Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,662

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    Going back and looking closely at the group, it appears there are lots of problems considering them and their contracts as comparables for a potential Twins bullpen signing. The list was defined as "non-closers" but the two biggest contracts (League and Broxton) were both acquired as closers from their previous teams and both ostensibly held the closer position immediately after signing these contracts (League to open the 2013 season in LA, and Broxton in spring training that year as the Reds were trying Chapman as a starter again). Also noted by others, Fujikawa was a Japenese closer with zero MLB experience. The fact that he ultimately signed with a rebuilding MLB team and forfeited his closer position suggests he was a gamble more than an attempt to get a solid MLB set-up man. Take these names off the list, and you drop $52 mil in salary obligations, and only lose ~$3 mil in Fangraphs value. All of a sudden, free agent set up contracts don't seem like such an obviously bad bargain that they are not even worth their modest investment.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Dave Cameron is not infallible, and not only did his quick analysis fail to note that FIP breaks at extremes (guys with high ERAs, exactly who we would expect around replacement level, often have much more favorable FIPs), he also assumed that 0 WAR = replacement level = whoever you can sign in any given offseason on minor league deals, without presenting any evidence to support that point. Unfortunately, this "update" didn't address those problems and actually added some more, which I will note in another post. International prospect signings are capped now, and the Twins have shown no indication that they will break that cap. And even if they did, they wouldn't need to take $4-$5 mil annually from the MLB bullpen to do so. And I think our "bevy of high upside arms" are just about as close to helping the MLB pen as they were a year ago (meaning, not that close).
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Just like Affeldt clearly hurt the Giants, like your data showed? Go back to your list and find how many teams were actually "hurt" by these modest deals, rather than just failed your arbitrary WAR/$ threshold. I think you are WAY overrating the potential negative impact of a 3/15 signing, especially in a Twins pen that history shows has had no shortage of weak arms lately. The Twins are in no danger of holding back better relievers right now.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Have the Twins shown better aptitude for drafting and developing relievers? Have they built a playoff caliber bullpen with 1 year FA deals (Stauffer) and minor league free agents? Frankly the Twins haven't even tried signing a valued MLB FA reliever, I am not sure why you are so convinced they thoroughly lack that skill.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    I read your article and Cameron's. Did you read any of my previous responses? The flaws with your data and conclusion go deeper than FIP. Chiefly, you don't analyze alternatives and their outcomes for comparison. Is there another place a team can spend $5 mil a year with notably better returns? A marginally better shot at a great relief season (like Affeldt's 2014, 1.5 bWAR plus an outstanding postseason) could easily be worth that modest investment for a contending team. You also state that the Twins method of bullpen building has been fine recently, which 2015 clearly suggests otherwise. You could analyze almost any group of free agents and conclude they are a bad investment as a group on a $/WAR level, but that doesn't mean signing any single one of them is necessarily a bad investment, especially when the cost is so modest and the need is so dire (i.e. present day Twins bullpen). A more accurate conclusion from your data is that it is inadvisable to try building a full 4-5 man bullpen in FA, but nobody is arguing for that at all.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Odds are too great according to what? You haven't really responded to any of the major issues with the data you presented.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Teams wouldn't have to give Pinto a 25-man spot yet, not until April. He won't clear waivers right now, maybe in March/April depending how his winter/spring goes.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    With the Benoit and Kimbrel trades, it certainly seems like San Diego is moving toward the sell mode that many have predicted.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    And that point wasn't really proven, at all. 3/15 isn't very expensive, it doesn't buy you much in those other investments either. So relievers at that price don't have to provide any kind of incredible return. (Of course, the article conveniently left out analyzing returns of any other strategies or investments, so we are left with nothing to compare with the FA relievers.) And we've seen what kind of bullpen is created by "bringing in a bunch of minor league free agents to see who sticks" and it isn't often pretty even when a guy like Boyer "sticks", and can really handcuff a team midseason. Would I want to build a complete 4 or 5 man bullpen out of these free agent signings, to the exclusion of all else? No, but nobody is asking us to do that. A targeted one or two of these signings can absolutely be part of a smart strategy to address a weak pen.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Nolasco clearly has negative trade value. To unload him, you have to eat most of his salary or sacrifice talent with him (or accept less in return, if paired with Plouffe, that's the very definition of negative trade value. Also, Nolasco is not currently a proven innings eater, he has failed to do so for two consecutive years and is coming off ankle surgery. Even aside from the guaranteed $24 million that someone has to pay, taking a flier on him also occupies a 40-man roster spot at a time of year when those spots are critical (either for protecting your own players or claiming interesting players forced out on other teams). If we are willing to eat a ton of cash, we might be able to move Nolasco somewhere this winter, but his name almost certainly torpedoes any deal where you hope to get talent back.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually, if we could have saddled the Royals with Aaron Hicks and whatever flotsam and jetsam from our minor league system circa 2011 instead of Cain, Escobar, and Odorizzi, that could very well have prevented their 2013-2015 run of success... EDIT TO ADD: the linked article suggested Hicks, Gibson, Revere, and Benson, and that we might try to not include all in the same deal. Imagine the Royals with those 4 instead of Cain, Escobar, and Odorizzi (and perhaps by extension, no Wade Davis?).
