Major League Ready

Thanks for sharing some rational thinking. If US Bank acquired another bank, they would assess the value of that business and set a maximum value they would be willing to pay and walk if it could not be acquired at the price they determined. That’s called good management. For some reason many here think the Minnesota Twins should not operate under the same basic principles as any other business. Let’s put it in more personal terms. If an individual goes to buy a home valued at $360K and there are multiple offers that somehow escalated the price to 472K, is it a good decision to pay $472K because you really want it. What if the seller says … I really want to sell to these other people so matching is not adequate? You will need to pay $500K. How many people here would just go for it? BTW …. I used the same ratios present in the Wheeler deal to produce these figures. The expectation the Twins should ignore their valuation and just throw around a hundred million like it is chump change is exceptionally naïve. It never happens. It’s just not that easy for any team and much harder for a mid revenue or less team. I keep asking for those who say they should just do regardless of cost to show me examples of another ML team with the Twins revenue or less who has “just gone for it” and it worked out. Some of you elect to ignore the facts. I welcome anyone who rebuts this notion to prove me wrong with facts. Two teams of similar or less revenue have ever signed such deals. Grienke when the Diamonds landed a billion dollar TV contract. They went nowhere and finally traded him. The other is Mike Hampton. Colorado went nowhere with him. They had 73 wins in each of the first 2 years of his 8 year deal and they traded him. He produced less than 3 WAR over his 8 year contract. Are all of the GMs of similar teams just incompetent that they can’t see paying whatever it takes to get a front of the rotation FA or do fans just not understand why it’s not a good practice to pay whatever it takes?

You are not alone. Many fans subscribe to the push all in theory and there were more GMs in the past who subscribed albeit to a lesser degree. The new breed of baseball executive has a background that precludes this type of immediate term decision making. They are paid to sustain success. We don't expect players to accept less pay when the team is bad so we should not expect teams to manage in a manner that will lead to bad teams in the future.

Yes. I do believe the Twins are positioned to acquire a top SP without creating a situation where the team can’t be kept together as the cost of some of the key players increases. (Berrios / Sano / Buxton / Garver / Rodgers and perhaps even Duffy) I gave some specifics on that a couple weeks ago. Wheeler was the guy I wanted so I am disappointed. However, my point of contention here is that a fair number of posters subscribe to the do it any cost philosophy. It’s unrealistic and exceptionally poor management practice. His price is already so high it becomes quite questionable to match the Phillies much less “blow him away” with something beyond that amount.

Why do you want to see that they will pay whatever it takes. What proof do you have that this practice will result in success for a team that profiles (in terms of revenue) like the twins. Show me two examples of teams with equal or less revenue where they signed a FA starting pitcher to 5 or more years at $100M+ and went on to make it to the world series. Not win, just make it. There is a lot of protest here based on an assumption this would result in success. Prove it! Show me a team that has done it in the last 20 years.

I would bet the Twins knew when they got involved that it was going to take $100M. Also, let's not take too much stock in the reported offer. Who knows maybe the offer was 6 yrs at 17M/yr. Maybe it never happened at all.

I have two questions. 1) Can he pitch? 2) Why would a 97 win team trade away an elite position player with 4 years of control, especially a low revenue team like the As?

You are being kind to Pineada. I am amazed, given the dollars involved, professional athletes allow themselves to get so out of shape. You would have to believe the Twins and other teams would be more inclined to sign him to a multi-year deal if he shed some weight.

He was my choice because he has the best stuff and I would like to think Johnson can help him make the most of that stuff. As a matter of fact, that would be part of my pitch to him. I also had him at the top of my list because of the physical characteristics to pointed out. Guys with this build age better. Maybe I just think this because it makes sense but Verlander, Grienke and others would support this notion. Your point about the other GMs validation is well-taken. They have superior information and a team of people assessing these players. It's a pretty bold assertion that he is a bad bet when so may teams have a high level of interest in him.

IDK … There is always a demand for SPs but it seems like there is as much demand as ever this year. Given the way Pineda was pitching before the suspension, I would think there will be a fair amount of interest in him. MLB Rumors had him 17trh overall, two spots ahead of Gibson. They had Gibson predicted for 2/18 and of course he got 3/30. I just don’t see Pineda still looking for a job when spring training starts. 2/20 with a 3rd year option sounds pretty good to me.

