The Time to Trade Kyle Gibson Is Now

Gibson is in his 30s already.  Extending him past next year is pretty much doomed to fail before the ink dries.  It was much like the Dozier logic...sure, you can try and bet that Gibson or Dozier will be the exception to the rule on the aging curve but it's not wise. You're far more likely to have it backfire in your face.

 

I get that you're convinced we can just maintain the status quo and be "fine".  No offense, but that kind of thinking is really, really flawed.  If this was a business and you were advocating this thinking for your company I'd want to sell all your stock and warn your employees to jump ship.  It's just not forward, value-driven thinking.

 

And the Twins have been burned by that exact mentality for too long in my fandom.  I'm done with it.  I hope the guys in the FO go the other direction.

Look, we all know what your opinion is. You have a right to it. But just because you have a right to your opinion doesn't mean others don't have a right to theirs. And FYI, if ANYONE owned a business and you talked like that to the employees, you'd get your ass sued. It is called interference with contractual relations. And you don't increase your credibility by being willing to do something that offensive.  On the contrary. 

You distort what people say and you twist things. For example, if you read my posts, I have never once even used the term "status quo."  I don't need someone else to state my argument, especially when they get it wrong. Many guys always want to make a deal for the sake of making a deal. I am against that. But if I'm playing black jack and hit 19, I stick. I think the Twins are close to contending and will be that way for the next five years if they don't blow it like a bunch of impatient fantasy league owners. We are still a couple players away, mostly relievers. 

So, your premise is what is flawed, because you distort what I've said. Knock it off, will ya?

Starting pitchers can be effective into their early thirties. Gibby has good years left. We can get two out of him for sure and if all goes well, an extension. Skinny framed guys can last a couple years longer. He is a solid 2 -3 starter as of at least this time last year. And we've seen how hard it is to find reliable starters. You don't just find those guys in the bargain basement. And what are you going to get?  A mid range prospect is three years away. Who is going to pitch in Gibby's spot until then.....? Someone not good enough to beat Gibby out in ST?  Yeah, great. 

You take advantage of guys growing up together ala Kirby, T Rex, Bruno, Rat and Gagne.  You keep your good core players and Gibby is one of those. You build around them. Adding your Gladdens and Baylors and Jacks and Reardons.

I am sorry you are so frustrated. I really am. I am bummed too. But keep it in perspective. This is only baseball. America's pastime. Its not life or death. 

Seriously, your post is all over the place and rather emotional.  From a business perspective where it is important to make sound decisions grounded in reality, you're suggestions would doom a company.  You seem to be ignoring reality and painting the future in the most positive light in spite of the facts.  

 

Gibson is already in his early 30s. A team on pace for 94 wins is not "a few relievers" away.  These are just a few direct examples of what I'm talking about.  Those statements are pretty much unjustifiable.  The first because your quoted statement seems to say you understand the aging curve for pitching, but either don't realize Gibson is already there or are ignoring the implications.  The second issue is almost comical.  We might lose close to 100 games and we just need a few relievers?  I'll save the adjectives for describing that, but....yeesh.

 

It's hard to frame your argument any other way than hopeful in spite of the evidence.  All evidence points to this team needing major reshaping.  I'm sorry holding pat doesn't make sense, but it doesn't make sense.  You should start to come to terms with that.  It sounds like everyone around baseball, including the Twins, have already done so.

Well, I'm not the one who is melting down and ranting and saying I am "done with it." .And your business practices thing is pretty limp. It is based on panic . You are stating an opinion as if it were fact. That's is counterfeit. 

Facts:  Byron Buxton won a platinum glove last year.

Sano was an All Star just last year.

Eddie is becoming money, and Eduardo already is

Dozier is having an off year, sure. Gordon is waiting

Mauer is battling back from concussion symptoms but he has two years left 

Keps is regressing, so what?

Polanco is back.

That is eight of the nine position players and it is not a desperation situation. 

Our stating catcher is out for the year but will be back.

The stating pitching is the best it has been in years.

How is any realistic businessman seeing this as a desperation fire sale? I call BS. 

I think many observers would see a year where 5 starters have missed time and the catcher out for the year and our number 1 starting pitcher is out too. You think we overcome all that with a young team like this?  That is going to set back any team.

I don't believe that panic is a strategy. 

Gibson has a fairly fresh arm for a 30 year old, and he keeps himself in shape. 

The odds of him having another 5 good years is >> than the chance any prospect you trade him for will ever be close to what he is now.

Getting rid of every decent player, which is all Gibson is, how can you develop a team with that as your mantra?

All decent players of Gibson's stature get are hit/miss prospects.

We can plug up the system with Palkas, Littells and Moyas until there is no room for any more. 

Treadmill.

Get rid of the chaff - keep decent MLB level players like Escobar and Gibson and build around them.

Who exactly are we talking about that was traded and netted a major contributor? The Indians are the only team you referenced who was remotely built though trade. And that is because they had a CC, Cliff Lee, and Jake Westbrook (ditto Zack Greinke) to trade (returning Brantley, Carrasco and Kluber). That's a long wait for return on investment. Shin Soo Choo returned Shaw and Trevor Bauer which is really the only players I could come up with. The As have been irrelevant for a decade. And all other 4 teams you referenced have this in common: lots of hits on high draft picks and international FA signings plus a willingness to take risks by signing big free agents and trading away prospects.

