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

    Standing Pat as a Strategy


    Nick Nelson

    'As we speak cruel time is fleeing. Seize the day, believing as little as possible in the morrow.' – Horace

    By all appearances, this is going to be a low-key winter for the Minnesota Twins. Coming off a season full of setbacks, the front office is reluctant to make firm commitments or chart a new course, with so much uncertainty permeating its existing core.

    And you know what? I get it. It's a logical approach in the scope of long-term strategy. But that doesn't make coming to terms with this reality any less of a bummer.

    Image courtesy of Benny Sieu-USA TODAY Sports

    Twins Video

    To their credit, the Twins have been proactive in addressing their needs this offseason. Already they have filled their two clearest positional vacancies. Granted, they've done so by gathering up castoffs non-tendered by other organizations, but C.J. Cron and Jonathan Schoop are hardly scraps. They're legitimate starters and intriguing flyers for a rebuilding team.

    It is that last part that stings. Every indication I've seen signals a conservative approach this offseason, as the front office continues to bide time and see how things shake out with its inherited volatile assets.

    "The Twins have indicated that next season will be about allowing their young core to continue to develop," La Velle E. Neal III wrote in forecasting a quiet week at the Winter Meetings.

    Derek Falvey himself echoed that sentiment during a Friday interview with 1500 ESPN.

    "I do believe that you build championship teams around an internal core," Falvey said. "In our particular situation I think we’re really attentive to how we impact that core with complementary pieces."

    "You have to be thoughtful, the more years out you go, how it impacts your club."

    This isn't a new narrative from Falvey's baseball ops group, and the strategy thus far has aligned.

    Schoop on a one-year deal allows the Twins to wait and see what happens next year with Nick Gordon, added to the 40-man roster last month. Gordon had an awful season in 2018 but he's 22, a former top-10 draft pick, and a fixture on national Top 100 prospect lists. Any kind of long-term answer at second base would have amounted to waving the white flag on this highly touted and talented youth.

    As far as stopgaps go, Schoop's a damn good one. He's 27 and one year removed from an All-Star campaign that earned him MVP votes.

    The Cron situation is similar. The Twins don't quite have a Gordon-level prospect coming up at first base but Brent Rooker looks like a player and could be ready by midseason. Minnesota also is accounting for the very real possibility that Miguel Sano will be relegated to first base in the near future. Cron gives them flexibility and offers a fairly high floor; he's almost certain to be a significant improvement over Joe Mauer v.2018. Plus, the Twins can control Cron in 2020, which will look great if he backs up his breakout campaign.

    So, like I said, I get the rationale for these moves. They're very defensible. But they're not bold or particularly ambitious. They don't point to an outright aspiration for serious contention in the division next year. At best, the Twins are hoping they catch fire with these low-wattage additions while things coalesce elsewhere.

    Even with solid returns on Cron and Schoop, and moderate improvements among the incumbent crowd, this position-player unit still doesn't look all that well designed. The offense is desperately lacking for on-base percentage. An infield alignment of Sano, Jorge Polanco, Schoop and Cron will likely be very poor defensively. Mitch Garver's status is basically a mystery at this point.

    The team is caught in flux, and that's not really anyone's fault so much as just the way things have played out. Most other positions on this roster are similar to first and second base – unestablished at present, but with too promising or undecided an outlook for drastic changes in direction.

    An offseason spent more or less standing pat makes sense for the Twins. But for fans – even those who fully understand and accept the thought process – it stinks nonetheless.

    Cron and Schoop are logical in the rebuilding framework because they're young and capable enough that either could turn into parts of the go-forward vision – or at least deadline trade chips to further supplement the pipeline. But they are probably not the kind of decisive difference-makers who help Minnesota take the next step, in the event that Buxton and Sano rebound.

    We all know they are at the heart of the matter – Buxton and Sano – and that neither of those outcomes can be fully counted upon, but it's almost as if the Twins are planning around it not happening, turning their gaze already to the next hot prospect wave led by Royce Lewis and Alex Kirilloff.

    Which brings me back to that Horace quote from the outset about the unrelenting passage of time. "As we speak cruel time is fleeing. Seize the day, believing as little as possible in the morrow." We can all hope Lewis, Kirilloff and the next group are up to the task of pulling this franchise from the dredges, but no one can be blamed for pessimism as we watch an endless rebuild carry on in perpetuity, with Buxton and Sano entering their theoretical primes.

