Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Bill Parker

Provisional Member
  • Posts

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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

Blog Entries posted by Bill Parker

  1. Bill Parker
    Miguel Sano is listed by Baseball-Reference at 260 pounds. This LEN3 article has him at 263. If you've ever seen him up close, you know that Miguel Sano's true weight is probably something closer to thirty-seven billion pounds. It's also possible that he has no weight, but rather that the Earth's weight is measured in terms of the effect Sano's gravitational pull has on it. He's a large man, is what I'm saying. He's one scary, seriously oversized muscle with a face.
     
    That's an unusual-enough thing for a third baseman to be, but it's all but unheard of for an outfielder, which is what the Twins keep insisting Sano is now. Outfielders are tall, but lithe, and quick -- the best ones a bit more slight, the plodders a bit bigger, but near enough to none this big.
     
    Not to put too fine a point on it, but seriously, he's really very large -- "just" 6'4", but almost impossibly thick for an outfielder. Click on the link above and scroll down to the photo of Sano reaching for a ball in the outfield, about halfway down. There's definitely a part of you that just says "no, nah, nope, that's not how it works" -- right? That's not an outfielder, playing the well-known baseball game position that is outfield. That's Travis Hafner or David Ortiz or Ryan Howard shagging balls in batting practice to give the guys a quick laugh.
     
    Now, none of that is to say he can't play out there. Sano is by all accounts an extremely athletic guy, quicker than he looks. He certainly has a strong arm, and his pro career has included 33 steals in 47 tries and about a triple for every hundred plate appearances. He certainly could be just fine out there. What I'm wondering is: has it ever happened before, with any success?
     
    There's no good way to figure that out, really. Weight is essentially the only proxy we have, yet it's a terrible thing to go by, for a long list of reasons. The biggest such reason is probably that players' weights can change dramatically over time, so a player's "listed weight" has very little meaning. Take, for example, four-time All-Star Carlos Lee: Baseball-Reference lists him at 270, which was no doubt accurate toward the end of the line, when Lee was almost exclusively a first baseman for the Astros. This card from his rookie season, though -- when he was roughly the same age Sano is now -- has him at 210. Lee was by no means a small man, and spent much of his career as an outfielder quite a bit above that 210, but wasn't Sano's size.
     
    So acknowledging those limitations, what do we know, or what can we guess at? It turns out there have only ever been 21 seasons of 140 games or more by players who Baseball-Reference lists at 260 pounds or more and who played at least half their games in the outfield: that list is here, sorted by Baseball-Reference's fielding runs. Eleven of those 21 were by Carlos Lee, and we've established why that doesn't really work--though he had some surprisingly good years with the glove, if you feel like looking that way for hope anyway.
     
    Another third of those seasons, seven more of them, were by Adam Dunn, and that's not good. That's not good at all. Dunn (who, like Sano, was an athletic minor leaguer, twice stealing more than 20 bases, and even going 19-for-28 once early in his big-league career) is listed as 6'6", 285. He was listed at 240 as a rookie, too, so it's not a pure Carlos Lee ballooning scenario, even though that's still 20 pounds lighter than Sano, at a similar age--and is famously one of the worst outfielders, and one of the worst players at any position, ever to regularly put on a glove. The -43.0 fielding runs he put up in 2009 stands as the worst mark of all time by any player, ever, and his -26.0 in 2007 is the 12th worst among outfielders, and at ages 29 and 27, respectively. If we're looking for reasons for any hope for Sano the corner outfielder, we're going to have to find a better comp than Dunn.
     
    The only other 260-plus regular outfielder -- owner of the remaining three of those 21 seasons -- is Dmitri Young, Delmon's much older, much heavier, much better brother. Young is listed at a whopping 295, though he, too, has a pre-rookie card that lists his weight (at age 20) at 210, so it's likely that even Young wasn't quite Sano-sized when he got his start. It also strikes me as a different kind of weight--Young was doubtless an incredible athlete, but carried considerably more fat and less muscle than Sano, on a shorter frame. For what it's worth, Young had a mixed record, but was far from a total disaster in the field (until the very end, when he was pushing 300). Young was also hurt quite a bit. It's not a close comparison, and, I think, also not a desirable one, though it's better than Dunn on that front.
     
    We can reduce the weight minimum to 250, and get these 17 more seasons. Seven are by Matt Holliday, and I'm not sure that works--he's listed at 250 even, so 10-15 pounds lighter than Sano, and just seems like a different creature: this is a picture of him headed into his near-MVP 2007, for instance, and he looks like the kind of person Sano could swallow in one bite. At approximately Sano's age, Holliday's baseball card listed him at 235.
     
    Another of our new comps is born DH Jack Cust, who the A's ran out there 83 times as a 29-year-old in 2008. Let us never speak of this again.
     
