believes in the in house options. The last two years he thought the starting pitching was a problem and signed 3 FA pitchers.




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...