JB_Iowa

Probably not. Also, to make clear, I see this as an imbalance problem club-wide not necessarily a Mauer problem. Mauer is a symbol but it is more of a question of there not being any other veteran leaders of a more outgoing nature to complement him. I also wonder if both injuries and knowing virtually everyone is "on the trading block" had an impact on Morneau, Doumit and Willingham. I just don't know enough about Doumit & Willingham's personalities to know. (And I tend to put the pitching staff in an entirely different category.) Early on, someone commented that it takes "all kinds of leaders." And I think that's true. It's the GM's job to make sure that there are some different personality types on the team -- not everything has to be homogenized.

Thanks, Oxtung and others for some explanation of the stats. Hoping others will add a little more to the understanding.

Honestly, I do think that TR is cheap -- and it really doesn't matter that he is spending Pohlad's money and not his own. It is probably (to him) the mere idea of spending it that gives him heartburn. And, you know what, having a few "cheapskates" in your organization is a good thing. Its bad to have people who think that they can (and should) buy anything they want. I'm just not sure that having a real cheapskate at the top of the organization is the best. It depends on how much he can take his boss' words about spending this off-season to heart. I guess we'll see.

I think the issues people will have will have more to do with whether or not he is the "centerpiece" of off-season acquisitions than with the acquisition itself. There are a lot of hopeful things in his stats and I do think that's part of what people anticipated when he was signed and why they were disappointed that there wasn't an option. If I remember correctly (not going to look it up), he is a Boras client so I'm sure that played into it.

If the offers are close in money & years, its logical to think that a player may base his decision on other factors. If they aren't close, I'd guess that money (or money in combination with years) almost always is determining.

Minnesota Twinsights: What's a fair offer for Mike Pelfrey? » Twins Now Most interesting to me is his reference to a lot of advanced stats (of course, I still have to dig through them for interpretation). Second thing I recall is that the most vocal criticisms of the Pelfrey contract last off-season seemed to be about the lack of an option for 2014.

Thanks for the responses. I guess I was under the impression that the Twins had made a bit more of an effort in the last year or so to acquire pitchers who had somewhat of a power profile as opposed to strictly control artists. i have to think about all of this a bit more.

But isn't it a bit of a chicken and the egg argument? Is it talent alone that you are adding or are you also infusing new personalities and dynamics in that clubhouse? The comment on the Red Sox was interesting to me because it was a clear acknowledgment of trying to change team chemistry. But I also believe that there were a few other lessons to be learned from the Red Sox' last off-season (including grinding out at bats). In the case of the Twins, though, I do wonder about the ideas in RB's original post. I would guess that even Joe Mauer would classify himself as a bit of an introvert. Quiet types can be leaders (and as I expressed above, I do think that he provides leadership by example with his professionalism) but I do have to wonder if a quiet clubhouse is the best atmosphere in which young players can thrive. Let's face it, the rookies and 1st and 2nd years players are generally young, at a different stage in both their baseball careers and lives than are the older players and are often of a different cultural background. Going to work each day should be exciting for them -- even if the team is losing because they have a lot to prove personally. But, as Gardenhire and others often say, it is still a GAME and games should be fun. I miss someone like Mike Redmond or Michael Cuddyer or Torii Hunter who seemed to understand that (and who could bring a bit of that to others).

Oops, sorry. Should never do things from memory. I'm still not sure that most teams spend 62% on salary although that still leaves them about 90 million for the rest of the operation and profit (probably more than that because it seems like the reports on revenue numbers still run a little behind the payroll numbers).

In fairness, I don't think most teams would sport a $184m payroll on $238m in revenues (although I would guess their revenues may be a little higher now). Illitch is definitely willing to finance a team that could win the Series.

