Let’s Wait to Declare the Offseason a Failure for the Minnesota Twins

I understand that many of you may disagree with the following statement, however, I consider signing Odorizzi, Pineda, Bailey and Hill to be signing  "impact pitching".  

I understand that many of you may disagree with the following statement, however, I consider signing Odorizzi, Pineda, Bailey and Hill and Romo and Clippard to be signing  "impact pitching".  

Edited for you. 

Okay, I can accept disagreeIng with the statement that the offseason can’t be judged until the end of the season. But I can’t agree with calling the offseason a failure with more than two and a half months until opening day. 

They said they were going after "impact pitching" .  They did not say positive or negative impact

You’re right, I (and I’d guess many others) disagree with you but in the interest of understanding your point of view better how do you define “impact pitching”? Is it a single one of those pitchers? Is it the cumulative effect of the 4 starters? Is there an ERA they must be better than? Help those of us who don’t agree understand your point of view better. 
 

FYI, this isn’t just to tarheeltwinsfan, if you consider the Twins to have signed impact pitching please explain how you define it and how the Twins met that bar. 

As the one who added “and Romo and Clippard” to tarheeltwinsfan’s post, I’ll take a shot.

To me it’s the cumulative effect of adding four veteran starters and two veteran relievers — all of whom I think have good likelihoods of being anywhere from above-average to well-above average — to a Nov. 1 roster that had only Berrios, four or so guys with something like a dozen combined career starts, and a solid, but still fairly inexperienced bullpen. The roster on Jan. 10 looks a heck of a lot better to me than the one on Nov. 1.

Another way I would phrase that is that I’ve tried to view it as adding “impact pitchING,” whereas it’s felt like many have focused on adding an “impact pitchER.” I would rather the possibility of an eventual rotation of Berrios-Odo-Pineda-Bailey-Hill, with Dobnak-Smeltzer-Thorpe-Graterol as my 6-9, than have a rotation of Cole-Berrios-Dobnak-Smeltzer-Thorpe, with Graterol and I’m not sure who else as my 6-9.

Now, that said, I think they can still do more, and I’d love to see them do that. That’s why I also posted that I don’t think it’s fair to evaluate the entire offseason on Jan. 10.

So for example, I’ve thought about starting a post noting that minor league signings seem to be starting. Some guys who may have thought they were going to get a major league deal are still out there. I can think of Alex Wood, Drew Smyly, Felix Hernandez, Clay Buchholz, Danny Salazar, and Taijuan Walker. I haven’t taken the time to evaluate them closely, but I’m assuming the front office has. If they do their homework and can pull off signing the best one or two of them to a minor league contract with incentive-based bonuses, I could support that. Even if one of those guys only pulls a Martin Perez and is top-notch for eight starts (i.e. until Pineda returns), that would be a bonus. And with the return of Pineda and the presence of Dobnak-Smeltzer-Thorpe-Graterol, I’d like to think that the front office would be much more likely to pull the plug if one or more of the latter guys is lights-out in Rochester and said minor-league-contract-guy turns into August/September Perez.

Similarly, with only Berrios, Odo, Bailey as vets on opening day, I’d also love to see them pull off a smart trade. Folks perceive that we don’t trade any prospects, but I keep pointing back to the February trade of a Single-A shortstop for Odo as one of their biggest wins so far. With their penchant for value, that’s the type of trade I think we’re most likely to see — what another team views as a lottery pick for an under-the-radar guy that our front offices perceives as under-valued. 

Probably more than you asked for, Oxtung, but that’s where I’m coming from. 

You’re right, I (and I’d guess many others) disagree with you but in the interest of understanding your point of view better how do you define “impact pitching”? Is it a single one of those pitchers? Is it the cumulative effect of the 4 starters? Is there an ERA they must be better than? Help those of us who don’t agree understand your point of view better. 
 

FYI, this isn’t just to tarheeltwinsfan, if you consider the Twins to have signed impact pitching please explain how you define it and how the Twins met that bar. 

I may be the only one to think this way, but since after the 2019 season ended the Twins only had Berrios as an experienced major league starter, it was necessary to sign at least 3-4 more experienced major league starters, otherwise the Twins would be in deep trouble. Had the Twins only signed one impact pitcher, Cole for example, that would be great...(similiar to Spahn and Sain and pray for rain) but that  great new pitcher would only give the Twins about 20 wins at most. That would be 10-12 more games won than an average major league starter, assuming 8-10 victories for an average starter on a team which should score lots of runs.. But what about the other 3 open starting pitcher spots which needed to be filled? Do the Twins use 3 AAAA pitchers here? I think that would have been a mistake. What the Twins did sign was 2 very good, familiar, experienced starters (admittedly not Cole), in Odo and Pineda (even though he will miss 39 games) plus an average ML pitcher in Bailey (who should eat innings and was throwing well for parts of 2019 and who has been a Yankee killer in the past, plus a very good pitcher with playoff experience, who had had surgery and who won't be ready until June (I think I read that), but who is not a flame thrower anyway...so maybe he can bounce back more quickly and successfully than a flame thrower who had had the same surgery.  Finally do you think Wes Johnson would have much positive effect on Cole? Maybe, but how much better could Cole become?  Do you think Wes Johnson can help Bailey improve what is already an average ML pitching career...I hope so. What about Rich Hill? Not sure, but if Hill is healthy, he can be really good, plus a lefty to boot. With Pineda and Hill  starting their seasons late, they should be fresher for October. These are my reasons why I felt that the Twins had signed "impact pitching", which I believe can be interpreted as plural. We must remember, the FO has a budget. Remember that the FO had to sign impact pitching and also to try to extend the core players (as they did today with Sano and hopefully will do with Berrios), plus arbitration increases for many others. Well, I'm exhausted from trying to explain all oft his as best I could. Thanks for asking, Oxtung.