    Seven of the seasons were by the great Frank Howard, who certainly never won any awards for his defense, but could acquit himself well enough (and hit SO well) that he stayed more or less out there for 12 years. At the same time, though, Howard was 6'7", three inches taller than Sano's listed height; an unholy beast, to be sure, but in a different way than Sano is one. Howard was much closer to the stereotypical outfielder build, just...enlarged.
     
    Finally, there's Yasiel Puig, who it shocked me to learn is listed at 6'2" and 255. Puig certainly doesn't give off that same old-world-god vibe Sano does, though I've never seen them together, so who's to say? Puig's athleticism is well known, and he's put up a total of 14 fielding runs in his career, even more or less holding his own in center when necessary. If you think Puig compares to Sano, that's an awfully encouraging comparison. It sure seems to me that they're different styles of athlete with vastly different frames, but what do I know?
     
    So here's what's interesting and worrisome: I'm not sure the game has ever seen anything quite like the hulking superhuman monster that is Miguel Sano trying to patrol the outfield on a daily basis. There are similarities here and there with Puig, and Howard, and Dunn (gulp), and Young, but none of them quite fit, for one reason or another. Fair or not, Sano's body just screams "1B/DH," and most teams and managers just wouldn't even think (or not much) about sticking him out there. This is kind of uncharted territory.
     
    That said, I don't expect a disaster. Learning the position and instincts are more important than any of this, but I think he can do it. I don't know that it's a long-term solution -- he's likely to keep getting more first-baseman-like as he goes, as history has shown -- but for a year or two, it doesn't seem crazy to think it might work out just fine.
     
    Regardless, though, no one as bulky as Sano, in the way Sano is-- and likely no one already so bulky when they were so young -- has ever attempted to play anything like a full season in the outfield. This is a whole new unknown sort of thing we're dealing with here. That's kind of fun, right?
  2. Bill Parker
    I want to talk about the Twins and payroll, and how we talk about the Twins’ payroll.
     
    It’s been about a month since Jack Moore wrote the excellent and scathing The Minnesota Small-Market Con over at Baseball Prospectus Milwaukee. The points it makes are numerous and wide-ranging -- the most important, I think, is “f the billionaire Pohlads had been willing to take a short-term loss, they could have made their way out of the Metronome years earlier without taking the public for such a ride” -- but being published as it was in the latter part of an offseason in which fans have watched the team take very few substantial visible steps toward getting better, most seemed to take it as a chance to complain about the team’s unwillingness in recent years to spend on free agents.
     
    And I get it. Having taken the public for said ride and secured a stadium that is maybe the most appealing in baseball, the Twins (per Cot’s Contracts) ended their first two seasons in Target Field with top-ten payrolls, but then fell back to 13th in 2012, and haven’t been out of the 20s since. While attendance predictably declined from 2011 to 2015, it seems a safe bet that they could generally have spent more money than they did in those years and still turned a nice profit.
     
    The problem I’ve always had, though, is that this (at the most) is generally where the fan’s analysis stops. They could have spent more money, but they didn’t, and they should have. The obvious next questions that get left on the table, though, are “on what?” and “why?”: what could that money have gotten them, and what makes it a good idea? The 2011 Twins had a $115 million payroll and were coming off a 94-win, first-place year, but with injuries to almost literally everyone -- only Danny Valencia and Michael Cuddyer would play as many as 120 games for the Twins in 2011 -- they lost 99, finishing a whopping 28 games out of a wildcard spot, and it was pretty clear their window had slammed shut. They lost 96 in both 2012 and 2013 (22 and 26 games out of the playoffs, respectively), and 92 (18 out) in 2014. Their season-ending payroll declined, meanwhile, from 9th in 2011, to 13th, to 24th.
     
    But, again, what could and should they have spent more money on, and what could we have expected it to bring them? In a league in which the very best player might be worth about nine wins and four is a typical All-Star, the Twins would’ve had to add the equivalent of four or five All-Stars, two Mike Trouts, or some combination thereof (assuming each of them takes the place of true replacement-level players, to boot) in order to have had any chance at a postseason berth in any of those years. That’s not the kind of thing that’s ever happened via free agency--teams have tried, typically with disastrous consequences (check out the turn-of-the-century Devil Rays sometime).
     
    But what if the postseason isn’t the goal? What about just putting a marginally more entertaining product on the field? I question whether that’s a thing, personally--it’s the competing that draws the crowds, the Timberwolves are as entertaining as a bad basketball team can get right now and not drawing substantially more than their terribly depressing squads of the last couple years did--but I get that, too. It’s not as though a team puts those savings in an interest-bearing account and adds them to the pot for next year. They would, in a perfect world, but they don’t; those savings go to the owners, and the next year’s budget is its own thing. So to the extent you’re concerned only about this season, yes, you as a fan should want the team to spend as much money as they can possibly get away with, because that money’s gone for your purposes after the season either way.
     
