The Twins' Great Advantage (That They Aren't Taking Advantage Of)

Mrs. Hansen called from 8th grade English in 1974. She says...

"of which they aren't taking advantage".

But, yes.

Gotta disagree...

Comparing the Twin's to the Yankees is just silly. They have the resources to just buy there way out of mistakes and their minor leaguers unless top notch are just trade add ins. We don't have that luxury. We are more on pace with the TB's of the world. We need to continue to grow from within... trading a Rosario for quality pitching would be smart right now even if it is a Liberatore type guy who is a bit away. We are NEVER going to sign an ace so we need to develop. 

As far as having many quality guys at the same position it is a great problem to have as about 20% of hot minor league prospects ever pan out.... 5 good prospects = 1 good major league player.... as a rule. 

We are better of doing what we are doing now in getting guys for 2 year or 1 year deals ... keep developing and as last year the young guys start contributing... and keep the costs down.... 

I'm guessing they are waiting for the starting pitching trade market to develop. Potential players like the Cubbies and Red Sox still haven't committed. Best to wait for the final out.

If the Twins' "Great Advantage" is that they have a crystal ball and *know* which of their prospects will bust . . . they absolutely should be using that advantage (while taking great pains to keep it a secret).

If the Twins' "Great Advantage" is that they have an above-average farm system, well, no that doesn't mean they should eagerly trade away prospects. They should certainly look for beneficial opportunities. But the article is a mess of nonsensical comparisons. I wonder if the author recalled that one of the Twins' recent 'Cashman-like' 40-man space-clearing trades was to give away Nick Anderson. 

It's also a fantasy that the Twins can just magically re-generate their farm system, if they trade away a substantial portion of its value. Their current farm strength owes in large part to two factors that we hope not to see for many years: picking at the top of the draft, and trading away players at the deadline. Without those avenues, it will be difficult or impossible for the Twins to maintain a strong system even *without* major trades.

Everyone would love for the Twins to get a top of the rotation starter. But as to the general notion that the Twins are foolishly hoarding prospects for no reason, it's just categorically false, and very poorly argued.

  "Deal from depth".  The list of OF on 40 man doesnt even take into account guys like Urbina, Wallner, Emmanuel Rodriguez. etc, who will be "next wave" behind the current "next wave" of guys like Kirilloff, Larnach....

  NOT dealing from that depth would just be irresponsible. 

Thank you for expressing this matter which I`ve been preaching on since I`ve started TD. So many people harp on " we need to hoard our prospects" I haven`t heard any of them speak up in this article. Hopefully they will wake up. On the other hand we can`t totally deplete our farm system. We need to exercise wisdom. I know we often get attached to our prospect which is a great thing.

I`d like to address another point. The Twins are in a wonderful opportunity. w/ our powerful offense that can give the young pitcher this year & years to come the chance to pitch & not worry about making mistakes. Together w/ our wonderful pitching coaches (which I believe will continue to strive for excellence) we can take on projects, (from other teams that don`t have our opportunity can take) & develop them.We can be creative in providing   opportunities for them w/ openers, give rest when needed, Use the revolving door from AAA to ML plus covering injuries etc. We can develop a fantastic source of pitchers for many years to come. We will have excess of good pitchers (I believe we can develop pitchers greater than we`ve ever experience)that we can trade for any weakness we might have. I`m hoping for a great team for years to come, the out come of this we won`t get high lottery drafts so we have to develop a means to continue to get great prospect & that is by trading 

Very, very, very true!

I've never been tied to the belief that any prospect is a sure thing. Wasn't long ago we were told how great Royce Lewis was going to be and since then we've been told he probably isn't going to stick as a Major league SS and just recently how he has a hitch in his swing that coaches are hoping they can correct. Every player has value, the Crystal Ball is the key. When do you move that player before his value goes down or disappears completely? Acquiring proven major league talent comes with it own risks but dealing with prospects takes that to a completely different level.

We have seen plenty top prospects flame out before they got to the majors. Gordon could have brought a solid return 2 years ago and now Seth projects he gets DFA'd for Donaldson. Now is the time to strike!

We have seen plenty top prospects flame out before they got to the majors. Gordon could have brought a solid return 2 years ago and now Seth projects he gets DFA'd for Donaldson. Now is the time to strike!

