Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Major League Ready

Verified Member
  • Posts

    4,267
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by Major League Ready

  1. I would suggest anyone offering an opinion on related topics should go to Fangraphs at look at any playoff team this century that is in the bottom 2/3 or revenue to see how winning rosters are built. It's very easy as they list players in order of WAR produced. 85% of the highest contributing Players ( I use 1.5+ WAR) are internally developed prospects or players traded as prospects which I define as having never produced more than 1 WAR in a season. Producing enough good prospects to make trades is obviously advantageous. However, the impact is very modest when compared to developing major league players or trading for them before they are proven. This is not a conceptual statement. The facts (history) show this clearly. So, those people who constantly trivialize the importance of prospects ( not you / generalizing) are proving an opinion that is unencumbered by the facts. isn't that a nice way of saying it? Three teams in the lower half of revenue (Oakland / Cleveland / Tampa) have been by far the most successful if measured by playoff appearances. Look at any of their teams and you will find their success was influence far more by trading established players for prospects than trading prospects for established players. Without going back through by spreadsheets, I think it's about 10:1. I have posted the actual results here twice and this conceptual description about 5 times. It's something people who want to believe in trading prospects elect to ignore. Again, I am not using your broad statement here to suggest this is what you are saying. Just making a generalized statement.
  2. Arraez has a wRC+ of 91 and an OPS of 661 against LHP. Putting Urshela at 3B and Miranda at 1B means Urshela with a career 750 OPS against LHP replaces Arraez in the lineup. Not a monumental improvement but an improvement and a good way to give bench players playing time and having Arraez as a pinch hitter in a key spot had one presented itself.
  3. This question prompted predictable responses. Perhaps the question needs to be slightly recast. How do they manage these 8 guys and any prospects that show they are ready next year. All 7 of the 8 guys are established major league pitchers and the 8th guy (Winder) showed he belonged during his ML stint. Dobnak has 3 options so he could be sent down to re-establish himself. Paddack won't be back until a point in the season where we will likely need an injury replacement. Therefore, one of the remaining 6 is a multi-inning RP. Pretty easy to manage if they start next season with the same personnel. I hope they sign Rodon and make it just a little more complicated.
  4. Correa's AAV has nothing to do with my point which you have missed entirely, and you are focused on one half of one season (Palacios). That would be reasonable if this thread was focused on Correa opting in for one more season and then moving on. However, much of the discussion has centered around extending Correa which means another 6-8 years. Focusing on one what would very likely be a 1/2 season replacement is extremely misguided but it kindly. Then, doubling down on your bias you have elected to use a SSS of Palacios OPS in his first MLB stint. Since going back down to AAA his OPS is 972 and he is hitting 323. IDK how he will adapt to MLB but the suggestion he will continue to have a sub 500 OPS is ludicrous. The most likely case scenario is that Lewis will replace Correa. He certainly has the potential to provide as much offense as Correa or more if Correa continues to hit as he has this year. The reasonable assumption is that the drop-off from Correa to Lewis should be minimal. Then, if the $35M is used more efficiently, (more per WAR) and effectively ( higher need) the team will be much better off overall. For example, a top of the rotation SP and a back of the BP ARM. Lewis + front line starter + back of the bullpen RP >>>>> Correa. You seem to be assuming there are no other possible uses fop the $35M being paid to Correa. I will take Lewis / Rodon and whatever BP arm we can get for whatever is left of the $35M after signing Rodon over Correa.
  5. He was looking for "Lindor Money" last year which of course was $341M. Lindor is almost exactly 1 year older so I would bet Boras still feels Lindor is a reasonable comp. Let's say the market is just not good and the best offer Boras can come up with is $250M. Correa could opt in for 2023. He would need to get $215M at age 29 to net the same amount. I seriously doubt he would or should reject an offer at $250 because he probably does not get more than $150 if his performance is not significantly better next year.
  6. If the context here is long-term, I believe Lewis will produce better offensively than Correa is performing now. So, will we see appreciably better offense from Correa going forward? IDK but you would think so. If not, I will definitely take Lewis plus $30M year for 6 years to spend elsewhere.