    Falvey and Thad Levine have made some nice moves with the coaching staff and behind the scenes (where some would argue the real war is being waged), but those moves don't put fans in the seats, nor do savvy buy-low investments like Schoop and Cron. The Twins drew their lowest attendance this year since 2004 at the Metrodome, and while that's partially attributable to weather, it also speaks to growing fan apathy, which I fear will only worsen in 2019 if Minnesota stays on course to field a low-payroll, low-profile club.

    Fans have endured nearly a decade of mediocre or worse play at Target Field. Even if the current rhetoric and ensuing actions are perfectly reasonable and valid, the whole "building a sustainable long-term winner, eventually" model doesn't do much to energize or excite a base that could really use some energy and excitement.

    Right now, the real focus is on 2020. At various points in the past, it's been on 2018, 2017, 2016, etc. No one wants or expects a rebuild to take eight-plus years, but here we are.

    If you've been conditioned into believing as little as possible in the morrow, that's more than fair. Especially because of the unique window of winnability in the AL Central, which won't last forever.

    At the same time, if you put yourself in the shoes of the team's decision makers, with all they must account for, hopefully you can see why – from their view – it's not quite time to seize the day.

    But as we speak, cruel time is fleeing...

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Riley Quick

    Fort Myers Mighty Mussels - A, RHP
    Start #3 for the 21-year-old went well again. He tossed three scoreless innings with no walks. He gave up one hit and had three strikeouts. In 8 IP through 3 starts, he's given up 0 runs, 1 hit, 3 walks, and 13 strikeouts.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    I think what looks to be an outlier season in 2017 is what is skewing the perception of where the team was and where the team is. They weren't supposed to be good (and frankly, they really weren't very good) and if their record had been poor as expected, all of those short term deals would have looked in line with being a rebuilding club filling positions with stop gap players and reasonable mid-season flips. 

    I don't really buy this. 2018 seems a lot more like the outlier than 2017 to me. The Twins should've expected to be good by the time Buxton and Sano were fully establishing themselves as big-leaguers alongside Dozier, Mauer, etc. 

    It would seem to me that if you have unknowns, like Buxton or growth from Kepler, that it shouldn't dissuade additions it would create depth. If you could sign a Michael Brantley and a Jose Iglesias, I think you could still find at bats for Kepler, Cave, Polanco, etc.  Lack of depth was exposed last year.

    I used to be a fan of waiting for the future to come to you and staying the course. In certain situations, I still believe in that.

     

    Not here. Not now. The rest of the division has gotten worse, and Cleveland is going to trade an all-star starter this winter. The mandate should be to win NOW in this division. Just go for it. The division is up for grabs, and if you make the playoffs, think about that extra revenue :)))

     

    I think what looks to be an outlier season in 2017 is what is skewing the perception of where the team was and where the team is. They weren't supposed to be good (and frankly, they really weren't very good) and if their record had been poor as expected, all of those short term deals would have looked in line with being a rebuilding club filling positions with stop gap players and reasonable mid-season flips. 

    I think you are seriously discounting 2017. They were maybe a little out over their skis, but they had a positive run differential for the season and were actually a net-negative in one-run games. And they had like 35 fWAR as a team, which was more or less in line with their record. It's not like the Mariners this past season who were WAY, WAY, WAY over their underlying indicators.

     

    And the offseason following that season is what bugs me more than anything else about this front office. They had the youngest group of position players in the AL, and many of the young guys appeared to be breaking out. Most other franchises - even small market teams - have aggressively tried to upgrade the top of their roster when on the cusp of competitive window by acquiring long-term, high-talent assets. The Brewers were in basically the exact same position as the Twins, and they went out and acquired Yelich via trade and Cain via FA. The Pirates just traded a bunch of talent for Chris Archer. The Phillies are trying to jump start their contention window, and they just traded for Segura. The Padres signed Hosmer and are seemingly involved in every big trade rumor going right now. Basically every single season since they started winning, the Astros have used their prospect depth to acquire more players for the top of their roster. And going back a few years, the Royals traded Wil Myers for James Shields and Wade Davis.

     

    Speaking for myself, I think there is an abundance of evidence that this front office hasn't believed in the Buxton/Sano/Kepler/Rosario/Polanco/Berrios core from day one, and that their long-term strategy (if there is one) is to tread water until THEIR prospects show up.