    The problem with that is that the one-year deal for a good (or even just “entertaining”) player exists in baseball only when that player comes with huge risks. Most free agents worth signing as anything more than filler in this game demand commitments of three years, or four or five or more. Most free agents are also in their 30s, which means almost without exception that they’re likely to get worse over those three to five years, not better. What that means is that most of the free agents the Twins could’ve signed to make them marginally better or more fun in 2013 or 2014 would still be getting paid as Twins in 2016, and would be less good or fun now than they were then (but probably making at least as much money). When you don’t expect to win, you probably shouldn’t (and can’t, to field a team that avoids challenging the ‘62 Mets) stop spending entirely. But your focus in spending, way ahead of getting better for the now, has to be to avoid hamstringing the team in future seasons, when -- if your prospects pan out and you’re not too bogged down by aging players’ contracts -- you might be positioned to spend to fill more immediate needs and make a run at it.
     
    In that light, I tended to think the Twins’ spending from 2012 through 2014 was just about perfect--a weird thing for me to say, as I’ve never been one to go easy on the front office (Tony Batista and Ruben Sierra? Seriously?). In 2012, there was just a long, black-dark road ahead, and nothing to do but fill a couple of the gaps to try to be interesting and wait it out. And that’s exactly what they did, bringing in Josh Willingham (who worked) and Ryan Doumit (who didn’t) to fill in for the departing Michael Cuddyer and Jason Kubel, and otherwise just stayed put and take their lumps. Heading into 2014, with Byron Buxton, Miguel Sano and others now on their way, it made sense to take a look at some relatively low-risk, 30-or-younger free agents who could reasonably be expected to be contributing at about the same level a couple years down the line, and they did that, bringing in Phil Hughes (who I’d argue worked) and Ricky Nolasco (who thus far clearly hasn’t), along with more stopgaps like Mike Pelfrey and Kurt Suzuki. For whatever else the Twins have done right or wrong, this is exactly how a non-contending team should spend its money. Should they have spent more of it? Perhaps--but it’s on the one arguing they should to identify where they should’ve spent it and why. Whining that they’re cheap and run by billionaires just doesn’t cut it; they’re losing ninety-plus either way. Show your work.
     
    I’ve left out 2015 so far, of course, and that’s a tough one because we know how it ends: the Twins win 83 games, surprising everyone, and miss the wildcard play-in game by just three wins. They entered the last week with a real shot, and as it turns out, even one modest upgrade in the offseason could have gotten them there. That’s cheating, though: the Twins didn’t know how it would end, and I really think they were looking at 2016 or 2017 as their next legitimate chance, and so they stayed the course, bringing in 32-year-old Ervin Santana to add to their stable of average starters who seem likely to still be about average by the next time they thought they’d be competitive. Were there moves that not only could have put them over the top as things turned out, but that they should have made in December or January 2014-15, knowing and believing what they reasonably did then? Maybe! But I’d like to know what those specifically were. (Note also that a first half from Santana might itself ultimately have put them in the playoffs.)
     
    So that gets us to today. I’ve been as frustrated as anyone with the lack of activity: Byung-Ho Park is certainly interesting, but hardly fills a glaring need, and there’s not much else that’s even worth mentioning. It feels much like a team with two third basemen and three or four 1B/DH types, which seems to suggest moves to be made, and I would’ve loved to see them land, say, Darren O’Day, an elite reliever who signed a four-year deal to stay with the Orioles similar to the ones the Twins gave Santana and Nolasco. But: O’Day is 32 years old, and at his very best -- at any modern reliever’s best -- is worth about three wins. The Twins had a lot of luck last year, and while I’m looking forward to seeing what they can do in 2016, there’s good reason to believe they’re not quite there yet, with or without the upgraded bullpen. If, as Baseball Prospectus’ PECOTA expects, they go 79-83 and miss the playoffs by seven games, O’Day probably wouldn’t have made a difference, and neither would most anyone else. And then what about in 2018, when Buxton and Sano are MVP candidates, but O’Day is 35 and ineffective, while his $9 million salary helps prevent you from signing that year’s Darren O’Day, who could be the difference between an LDS loss and a world championship?
     
    I have no answers. I thought they should have done more this offseason, and I sure hope that they do well enough that there’s a worry it might come back to bite them. But too often, we collectively seem to want the team to spend more money without considering (a) the limits of what that spending can actually do, or ( the risks down the road of imprudently committing money now. Fans can complain that the team is cheap all they want -- and why not, it’s just baseball, it’s all in fun, you do you -- but without an idea of how they should spend that extra money, why they should and what might happen if it goes bad, all it is is whining for whining’s sake. Seems to me it’s more fun, more instructive, and, at least in this case, harder to argue with the plan, if you show your work.
×
×
  • Create New...