arby58

That's a pretty lop-sided point of comparison - on a standard deviation basis, there is a huge disparity between the very top and very bottom. We're not talking about the Twins entering into the very bottom zone, even with the cuts foreseen. The point is you don't have to be number 1, 2, 3 - or even 4, 5, 6 - to win the World Series.

I quoted directly from the Harvard study: "In practice, there is essentially 0 correlation between relative salary and HHI (correlation = positive 0.008). This means that holding budget constraints constant, teams with lower HHIs tend to have higher winning percentages. Holding relative salary constant, a team may be able to increase their winning percentage by 0.018 points (i.e., the difference between a 0.500 and 0.518 team) by decreasing their HHI by one standard deviation. Thus, teams on a budget might want to sit out of the bidding war for top free agents that has occurred in the 2022 offseason, and instead focus on signing some good lesser known names." So now the standard is 'in contention' not makes the play-offs? Set the parameters for that - my guess is 20-ish teams would meet that standard. You know who weren't in contention? Numbers 1, 2, and 3.

I was using your numbers - you didn't list #5 as making the play-offs. There are 12 teams in the play-offs. That means 6 teams that were not in the top 10 were in, including number 21. Did you actually read the Harvard study? It suggests this 'spend big on a few free agents' mantra, which you seem to encourage, isn't statistically significant in terms of actual results. Better to be smart than just spend big. Ask the Padres and Mets fans about that.

Agree - it's not how much money you spend, it's whether you spend it wisely. Gray, when they traded for him, was wise spending. Last year, Farmer and Solano were wise spending - Gallo was worth a flyer and had his moments. I highly doubt Pagan is worth what the Reds spent for him - look at what the Twins unearthed with Stewart last year. I sort of feel the same about Maeda. My guess is they will trade for a 4-5 pitcher who is younger and has less risk. We shall see. That said, the track record with high priced starting pitchers is not great. This front office seems to get that, even if some fans don't.

I'll take that bet.

So, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 were not in the play-offs - half of the 'top ten' and four of the top five - and you're telling me I live in anecdotal evidence?

This canard that the Twins don't trust starting pitchers to pitch further into games has GOT to be put to rest. They were 3rd in all of MLB in average length of starts in 2023. It has nothing to do with analytics, it has to do with having good enough starting pitchers to let them pitch. They didn't have them in 2022, and the starts were short. They had them in 2023, and the starts were on average longer than all but 2 other teams of the 30 in MLB.

Please provide the quote where the Twins are 'planning to be worse.' You don't like them cutting payroll, fine - but you're falling into the same old same old trap if you think just spending more money will yield more success. The top three salaried teams in baseball last year all missed the play-offs, and none of them even had a sniff of them.

It's not nearly as simple (things rarely are) as this 'higher payroll directly correlates to on-field success' claim. First, you like to 'thumbs down' the FACT that the top three payrolls in MLB all missed the play-offs last year, and the FACT that the team with the 21st/30 payroll was in the World Series. I've never understood how a person disagrees with clear facts. These clear facts from 2022 suggest that the 'direct correlation' is only by using a long-run regression analysis - and, in the immortal words of JM Keynes, 'in the long run we're all dead.' The point is that higher payroll teams don't always make the play-offs, and emerging, low-payroll teams can and do. If you delve into the paper from the Harvard Sports Collective, there was a fascinating discussion about payroll concentration (where they use the Herfindahl Hirschman index, or HHI) to measure spending a lot on a handful of players. Interestingly, they find no statistically significant correlation between those high impact player purchases and positive outcomes (and think back to some of those, and tell me how the Mets did with their starting pitching purchases, or the Angels when they signed Albert Pujols, or lots of other big splash signings). The conclusion they reach is that "In practice, there is essentially 0 correlation between relative salary and HHI (correlation = positive 0.008). This means that holding budget constraints constant, teams with lower HHIs tend to have higher winning percentages. Holding relative salary constant, a team may be able to increase their winning percentage by 0.018 points (i.e., the difference between a 0.500 and 0.518 team) by decreasing their HHI by one standard deviation. Thus, teams on a budget might want to sit out of the bidding war for top free agents that has occurred in the 2022 offseason, and instead focus on signing some good lesser known names."

Players talk all the time, and they certainly have the right to change their minds, That said, I wouldn't put much stock in the comment you refer to - unless you believe he was flat out 'untruth-telling' here (Sports Illustrated): “I do truly believe there is something special going on in this clubhouse," Gray said. "It’s definitely going in the right direction. But at the same time, it’s something we’re going to have to take a look at as a family and see what is the next step for us, not only as a baseball player, but where are the next three to four years of our lives going and what direction is that going to go in. I do know it’s going to be playing baseball, I just don’t know exactly where. But we’ve enjoyed every single moment that we’ve had since we got traded over here, not only the people in the clubhouse, the fans, the city, the organization — everyone has been as much as you can ask. It’s been an incredible experience.”