    The Twins have ZERO idea what to expect from Buxton and Sano.

     

    Will they be near-all-star level? Or will they be brutal? The problem is that the difference between one or the other is the difference between contention and non-contention. And if you don't know what you're going to get out of your two most important core pieces, do you spend a ton on free agents and trades? You probably don't. It's a wise decision.

     

    Doesn't mean it's that much fun. 

     

    Too bad, really. With Cleveland cutting salary and the White Sox not quite ready for contention yet this would be a nice window. 

     

    Not sure I follow. Did I imply that? 

     

    I took from your comment that the team will have 30M coming off after this year.  What did you mean by that, if not to imply they'd have money to spend?

     

    We've been hearing for half a decade that Mauer's contract was stopping us from being aggressive.  And yet here we are....

     

    Of all of the things that frustrate me, the concept that we shouldn't pay a lot of money to sign good major league players because they might "block" our young prospects is probably the most frustrating. I've never seen a situation where a young player was actually blocked from playing. As a very extreme example, the Angels traded for Vernon Wells, who was being paid more than $20 million per year, while a young Mike Trout was ripping up the minors. When Trout was ready to dominate the majors, did Vernon Wells block his path? Hell no. The Angels simply sat Wells on the bench until they could trade him.

     

    If a young player is ready to make the team, they'll make the team. In the meantime, let's stock the team with the best players we can. That strategy works whether the young guys pan out or not.

    This is spot on. I for one am sick and tired of waiting for the young guys to become stars. I have followed this team for more years than I care to admit. I remember David McCarty, Eddie Bane, Rick Sofield and BJ Garbe. All of them were going to be superstars. None even came close. Now we have Buxton and Sano. Neither will ever be superstars but we have to hold up the entire team waiting to see if they can justify their big bonus. Their is no guarantee on Lewis or Kirillof coming up so why cant this team get some players who have proven to be quality major leaguers. Its not money. We have plenty of money and the richest owners in the league. Its an organization philosophy and until it changes this team will always be a second division team.

     

    I took from your comment that the team will have 30M coming off after this year.  What did you mean by that, if not to imply they'd have money to spend?

     

    We've been hearing for half a decade that Mauer's contract was stopping us from being aggressive.  And yet here we are....

    No, I was just pointing out that they are spending some money on the rotation in 2019, whereas they could have non-tendered or traded Odorizzi/Gibson if they wanted to go extreme with the "stand pat" approach. And I bet we'll see fairly significant $ spent on 2-3 more pitching staff additions, as well as a sizable deal to lock up Berrios.  

     

    I dont view standing pat as a strategy. It's the opposite of a strategy.

    And it certainly does nothing to move the Twins toward the "sustainable" goal I keep hearing from Falvine.

    "Hope" is not a strategy, but that seems to be the sales pitch. 

     

    I dont view standing pat as a strategy. It's the opposite of a strategy.

    And it certainly does nothing to move the Twins toward the "sustainable" goal I keep hearing from Falvine.

     

     

    If spring training rolls around and these are the only moves we see, then I'll agree that Falvey was standing pat and non-strategic. Until then, I think those descriptions are inaccurate and a bit unfair. 

     

    That said, I wish I saw evidence that Levine's hint about being open to trading for help is in play. Although I really wonder if dangling prospects #4 and beyond, guys in the Gordon Gonsalves Rooker Baddoo tier, are going to net you a frontline starter or a solution at 2B all that much better than Schoop. I don't see the Cron and Schoop decisions as non-strategic. They seem like fairly smart ways to put you in a position to compete in 2019 if your core of Sano, Buxton, Rosario, Berrios, Gibson, Polanco, Rogers, May, and (yeah, I know) Kepler come through in general terms. 

     

    I was hoping for another starter in that Gibson range, via trade probably. I doubt that's gong to happen, not because of a non-strategic "stand pat" attitude, but because they trust their own plan (opener/primary using Odor, Mejia, Stewart types?). I was hoping for McCutcheon, willing to settle for Nelson Cruz maybe. If Falvey "stands pat" with what we have right now for a line-up, I'll be mildly unhappy about it unless Kirilloff and Lewis burst onto the scene. And if he passes on all the RP FA opportunities for guys like Soria, Robertson, Familia, Allen where the cost is maybe 3 years at $8-10M per? THEN I'll be on board with the criticism. THEN come February, I'll label Falvey as having sat on his hands and worse.