Yes pull the trigger

Good article.  If every major league team had that "crystal ball" nobody would make a mistake.  Remember 1987 ?  The Tigers probably had the best team in baseball that year and they traded for Doyle Alexander who went 10-1 for them down the stretch and was excellent.  The Tigers gave up a young pitcher who was close, but not close enough named John Smoltz.  Hindsight says the Braves killed it in that trade.  But what if the Twins don't upset the Tigers and Detroit goes on to beat the cardinals in the World Series and Alexander is a big reason for that ?  Atlanta still wins that trade, but every fan in Detroit would say "it was worth it."  You can never have enough pitching or pitching prospects.  That said, when a team has an abundance of talent at a specific position in the minors like the Twins have with outfielders, they simply have to leverage some of that.  I'm a huge fan of what Kiriloff and Larnach COULD be for the Twins.  One starting in LF and the other at 1B.  But the truth is, one of them will probably get dealt (and should be dealt) to acquire a Syndergaard type pitcher.  Matt listed 7 outfielders who are all close...within 1-2 years of possibly being able to contribute.  The Twins can't keep them all.  Make it 8 if Lewis ends up a CF'er.  Whoever pointed out Nick Anderson...GREAT point !  Teams should never let a pitcher with THAT kind of potential get away.  I thought the Twins should have been pushing the Nick Burdi types much faster.  Instead, it was one arm injury after another and a whole list of guys like Burdi never panned out.  MOST of the time, if you can deal "prospects" for someone who has a proven record of high success in the majors, especially if it's at a position of need (like pitching) you should do it.  Especially if you have depth at the position/positions you're dealing from.

The old front office was justifiably ridiculed for not recognizing and applying modern metrics. As teams hired leadership with a more sophisticated skill set, prospect valuation and practices changed. Most teams are more inclined to hold onto prospects as compared to a decade or two ago. They have assessed the relative merit / success of pushing the chips in and have adopted new practices.

The two men at the top of the Dodgers organization (Stan Kasten / Andrew Friedman) are among the most highly respected executives in sports. Their actions have made their strategy where prospects are concerned it quite clear. Their top 10producers in terms of WAR from last year’s 106 win consisted of 6 drafted players, 3 Intl draft and one that was traded for as a prospect. Not a single FA or player that was traded for after becoming established. They have done a 180 from their practices of a decade ago. The Braves have a more depth than the Twins at least in terms of elite prospects. Yet, they have made no such trades. Arizona has 20 40+ prospects (Twins have 15). They had the 6th most wins in the NL last year. Obviously, they are close and have chosen to retain their prospects.

Teams are much less inclined to trade prospects than many fans. I would suggest this is a product teams wanting sustained success and many fans wanting to go all-in for the present. Looking at last year’s playoff rosters it might also have to do with recent outcomes of these trades. Looking at the top 88 players from 2019 playoff teams in terms of WAR.

28 were Drafted (32%)
8 were Intl players (9%)
21 were traded for as prospects. (24%)
21 were free agents (24%)
10 were traded for as established players (11%)

This would indicate trading prospects for established players has favored the team getting prospects. It’s not exactly rock solid proof but the indication is clear.

Gotta disagree...

 

Comparing the Twin's to the Yankees is just silly. They have the resources to just buy there way out of mistakes and their minor leaguers unless top notch are just trade add ins. We don't have that luxury. We are more on pace with the TB's of the world. We need to continue to grow from within... trading a Rosario for quality pitching would be smart right now even if it is a Liberatore type guy who is a bit away. We are NEVER going to sign an ace so we need to develop. 

 

As far as having many quality guys at the same position it is a great problem to have as about 20% of hot minor league prospects ever pan out.... 5 good prospects = 1 good major league player.... as a rule. 

 

We are better of doing what we are doing now in getting guys for 2 year or 1 year deals ... keep developing and as last year the young guys start contributing... and keep the costs down.... 

What happens when your system is out of balance? Meaning, too many position players and not enough pitchers? What about when your ML lineup is all young, controllable and producing? Do we hang onto those prospects and just let them sit in the minors? Do we trade the guys on the MLB roster?

When you are in dire need of pitching like this team is, I think it is imperative to trade from your position of strength to shore up a weakness. 

The old front office was justifiably ridiculed for not recognizing and applying modern metrics. As teams hired leadership with a more sophisticated skill set, prospect valuation and practices changed. Most teams are more inclined to hold onto prospects as compared to a decade or two ago. They have assessed the relative merit / success of pushing the chips in and have adopted new practices.

 

The two men at the top of the Dodgers organization (Stan Kasten / Andrew Friedman) are among the most highly respected executives in sports. Their actions have made their strategy where prospects are concerned it quite clear. Their top 10producers in terms of WAR from last year’s 106 win consisted of 6 drafted players, 3 Intl draft and one that was traded for as a prospect. Not a single FA or player that was traded for after becoming established. They have done a 180 from their practices of a decade ago. The Braves have a more depth than the Twins at least in terms of elite prospects. Yet, they have made no such trades. Arizona has 20 40+ prospects (Twins have 15). They had the 6th most wins in the NL last year. Obviously, they are close and have chosen to retain their prospects.

 

Teams are much less inclined to trade prospects than many fans. I would suggest this is a product teams wanting sustained success and many fans wanting to go all-in for the present. Looking at last year’s playoff rosters it might also have to do with recent outcomes of these trades. Looking at the top 88 players from 2019 playoff teams in terms of WAR.