Winning fills the stands. There has been countless examples of teams with superstars that don't win and don't fill the stands. I recall similar statements being made about Cueto a few years ago, Darvish two years ago, and blanket statements about going all-in for the big RPs on the market last year. Blind faith has it's charms but I don't want our team run with it. We should also ask if spending $35M+ on one player is the best way to build a winner outside of a top revenue market. Why haven't GMs of other mid or small revenue teams have ever made a similar signing with the exception of Arizona when they had just signed a billion dollar TV contract? Are these big names FAs just not inclined in general to sign with a small/mid market team. Have the dozens of GMs that have been in this position all incompetent? Why doesn't it happen. Arizona got Greinke but that was a very abnormal set of circumstances. Washington signed Scherzer but their incremental revenue more than pays for Scherzer so while Washington is a closer comparison than the Yankees or Dodgers, their revenue has been substantially higher than the Twins or other teams below the twins in terms of revenue. I would be quite happy with Wheeler and Pineda.

Depends ... I am not going to assume to know the affect of the banned substance based on what is reported. I'm a fan, not a doctor and I only have the reported information to go on. If the Twins still have confidence, I think he fits nicely into the plan, especially on a 2-year deal. At the start of the off-season, I thought it was realistic to get Wheeler and bring back Odo and Pineada. Wheeler on a 4 or 5 year deal, Odo, one year, Pineda on a 2 year contract makes us better next year and allows us to transition Graterol / Balazovic and others over the next 2-3 seasons. Wouldn't it be nice to talk about it being hard for our prospects to crack the rotation.

Of the players contributing 1.5 WAR or more to 2019 playoff teams Houston had two 1 yr deals w/FAs Yankees had two 1 yr deals w/FAs Dodgers did not have a single FA or player they traded for Atlanta had 2 1yr free agents and no 1.5+ WAR players acquired by trade Oakland had 2 1yr free agents and 1 1.5+ WAR player. They did acquire six 1.5 WAR players via trade. However five of them were acquired as prospects. Tampa Bay also had 2 1yr free agents and 1 1.5+ WAR player. They acquire a whopping eight 1.5 WAR players via trade. However seven of them were acquired as prospects. This includes the trade or Archer (established) for Glasnow and Meadows who had not yet established themselves. The WS champion Nationals did trade for Adam Eaton (2.4 WAR). Milwaukee had two place holders in Grandal and Moustakis who were 2nd and 3rd to Yehlich in WAR. The results don’t agree with you position.

Is there a better option available for $7M and is he available on a 1 year deal? Hey, if you can upgrade at 3B, that's not a bad way to go but Cron for another year until (hopefully) one of our AAA guys forces their way onto to the team is a good plan too.

Avila would be a nice back-up to Garver and add a veteran presence with young pitching. I had not thought about Kendrick but he would be a good bridge if we could get him on a 1 year deal. Would prefer to see the rumor of Josh Donaldson come to fruition and move Sano over. Wow... that would be a scary offense. Add Wheeler and Pineada and you have a 105 win team, right!

Good point. It sounds much easier until you have to come up with a list of candidates. Although I am a little confused as to if you are saying from a playoff team or a non-playoff team.

I would like to think they would be closing this deal as we write here. IDK, maybe all of the teams have the reservations expressed here but then why are so many teams looking at him. It will be very interesting to see what it takes. I like that he has or at least it appears he has the highest ceiling of any of the FAs not named Cole or Strasburg. I would like to think Wes Johnson can help him harness his stuff.

The variance in expected performance varies greatly for FAs and trades for established players. So, based on this logic we can't evaluate free agent acquisitions or trades for MLB talent either until their contracts have expired. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assess those trades as of today.

The point is that there are times (like now for the twins) it makes sense to sign 4+ yr free agents. However, it's not essential and you beat this drum constantly as if there is no chance without signing this type of deal. Look at the highest contributors for LA. All of them home grown. They had a high payroll for years because they were still paying for guys that had not played for them for a couple years. The one year argument is absolutely bogus. Again, you refuse to accept the obvious. They have averaged 96 wins over the past 7 seasons and they have an exceptional core of young players. They will continue to be good. You bang the same drum without examining the models of success right before your eyes. BTW ... I know Corbin produced 4.8 fWAR. Morton produced 6.1 on a 2-year deal.

