The Falvey And Levine Machine

Really, at that point you would have bet money at less than 1:1 odds that they'd make the playoffs?

 

And, you'd have made that bet in July, when the Twins had to make a decision also?

So the only way to invalidate an opinion is to challenge somebody if they would bet money?  Before the July trade deadline they were 38-30 against the teams not playoff bound.  They were done with  3 of the best teams in baseball that they fared 3-14  against.  5-8 against the Indians.  Given how they had played over the course of the season given the teams they had to play the final months of the season should be no surprise. It is what they were capable of.

I agree, I'm only saying that after the improbable happened, it became an error.

 

A largely unpredictable error but an error none-the-less. I supported the move at the time and still support the thinking that led to it.

The fact that there's a narrow range of opinion about the quality of the Kintzler decision tells me a lot. I don't call it an error, but I can see why some would view it as a good decision and others a bad decision. I cut Falvey slack on the basis of the degree of difficulty. It could end up as a bad decision/good result scenario, who knows? But I also think it's terribly premature to form an opinion about the results. Tyler Watson could flame out in AA, but that $500k in IFA money could attract a stud. That's Lewis Thorpe or Jorge Polanco money, right? I'm going to wait.

They also traded Gray.

Doolittle, too. They were neither winning nor losing because of Gray.

Not quite, Polanco got $700k. But that was 8 years ago, and Thorpe's $500k was even 5 years ago. Also Polanco and Thorpe both signed on July 2nd, but we will only be able to use the Kintzler $500k later in the signing period. This article suggests the Twins are still almost a millon under the cap, even before the added money, and I'm not sure who they will spend it on:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/09/twins-to-sign-venezuelan-prospect-carlos-aguiar.html

Obviously we can evaluate those returns over time, but right now it looks pretty much like fair market value for a 2 month rental reliever. Given that, I think I would have rather had the 2 month rental reliever, given the wide open 2nd wild card race and our pitching needs.

Yeah, I don't have a strong opinion on the quality of the Kintzler decision itself, other than that both decisions had merit. Although I wouldn't have traded him myself because he didn't represent surplus.

I was talking about unknown results being prematurely judged. I probably should have used other examples instead of Thorpe and Polanco, could have used, say, Felix Jorge or someone, but the point I attempted to make is that the potential is certainly there for the organization to score an IFA of considerable future value. Plenty of IFA talent is eligible to sign after July 2 but not before, so while the pool of talent isn't as strong after July 2, unique   opportunities exist. Having dry powder to pursue these opportunities is not something most teams possess, so I'm loathe to discount the potential that $500k represents. And Watson was gaining some believers too.

They got just shy of 100 innings of 124 ERA+ ball from Gray.

 

That's a better per-inning value than any Twins starter by a healthy margin.

bref says Santana has thrown 211.1 innings to an ERA+ of 135 There is a little extra value in that Erv also pitches about 4/10 of an inning more per game.  No knock against Gray,  I don't think the Twins had the quality pieces in the minors to compete with the Yankees offer.

Sonny Gray FIP 3.90, Ervin Santana 4.46.

Sonny Gray xFIP 3.76, Ervin Santana 4.77.

Ervin Santana averaged about one more out per start. Then again, Yankees bullpen is way more trustworthy, so the Yankees had no issues with pulling a starter.

Sonny Gray FIP 3.90, Ervin Santana 4.46.

Sonny Gray xFIP 3.76, Ervin Santana 4.77.

 

Ervin Santana averaged about one more out per start. Then again, Yankees bullpen is way more trustworthy, so the Yankees had no issues with pulling a starter.

Pick your stat.   Santana has pitched 64 games the last two years, Gray 49. A pitcher that can't pitch isn't very conducive e to a team's success. What happened in the other 14 games? FIP and xfip are strikeout driven numbers. Sanatana has a better  hitting team, a better fielding team behind him than Gray did with the A's.  Pitching is not strike out every batter. That is the limitation of fip and xfip.