    Edited by birdwatcher

     

    If spring training rolls around and these are the only moves we see, then I'll agree that Falvey was standing pat and non-strategic. Until then, I think those descriptions are inaccurate and a bit unfair. 

     

    That said, I wish I saw evidence that Levine's hint about being open to trading for help is in play. Although I really wonder if dangling prospects #4 and beyond, guys in the Gordon Gonsalves Rooker Baddoo tier, are going to net you a frontline starter or a solution at 2B all that much better than Schoop. I don't see the Cron and Schoop decisions as non-strategic. They seem like fairly smart ways to put you in a position to compete in 2019 if your core of Sano, Buxton, Rosario, Berrios, Gibson, Polanco, Rogers, May, and (yeah, I know) Kepler come through in general terms. 

     

    I was hoping for another starter in that Gibson range, via trade probably. I doubt that's gong to happen, not because of a non-strategic "stand pat" attitude, but because they trust their own plan (opener/primary using Odor, Mejia, Stewart types?). I was hoping for McCutcheon, willing to settle for Nelson Cruz maybe. If Falvey "stands pat" with what we have right now for a line-up, I'll be mildly unhappy about it unless Kirilloff and Lewis burst onto the scene. And if he passes on all the RP FA opportunities for guys like Soria, Robertson, Familia, Allen where the cost is maybe 3 years at $8-10M per? THEN I'll be on board with the criticism. THEN come February, I'll label Falvey as having sat on his hands and worse.

    You should address this with the author of the article, no?

     

    I'm simply disputing the idea that "standing pat" is a strategy.

    I get both the strategy and the frustration.

     

    With the division weak and the talent that the twins have, I absolutely understand a desire to be bold and make a play for some of the FA that are/were out there that would fill some of our roster holes very nicely and position us better to compete. But some of that perception of talent is dependent on things like: Sano being healthy and being 2017 and not 2018, or Buxton finding a way to hit enough and stay healthy enough to stick in the lineup, or 2nd half Polanco being the "real" Polanco, or Kepler finally having a breakout season.

     

    Which is why I can understand the "wait & see" approach, because if 1/2 those guys fall flat again, we ain't nearly as good as we think we are.

     

    If Lewis and Kirilloff had played AA last season and we felt more comfortable they were really breaking down the doors...

     

    If Romero was a guy you felt confident could start getting consistently out of the 5th inning...

     

    man, I just don't know. I'm worried we have too many hackers who don't get on base. I'm worried we don't have another power arm in the bullpen we can count on.

     

    Would I feel better if the Twins made a big push on Machado, even if they came up short? I dunno. I mean, they made a big push on Darvish last season, missed on him, and it might have been the luckiest thing that happened last season. (that 6th year is looking dreadful to have tacked on now).

     

     

     

    Sign players for more than one year deals. Bet on success, not failure. But if every year you fill your holes with one year deals, you have the same holes again. Or, I guess we can be happy with constant failure. That's also an option. Plenty of people have laid out their plans on this very site.

     

    Let's take a moment to look back. What percentage of these signings have been the huge difference maker you insist are essential to building a winner.

     

    2018

    Eric Hosmer 8/144 – played in a 157 games and produced -.1 WAR.

     

    Yu Darvish 6/126/AAV 25 – Obviously added nothing to 2018. Hard to say what he adds to 2019 but it is very unusual for SP to produce at their norm after a year off from injury. Next year he will be 33 ½ so there is a good chance this contract could produce very little for a 6 year period and be detrimental to the Twins extending their core or adding key FAs when they are actually contending.

     

    Martinez 5/120 – Great so far.

     

    Arrieta – 3/75/AAV 25 – Produced 2 WAR @12.5M/1 WAR. Odorizzi produced 2.6 WAR @ 2.46M/WAR.

     

    Arietta would have at best made a negligible difference being added to the rotation.

     

    Cain – 5/80M - Been great so far and exactly the kind of guy we should add.

     

    Carlos Santana / Wade Davis & Alex Cobb – All serviceable but not much above replacement level.

