Major League Ready

I have to admit I am surprised to see this resurgence of the old Joe after 4 mediocre years. He has been a very important part of this team being in contention for a wildcard spot and his defensive has been stellar. He deserves a gold glove this year.

We now understand the cost in prospects. Franklin Perez won’t be 20 until December and he is pitching well in AA. We don’t even have a SP prospect as good as him so we would have likely needed to give up better prospects than the other two Houston gave up.. Having said this…. Rogers is a better prospect than any catcher we have in the system, especially defensively. Cameron is not a high ceiling prospect but has good tools and likely has a floor of a 4th outfielder.. The Twins equivalent offer is something like Romero and 2 other top 15 prospects. Perhaps Blankenhorn and Graterol. Perhaps the greater impact to our future would be in would negate our ability to pursue meaningful free agents at a minimum until Mauer and Santana are gone.. Between Verlander’s 28M and arbitration increases in 2018 and 2019 the Twins simply do not have the revenue to support any significant free agents beyond Verlander. Getting Verlander would have been absolute incompetence in my opinion. Let’s say they have a 40% chance of getting a wildcard spot today. That means they have a 20% shot of making it to a playoff series against Houston. Add to this that their odds of winning that series even with Verlander are at best 40% and that’s generous. Therefore, their odds of getting past the first round are 8% even with the generation assumptions I used. Giving up 3 prospects with a very good chance of being meaningful players for 6+ years each at a controlled cost and is a bad baseball decision in itself. When you add to it that they or we could have used the $28M/yr to sign a younger free agent and it becomes something considerably worse.. Verlander is 34 so we are talking about age 35 and 36 seasons. By far the most probable result is that Verlander’s performance continue’s to decline just as it did this year. His ERA plus fell from 137 to 117 and FIP from 3.48 to 4.04. I would certainly hope if the FO was willing and able to spend $28m/yr they would invest it in Darvish. I would actually prefer signing Alex Cobb and keeping the prospects. He had an ERA plus of 130 and 139 the two years prior to injury and he was solid this year with an ERA + of 112 and a FIP of 4.26. Cobb will be 30 next year so its pretty reasonable to expect him to get back to his pre-injury performance where I would expect Verlander to continue to fall off. I am not sure what Cobb will cost but the difference would surely cover a good bullpen arm that could be traded if enough of our prospects reach their potential.

So true. Genius is much easier to construct in a hypothetical world. They may have inquired about Verlander and found the cost in prospects was prohibitive. There is a very good possibility he is simply not willing to come here.

Are you really suggesting that it is not advantageous for professional athletes to be in the best physical condition possible? Baseball players can get away with. Golfers can get away with it. You dont see any overweight soccer players because they cant get away with. How many elite NBA players are overweight? I think we can say with a high degree of certainty Sano would be more agile at 3B and faster on the basis if he were 25lbs lighter. Would he come back form injury faster? Probably. I dont know if it would many any difference at all in his hitting. Probably not and that's why he can stay in the ML. While it's hard to quantify in exact terms or measurements. We can also say with a fair amount of certainty being in better physical condition would extend his career.

I am ecstatic Sano is on our team and I have always been in the camp he is a great athlete and that other sports have very big when with exceptional athleticism is just much more rare in baseball. The bias angle at the core of your post is dead on. It is all to common for conclusions to be a product of an already held point of view rather than looking at the facts objectively. There is a lot of that involved when it comes to Sano. The detractors to appreciate his athleticism and his accomplishments at such a young age. The athleticism is on display and the stats speak to his talent. On the other hand, the vast majority of ABs he refuses to apply any sort of two strike approach and he strikes out on a lot of bad pitches. He is a greater hitter but he is still along ways from being comparable to Cabrera. He ranks 60th in WAR and 37 in OPS. Good but he has significantly more potential. Altuve's OPS is 120 points higher and Bellinger is 108 points higher. Harper, Votto and Stanton 175-200 pts higher. There are 34 players with one home run or that have more home runs. His numbers are very good but not elite. The only thing all say about the weight is that there is absolutely no way anyone could argue he could lose 20 pounds quite easily. This can make him a target with the media because modest effort and reasonable dietary discipline and he is there.

