The Discard Pile

I think it's possible you are right but... OMG... That's a bad plan.

 

Any plan based on the performance of only two players is a bad plan.

 

Any plan based on two players who were sent to Ft. Myers and home in September last year is even worse. 

Of course the plan is not based on JUST Sano and Buxton. There are 25 players on a team, and really 40 if players are moved in and out. But there is no denying that at least for this year the team has to proceed with those 2 being the important cogs in the gear. All the other pieces have to mesh with them. But if they fail again, the team has to be in a position to cut and run, and build for next year. And having no long term commitments and all their prospect capital in place, they can go in any direction they want for next year. 

But if things do come around for this year, they do still have the option of devoting more resources to this team and going for it.

I think it's possible you are right but... OMG... That's a bad plan.

 

Any plan based on the performance of only two players is a bad plan.

 

Any plan based on two players who were sent to Ft. Myers and home in September last year is even worse. 

Fully agree, considering that we have already seen how volatile these players have been thus far in their young careers. As has also been pointed out, we only have 3 more seasons of Sano. What then?

In hindsight, but you don't make decisions with hindsight.

if their foresight was the core of the team was marginally better with a year more of experience the adding a pitcher with a career fip of 3.5, a solid workhorse reliever and a player that hit 38hr the year before does show effort.. To think that the 85 win team from 17 could become a ws contender shows neither foresight nor hindsight, merely wishful thinking

  The motive behind these moves is obvious to me.  They are trying to give the young guys "one more year" to develop.  Nick Gordon isn't ready yet...give him another year at AAA and sign Schoop.  If Gordon is ready next year, he'll be here.  If not, they can try to keep Schoop or look for a long-term solution.  

  Is Sano gonna step up or bust?  Is he a 3B or 1B?  Sign Cron and give Sano a year to figure it out or the FO has to find a long-term solution.  

  It's basically a wait-and-see approach that tries to allow your young players every  opportunity to develop, to show they belong....or show they do NOT belong.  

While I agree that what they've done so far allows those "wait and see" things to happen, I also believe the FO knew they had gaping holes at DH, 2B, RP, and 1B. I believe they filled three of those holes with 2019 in mind IMO, not 2020. It's ironic to me that some of the complaints have been about playing for 2020 and ignoring 2019, and some of the complaints are that these moves ignore 2020, and some of the complainers are critical in both regards.

I'm in the minority. Most believe they are more concerned with pinching pennies. Most probably believe they have a concerted strategy to avoid all long term commitments and that the Schoop type moves prove this. Many believe they haven't done enough because they haven't pulled the trigger on a high-profile multi-year FA deal and haven't traded prospects for the next Yelich or whomever. For me, if they add that one last RP, all of it makes sense. They're making moves to contend in 2019 without compromising their "sustained excellence" goals.

I couldn't give a rat's derriere if payroll is at $100M. Fill the holes for 2019. Keep a robust pipeline. Accumulate some surplus assets for the first time in a decade or so, and then continue to be savvy at horse-trading when the opportunity comes along. Bottom line for me? They have a very unique opportunity this off-season to build asset value and at the same time make a run. An unprecedented opportunity, because of cash, plenty of choices n FA, capacity to make a trade from prospect surplus, and an open window to contend. If they produce a 90 win season, I'll sing their praises. If they produce an 85 win season, I'll rip them.

I may be wrong. They could be playing the wait and see game, and I'm fully aware that this is the appearance of things. But my sense is that they think this core is solid, that Cruz, Schoop and Cron round out the lineup well, that the rotation is better than most TD'ers think, probably the pen too, and maybe they like the depth in AAA a lot better than we do too.

My nagging concern is them falling one move short with that pen. I've been frustrated too many years in a row about this organization's under-appreciation of the value of a great bullpen.

I'm sorry, but I am SO tired of people claiming that any of us who believe the Twins should make SOME attempt to put a more competitive product on the field are saying they should spend like NY, LA and Boston!

 

The bottom line is that there are multiple ways to add legitimate talent to your roster and, yes, all of those ways entail taking some risk. FAs can bust. But so can first round draft picks and guys you trade for.

 

If the FO is so damn smart, they should be as good at evaluating mid and upper level FAs as they are young players. They shouldn't have to consistently take flyers on dregs and reclamation projects that their magic numbers tell them have the best chance of not sucking.