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes. And that potential value return could blow away whatever we get from Murphy in a part-time role at catcher in 2016. Even if Hicks stagnated in 2016, I feel like he could have snagged Murphy or a similar catcher next winter. I don't necessarily mind the trade, but I get the feeling the Twins don't even plan to give Murphy much opportunity to break out in 2016 (if he even has that potential).
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Sipp was terrific last year, but he was actually solid the year prior too, and also for a year or two earlier in his career with Cleveland (although much wilder then). If teams thought 2015 was "real", he'd probably get more than 3/21. FWIW, MLBTR predicts he stays in Houston with a 3 year $12 mil contract, which isn't that much more AAV than what the Twins paid Duensing last year ($2.7 mil) I don't know if relievers are that much different than other free agents, as far as reliably predicting future performance. Teams look at age, peripherals, track record, and upside in much the same ways, and the fact that these guys seem to hover around the modest commitment of 3/15 on the open market is a reflection of their roles and the realities of variable performance. A guy from last year that stood out was Zach Duke -- he really came out of nowhere to have a great relief season in Milwaukee. He got 3/15 because teams knew that one season wasn't "real" but it suggested he had joined the club of decent FA relievers in that price range.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    MLBTR projects Plouffe to get $7.7 mil this winter in arbitration, could push $10 mil next winter. Probably the same as Todd Frazier will earn (guaranteed $7.5 mil in 2016, then arb eligible for 2017). They also predict Freese to ultimately get 3/30 from a market including the Angels, White Sox, and Indians, although they note the third year as possible due to the lack of a qualifying offer -- maybe 2/24 is in play if the QO effect is overblown for him... Would it be better for us to see our division rivals shut out at 3B upgrades, or to see them to take the top FA option off the board for the Angels? I'm not sure we get any strong offers for Plouffe as long as Freese is on the market.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Again, Nolasco has negative trade value right now. If you include him and his any part of his $24 mil remaining, you'd basically have to give Plouffe away.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    The poster was referring to the period around the actual Greinke trades (2011-2012). Referring to Hicks as "the top prospect" in the deal should have been the dead giveaway, as Hicks hasn't really been considering a prospect since 2013.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    To be fair, this "bet" is on two different things: Hicks being notably above average for his position, and Murphy being average for his. You could actually lose that bet on Hicks and still have him equal or exceed Murphy's contribution.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    At its extremes, obviously you can give anybody the "take" sign against Shooter Hunt and Rick Ankiel at their worst. But it's not all clear Runtzler is in that extreme. Based only on these numbers, it's possible Runztler changed his pitch selection and approach in indy ball, as he didn't really gain a lot of additional strikeouts or allow significantly fewer hits as you might expect against inferior competition. If he used his old approach, maybe he would have had 14 K/9, 4 H/9, and 5 BB/9 or something. But who knows if the new approach will help him and to what degree back in affiliated ball. Still, I'll drop it as I agree with the rest, it's a good signing, and thanks for bringing it to our attention!
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Analysis please? A guy like Maloney or Stauffer who fails and gets cut doesn't count much on the negative side of the ledger... but then who replaces them? A guy like Gray or Roenicke who struggles but sticks around doing low-leverage work to keep his WAR from dropping too low -- who takes the higher leverage innings? The Twins bullpen the last 4 years has seen a notable lack of plus performers, which was highlighted in this year's pennant race. I don't know if the Twins current recipe is really working all that well. Targeting a good, high strikeout reliever on a 3/15 type deal seems like it could be a really smart play for the modest commitment involved, unless you know a better way to invest that money.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Free agents are overpaid as a group because of baseball's service time structure, and this kind of analysis is always going to make the group look bad due to a few bad eggs. It's particularly bad with relievers and WAR, because great relief seasons often only tally 1 WAR anyway. Looking at your list, the first guy (Affeldt) had an average season, a stellar season, a postseason not included at all in your tally (with Affeldt pitching 11 games/innings without allowing a run or an inherited run to score), and a bad final season when they finished 8 games out of the playoffs anyway. Do the Giants really think they "lost" $24.6 million on that transaction? Also, Cameron concludes that you might as well sign minor league free agents, but he doesn't actually perform any analysis of minor league free agent relievers. Getting a minor league free agent reliever that costs nothing and produces nothing indeed seems better than a negative performance on paper, but what are the odds you actually get a plus performance like Grilli or Soria from a minor league free agent, or even a mixed bag like Affeldt? It only really matters if you think the money could have been invested elsewhere, and given the extremely modest amounts of money we're talking about here relative to MLB payrolls, that's far from clear. $6 mil AAV over 2-3 years is very difficult to better allocate.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Depends how you define "potentially high reward" -- I guess when you are dealing with very low costs, any reward at all seems high by comparison, but I'm not sure if TR's record shows many notably high rewards from these types of signings.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, I was going to say this too. The Sugar Land Skeeters competition probably doesn't have anywhere near the pitch recognition or bat speed of affiliated hitters. Lew Ford is an absolute beast in that league. It's definitely better than if he'd have walked 5.5 per 9 down there, but it really doesn't tell us anything about whether he is ready to improve upon his career 5.5 per 9 walk rate in MLB or the affiliated minors. Good signing, though.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    If Santana is also the 4th OF, I wouldn't mind having him and Nunez on the roster.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    The Twins did officially lose Fryer today, he signed a minor league deal with St. Louis.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Cool, thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...