Also fair points. I do recall that Correa had something of a breakthrough (literally) with his plantar fasciitis late last season, so perhaps that is a portent of things to come.

That's usually the way projections work - the most recent data point is generally most relevant. Why would you look at 2022? Only two current relief pitchers (Duran and Jax) were a part of that bullpen - no Thielbar, Stewart, Funderburk, etc. - guys who will be relevant for 2023. Who cares how Cano, Cotton, Duffey, Fulmer, Lopez, Megill did? 2021 is even more remote. When you're riding a dead horse,, dismount.

The main point is that you said the Twins bullpen 'will be crappy. Again.' Except it wasn't.

Last year's bullpen ERA was 15th of 30 teams. Unless your definition of crappy is a team in the middle of MLB, that wasn't the Twins. OK, there are other measures, to be sure. They were 7/30 in WHIP, which is probably a better statistic than ERA anyway.

First, the response was to a comment that said the Twins had Lewis and Lee cued up to play - and that was not true. Second, the Twins made the play-offs (and Correa was arguably their best position player in them), so it certainly wasn't a 'mistake' last year - it's possible the Twins don't beat Toronto if Correa wasn't playing shortstop for them. If Correa returns to form next year, it certainly won't be a mistake. The planter fasciitis that plagued him last year wasn't even remotely related to the past ankle injury concern expressed by the two other teams (neither of whom made the play-offs, BTW). I don't know anything about Correa as a person - my analysis is based on the Twins results last year, and his career to date. The guy has put up 40.9 WAR in the equivalent of about 8 years in MLB, he's won a Gold Glove, been a three-time All Star, Rookie of the Year, and will be entering his age 30 season. To claim the signing was a 'mistake' based on one sub-par year strikes me as based on entirely insufficient evidence.

Last year, Lewis was not 'cued up' to play shortstop - they didn't reinstate him from the IL until May 29. Lee was at AA until August. The 20-20 hindsight on the Correa deal is not really fair - and also overlooks he had a very good postseason. There is plenty of reason to think the issue last year was plantar fasciitis, and he will return to his previous norm in 2024.

I doubt that would be the consensus of those 'in the know' in MLB. Baseball America polled managers, scouts, and executives, and Lopez was voted the second best change-up of American League pitchers (they also voted Duran the best fastball and third best curve). It's also hard to argue that 2-0 in the postseason, with 12.2 IP and a 0.71 ERA against the Blue Jays and Astros is not the line of an Ace. For that matter, 234 Ks in 194 innings pitched in the regular season and an 11-8 record. Maybe you meant a different Lopez?

As a Twins fan, my thought is it's a little early in the off-season to be deflated. This front office has generally shown patience in its moves - and last year's example suggests it's too early to make projections on moves that might be made. Last offseason, Correa was signed on 1/11/23, Lopez was acquired via trade on 1/20/23, Michael Taylor was acquired on 1/23/23, and Solano signed on 2/23/23.

Of course, they will want Lewis first, but the Twins aren't trading Lewis - that's a non-starter. I still think one of Julien or Lee can be had, but not both. If one of them goes, Kepler is the logical next from the Twins perspective, to maintain infield depth with Polanco. I'd guess Seattle asks for Wallner second, and the Twins would only give up Wallner if they get back one of Seattle's already proven starters with some team control (since Wallner is controllable for a long time).

I agree that if Nick Gordon is his replacement I'm less inclined to make a trade. That said, I assume the first shot at a corner outfield spot would be Trevor Larnach. He's been on the cusp of being a bona fide MLB outfielder - probably now or never.

The top three teams in payroll last year did not make the play-offs. The Diamondbacks were in the World Series with a payroll that ranked 21/30 in MLB.

That was my point as well. It may work itself out, as Polanco has only had one full season in his last four and may be better suited to occasional play in the field and DH. In that case, the lynchpins are Buxton playing the outfield and IF Lee is ready to play in the major leagues. If Buxton can play some in the field, they have more flexibility. If Lee is ready, you probably move Polanco and expect Lee to play some at all three infield spots.

Wallner is a lot to give up, but so was Arraez. If the Angels really are in 'win now' mode (not sure I believe it unless they re-sign a certain pitcher/DH), they may want a closer to ready prospect instead of Raya. Maybe the Twins could limit the damages with, say, SWR, who was at Triple A last season. I'd only do the deal if the Twins really think Sandoval can be/become a number 2-3 starter.

In 2021, at A and A+, Julien played 181 innings at 1B, 341 at 2B, 189 at 3B, and 120 in LF. In 2022, at AA, he played all 813 innings at 2B. In 2023, between AAA and MLB, he played 819 innings at 2B and 17 at 1B. It's pretty clear from this that the Twins do not view Julien as a viable everyday option at 1B. Any other reading is trying to shove a square peg into an analytical round hole.

If they keep Farmer, it will be Farmer.