 

28 were Drafted (32%)
8 were Intl players (9%)
21 were traded for as prospects. (24%)
21 were free agents (24%)
10 were traded for as established players (11%)

 

This would indicate trading prospects for established players has favored the team getting prospects. It’s not exactly rock solid proof but the indication is clear.

You're definitely a one way is the only way type of guy. 

Not every team's situation is the same. You can post about those generalizations on and on and it means nothing as it pertains to this current Twins club. Look at the Twins roster right now. I am certain that their top performers are very similar to your numbers you posted there. Most of our guys are home grown too. Always have been. Lots that were drafted, signed internationally, traded for as prospects, etc. 

It's OK to take a chance once in awhile and give up 1 or 2 top 10 guys. Do you trade from your system all the time? NO, it's not good practice. But to balance out and fill holes, it is acceptable IMO.

You're definitely a one way is the only way type of guy. 

 

Not every team's situation is the same. You can post about those generalizations on and on and it means nothing as it pertains to this current Twins club. Look at the Twins roster right now. I am certain that their top performers are very similar to your numbers you posted there. Most of our guys are home grown too. Always have been. Lots that were drafted, signed internationally, traded for as prospects, etc. 

 

It's OK to take a chance once in awhile and give up 1 or 2 top 10 guys. Do you trade from your system all the time? NO, it's not good practice. But to balance out and fill holes, it is acceptable IMO.

I am not saying it's not OK to trade, especially outside the top 5 in this specific case. What I am saying is the facts are quite clear in terms of how teams are valuing prospects. Listen to the Front Office on MLB Radio and this topic comes up fairly often.

I included a synopsis of the ALL the playoff teams with top farm systems. I don't have Kasten and Friedman's credentials so my opinion does not matter. Their direction however is quite clear. We can also look at Atlanta. They have a loaded system and they are not trading top prospects. Feel free to point out examples of them trading top prospects. Obviously, this could change tomorrow. Tampa Bay's roster has numerous players acquired as prospects. They have valued prospects to the point of trading established players to load their system. Is this true or is this untrue in terms of what these teams have done of late? Never mind my opinion. What have these team's indicated through their actions.

It's interesting seeing all the prospect hoarding comments on this article. Nowhere did Matt mention trading any IFs, Cs or Ps. He only suggests trading away OF prospects.

We have a proverbial game of musical chairs going on right now with 3, maybe 4, chairs in play over the next 4 years for all our current OFs that are at AA or higher. Kepler and & Buxton are pretty much locks to hold 2 of those down over the next 3 & 4 years.

That leaves 2 chairs left for: Rosario, Cave, Wade, Raley, Kiroloff, Rooker & Larnach. 

If you put the Twins 2020 AAA OF (Cave, Wade, Raley, Kiroloff & Rooker) on a ML roster together, they might out-fWAR the OF of a third of MLB teams in 2020, a bar I will set at 4.5 fWAR total based on 2017-19. They would almost certainly out-fWAR the bottom 5 teams at just 3.3 fWAR.

That is a surplus and a situation where trading from that particular sliver of prospect depth would be the responsible way to manage resources. Don't trade them all, but if you trade any four of those away (holding onto Rooker, the only RH bat, and one of Larnach/Kiroloff) the team would likely never miss them over the next 3-4 years with the A ballers coming up behind them.

Plus, you have guys like Lewis, Blankenhorn, etc that may not be able to cut it on the dirt at the MLB level and will need to be thrown in the OF mix as well. 

Nick Anderson is Falvey's David Ortiz.

It's interesting seeing all the prospect hoarding comments on this article. Nowhere did Matt mention trading any IFs, Cs or Ps. He only suggests trading away OF prospects.

We have a proverbial game of musical chairs going on right now with 3, maybe 4, chairs in play over the next 4 years for all our current OFs that are at AA or higher. Kepler and & Buxton are pretty much locks to hold 2 of those down over the next 3 & 4 years.

That leaves 2 chairs left for: Rosario, Cave, Wade, Raley, Kiroloff, Rooker & Larnach. 

 

If you put the Twins 2020 AAA OF (Cave, Wade, Raley, Kiroloff & Rooker) on a ML roster together, they might out-fWAR the OF of a third of MLB teams in 2020, a bar I will set at 4.5 fWAR total based on 2017-19. They would almost certainly out-fWAR the bottom 5 teams at just 3.3 fWAR.

That is a surplus and a situation where trading from that particular sliver of prospect depth would be the responsible way to manage resources. Don't trade them all, but if you trade any four of those away (holding onto Rooker, the only RH bat, and one of Larnach/Kiroloff) the team would likely never miss them over the next 3-4 years with the A ballers coming up behind them.