OK, I understand where you are coming from. You just feel they did not get enough to warrant letting Kintkler even when considering there odds of making the playoffs were very low at the time. Our difference in opinion is that I did not expect anything more than they got for Kintzler. Watson is a projectable LH starting pitcher. It would have been nice if we could have gotten someone a little further along but MLB.com say he has mid-rotation potential. He is ranked 18th in our system and Littell is 16th. He is ranked just above Curtiss and Chargois. John Sickels of Minorleagueball.com ranked Watson as the No. 14 prospect in Washington’s system before the season and put a “sleeper alert” tag on him. Sickels tabbed Watson’s major-league ETA in 2020 and noted he is a “highly intriguing prospect with breakthrough potential.” If he reaches these projections, this was a fantastic trade. Six cost controlled year of a mid-rotation starter for giving up Kintzler would be fantastic. I would guess his odds of realizing this project are probably about the same as our odds were of making the playoffs. The $500K of international money should not be overlooked, especially with the CBA changing. There were six international prospects that signed for $500K. They were ranked 32-38. We all know about prospects but that’s a pretty good asset.

That's a matter of opinion. The management consulting group I am a part of often evaluates management decision making processes. We don't find fault in decisions made on the basis of high probability even if the improbable materializes. We should also consider the net result is a one game playoff. So, the low odds might have led to a 50/50 shot at a playoff series.

Well, I think we are all aware that this team lost 100+ games last year and that we needed to rebuild the personnel. We also knew we had a lot of very good bullpen prospects in the minor leagues and they would be the source of the rebuild. Would you be happier if we 15 games under 500 as predicted by the national media and most people on this site? We have been fortunate to have a decent product to watch in the midst of retooling the roster. This was inevitable so I am not going to complain. I think I will just enjoy this new roster/ team that is coming together. There will be some bumps as there have been lately but I am very glad to have a team that's fun to watch while in the process of building a true contender. Between Hildy / Rogers / Pressly / Busenitz / Curtiss / Burdi / Chargois / Reed / Rosario we should be able to put together a great bullpen for several years. They will all be cheap so that help make room in the budget if the need a FA piece. Might need another lefty. We need Rosario to reach his potential and maybe Turly can help in the BP. Who knows maybe Perk will regain enough velocity to help.

They were decisive and made the right decisions given the decision criteria before them at the time. That's called good management. Criticizing them now because the team has played well without Kintzler is complaining for the sake of complaining. So far I am quite pleased with the new FO. From what I can tell, They are approaching needed change in a systematic way and they focused on areas that are critical to building a consistent winner.

I am pretty sure those are all contracts with their current club except Zimmerman. We all know this is a different animal and The Twins gave Mauer $183. Not sure of your point. Seems like now that the facts are clear you are changing the narrative. Zimmerman was not the Ace type SP we have talking about. He is the type of player the Twins could land. However, given how he is performing, Zimmerman is not an example of something we missed out on.

Arizona had just signed a billion dollar contract. Not equivalent by any stretch of the imagination and a deal I hope we would not sign even if we could. Shields was a 4 year deal for $71M. Not that much different than Santana. This is certainly not beyond the Twins capacity. He is the type of player they can and should get with one exception. He was a bit too old and already starting to show decline. The next year after signing him they traded him and had to absorb 60% of his salary to move him. Regardless, I simply did not consider this contract or player to be comparable to the elite FA SPs. If he is an example, he is an example of why signing SPs past their prime is a suspect strategy. Scherzer is the one reasonable example. We just need to be reasonable in our assessment of financial equivalence. $60M or 20% incremental revenue is significant. When any of us increase or income by 20% I think we probably buy things we would not have prior to the increase. Accepting Scherzer as a somewhat reasonable example is reasonable. Suggesting the financial capacity of the two teams is the same is not very reasonable. If the Twins get a new TV deal and get into that $300M range, I would expect them to spend accordingly. The net is that there is one example of this every happening that can be reasonably compared but that example is from a team with 20% more income. (when the team peaked in revenue). Is it reasonable to expect this to happen or suggest the twins are simply cheap. I would love if Jim Pohlad went nuts but expecting it is very Naive. What really drives me crazy is that group really knows baseball and would be quick to point out any other situation that was so rare or any circumstances that diminished the comparison to similar occurrences.