 

NOBODY expects them to spend like the largest markets, but that doesn't mean it's unreasonable to expect more effort than they're making this year. They're not only looking like they'll be pocketing the entire Joe Mauer contract savings, but millions MORE than that!

 

That is indefensible. Plain and simple.

Indeed that's what people on the board want. They want us to spend like a large market team. Go back and review the Darvish meltdown thread. There is death, taxes, and my favorite team is owned by the Pohlads. IT'S NOT EVER GOING TO CHANGE!

Funny, that is my feeling about the Twins.  ...Yawn.

 

How could anyone possibly be excited about this team? For the second straight year (at least), the bullpen was an obvious need. And there were loads of quality arms on the market, most of whom signed two-year contracts for less than $10M a year. Even I, a long-time Pohlad skeptic, assumed we would sign a couple quality relievers.

 

That wouldn't even bring payroll up to league average, or up to 50% of revenue. To not even do that is just baffling. I don't know why I even pay attention to a team that is spending under 40% of revenue on payroll. What's the point? I am starting to spend more time on athleticsnation, and it's a lot more fun. I also like the Brewers, and anyone else who can give the bloated coastal payroll monsters a run for their money. But this one isn't even trying.

 

Most of their key players had a bad year last year. Some may rebound. But even if Buxton, Sano, Schoop, Kepler, and all our other former-future-stars miraculously blossom at once, it won't matter, because they don't have the pitching to compete.

 

Match our lineup,  our rotation, and our bullpen, man for man, with the Yankees. Is there one player who could beat out their counterpart for a job?

 

I don't need a championship to enjoy baseball. I can enjoy a pennant race, even knowing they can't really win in the playoffs. And it wouldn't take much to deliver one, in this division. But they have barely even pretended to fill the many holes left from last year.  And the odds of all their long-shot bets hitting at once are so low, I can't get excited until I actually see it happening, which it probably won't.

 

Rooting for a team like this is all about hope. All it would have taken to hook me would be to shell out a league average payroll. Give me one real playoff quality starter, and two legit bullpen arms, and I will start dreaming on the potential of all their giant question marks. I've been enjoying the thrill of "what if" my whole life. I would do it again if, you gave me even the pretense of real hope. But this year, I'm not feeling it.

You're expressing a common sentiment>

Here's what could possibly get me interested again (I stopped watching a boring team last year):

1. Buxton has a chance to be one of the most exciting players to watch in all of baseball. Period.

2. This lineup could be pretty dang fun to watch, power-wise, and even basepath-wise. I won't walk to the fridge when Cruz or a healthy head-straight Sano steps to the plate, for example. And Rosario, Polanco, and Kepler don't make me cringe either.

3. If Romero turns into a shut-down guy, and May and Rogers deliver? We may end the habit of giving games away. Admittedly, Reed and others are question marks, but hey, bullpens are weird things.

4. This rotation could be bad. But it could also be good. It will be interesting. I'm not unhopeful.

In one sentence, who suggest we match our roster to the Yanks. In the next, you say you don't need a championship to enjoy baseball. Then you say rooting for a team is all about hope.

If one believes, as I do, that they DID address the departures of Dozier and Mauer in a good way and filled the holes adequately (assuming one more RP), then maybe one has hope.

I'd simply suggest that you stand a very good chance of being surprised by this team in 2019.

A team that won't spend money can't do multiple 1-year deals. The money problem never goes away, but those players do, all while blocking the cheap players they could have been developing.

Of course they can. What money problems are you concerned about? I don't see any.

No, they weren't in on Darvish till the end. That is Twins speak for: we low balled a player and acted like there was a chance, when we knew damn well there wasn't. It's OK to go out a sign a stud and pay him big money. 

What is the point in grabbing 4 players for 32 million a year? How about, 1 or 2 players for that same money? Then fill in with your system. I am so sick of the Twins way of acquiring piles of mediocre players thinking that they will get lucky some time. You are better off bringing in less guys on higher money deals. That way you get real talent. Not fringe guys or guys other teams don't want any part of. Just bite the bullet for a change. It gets old. 

They were in on Darvish to the bitter end. It was all documented in the monumental Darvish meltdown thread.