As the one who added “and Romo and Clippard” to tarheeltwinsfan’s post, I’ll take a shot.

 

To me it’s the cumulative effect of adding four veteran starters and two veteran relievers — all of whom I think have good likelihoods of being anywhere from above-average to well-above average — to a Nov. 1 roster that had only Berrios, four or so guys with something like a dozen combined career starts, and a solid, but still fairly inexperienced bullpen. The roster on Jan. 10 looks a heck of a lot better to me than the one on Nov. 1.

 

Another way I would phrase that is that I’ve tried to view it as adding “impact pitchING,” whereas it’s felt like many have focused on adding an “impact pitchER.” I would rather the possibility of an eventual rotation of Berrios-Odo-Pineda-Bailey-Hill, with Dobnak-Smeltzer-Thorpe-Graterol as my 6-9, than have a rotation of Cole-Berrios-Dobnak-Smeltzer-Thorpe, with Graterol and I’m not sure who else as my 6-9.

Indiana Twin, You explained my point about "impact pitching"  better than I did  in my reply to Oxtung. . Thanks.

While I agree that you can't judge the offseason when there's still a few months before the season starts, you can certainly evaluate what has been done so far. To me, the goal should be to get better. Has the FO done things to improve this team for next season? I'm sorry, but resigning Odo and Pineda is not "adding" impact pitching. They were on the team last year, so not an improvement. Bailey? Same as Gibson, so not better. Hill? I would say an upgrade over Perez, but when is he actually going to pitch? Cron and Schoop both had some nice offensive contributions and they are both gone. Yes, there is still time to acquire a few players through trades, but due to this organization's penchant for coveting prospects I have little confidence in them being used to trade for any difference makers. So while it is still offseason and you can't truly evaluate until it's over, what are they going to do? Who are they possibly going to get? If we look at where this team is right now, with an offseason goal of improving this team for next season, how can it be anything but a failure?

I’ll respond by reframing your question a bit:

Has the team gotten better than the playoff roster? Personally, I’d give it a pretty tentative “yes,” but that’s at least partially dependent on Gibson being hurt at the time and Pineda being suspended. With health and no suspensions, our playoff rotation would be Berrios-Odo-Hill-Pineda (or Bailey) in some order instead of Berrios-Bullpen-Odo-Bullpen.

But that’s a tentative “yes,” and I can see what seems to be your suggestion that at best they’ve stayed the same. With the presence of Arraez, I’m more concerned about the loss of Cron than Schoop, which makes me wonder — if they would have known they were going to miss out on the higher-profile pitchers and have as little money committed as they do, might they have tendered a deal to Cron after all. On the other hand, they did still have the opportunity to sign him up until Dec. 21 when he signed with the Tigers, so maybe they didn’t value him as highly as I do. 

However, I frame the offseason evaluation question by asking, “Is the team better than it was on Nov. 1?” With Odo having the ability to opt out of the QO, they didn’t control his rights. They didn’t have Gibson’s or Pineda’s rights. They had one proven major league starter on their Nov. 1 roster. I won’t repeat my points from post No. 55 above, but with the additions of Odo, Pineda, Bailey, and Hill to the Nov. 1 roster, plus Romo, Clippard, Avila, and the no-brainer decision to pick up Cruz’s option, the answer to the latter question is an unequivocal “yes” in my mind.  

And part of my point In giving them an “incomplete” grade is that we are actually still closer to the last day of the World Series than we are to Opening Day. True, nearly all of the low-hanging fruit, i.e. free agents that only cost us money, has been picked. However, there Is still a LOT of time to turn my “yes” into a “YES” with some under-the-radar and not-very-sexy moves that are hard to predict, but that this front office seems to excel in.

There is at least one sexy move left In signing Donaldson, but I’m ambivalent on that one. The reason for my ambivalence is that I value the flexibility that they have to use the same money for multiple boring moves. That includes in-season moves. They HAVE been active in mid-season the past several years — they just have been as bold as some folks would like. But I also wonder if having such a low payroll at this time might lead to them being considerably more aggressive if the situation calls for it.