Actually, I have always readily acknowledged these examples and that there is some merit in them as examples. However, I have pointed out that Arizona had just signed a billion dollar TV contract. The core principal here is teams in the same financial position. Are you really suggesting that this extremely large anomaly disqualifies this example. It is ridiculous to accuse me of not accepting the facts when you cling to this example. Let's also keep in mind that even a team with the Dodgers revenue felt it was a very bad idea to pay Grienke that kind of money through his age 37 season. Therefore, if we are reasonable about this example, it would suggest that this example also required paying a very high AAV though age 37 which history strongly suggest is a very poor utilization of payroll. Therefore, even if the financial profile was the same, the Grienke is tempered by the fact that contract will probably hurt the team substantially. I also acknowledge Scherzer as being a reasonable example. If we are being fair, one could argue Washington is not a financial equal. They averaged roughly $300M the last 3 years. That's enough to pay for Scherzer a couple times so let's be reasonable about the Nationals not really being a team in the same financial position. It's just not the $100-200M advantage some teams have. Here is the net of this discussion. Arizona signing Grienke right after landing a billion dollar TV can't be considered even remotely similar financial circumstances and Scherzer to a team with enough incremental revenue to pay for him twice. Given that's the extent of the example, I think my position that it's not the Twins organization as those of you who cling to this argument suggest. It's simply the financial realities of a mid-market team.

They don't have to get one of the $300M free agents to help this team significantly. Is it really that hard to understand that all of these guys entering free agency in the same year will absorb the dollars available among the to 5 or 6 teams that the Twins simply cant compete with in free agency. Thus, the Twins will be in a better position than most years to compete for the free agents after the top markets sign several extremely expensive deals. No, we are not going to get Harper or Machodo but we should be positioned to compete for the tier just below the superstars. There are only two possibilities. One, other teams with similar revenue to the Twins have landed these types of SPs and I simply unaware. Name them. The second possibility is that with the exception of Detroit who has modestly more revenue than the twins, none of the other similar teams have signed these elite free agents either which clearly indicated they either consider detrimental to put all of their eggs in one basket or they just cant afford it, period. So, for once, quit making empty arguments and present examples of similar teams landing elite free agent SPs to 5+ year contracts. If you can't come up with them, you can't single out the Twins.

If Forbes information is accurate, Illitch in Detroit is the only MLB owner who has ignored fiscal responsibility. I have looked back at all of the Forbes reports and while its a generalization, the teams basically spend in line with revenues. I would love it if the Pohlads were willing to operate as a non profit or lose 10s of millions like Detroit has in some years, expecting someone to make nothing on their billion dollar asset is a far-fetched expectation.

This year was setting up for a complete bullpen makeover of young power arms. I am not going to complain that we are in contention and can't just roll with the young guys. The injuries really suck. However, I still think the bullpen is going to be a real strength by the end of next year. Hildy looks like a fixture in the pen for several years. Rodgers has been quite good with the exception of a couple weeks where he just was not effective but he seems to have what it takes to be part of our BP for several years. We just need a couple of the numerous other prospects to step up the remainder of this year and the first half of next year. The only place where we might be short is LH relievers but that's generally the case. Maybe Turly could be good in that role and we do have a handful of other LH relief prospects. It will be interesting to see what the BP looks like at the end of next year. I am glad they are finding a way to give the Slegers of our organization a chance. He looked like he has the potential to be part of the solution. It would be a huge boost if one of these guys step up. I have enjoyed watching Colon but he is a very short-term boost. One of these AAAA guys outperforming their projection would really help 2018 and beyond. I would like to see them cut Colon and give those starts to someone who will be here next year.

It’s somewhat irrelevant if they resign or not. The point was that they will absorb the available dollars and that the cumulative effect will put the Twins in a better position to compete with teams that normally have far more dollars to spend on free agents. Where they sign or if they are available does not change the financial realities of all the elite players becoming FAs in the same year. I too get tired of hearing the whining about the Twins “elect / chose” not to compete for the elite free agents as if it’s only the Twins. I have asked repeatedly for those of you who say this to give examples of when a team with equivalent or less revenue sign one of these elite SPs to a 5+ year contract. I even went so far as to list them at one point. Yet, you and others just ignore the fact that other teams with similar revenue also have been unwilling or unable to sign elite FA SPs. With the level of baseball knowledge here its certainly not that you and others are not aware of history. You just refuse to accept it. At least put it in the appropriate context and don’t single out the Twins like it’s just this organization. Complain that none of the mid-market or smaller teams are willing to spend with reckless abandon in order to keep up with teams with $100-200M more in revenue. At least then the argument would be presented in an accurate context. The only semi-reasonable examples of it happening are Grienke and Scherzer. However, Arizona had just signed a billion dollar TV contract so Grienke is only a reasonable example if you ignore the enormous TV contract Arizona had just signed. If the Twins sign a billion dollar TV contract and wont spend, I will be the first to condemn them. Until then, you are complaining that they refuse to act like a business. Washington is a considerably bigger market but the Scherzer signing is a somewhat reasonable example. Their revenue has averaged around $300M the last 3 years. That pays for Scherzer twice so I won't not characterize the Nationals as a fair example but they obviously dont have the spending power of the very top markets.