What about this as a counter on the WAR debate:

Kepler 2.8

Cruz 2.9 (4.1 2017)

Berrios 3.8

Rosario 3.6

Gibson 3.9 in 2018

Schoop in 2018 (5.1 in 2017)

Buxton in 2018 (5.2 in 2017)

 

You could legitmately say we have 5 players near or above 3 WAR w/o bringing Schoop, Buxton, or Sano into the conversation..

The Red Sox had eight players with bWAR above 3 in 2018, including three above 6.

The Astros had eight players above 2.5, including four above 5.

Just showing how big a gap there is between “competing” and “contending”.

The Red Sox had eight players with bWAR above 3 in 2018, including three above 6.

The Astros had eight players above 2.5, including four above 5.



Just showing how big a gap there is between “competing” and “contending”.

So you're suggesting we spend 230M like the Red Sox? 

So you're suggesting we spend 230M like the Red Sox?

Simply pointing out that a team isn’t going to contend with a handful of 3 WAR players. A team that wins has IMPACT players.

PS: Houston’s payroll in 2017 was $140 mil. They won the World Series that year with nine players of 2.5 bWAR or higher, including three over 5.

While I agree that what they've done so far allows those "wait and see" things to happen, I also believe the FO knew they had gaping holes at DH, 2B, RP, and 1B. I believe they filled three of those holes with 2019 in mind IMO, not 2020. It's ironic to me that some of the complaints have been about playing for 2020 and ignoring 2019, and some of the complaints are that these moves ignore 2020, and some of the complainers are critical in both regards.

 

I'm in the minority. Most believe they are more concerned with pinching pennies. Most probably believe they have a concerted strategy to avoid all long term commitments and that the Schoop type moves prove this. Many believe they haven't done enough because they haven't pulled the trigger on a high-profile multi-year FA deal and haven't traded prospects for the next Yelich or whomever. For me, if they add that one last RP, all of it makes sense. They're making moves to contend in 2019 without compromising their "sustained excellence" goals.

 

I couldn't give a rat's derriere if payroll is at $100M. Fill the holes for 2019. Keep a robust pipeline. Accumulate some surplus assets for the first time in a decade or so, and then continue to be savvy at horse-trading when the opportunity comes along. Bottom line for me? They have a very unique opportunity this off-season to build asset value and at the same time make a run. An unprecedented opportunity, because of cash, plenty of choices n FA, capacity to make a trade from prospect surplus, and an open window to contend. If they produce a 90 win season, I'll sing their praises. If they produce an 85 win season, I'll rip them.

 

I may be wrong. They could be playing the wait and see game, and I'm fully aware that this is the appearance of things. But my sense is that they think this core is solid, that Cruz, Schoop and Cron round out the lineup well, that the rotation is better than most TD'ers think, probably the pen too, and maybe they like the depth in AAA a lot better than we do too.

 

My nagging concern is them falling one move short with that pen. I've been frustrated too many years in a row about this organization's under-appreciation of the value of a great bullpen.

I'm with you.  I don't believe they are "pinching pennies" either.  Just spending wisely.  Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco have to be the answer at their respective positions.  This organization NEEDS them to be.  If not, there's no sense in committing beyond one year to any FA.  If they are not, it'll be status quo until the Lewis/Kiriloff/Graterol, etc. train arrives.  I really don't care for the Perez signing, but I get it.  He's depth in case one or more of Pineda, Mejia, Gonsalves, etc. aren't ready this year.

I'm with you.  I don't believe they are "pinching pennies" either.  Just spending wisely.  Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco have to be the answer at their respective positions.  This organization NEEDS them to be.  If not, there's no sense in committing beyond one year to any FA.  If they are not, it'll be status quo until the Lewis/Kiriloff/Graterol, etc. train arrives.  I really don't care for the Perez signing, but I get it.  He's depth in case one or more of Pineda, Mejia, Gonsalves, etc. aren't ready this year.

According to LEN III the Twins are viewing Perez as an SP. This makes me dislike this even more. If we aren't going all in for 2019, and this signing implies greatly that we aren't, then this would be a great chance to put one of the youngsters in at #5 and see what they have. We have a half dozen prospects that need to be evaluated so we know if we have something or if we should be moving on. The next wave is soon in need of evaluation and we still have little clue on the present group. 