  7. The 8.5M per WAR represents the average cost of free agents. Cost and value are not the same thing. Paying 8.5M per WAR for a mid-market team is a recipe for failure. To put this in perspective, if they were to sign four players that produced 4 WAR at 8.5M, the cost would be 136M which of course is almost their entire budget. Even if they spent $150M, every single player among the remaining 22 players would have to be prearb which of course is extremely unrealistic. The free agent portion of the budget would get you to approximately 66 wins. Therefore, the requirement in order to build a 95 win team would be that they produce 29 WAR from 15.4M in spending. The premise that free agents are worth $8.5M is misguided. They cost $8.5m on average but it's a failure when they produce 1 WAR per $8.5M, especially for lower revenue teams. That's the other failure of this premise / value proposition. What is Viable production per dollar spent is far different for the Dodgers / Yankees than the Rays / As. The equation here is what will be the difference in WAR between Lewis or whoever would replace him plus the war produced with the $150M in the salary (estimated) difference between the replacement over six years.
  8. They are at $110M for next year plus whatever incentives Buxton and Maeda earns so $115-$120M. It makes no sense to add a SP unless its a top of the rotation guy (better than Gray / Mahle) which is $25M-35M. How much do you think they will spend?
  9. Don't look now but Jermaine Palacios has a .337 ave and an OPS of 1.034 for his last 100 ABs. He has gotten better and better as the season has progressed. Sure would be nice to see him perform this well for the rest of the season.
  10. It's not that big of a mess. Bundy and Archer's options will be declined. The starting 5 will be Gray / Mahle / Ryan/ Winder and either Maeda or Ober. Smeltzer / Dobnak and eventually Paddack will be inexpensive depth. I suspect 1 or 2 of them will be multi-inning RPs.
  11. I would much rather finish 2nd in the division with a 100 win than get into the playoffs with an 84win team. In other words, how much we leverage the future should not be driven by the fact we are in first place. The goal should be to build a great team, not sneak into the playoffs because we play in a division that is very weak this year. Do we want to be good for several years or make the playoffs for 1 year? That said, anything is possible so plug the biggest holes which is the BP.
  12. No ... Pittsburgh / KC and Detroit have been bad for a prolonged period. They have not been a position to be buyers which is a very different scenario from what you are implying or the situation the twins find themselves. It's reasonable the Twins would be buyers. The question is how much should the Twins leverage their future for this team? The teams you mentioned have had absolutely no chance. Wasn't the article you are referencing specifically about position players? If so, how is that relevant to the Twins situation? We have recent examples in the Clevinger and Kluber trades where those players were hurt and provided nothing while those teams gave significant long-term assets. Clase for Kluber, Miller / Naylor and Quantrill for Clevinger. Snell has not been of significant value and of course there is always the Shields for Tatis jr.
  13. So let's do something really stupid instead of executing a plan with the best probability of success. BTW ... he number of prospects that "survive has very little value in measuring the impact of trading prospects for elite / established pitching. That measure would be exclusively the prospects traded for elite pitching. When you look at prospects returned for pitchers like Sale / Clevinger / Kluber / Shields, etc you will find a much higher frequency of success. I cringe every time someone uses the failed prospects argument in this context because it is quite misquided.
  14. You assume. I just made several posts regarding the 40 man roster crunch and advocated they trade some of those prospects already on are that will need to be added. I have also stated directly more than once I would upgrade the BP. My objection is with those who would trade Kirilloff / Miranda or Winder.
  15. You seem to be suggesting the twins trade away players that will / should be important for the next several years in order to improve a "incredibly flawed" team for the short-term. I guess that's fine for a fan to be obsessed with the right now. If you are a GM / PBO, it's a good way to lose your job and also make sure you never get another one at the same level.
  16. When did I ever suggest they stand pat? I just don't support the unprecedented type actions being suggested here where we trade of 5 players. It is pure fantasy. Name a team that has ever done what is being suggested. If we are that bad off they should be selling.
  17. If the team is so bad as to require this many additions they should be a seller. Can you name one instance where a team ever added nearly this much at the deadline. That should be a good indication if it's a good idea.