Obviously, he is not an established MLB player but this is the kind of creative approach that could help this team stay in serious contention for several years. I like it and the new CBA rules might make it possible for us to compete with the big markets.

His war is 1/2 what it was last year in his age 33 season. To suggest there is no reason to expect he will continue to decline ignores one of the most consistently proven results in baseball. Aging pitchers, especially power pitchers decline, generally starting in the early 30s. You are also ignoring that we are talking about his age 35 & 36 seasons. It might take 168M to get a SP that produces at the level he is at this year but I doubt it will cost quite that much. It won't take nearly that much to get what he will produce if he declines at the expected rate with the expected rate defined as the normal degradation rate of all starting pitchers. Obviously he could defy the odds but good business decisions do not defy the odds. It's also at bit misguided to say it costs 3 times as much even if the spend 3 times as much when you are comparing a 2-year contract to a 6 year contract. AAV is a more accurate representation although the 6 year contract does have more risk. If Verlander's decline is "normal", he is probably worth 4-5 war over the next 2 years. Obviously, the prospects we trade could end up to be busts but I would bet they will yield considerably greater WAR over their 6 years of control. Some fans fall in love with the idea of these big name guys hoping they defy the odds and remain great well past their prime. It does happen but the odds are he is no better than average over the next couple years. Mid market teams don't get the absolute top FA SPs. It will always be very rare. However, next year has a rather good supply of FA SPs. We will also be in a good position the following year when Mauer, Santana, and Perkins come off the books. We will also be a year away from Hughes coming off if they have not already bought him out. That will be an enormous year for free agents. In other words, supply will be at an extreme high which will help make it feasible for us to land a top FA SP. The big markets teams will be chasing Bryce Harper, Josh Donaldson, Andrew McCutchen, David Price, Jose Fernandez, Manny Machado, Jason Heyward, Dallas Keuchel, Clayton Kershaw and Matt Harvey. Mosat of the deals will be absolutely enormous. We can't compete on the $300M contracts but we should be able to get someone that projects to be at least as good as Verlander has been this year.

Bingo. It's short-sighted. Why on earth would you take on the last years of this type of contract and give up prospects. If you are going to spend the money associated with this type of SP, go get one next year that is 3-5 years younger and hold on to our prospects to boot. Don't spend $28M/yr and only get the years that they are very likely to decline. Go get someone still in their prime and keep the prospects. Plus, Nicksavings is likely right about his willingness to waive his NT clause.

I don't know how you can possibly assign 100% to anything when you were not there. Buxton is suppose to be the field general and it appeared he did not assert himself. If he did not assert himself properly, at a minimum he contributed. If he failed completely or called very late, he is the primary contributor to the collision given it is his role to control those plays. We applaud Buxton's all out efforts but when Grossman does it he is a madman? Seems like a double standard out just flat out extreme bias to me.

I will have to say that there is a certain element that should be a familiar approach in terms of management style. However, what do we hear all of the time from athletes and sports executives ... It's a business. Players go wherever they can make the most money and fame. We also don't release family members. At least, not with the same ambivalence as we do athletes. So, we agree to some extent. However, in terms of the general premise here. We will have to agree to disagree. The number of direct reports has no relevance to this discussion in my experience. I have had full P&L responsibility for businesses of various sizes (up to $1B) and provided consulting services for roughly 100+ organizations. Management practices, and expectations, change the bigger numbers and the greater exposure. IMO, this perspective is a product of the love of the game as opposed to experience.

This is not only a different context, it’s a different discussion. The number of direct reports is completely irrelevant to the question of … Is the Minnesota Twins Organization more like a small business or a large / high profile business. If I manage a small group at Exxon, is that like a small business. Perhaps you meant to make a different point but the size of the group managed is simply not relevant to the stature or type of business.

Your family business is not constantly scrutinized by the media and your decisions are also not discussed on the internet by thousands of people who think they know how to run the business better than you do. You don't have public figures for employees and I doubt the minimum salary of your employees is in excess of $500K. There is nothing about managing a major league professional sports team that is more like a small, family owned business.

Could not agree more. Why make a move with significant potential to create a problem. If they really want Jake Mauer, craft a plan to put him in that seat in 2019.

I am somewhat on the fence. The reason I am on the fence is because the they have considerably outperformed projections and have a great track win percentage in one run games. They have also completely turned the defense around with the basically the same cast of players. So, to say he costs them more games than he earns them is a very suspect conclusion. The facts certainly do not support this conclusion.