The only way this is a good sign is if Perez happens to have a career year and the Twins win the Central b/c of it. If they dog their way to a .500 or just over record with Perez at #5 it's a very bad signing. 

I just think that if Sano plays like he did in early 2017 and Buxton plays like he did in late 2017, this team can be very good. I think the front office has to count on that because they can't NOT count on it. And if it happens, I think they have the resources to add later and make a push.

And realistically, if they wait things out, maybe something falls to them that makes a ton of sense now. I just don't think they want to "reach" for anything right now.

I realize that this isn't really your point, but the ASG representatives from this team has been dominated by homegrown players. Italicized names are non-homegrown players.

 

2007 - Johan, Morneau, Torii

2008 - Nathan, Morneau, Mauer

2009 - Nathan, Morneau, Mauer

2010 - Morneau, Mauer,

2011 - Cuddy

2012 - Mauer

2013 - Perkins, Mauer

2014 - Suzuki, Perkins

2015 - Perkins, Dozier

2016 - Nunez

2017 - Santana, Sano, Kintzler

2018 - Berrios

 

All that said, it's always the same names on that list and it's probably partially aided by the fact that each team has to be represented. And more to your point, the fact that they've been largely unable to build around anyone since the Mauer/Morneau heyday is, and has been, an issue.

I said players CALLED UP SINCE 2006.  Why did you quote me? 

The Red Sox had eight players with bWAR above 3 in 2018, including three above 6.

The Astros had eight players above 2.5, including four above 5.



Just showing how big a gap there is between “competing” and “contending”.

You make a good point here. You could make a point that your assertion is why the Mariners opted to rebuild this year as well as Chicago when they traded Sale and others.

It's interesting to look at how the true contenders have been built over the past decade. It appears most people just assume big free agents and trades for impact players are the key because recent history does not support that assumption. For all the complaining there should be ample examples of mid market teams building contenders when utilizing premier free agents and trades for established impact players. Lots of noise with no validation.

One could make a case that examples like the Red Sox have less validity given their ability to spend. However, I think there is still something to be learned from examples like the Dodgers who tried to buy a team with limited success.They cut around $75M from the 25 man roster in 2017 and put a great team on the field that was deep like the other teams you mentioned.  They produced 104 wins.

Here are all of the players from the 2017 team with WAR of 2+.

Corey Seager  - 5.9WAR - Drafted
Justin Turner - 5.4 WAR – Never broke 1 WAR before being acquired by the Dodgers
Chris Taylor - 4.8 WAR – Had .5 career WAR before being acquired by the Dodgers.
Cody Bellinger  4.0 WAR - Drafted
Yasiel Puig - 2.9 WAR – International Draft
Austin Barnes - 2.5 WAR – Dodgers traded an established player (Dee Gordon) for Barnes
Yasmani Grandal - 2.5 WAR – Had a good rookie season (2.4) WAR then .6 WAR in 2013 and 1 WAR in 2014. He was not an established performer after a combined 1.6 WAR in the 2 previous years.
Joc Pederson was hurt a lot in 2017 so he did not contribute like he did the 2016 but he too was drafted.

Clayton Kershaw - 4.6 WAR - Drafted
Kenley Jansen - 3.6 WAR - Drafted
Alex Wood - 3.5 – Traded in a 13 player 3 team trade. The Dodgers gave up very little for him.
Rich Hill - 2.6 – Signed as a FA in 2017 for 3/48. mid-tier where free agent SPs are concerned.  
Brandon McCarthy - 2.4 WAR – Freeagent signed for 3/36M
Kenta Maeda - 2.0 – International FA - $20M signing fee + 25M over 8 years. The cost including the posting fee is an AAV of 5.625M

In summary, 4 of the position players were acquired via trade.  All of them fit far better into the unproven category than proven at the time. There was not a single established player acquired via trade. There was also not a single high profile free agent. The 2017 Dodgers team was made-up of players drafted by the Dodgers or acquired as prospects. Just another example of trading established players for prospects being more effective than vice versa. Is there any wonder why the Dodgers have been so ardent about holding on to their prospects in recent years or for that matter why the Twins are not willing to trade our best prospects. The league is adapting.