Why Non-Tendering Matt Wisler Made Sense

I hate how a guy like this works all his life for a year like he had and gets the shaft, and a guy like Malik Beasley goes and signs for $60 million.

Aside from the stats, this makes sense if the Twins are agressive in signing FA relievers.  This is a deep class and the Twins do have needs.  I have no problem with nontendering Wisler, assuming the coaching staff has supportable reasons.  Same with letting homer-prone May go.

But they need a reliable closer.  Rogers was awfully hittable and relievers are very prone to quick drops in effectiveness.  A franchise truly interested in going deep into the playoffs must look for a second closer.  Today's market includes several: Hendricks, Rosenthal, Yates, Hand.  I'd like them to select two, but if only one, Liam's the one and then  resign Clippard and your bullpen becomes very solid, at least on paper.  Unfortunately, there is no one in their minor league system who seems major-league ready.

This is a must for a team that seems intent on over-protecting their starters!

I argued elsewhere that non-tendering Wisler is dumb, but thank you for this extensive analysis. I still think he's worth the risk, given his performance, though the FA class at his position might be the crucial factor that got him axed. If other GMs think as you do, though, it might be that Wisler might still be available to the team on the cheap. Nobody can know quite yet when vaccines will take us to herd immunity and allow full stadiums and a season that's not shortened by many dozens of games. Too many Americans are incapable of trusting epidemiologists and scientific acumen; only the vaccine in this country will bring Covid to its knees, and that will take time to manufacture and distribute. We need baseball this year. Here's hoping it can come on its usual schedule, with or without Wisler.

This is what baseball has become. A somewhat "minority report" hybrid. It doesn't matter what you accomplish and how you actually perform, it only matters how an observer might think you will perform. It is not your thoughts and actions that count, it is some pencil pushing baseball nerd's that can't even come close to performing if they tried.

I believe arbiters are legal professionals, not baseball professionals.

This is what baseball has become. A somewhat "minority report" hybrid. It doesn't matter what you accomplish and how you actually perform, it only matters how an observer might think you will perform. It is not your thoughts and actions that count, it is some pencil pushing baseball nerd's that can't even come close to performing if they tried.

Did you have a better baseball career than Falvey? Just curious.

I guess to avoid being a "nerd," Falvey should intentionally make incorrect decisions, to show that he's above concepts like "due diligence" and "logic"?

I hate how a guy like this works all his life for a year like he had and gets the shaft, and a guy like Malik Beasley goes and signs for $60 million.

Nice dogwhistle.

I hate how a guy like this works all his life for a year like he had and gets the shaft, and a guy like Malik Beasley goes and signs for $60 million.

Why compare two different sports, one that has a salary cap and one that does not.  One that has 15 man rosters and one that will go through nearly 50 people on their roster any given season.  

Also, just because Wisler was not tendered by Twins does not mean he cannot sign with any team.  He is free to sign and make money off of his season. 

 It doesn't matter what you accomplish and how you actually perform, it only matters how an observer might think you will perform.

Well, yes. Putting a player on the roster should be based 100% on how the front office thinks the player will perform and 0% on how the player has performed in the past.

The only throwing slider gimmick must have run its course. Maybe they road that wagon and the wheels were falling off. Better to jump off now!

Or maybe he had some kind injury that him and team doctors didn’t see eye to eye on.

Nice dogwhistle.

Edit: Upon further reflection I still stand by my reaction to the dog whistle comment as it is perfectly reasonable to be irritated that a man can wave an assault rifle at an innocent family for being on his property when in fact they were on public property while negotiating a contact for a high level, very public position with a large corporation and not have his behavior affect said negotiations. That said it is true that it is apples to oranges. On the one hand you have a first round pick and on the other a fringe player.

Good article -  and I completely disagree. 

 

For his price we could have seen if the success continued and still DFA'd him if it was appropriate.

 

Numbers, stats, graphs - the only questions I ask are - did he do what he was asked to do?  Did he do it well?  Was he affordable.  Those are my analytics and I would sign him again.

We had a front office this resembled these remarks and most people here felt (correctly) the game had passed them by. It's just not nearly that simple and it never was that simple. Team's have become much better at evaluating potential and sustainability and I don't would like our team to among the most sophisticated in their analysis as opposed to the most simplistic.

I hate how a guy like this works all his life for a year like he had and gets the shaft, and a guy like Malik Beasley goes and signs for $60 million.

You're not wrong except that Beasley can do so many things and is on a rapid incline of improvement, raw talent always gets a second chance.  Wisler throws a slider and Matthew points out that his numbers don't project well in addition to the fact that he can't do the up and down anymore.

It was meant to be a general observation. Not personal. But I have no problem with a Falvey apologist. I don't know how the decision will turn out, and I am not advocating for Wisler or Falvey.

 

I had taken a bit of a break from the boards..... I guess I forgot how the internet works. 

Considering the performance of the organization under Falvey, I'm not sure that he needs much "apologizing" on his behalf.

Interesting article if his projected salary was actually significant. I would have simply tendered him a 1.5-3 million dollar deal and DFA’d him if he turned back into a pumpkin. What’s the point of taking a flyer on a guy like Wisler and cutting him loose when he achieves the best possible scenario of performance?

I think it might all be about the fact that he wouldn't sign a contract in front of the deadline and the Twins didn't want to take a chance on his salary.

Given that, I think it might also be about flexibility. If they do sign someone in free agency as the closer, and do sign a starter or 2 to bring in as well, there is going to be a lot of potential pitchers pushed into bullpen duty. Thorpe is out of options. Romero, should he work himself into the picture, is out of options. Dobnak probably deserves a roster spot. Alcala seems like he belongs. Stashak seems like he might belong. And there needs to be opportunities for guys like Colina, Chalmers, and probably Duran. Smeltzer is still around as well. 

I know that a lot of these guys are not proven commodities, but they need opportunities to prove it.

And if the front office choses to take advantage of the vast amount of relievers available on the open market, it gets even tighter. 

Why compare two different sports, one that has a salary cap and one that does not.  One that has 15 man rosters and one that will go through nearly 50 people on their roster any given season.  

 

Also, just because Wisler was not tendered by Twins does not mean he cannot sign with any team.  He is free to sign and make money off of his season. 

All valid and trumping points of what I said.  It was a knee-jerk opinion after reading a Beasley article just prior to this one.  Opinion hasn't changed.  I just need to make comments more relevant.

All valid and trumping points of what I said.  It was a knee-jerk opinion after reading a Beasley article just prior to this one.  Opinion hasn't changed.  I just need to make comments more relevant.

I was not defending the Beasley deal, just felt the comparing the two was a little flawed.  Also, one other thing of note, is in basket ball they share the revenue.  You hear a player makes 'x' money in NBA they may actually not make that if the league makes less money.  I could be wrong, but I think I heard NBA is asking players to have about 50% of salary in escrow until end of season, normally it is only 10%.  So if league makes 50% less than what they would normally be expected, the players lose that money and it goes back to league.  So a player making 10 mil will make only 5 mil.  

In baseball, the player will earn all their money no matter how much money the league pulls in.  So there is much more risk to team owners in baseball giving deals than in basketball as well.  

An apologist, by definition, is one who speaks in defense of (not one who is apologizing for). So I am not suggesting Falvey needs much apologizing for, at all, and I agree with you. I was noticing your defense of him, when I was meaning to speak in general, and had not even accused him personally.

 

I am a proud apologist for many people and things and ideas, and don't apologize for it at all. I also embrace being a baseball nerd. I am even a baseball nerd apologist.

I'm aware of the definition . . . the word is almost never used that way colloquially. But I'm glad you agree with the general point.