I am not asking this question to be mocking. I am thinking back over where the Twins have been with their pitching staff. As I recall, Rick Knapp was the Twins minor league pitching coordinator for a number of years -- until he got a call from the Tigers to be their pitching coach -- a position in which lasted about 3 years. The Twins now have someone on their roster whose title is Eric Rasmussen, coordinator, pitching. Is this the same position that Rick Knapp held? What does anyone know about him? (When Knapp was in the position, I remember hearing about him all the time. I really don't recall hearing much, if anything about Rasmussen.) For some reason I went back and looked up the number of strikeouts by Twins pitchers over the past 10 years or so. The numbers are from baseballreference.com along with their rank in the league (keeping in mind that there were only 14 teams until this year): [TABLE=width: 192] [TD=width: 64, align: right]2013[/TD] [TD=width: 64, align: right]985[/TD] [TD=width: 64, align: right]15[/TD] [TD=align: right]2012[/TD] [TD=align: right]1058[/TD] [TD=align: right]11[/TD] [TD=align: right]2011[/TD] [TD=align: right]940[/TD] [TD=align: right]14[/TD] [TD=align: right]2010[/TD] [TD=align: right]1048[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD=align: right]2009[/TD] [TD=align: right]1052[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD=align: right]2008[/TD] [TD=align: right]995[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD=align: right]2007[/TD] [TD=align: right]1094[/TD] [TD=align: right]4[/TD] [TD=align: right]2006[/TD] [TD=align: right]862[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD=align: right]2005[/TD] [TD=align: right]965[/TD] [TD=align: right]7[/TD] [TD=align: right]2004[/TD] [TD=align: right]1123[/TD] [TD=align: right]3[/TD] [TD=align: right]2003[/TD] [TD=align: right]1020[/TD] [TD=align: right]7[/TD] [TD=align: right]2002[/TD] [TD=align: right]1026[/TD] [TD=align: right]6[/TD] [/TABLE] So the most "powerful" pitching the Twins had was in the Santana era, specifically 2004 with 1123 strikeouts. Yet 1123 would still put them behind every other team in the league except the Astros this year and falls substantially below the AL average of 1235. (yes, I realize that hitters have also changed from that time period). I know that the Twins have made a move to acquire more powerful pitchers in very recent years. But how did they get so "far behind the 8 ball"? And have they changed the way that they work with pitchers to ensure that power pitchers stay power pitchers (and more than that, progress to actually being good at the major league level)? Really looking for some insight into the system. Thanks.

Well, Chief, I was 10 in 1965. When I read the first 3 comments above, I just remembered that and smiled. Looking forward to more of your Grandma's treasures, Parker.

I'm not sure the Red Sox would agree with you. According to a Verducci article before the ALCS, one of the 4 key points of the Red Sox' offseason plan was to: seek out extroverted baseball rats who would watch the game from the top step of the dugout and not behind a bucket of fried chicken in the clubhouse Read More: Relentless Red Sox grind their way into ALCS - MLB - Tom Verducci - SI.com No one is saying that personality trumps ability but winning teams also have that "something extra".

There is more here historically, though, right? Because Anthony Swarzak threw 96 innings (albeit over 48 games) with a 2.91 ERA with a 1.156 WHIP in major league ball but only striking out 69.

I'd sign him (of course, we're in hypothetical la-la-land). I may not have said it in my last post but in one of my earlier posts, I thought I made it clear that if the Twins were going to devote that high a percentage to a second player, I thought it had to be for pitching. I just can't see it for another position player at this point. I still gulp to think of that high a % spent for 2 players but the Twins do have young prospects who won't be due for their big pay raises until about the end of Mauer's contract. It's a balancing act, I realize that. And it does point out why most of your talent has to be home-grown and cost-controlled. (I also strongly believe that the starting pitcher needs to bring some veteran leadership. Not sure that Kershaw is quite at that point but I firmly believe in players learning from other players and you have to start at some point with a high quality starting pitcher.)