  18. We could paint any scenario we could possibly come up with in the same negative light. We could have traded for Clevinger and hoped he would not go down with an injury like he did or many other established players who were traded and injured. We could have signed Patrick Corbin and hoped he did not turn into a bad pitcher like he has. We could have signed Anthony Rendon instead of Donaldson and hoped he did not turn into a pumpkin and on and on. The same negative crap was said about trading Donaldson. Several people absolutely insisted we got worse. Well, since Miranda got it together in late May his OPS is 300 points higher than Donaldson. Now we have a better player going forward and an extra $20M to spend on pitching. What they need is reasonable health and players to perform to the capabilities. No kidding players will have to play well for the Twins to be good. What a concept! Guess what ... That scenario is true no matter what strategy the team pursues so all of this is nothing more than finding a way to be negative.
  19. It starts with them getting some injured pitchers back. They are missing Ober / Paddack / Alcala / Maeda and Dobnak. Hard to say what Dobnal provides but it's worth mentioning. Get Winder back as a permanent addition and replace Archer / Bundy with a top of the rotation free agent and add a back of the BP free agent and you have a very different pitching staff. Of course, the response will be that the Twins won't spend on pitching. I would suggest they have not spent big on pitching but they have never been in the position they will be next season. They will only have roughly a $73M payroll and they will already have Gray / Ryan / Wider / Ober / Maeda, eventually Paddack plus Smeltzer / Dobnak for depth. The only hole to fill among position players is catcher and who knows maybe Hamilton impresses the remainder of the season. It's not like Palacios is horrible and Lewis should be inserted by mid-season. Miranda and Kirilloff are night and day better than they were to start this season so their emergence makes us better next year. Those two also collectively save us $30M which could be invested in pitching. They could also afford Willson Contreras. Yes, they need to execute on landing a free agent SP and RP but that's all they need to do to make this a darn good team next year. So, we will see if they are just dead set against spending on pitching. Keep in mind, I am the guy who was against such a move in previous years. I have a totally different opinion now because of the situation I just outlined. There is a reasonable chance the FO will also be much more open to spending on a top free agent SP. How does Musgrove / Gray / Ryan / Maeda / Winder sound for a rotation with Ober / Paddack / Smeltzer / Dobnak for depth? An infield of Kirilloff / Polanco eventually Lewis and Miranda. BP of Duran a LH free agent / Alcala / Jax and three among Thielbar / Megill / Hamilton / Moran / Sisk / Schulfer / etc. We could also use Two of Ober / Paddack / Smeltzer / Dobnak could be used as multi-inning RPs. This all fits within a roughly $130M budget. This looks like a better team than we have at the moment to me.
  20. Apparently, you did not see my earlier post in this thread. I listed 10 players including all the ones you mentioned that have expiring contracts or were otherwise certain to come off the 40 man and I listed 6 others who were good candidates. The point was that removing those certain to come off only gets us down to 38 and there are 7-8 that should be added.. Garlick / Cotton / Romero and Colombe are arbitration eligible. That's quite different than an expiring contract and all of these players are not key players but not all of them will be or should be non-tendered. How can Dobnak show he can pitch unless he remains on the roster? They will not and should not just flush Dobnak and if they do there is a reasonable chance he becomes a back of the rotation starter or good long reliever. Having to make decisions on players like Columbe / Garlick and Dobnak would suggest a 40-man roster crunch. Now, I think we can agree losing any of these players will not be remotely devastating, but depth has value which has been quite evident this year.
  21. I would not trade Kirilloff / Miranda and would be unlikely to trade Canterino / Wallner / SWR / Steer / Varland. I would hope to get 2 good RPs with a pool to trade from of: Yannier Cano Jharel Cotton Sawyer Gibson-Long Brent Headrick Edouard Julien Jair Camargo Austin Schulfer Cole Sands Jovanni Moran Ronny Henriguez What do you think? Would Julien + another prospect and SGL + another prospect net good 2 RPs?
  22. I didn't think so either until I actually looked at who would come off and who needed to be put on. As I wrote earlier, there are 48 on the 40 man now and 10 that for sure need to come off. Obviously, that only leaves 2 spots. I came up with the list below of 13 who arguably need to go on. I believe that's a "crunch". Matt Canterino Matt Wallner Simeon Woods-Richardson Spencer Steer Louie Varland Sawyer Gibson-Long Blayne Enlow Brent Headrick Edouard Julien Jair Camargo Austin Schulfer Caleb Hamilton Evan Sisk I would not argue that SGL / Headrick and Camargo probably don't need to go on the 40 man but we would still need to find room for 6 additional players.
×
×
  • Create New...