I am an advocate of them going 4-5 years for Wheeler or Bumgarner. However, year after year several posters insist signing the 5 year type guys is essential to winning. You and several others were quite incensed the Twins did not agree it was a no brainer to sign 2 of the high-end RPs. We would not be positioned to fill the holes we have in the rotation had the Twins FO agreed. It would be great if proponents actually checked this premise to see how successful teams were constructed. This year the 4 teams with the best records in MLB had a total of one free agent on a 4+ year deal that produced 1.5+ fWAR. That was Chapman. Morton was signed on a 2-year deal and had 1.3 higher fWAR than Corbin. LaMahieu and Donaldson (2 years and 1 year) produced 10.3 fWAR. Machado and Harper produced 7.7 fWAR. The 8 playoff teams had 102 players with 1.5+ WAR. Four of them were acquired via the type of contract you insist is critical to success. The Dodgers are a great case study. Go back 10 years. They signed the FAs you describe and traded for big name players. They went nowhere. The only FA player contributing 1.5 + fWAR last year were Intl free agents of modest cost. They had no players that were acquired as established MLB players. Of course, they do have an exceptionally high cost RP in Janzen but he was replacement level. The lowest revenue teams (Oakland / Tampa Bay) had 6 FAs contributing 1.5+ fWAR. Four of them were 1 year deals and Two 2-year deals. They had zero players acquired as established players and 12 between them acquired as prospects. They only had 5 players between the two teams that were drafted by the Rays/As. The facts do not support your theory.

Why would a team trade a #1 for a #3? The only reason a team trades a legit #1 SP is for a haul of prospects or prospects plus salary relief.

We had a lot of the same indignant responses when Sano was first criticized here. A couple years later the majority of people were pretty down on Sano. It was pretty much the same thing as I recall. Nobody thought he was a terrible player but he did not have the commitment necessary to make him the star he could be. I have great hope that Rosario finally recognizes he could be a far better / far more consistent player if he improves his plate discipline. I believe he wants to be great so badly that he can't help himself. The good news is that it is all together possible he will get sick and tired of pitchers making him look foolish and dedicate himself to taking better ABs like Sano did last year. You would think Sano's resurgence would be a great lesson for Eddie.

Aggressive within the strike zone is great but there are a high percentage of ABs where Eddie swings at a borderline pitch or a pitch outside the zone on the first pitch or even when he is ahead in the count. There is no selection once he gets two strikes. He is swinging. Being aggressive is not helping. Nobody can hit the crap pitchers throw at him now. He is so skilled that he is still able to hit some of those pitches but he would have Yehlich like numbers if he made opposing pitchers give him something in the strike zone. This is frustrating to watch because I can’t help but wonder what we would have in Eddie if he took more professional ABs.

Kirby was the model of consistency. He averaged 4.25 bWAR for 12 seasons. He had 2 seasons over 7 bWAR. Rosario has 10.3 bWAR over 5 season for an average of 2.06. Rosario has only had 1 season where he exceeded 3 bWAR and that was 2018 when he produced that WAR in the 1st half of the season. Since then, he has barley been above replacement value. Sure, stats don't tell everything but don't compare Rosario has not earned the right to be compared to Puckett. I will be just fine watching Rosario play with no discipline when he can produce like Kirby while doing so.

I would think the fact he can play both 1B and OF will get him here quicker. The scouting reports I found are old. How does he compare to Larnach as an OFer? Is Rooker destined for 1B? He does not seem to be an OF solution. I could see him being brought up mid-season if Cron does not produce, assuming Cron is signed.

I agree with you conceptually and from a best practices point of view. Hell, I applaud the insight and aptitude. It’s not hard to come up with a plan to improve in the immediate term. Sustaining success is far more difficult. Specifically where Cruz / Cron, and Rosario are concerned, I have to agree with Mike. Cruz is going to be hard to replace no matter what. However, there will be good options in the form of a prospect for that roster spot. Cron is really not hard to replace and I would hope that one of our prospects could be even better. I am not sure about Rosario. He has huge upside but he has produced 1.2 fWAR over the past season and a half. The league has adjusted and he has proven to be incapable of the plate discipline necessary to count the adjustments teams have made. It's likely IMO that Kirilloff or Larnach will produce better than Eddie in his current form at a prearb cost. The key is can they produce impact starting pitching? In this case, I am referring to their financial ability to keep the team together. They have quite a few guys that could step up over the next 2 years and lead the rotation. That would make it possible to replace Odorizzi next year with a prearb contract. It’s a good bet we will have another guy ready in 2 years. That’s why I am an advocate of a Pineada type signing for 2 years. The next would be nearly $30M coming off over at the end of 2021. They are positioned to be very good for several years if they keep the right prospects. Obviously, there are fans who would prefer to present focused approach but that's not going to happen. (see LA Dodgers)