Well, until late August, The Twins' 2nd highest paid player made what $14 or $15 million? That would be about 45% of payroll devoted to 2 players. Without going back through a lot of data, I have no idea of what teams would have 2 players eating up that much payroll but I'm guessing it is pretty rare. And it looks to me that if the Twins were to sign Cano, it would stay at about that 45% level (assuming a $100m payroll). As for Mauer, I have always maintained that his contract was a business decision that had to be made. I didn't care for it for the long-term baseball interests of the Twins but I got why they signed him and I'm sure that his mere presence drives sales of merchandise and tickets (especially in good times although the % of revenue attributable to him from those items may actually be higher in bad times). This isn't about Mauer. This is about whether the Twins should add a contract of almost that magnitude for a position player, Cano. I just can't see it working out.

Is it ridiculous to think that a free agent could ever be a cornerstone of your rebuild? I realize that Pavano wasn't a free agent (but close and had been a FA previously I think). To me, he was a cornerstone of that 2009 team not just because of his results (17-11) but because he took the ball for 221 innings and provided a good role model for the rest of the starting staff. I go back to good pitching begetting good pitching. Do the Kyle Gibson's and Alex May's and others NEED that one veteran, workhorse pitcher to help them develop? Is there more to be learned from teammates than can be learned from a pitching coach (e.g. the way Price looked to Shields in the past or the way that Scherzer, Fister et. al look to Verlander)? Pavano wasn't a superstar by any measure but he brought a degree of professionalism and leadership (when healthy) that we just haven't seen the last couple of years. Far from being a "supplement", I'm thinking that type of player is a cornerstone -- whether acquired by FA or trade.

Then they'll continue to spend $184m (or more with next year's added TV $$$) trying to win a championship for an Octogenarian. They have money coming off the books after this year (Peralta, Benoit, Infante) and next year (VMart, Torii) and they'll have some needs to fill so I could see them going after Cano. They'll also have about $90m tied up in Prince, Verlander, Miggy and Sanchez through 2015 (the end of Miggy's contract) which still leaves them a generous amount for other parts (although Scherzer, Fister and Porcello will continue to get more expensive). Financially the Twins can't compete with the Tigers (even without their added incentive to win a World Series for Illitch). But the Twins still have to do what most improves the Twins. There's no use adding someone like Cano at this point because there are just too many other needs on this team.

Actually that kind of takes it back to RB's original post. Many of those guys came up together and had the opportunity to develop their leadership skills. And that may happen with this next group of Twins. But during those years of struggle in the early 80's, did the Twins have any one player whose presence sort of "set the tone" as suggested by the LEN3 comment? Does Mauer's mere presence (given his role as a likely future H-of-Famer) set a tone that somehow precludes the development of a variety of leaders? I have to think that over time, as some of the younger players develop their skills, some of them will also emerge. But we've also seen stories about the Twins "squelching" some personalities. RB really posed an interesting set of questions.

Mike Illitch won't live forever (although it may seem like some of the contracts signed under his ownership may last that long). There have been articles floating around that the Tigers may see some retrenchment over the next few years. It would be a mistake for the Twins to spend huge money just to keep the Tigers from getting Cano. The Twins need to focus their money on how to improve the Twins.

First, can we take about 10 years off Mike Redmond and sign him to fulfill #2? #1 - without saying how big the Twins' bid will be, I think that your title statement is correct #2 - tossup #3 - kind of. I think he will ink a 2 year FA deal with a higher yearly amount than Willingham's but not sure if the total $$$ will be over $21 million but it will have a 3rd year option that will take it over the 21 #4 I hope so but make no predictions #5 I think he's probably still a Twin next year

That's irrelevant because in fact they HAVE the higher payrolls. The Cards are a bit of a different example because their payroll is in the same tier ($116-$117m) as where the Twins could be. But they actually provide a pretty good example for the Twins. Holliday's contract is at less than 15% and although they made a strong bid for Pujols, they put on the brakes. The point is that the Twins have a bunch of payroll tied up in ONE position player. They really can't afford to tie up another big chunk in another one as attractive as Cano may be.