     

    2017

     

    The top 3 in AAV were Cespedes / Chapman and Fowler. Cespedes produced 2/5 WAR for 2017-18 combined. Chapman produced 3.5 WAR so he has been good, not great. Fowler was no better than what we already have in 2017 and terrible (below replacement) this year.

     

    Jansen was great in 2017 and had .4 WAR in 2018. Melancon produced a total of .7 WAR in 2 tears.

     

    Justin Turner at only 13M AAV has been fantastic. Ian Desmond has been equally horrible.

     

    2016 – A little more meaningful because we see the impact over 3 years.

     

    David Price 7/217/AAV of #31M – He has been decent but not a difference maker. Quite good the 1st year (4.5 WAR). Odorizzi level in terms of WAR the last 2 years. Over $10M/1 WAR and will be 34 at the end of next year. Odds are he had 1 season where he was a difference maker at a cost of $200M. That won’t hurt Boston given they have almost $200M more in revenue but this type of deal is a detriment to the Twins sustaining success.

     

    Zack Greinke – Pretty much the same story as price but he has been a little better.  One year where he was a real difference maker. The last 3 years are likely a very poor value and the odds are he is not a difference maker going forward.

     

    The next 5 in AAV are Chris Davis / Jason Heyward / Johnny Cueto / Justin Upton Jordan Zimmerman, and Jeff Samardzija.  Davis is below replacement level. Hayward is a 4th outfielder. Johnny Cueto had a great first year and has been a disaster ever since. Zimmerman produced 3.2 WAR over 3 years. Samardzjia was average in 2016, good in 2017 with 3.8 War and had .2 WAR in 2018.

     

    That’s a lot of failure. Failure you can’t jettison when they are long-term contracts. The premise that the answer to sustained success is long-term FA deals is not consistent with history. This does not mean we should never do them but to beat the drum constantly that the Twins failure is a product of an unwillingness to sign long-term deals suggests you have not stopped to consider the relative success of this strategy in recent years. This entire group collectively have produced very few seasons where they were difference makers.

    Edited by Major League Ready

    I get both the strategy and the frustration.

     

    With the division weak and the talent that the twins have, I absolutely understand a desire to be bold and make a play for some of the FA that are/were out there that would fill some of our roster holes very nicely and position us better to compete. But some of that perception of talent is dependent on things like: Sano being healthy and being 2017 and not 2018, or Buxton finding a way to hit enough and stay healthy enough to stick in the lineup, or 2nd half Polanco being the "real" Polanco, or Kepler finally having a breakout season.

     

    Which is why I can understand the "wait & see" approach, because if 1/2 those guys fall flat again, we ain't nearly as good as we think we are.

     

    If Lewis and Kirilloff had played AA last season and we felt more comfortable they were really breaking down the doors...

     

    If Romero was a guy you felt confident could start getting consistently out of the 5th inning...

     

    man, I just don't know. I'm worried we have too many hackers who don't get on base. I'm worried we don't have another power arm in the bullpen we can count on.

     

    Would I feel better if the Twins made a big push on Machado, even if they came up short? I dunno. I mean, they made a big push on Darvish last season, missed on him, and it might have been the luckiest thing that happened last season. (that 6th year is looking dreadful to have tacked on now).

    If they sign or acquire new players via trade, then the Twins have new players to add to the core moving forward if the others fail.

     

    I have a feeling we're going to look back on the Button/Sano era and remember one thing "Wait and see".

    This is not an answer to the posting asking for a three year plan from one of us.  Give me the money and resources of Lavine and Falvey and I will come up with a plan.  All I can say is waiting for Buxton and Sano year after year after year is getting quite old.  I am waiting for Lavine and Falvey and every year I am told they have a plan.  What is their plan?  Here are the players that they have signed or traded for in 2017 and 2018, there are 54 and I skipped a few from 2017.  So this is more than a 40 man roster - how much have these moves pushed us forward?  What is the strategy of the FO?  

     

    Lynn, Reed, Castro, Rodney, Morrison, Schoop, Torreyes, Adrianza, Cron, Austin, Cave, Odorizzi, Pineda, Haley, Paulsen, Field, Rucinski,Hague, Schuck, Tepesch, Vogelsong, Greenwood, Miller, Tracy, Giminez, Belisle, Breslow, Kinley, Duke, Pacheco, Buss, Curtis, Magill, Wilkins, Heisey, Sanchez, Rodriguez, Carter, Villalobos, Motter, Rupp, LaMarre, Raley, Smeltzer, Forsythe, Duran, Alcala, Celestino, Maciel, Trinidad, Costello, DeJong, Rijo, Drake,Adams, 

    I think reality setting in may be the emphasis behind these moves. The Twins are in a precarious position with what they planned to be the core of the team at this time having for the most part under performed and disappointed, but still probably exhibiting enough talent and potential to be worth waiting for. Unfortunately, I think they believe the coaching staff that had been in place, as well as those in the developmental levels below have failed to bring the best out of these players.