Let's ask these questions. If the Twins had not made this deadline trades, or giveaways to some, would they have finished higher? Caught NY? Caught Cleveland? We ended up further than anyone thought. We will play NY in NY. And while it's going to be very difficult not to have Garcia pitch for us, the main issue will be if we get ahead and don't have Kintzler to close. Or Perkins? Or Joe Nathan? Garcia was almost a reclamation project traded to a team more desperate and well heeled than us. Kintzler was a ground ball pitch to contact closer. The truth is while he had a nice run, and seemed to have the psyche to close, if Brandon Kintzler is the best your bullpen has to offer, you have pitching issues. I don't want us to just hang around every year hoping for the ducks to line up for a second WC chance. I want us to be at the top, looking down at the peons hoping for someone else to lose 6 games in a row so they can call themselves a playoff team. I hope that's what Falvine are looking for. Otherwise, even if they keep adding "playoff" spots, crappy baseball is still crappy baseball.

https://www.fangraphs.com/library/pitching/fip/

● FIP does a better job of predicting the future than measuring the present, as there can be a lot of fluctuation in small samples. It is less effective in describing a pitcher’s single game performance and is more appropriate in a season’s worth of innings. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a retrospective statistic, simply that it requires more than a handful of innings to be a reliable indicator of performance, just like any statistic.

Well IMO their major free agent signing (Jason Castro) is not good. Their catching sucks and they really didn't do anything else. The improvement this year is just talented young players adjusting to MLB play.

Sounds like you are prematurely judging unknown results too in your second paragraph, just in the Twins favor. You are invoking Polanco for unallocated IFA cash, and I've seen others bringing up Kluber in regards to Watson. The Twins didn't get that here, they got 2 lottery tickets with very low chances of that kind of return. Perhaps not meaningfully different than the lottery tickets already in the system or signable under our original IFA pool. (And in the FO's favor, I don't necessarily think they will deserve further blame if those lottery tickets don't produce meaningful contributions down the line.)

I think the only way to really judge a trade like this right now is to assume both sides got fair market value. In which case, it is prioritizing type of return. And for a team with a real opportunity to play meaningful games after July 30 (and not just our own 10% wild card odds, but a much higher chance of staying in the race until the end given the suspect competition), and clearly not dealing from a surplus, it's enough to make me question it. It feels almost like the FO got too cute with a future strategy here, when they should have let the present strategy simply play out instead, and got bailed out on it so far by the unlikely result of us winning the 2nd WC by 5+ games.

Still more returns left by which to judge the trade, of course. Our pen in the playoffs, and the front office's efforts to get meaningful future value from Watson and the IFA investment. Probably a small part too in where Kintzler signs and performs versus our own efforts to address our pen this winter.

On IFA specifically, even players who are not eligible to sign on July 2nd generally have deals arranged with clubs. Haven't heard anything about the Twins plans for their remaining cash. Other late signings who go under the radar generally don't command big bonuses (like Fernando Romero'a $260k). Not that it is valueless, but it does seem the value of additional IFA money goes down the further away from July 2nd you get, and the further you are under your original IFA cap to begin with. (Personally, pessimistically, I wonder if the money was included as a speculative hedge because Watson alone wasn't valuable enough?)

I believe you're inserting things into my comments that aren't there. You think they got cute and the trade was ill-advised, Fine. As I said, i don't have a strong opinion about the quality of the decision and can see both your side and the other side. All I said about the trade results is that it's too early to judge that part of things. I don't buy into your pessimism and your belief that the value of that $500k has "diminished" to any measurable extent. But the point I'm making relates to the majority of comments from people who have already judged the results, making no mention at all of the IFA money and forming a definitive viewpoint about Watson's future value. I don't have an opinion about what that value is and don't find any use for nitpicking about whether that $500k has more or less value post July 2..

https://www.fangraphs.com/library/pitching/fip/

 

 

● FIP does a better job of predicting the future than measuring the present, as there can be a lot of fluctuation in small samples. It is less effective in describing a pitcher’s single game performance and is more appropriate in a season’s worth of innings. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a retrospective statistic, simply that it requires more than a handful of innings to be a reliable indicator of performance, just like any statistic.

FIP and x fip as measures of pitching. They use a standard of league average BABIP as if it should normalize to an average over a season. By that kind of logic they should have kept running Nik Turley, Haley, and Wilk out there. As they have ungodly high babip that number should normalize lower. They were the most unlucky pitchers since Andrew Albers, Pat Dean or Worley.. Small sample sizes, the numbers would normalize lower, right?    

Falvey and Levine were likely right in the lack of mortgaging the future on a 3/4 time starter. The had plenty of pieces with upside available