Part of it was Morneau but the quotes I most remember are Cuddyer (see, e.g. this story: Target Field ?Scary, Literally Scary? Spruce Trees Evicted! | No Pepper Playing) The trees are "scary". Mind you, I still hate the removal of the trees (perhaps I should have said trees not batters' eye) but Cuddyer was very vocal. I also believe that before his long group of injuries, Morneau was a team leader (much more so than Mauer) but he has never been the same since his concussion and other injuries.

I agree that the Mauer situation is a bit of a mess -- and the leadership question is part of it. I can remember a number of posts on the Strib about this potential problem when his contract was inked -- if you are going to devote more than 20% of your payroll to a single player, that player needs to be the team leader. There were MANY concerns even at that time about whether Joe could fill that role. Everyone admires his professionalism and preparedness -- he can certainly provide leadership by example in those areas. But I believe that teams also need a vocal leader -- one that can cajole them out of slumps; step down on young players as need be; speak out on behalf of the team members (see, e.g., Michael Cuddyer and the batters' eye); NEVER shies away from answering the media's questions -- no matter how tough; and most importantly, does what is expected of ALL players even if he is a veteran and highly paid. (Note, some of this also comes from the manager but a player still needs to take on this role). We'll never know exactly what happened with Mauer in 2011. I doubt that he actually refused to do a rehab stint in Rochester but it was pretty clear that Gardenhire thought he should. I suspect that Mauer made it clear enough that he didn't want to that Bill Smith never actually asked him. I saw this as a huge failure in leadership. There were numerous injuries that year and virtually every other player was doing a short stint in Rochester. In addition, the Red Wings were mired in the midst of a miserable season AND their contract with the Twins was due for discussion. When Gardy made it clear that he thought Joe should do a rehab stint in Rochester, Mauer should have demonstrated that he understood the responsibilities of his new contract -- he should have stepped up and said, "when do I leave". That isn't what happened and I think it is part of what has contributed to the "country club" atmosphere that has been noted elsewhere. Joe Mauer, the size of his contract and his personality are givens. I actually have a lot of doubt about whether he could be traded even if he waived his no trade clause (at least until we know how his concussion situation will play out) but he would fit in well on a team with a larger payroll where he was not expected to be a vocal leader. In the case of the Twins, I think they have to try to find a way to work around it. The only way I see that happening is by inking a veteran player who has respect around the game and who is willing to take on the vocal leadership role and who commands a high enough salary ($10-$15 m) to show that he is considered to be a vital cog. Now the problem is figuring out how to find that player who can "walk on water".

I vote NO as well. If the Twins are going to spend in the realm of $20 million on a single player (in addition to Mauer), it has to be a pitcher. I also believe that they need to add a vocal clubhouse leader (have to figure out what position that would be at based on availabilty/need) but I think that is going to have to be a lower tier ($10-$15 m). Please note that I am not saying that they can find a FA pitcher worth $20m or more in this off-season just that if they are going to spend big money, that's where it has to be. The Twins' spending is horribly unbalanced, we all know that. In 2013, Mauer's contract takes up about 28% of the payroll. At its lowest percentage (2011), Mauer's "new" contract still took up over 20% of the payroll. Take a look at this year's playoff teams and their largest current contract in relation to their total opening day payroll: Cards: Holliday -- just under 15% Tigers: Prince -- 16.5% Dodgers: A Gonzales -- 10.15% Boston: Lackey -- 10% Indians: Swisher -- 20.15% Pittsburgh: Burnett -- 24.6% Rays: Price -- 16.5% Reds: Votto -- 11.85% (will go up substantially next year but probably still won't be over 20% given the new TV revenues). The only one of those playoff contenders who devoted more than 20% to a position player was the Indians. The big spenders had the ability to spread their money around enough that their highest players weren't taking up more than 20% of their payroll. Even if the Twins increase their payroll back to 2011 levels (I don't really see that happening even with the new TV $$$), it would be a huge mistake to tie up another 20% or more in another position player.