    So, with little choice but to see if new coaching can bring the talent out of these players, it makes little sense to make long term commitments to free agents that might not be enough to push them over the top.

    Their preferred choice of using trades to suppliment the existing team probably has been unfruitful as well, given that most of the Twins prospect talent is at lower levels and not going to be at peak demand at this point.

    Some of the trades I see happening don't make a lot of sense. Carlos Santana was supposed to be a Twins target since Philly was motivated to move him to free up a spot for Hoskins. Given that he was already being overpayed and the expensive end of his contract yet to come, it made sense that Philly would need to eat a lot of money and/or give up prospect capital to get him off their books. But in the end they turned Santana into Segura and Pazos, and only had to chip in Crawford. Any wonder the Twins weren't in on that?

    I saw a suggestion here that the Twins try to get Santana from Seattle by trading Cave and a couple prospects. Why? Santana is being over paid. He has negative trade value. Why would the Twins do that?

    I think the FO may be correct to just look for bargain pieces for this year, try to put a team on the field that can be competitive if the players perform, and see how things shake out.

    There are a lot of pitching pieces that need to be evaluated before they will really know where they are. Would it make sense to start trading any of those pieces away before they had a better idea what they really have? Seems like that would be a bigger gamble than just letting things develop and shake out.

    Really like a lot of posts here, but can't "like" them for some reason. (Is there a reason some articles lack a "like" button or is it just my equipment?)

     

    I know I sometimes come off as an optomist, but I am frustrated as anyone with the length of re-build and how disappointing 2018 was. But the Twins are in a difficult "catch 22" situation if you stand back and look objectively.

     

    What they saw in 2017, and didn't see in 2018, leaves them truly unsure what they have. I like ideas for roster depth and flexibility. But how many guys do you bring in for depth and versatility on a finite roster? You simply can't just dump Buxton, or Sano, and go sign someone to replace them for the next 3 years.

     

    I agree this is a sort of "audition" year. There simply couldn't be the same number of injuries and weird happens in 2019 as there was in 2018. Top prospects will get closer, and even by mid season, we may have a better idea of the construction and future of the team.

     

    All that being said, there is also ample opportunity to still add to this team for 2019 and build on the potential you are mostly "standing pat" for. The bullpen is a prime example. There is no reason a couple arms couldn't be added on 2-3yr deals. They help, and they block NO-ONE.

    Going for it and standing pat each come in degrees.

     

    If you don’t like Schoop you can call it standing pat or going backwards if you’d like. If you like Schoop it has a degree of going for it so it’s in the eye of the beholder.

     

    Personally... I’m not suggesting specific names. I have my personal preferences but the front office has the analytics department and I’m going to trust them and assume they are more informed while also willing to understand mistakes will happen because it isn’t an exact science.

     

    I wasn’t expecting a Machado or Harper like going for it so filling holes with Schoop types are ok with me to a degree providing they fill all the holes with players who can help us win everyday if needed.

     

    If Ryan LaMarre types and Rule 5’s are on the roster and gathering dust. I will object.

     

    Apart from that my expectation is simple. Fill the every hole with players that you expect to deliver more often than not. If the data projects that players like Michael Reed can do that. I’m good but I’ll be able to tell via real time context as it happens and the utilization of each roster spot.

     

    You can still support this current core without a long term free agent signing. Standing pat to me means Ryan LaMarre.

     

    This is a good point. Also, if the core players do take their step forward in 2019, there's no reason that this team can't compete. Buxton. Sano. Kepler. Rosario. Berrios. Polanco. These guys are all very talented. I think only Rosario didn't make a Top 100 list as a prospect. Health. Something clicking... Luck. There's no reason to think that they can''t, or at least maybe 4-5 of them instead of just two like last year. Schoop is young and there's no reason to think he cant return to close to 2017 form.