Yankees don't get Gleyber Torres from the Cubs without first signing Aroldis Chapman.

What players are you referring to as examples of rebuilding through fire sale? Bad teams just usually don't have much to sell.

For starters, keep in mind the point I was countering was that "prospects are fools gold". The focal point of my post was that NY, Boston, Houston and Cleveland are built primarily around prospects. It would appear you assumed I meant the prospects primarily came from trades which was not remotely close to the intended message. You apparently assumed when I said "I would add" there was a sell off component to rebuilding that meant it was the primary catalyst. I used KC as a specific example and the players netted in the Greinke trade. I am not sure how that indicates all the draft picks and international free agents were not the most important aspect of their rebuild.

When you have our budget, draft or trading for prospects and developing them is crucial to being able to afford to retain them when we are in a window. It also provides the payroll room like we have next year to add free agents. People complained when we let Cuddyer go too. That compensation pick resulted in Berrios. It's easy to figure how to put the best possible team on the field next year which is often the focus of fans. Unfortunately, building a contender requires a long-term approach and the short-term focus of most fans is often detrimental to sustained success.

80 percent of prospects never make it to the Show. 

That's why we have a lot of them. How is this relevant. Have you somehow come to the conclusion that all of the best teams are not built around prospects or do you think it was just luck? I am really curious to hear how you look at the construction of NY, Boston, Houston, and Cleveland and not conclude drafting and development or trades acquiring prospects without giving up key talent (Indians / NY) are the most important aspects of building a contender, especially for teams outside the top 10 in revenue.

The Twins are likely to finish with around 90 losses, do you really think they are a contender next year? Without Dozier and Mauer?

 

I don't. 

There is a very long list of things that need to be improved / sorted out before this team becomes a contender. The loss of Dozier and Mauer is just a start. Our two guys that were supposed to be the key guys are in the minor leagues, our bullpen is a mess, and most of the SPs are gone after next year. Why would we want to manage our assets based on the assumption ALL of these thjings are going to turn around next year? Managing this teams assets as if we are going to be a contender next year is the kind of blind faith driven by fanaticism. A guy that can produce for 6 years has waaaaay more value at this point than having Gibson for 1 more year. Go get a free agent SP next year. You have Berrios / Romero / Odorizzi / FA / and one of several others for the 5th spot. If you can get Sheffield from the Yankees or someone similar, in the next couple years your SP staff looks something like Berrios / Romero / Graterol / Sheffield and the FA if they are still here or one of Gonsalves / Thorpe / Stewart / etc.

Gibson had been worth 1.6 fWAR / 1.8 bWAR in the first half. If he duplicates that in the second half, and then repeats it in 2019 with -0.5 WAR for aging, he could produce ~4.4 WAR. At $8 mil per win, that would be worth $34.4 mil. His remaining salary is $2.1 million this year, plus arbitration next year which could be $8 mil coming off a good season. So his net value could be $34.4 minus $10.1 or roughly $24.3 mil.

 

Looking at the Yankees, Justus Sheffield is a 55 FV pitching prospect at Fangraphs, which they valued at $22 mil last year, so it's not far off.

 

Of course, assuming that Gibson has it all figured out is a pretty big assumption. There is a lot more risk with Gibson crashing than, say, J.A. Happ, who has been a consistent 3.5-4.5 bWAR performer for the last 3.5 years. (Plus he's left-handed, if they prefer that.) If Gibson is for real, though, he does have the extra year of control. But if the Yankees could deal a lesser prospect like Adams or Tate for Happ, they could potentially deploy Sheffield in the 2019 rotation themselves and save $8 mil towards the luxury tax next year too. Probably what I'd be looking to do.

 

And nothing is too urgent for them -- they largely have a playoff spot locked up, and the bulk of the wild card sorting will occur after the deadline.

Who has determined that one WAR is worth $8 mil?

The Twins last year had a total WAR of about 36. Payroll wasn’t $280 mil.

The Yankees, by way of comparison had a total WAR of 52. I’m pretty sure their payroll wasn’t $400 mil.

$8 mil per 1 WAR sounds like something made up by an agent to me.

Best news with this team in months.

Yep i agree. Start wheeling and dealing. The offense needs a rebuild.

Lynn probably needs a good rest of July to possibly get a Huascar Ynoa type. Maybe a Littell/Enns if we eat the salary.

Pressly only has one more year of control (2019). He'll make a few million and he's been inconsistent for a long time, so it's hard to peg his value.

Pressly is making 1.6 million. Less than a half year of that salary is not a lot in terms of baseball salary. As he has an ERA+ of 110 he should net a decent reliever type prospect. Ynoa at the time of his trade was a decent prospect as services viewed his potential as a middle of the rotation starter.

Who has determined that one WAR is worth $8 mil?

The Twins last year had a total WAR of about 36. Payroll wasn’t $280 mil.

The Yankees, by way of comparison had a total WAR of 52. I’m pretty sure their payroll wasn’t $400 mil.

$8 mil per 1 WAR sounds like something made up by an agent to me.

I have not read the Fangraphs article but I think the $8M/WAR is the average cost of acquiring 1 WAR though free agency. This is used by many as a measure of value. Your post demonstrates that 1 WAR is not worth $8M. What this really tells us is that building through free agents has been a relatively poor strategy. Of course, there are some free agents (like Lester) that provide the final pieces to a contender. Let's hope the Twins spend the available money wisely and outperform the $8M/WAR productivity measure.