Plus, you have guys like Lewis, Blankenhorn, etc that may not be able to cut it on the dirt at the MLB level and will need to be thrown in the OF mix as well. 

This medium makes it easy for arguments to change forms somewhat. I guess my argument should have been nobody cares if you trade Cave, Wade, Raley or probably even Rooker. I am going to go out on a limb and say most of us who want to preserve prospects don’t care about them. I guess I ignored the argument of trading the surplus. Because I just don’t believe depth can be traded for good starting pitching unless that SP has a big contract. Cave / Wade Raley or even Rooker or even all of them together does not land a front of the rotation SP. You mentioned their relative value in your post so why would you conclude they could be traded for good pitching?

We have two OF prospects (Kirilloff / Larnach) who will make a difference in acquiring someone better than Berrios. IDK but I think it makes a lot of sense to move Sano to DH when Cruz departs and Kirilloff takes 1B. He is not even an average defender at a corner OF spot as I understand it. Perhaps I am wrong but this seems to makes sense.

If this is true, we really have one really good OF prospect (Larnach) to take Rosario's place. The timing should be perfect for him to come up next year and prove he is Rosario’s replacement. I think Wade & Raley have very little value. Cave has some value and Rooker will need to prove he can make enough contact at the MLB level before he has any real value. I am pretty sure all of us prospect hoarders would trade depth for a Berrios + level SP. It’s the other teams that won’t go along with that scenario.

I'm not sure it makes sense to think in absolute terms when it comes to the Prospects versus established player debate. I think what DOES make sense is having a strategy of:

1. Avoiding holes in the major league line-up. Holes being defined as negative WAR guys. Not every player has to produce 2WAR, but when they don't, you want them to be guys like Rosario, Cron, Castro, and Gonzales. Guys that don't crush you when they're in the lineup. This hold true for pitching too.

2. Not letting your prospect talent become a below-average asset. This is a fluid thing. Most of a system's authentic value is produced by a half-dozen prospects. However, it's absolutely essential to have numbers too, meaning high numbers of those 40+ FV prospects and above. Guys like Duffy, Arraez, and Rogers emerge from these numbers.

3. Trading from surplus, and being rather agnostic about whether that surplus is being dealt from MLB or the pipeline. It only matters that the replacement for that established player project to be an almost immediate production upgrade. You trade Rosario to make room for Larnach. In 2021, not 2020. If Lewis isn't an upgrade over Buxton when the time come? Goodbye, Mr. Lewis.

The Twins are in elite territory at this time. They're in the top half dozen in MLB power rankings (SI). They've been in that same range in prospect rankings. I believe that's Falvey's intent.

This medium makes it easy for arguments to change forms somewhat. I guess my argument should have been nobody cares if you trade Cave, Wade, Raley or probably even Rooker. I am going to go out on a limb and say most of us who want to preserve prospects don’t care about them. I guess I ignored the argument of trading the surplus. Because I just don’t believe depth can be traded for good starting pitching unless that SP has a big contract. Cave / Wade Raley or even Rooker or even all of them together does not land a front of the rotation SP. You mentioned their relative value in your post so why would you conclude they could be traded for good pitching?

 

We have two OF prospects (Kirilloff / Larnach) who will make a difference in acquiring someone better than Berrios. IDK but I think it makes a lot of sense to move Sano to DH when Cruz departs and Kirilloff takes 1B. He is not even an average defender at a corner OF spot as I understand it. Perhaps I am wrong but this seems to makes sense.

 

If this is true, we really have one really good OF prospect (Larnach) to take Rosario's place. The timing should be perfect for him to come up next year and prove he is Rosario’s replacement. I think Wade & Raley have very little value. Cave has some value and Rooker will need to prove he can make enough contact at the MLB level before he has any real value. I am pretty sure all of us prospect hoarders would trade depth for a Berrios + level SP. It’s the other teams that won’t go along with that scenario.

This point needs to be better understood in my view.

What happens when your system is out of balance? Meaning, too many position players and not enough pitchers? What about when your ML lineup is all young, controllable and producing? Do we hang onto those prospects and just let them sit in the minors? Do we trade the guys on the MLB roster?

 

When you are in dire need of pitching like this team is, I think it is imperative to trade from your position of strength to shore up a weakness. 

When you have great assets... OF right now you move a Rosario for what you need or a piece for your system to fill a possible future need. Having a balance on your major league club of young and vets is ideal. If an ace comes along and a quality position player is needed I am okay with it but NOT for a pitcher that is not a top end guy... value is not there. Position players are tough to come buy and while about 1 in 5 quality prospects actually work out... we need to keep the system full. If we have a ML lineup that is controllable and producing.. we are in an AWSOME place and we can call the shots better. 

Lots of low risk high reward guys out there that can bridge the gap until our pitching studs are ready... which is right around the corner....