     

    The top four of the starting rotation is solid. There are a lot of options for the 5th starter job and a couple of them do have some upside. They have depth. (I think they will grab a starter though) And then there's the bullpen. Like I've written, I think there are four givens, and they can add a couple of veterans. Reed could return to 'normal.' 

     

    So yeah... thats obviously an optimistic view. It doesn't make for an exciting offseason (though again, as many as three pitchers signed yet could make it a little more interesting), but it's also not completely out of the realm of possiblity.

     

    And as many others have said, if Buxton and Sano don't become something, then 2019 was lost no matter who they signed. 

     

    If you are optimistic, you add good players to the roster. You don't stand pat. If you stand pat, and don't  add some really good players, it won't matter how good Buxton and Sano are, because there won't be enough other great players on the roster. This middle path is the worst path. IMO

    This is not an answer to the posting asking for a three year plan from one of us.  Give me the money and resources of Lavine and Falvey and I will come up with a plan.  All I can say is waiting for Buxton and Sano year after year after year is getting quite old.  I am waiting for Lavine and Falvey and every year I am told they have a plan.  What is their plan?  Here are the players that they have signed or traded for in 2017 and 2018, there are 54 and I skipped a few from 2017.  So this is more than a 40 man roster - how much have these moves pushed us forward?  What is the strategy of the FO?  

     

    Lynn, Reed, Castro, Rodney, Morrison, Schoop, Torreyes, Adrianza, Cron, Austin, Cave, Odorizzi, Pineda, Haley, Paulsen, Field, Rucinski,Hague, Schuck, Tepesch, Vogelsong, Greenwood, Miller, Tracy, Giminez, Belisle, Breslow, Kinley, Duke, Pacheco, Buss, Curtis, Magill, Wilkins, Heisey, Sanchez, Rodriguez, Carter, Villalobos, Motter, Rupp, LaMarre, Raley, Smeltzer, Forsythe, Duran, Alcala, Celestino, Maciel, Trinidad, Costello, DeJong, Rijo, Drake,Adams,

     

    My request was primarily for actionable ideas. To paraphrase you, “this website is littered with complaining posts, but a bit short on actionable ideas”. I too am frustrated and not trying to defend the status quo as you have implied in a few posts. I get that you are wondering what the FO’s strategy is. My question was what specifically should it be?

     

    If you are optimistic, you add good players to the roster. You don't stand pat. If you stand pat, and don't  add some really good players, it won't matter how good Buxton and Sano are, because there won't be enough other great players on the roster. This middle path is the worst path. IMO

     

    I mean, they have added two good players so far and the Winter Meetings just started... no realist to be non-optimistic at this point. 

     

    No, I was just pointing out that they are spending some money on the rotation in 2019, whereas they could have non-tendered or traded Odorizzi/Gibson if they wanted to go extreme with the "stand pat" approach. And I bet we'll see fairly significant $ spent on 2-3 more pitching staff additions, as well as a sizable deal to lock up Berrios.  

     

    Trading Gibson isn't standing pat, it is picking a direction. If they aren't serious about contending this year, why keep Gibson and not get some great minor league talent for him? Or, they can keep him, and get around the 40th pick next year (a pick which has an almost 5% chance of mattering, give or take).

     

    I mean, they have added two good players so far and the Winter Meetings just started... no realist to be non-optimistic at this point. 

     

    both on 1 year deals, meaning you have those same holes again next year. They aren't betting on success. IMO. Unless we think Gordon is going to be above average in 2020, and Rooker too......which I'm told over and over on this site that we shouldn't expect that from rookies.

    "The team is caught in flux, and that's not really anyone's fault so much as just the way things have played out."

     

    Injuries are one thing but acting like we got here just by sheer dumb luck is incredibly naive

     

    Trading Gibson isn't standing pat, it is picking a direction. If they aren't serious about contending this year, why keep Gibson and not get some great minor league talent for him? Or, they can keep him, and get around the 40th pick next year (a pick which has an almost 5% chance of mattering, give or take).

     

    Would you agree that we have a shot at 2019 but we have great uncertainty surrounding many players? Is it a good idea in general to make a decision (pick a direction) with a great deal of uncertainty. What is the benefit of deciding now? How much better Is the return on Gibson going to be now than at the deadline. If the difference is small, why pick a direction when you will have much better information in July? 




    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...