chpettit19

Think it depends on what you consider a "trading frenzy." I don't see any reason to hold onto any veterans on expiring deals. Even if all you get is some low level prospect with almost no chance of making it to the bigs that's still more than nothing when they leave at the end of the season. If they really want Cruz back next year and he really wants to be here they can still sign him again after the year. He'd actually probably appreciate a trade to a contender so he can get a shot at a ring. Same with Simmons, Happ, Pineda.

I think everyone would agree they need to do vastly better than this year. Not sure how you could say anything but that. Where some of us differ is in whether or not they've shown they can do better and whether or not just going back to their previous results would be sufficient. My problem is with the narrative now being that they have no ability to identify pitching talent or build a staff when they've shown for years they can. That doesn't mean they didn't do a terrible job this year, but this 1 year shouldn't outweigh the previous 4. I don't have overly high hopes in next year's staff being adequate to win the division or WS, but I believe this FO has the ability to get them back where they need to be by 2023.

2019 when they had the 9th best staff in all of baseball? I know the playoffs and the losing streak is very troublesome for people, but the fact is you're talking about a very small sample size and that series was even smaller. Not to mention Pineda getting suspended wasn't something the FO could have foreseen and changed the complexion of that series a great deal. A series where they also scored 2.3 runs per game. Not sure what pitching staff you are expecting, but there aren't many out there that are winning a series with that kind of run support. In fact the Dodgers lead the league with a 3.37 ERA that year and there were only 6 total teams with an ERA under 4. Which means the Twins scored enough runs in 1 of 3 games to have won a game with the very best of the best pitching staffs in baseball. The whole team was pretty trash that series so saying "of course pitching let them down" is purposefully omitting quite a bit of information. So you, and Chief, can feel as vindicated as you want this year, but the fact of the matter is the Twins had the 9th best ERA in baseball in 2019. They had the 4th best in the 2020 "season." That's my point. People are trying to use this season to say "see, I was right back in 2019 or 2020 when I complained about the pitching!" when really it doesn't change the fact that the pitching was actually quite good in those years. And I won't even throw out advanced stats because I know Chief doesn't like those anyways. He's a "classic stats" kind of guy so 9th best ERA in baseball should be enough to satisfy the question of the strength of the pitching that year. I haven't seen anyone on here saying the FO crushed it this offseason or didn't make mistakes. I'm not even saying that. I'm saying the idea that they've shown no ability to build a staff and are basically just a continuation of what the staffs were like at the end of the Ryan regime is simply wrong. They had improved the staff every year for the last 4 years and then this year completely fell off the rails. There's suggestions on this site everyday that the FO is trash and should be fired. They complain that they've never built a quality pitching staff or improved the pitching at all. That's false and there's a whole internet of stats to prove it. I'm not saying they're perfect and shouldn't be questioned harshly about how things could go so poorly this year, but pretending that the previous 4 years didn't happen the way they did isn't helpful, productive, or logical. The Twins had a good staff in 2019. Clayton Kershaw is a great pitcher. Playoffs are a small sample size. Some fans on this site would complain about the FO having brought him in cuz he can't win in the playoffs. That just doesn't make sense to me. Sorry.

In 2018 (after the trade) Escobar had a 102 OPS+ with Arizona. He has since gone 110, 62, 106. He's been basically a league average hitter since the trade. He had a 117 wRC+ in 2018. Then 108, 56, 105. "Extremely well" is not how I'd describe his performance since that trade. Extremely average is how I'd describe it. If you can turn a league average player on an expiring deal into a top 100 global prospect you do it 100% of the time.

For sure. I even said that in the post. Not taking away anything from what he's doing and not predicting a collapse. But those numbers are certainly a red flag. At the end of the day his job is to stop the other team from scoring. He's doing that well now. But there's some pretty big signs that it may not be sustainable. I wish the kid nothing but the best and that trade is certainly not a gold star moment for the FO. And I'm well aware that a large segment of the baseball fan population aren't fans of statcast data, advanced stats, analytics, what-have-you, but its available data that gives a look into how he's performing that people can do with what they will. I omitted his 74th percentile K%, 81st BB%, 71st Whiff%, and 78th Chase Rate that explain why he's able to survive giving up hard contact. The job of front offices and scouts and coaches is to determine if he can maintain those good rates and/or improve the bad ones. I'd certainly rather have Ynoa in a Twins uniform right now than having traded him for 1 Garcia start, but that's hindsight and I wasn't overly upset with the trade at the time.

He was a solid get out of the DR that year for sure. Ranked in the 20th or so area for international signings that year. Not bad at all. But there's a ton of arms in the low levels that throw as hard as him. He was a lottery ticket and nothing more. It turned out well and kudos should be given to Atlanta for getting him to the bigs and having him perform well this year. No doubt about it. But it wasn't a bad trade at the time for the Twins. It made sense to give up a rookie ball pitcher lottery ticket for a Major leaguer. It's basically always a smart move to do that. I think we'd agree on that. And, I know you probably won't be a big fan of these numbers in general, but I'd pump my brakes on Ynoa. He's got a great WHIP and ERA this year for sure. Not taking anything away from him. But when he gets hit he gets smashed. 12th percentile for Avg Exit Velocity. 5th percentile for Hard Hit%. 24th for xERA. 20th for xBA. 14th for xSlg. 12th for Barrel%. Now he's getting results and I'm certainly not predicting he falls apart or taking anything away from what he's done this year, but he's walking a real tight rope with the way he gives up loud contact. For reference Jorge Alcala is 76th, 52nd, 34th, 46th, 15th, and 20th in those same categories. Obviously a difference between starter and reliever, but Ynoa's no certain thing even right now. My point on this article is there's a lot of context missing in Tom's breakdown. Trading expiring deal veterans on bad teams typically don't lead to big time returns. Sometimes you crush one like Tatis Jr for James Shields. Sometimes you get a Ynoa for Garcia deal. But those are few and far between. It's why people are proponents of trading prospects for proven major league talent. There is nothing from these previous deals that I would say lends itself to any sort of indicator on how this FO could do with trading someone like Berrios. You could draw upon the Pressly deal when considering a Rogers deal, but that's about the only comparison you can make and this article lacks a lot of context and using WAR to determine results here isn't a useful exercise in my opinion.

Ridiculous? I already posted the stats of the guys that left. Odorizzi has found his footing and is doing well. Romo was just as bad as Colome to start the season and is now about average. May has been solid. Clippard hasn't thrown a single pitch. Hill has been good. I'm saying your hindsight is wrong because you're making statements like "Nearly every pitcher who left last year is doing better now" when it is simply not true. Wisler got cut with a 6+ ERA for goodness sake. "Those players went on to be even better." Who? Which of those pitchers have gone on to be even better? Odo? Ok you can have that 1 even though he's not markedly better than when he was healthy here. Hill? Nope, was better last year than this year in basically every stat. Wisler, as I've mentioned multiple times now got cut. Romo is worse in basically every statistical way this year. Trevor May is slightly better than last year, but is basically the exact same as he has been the last few years here. Clippard, again, hasn't thrown a single pitch this year. You opinion is certainly as legitimate as mine, but there's no statistical evidence to back yours up. The moves didn't work this year and there were certainly some that were questionable at the time (Shoemaker), but there were none that gave off warning signs of the entire staff being this brutally bad.

Didn't give anyone a pass or put blame on anyone. Simply said the title of the article and the use of WAR as the determining factor are misleading then provided reasons why I think that. Ynoa was a complete lottery ticket for the Braves in that trade. If the Twins bring back a rookie ball pitcher with a 5+ ERA for Pineda is your reaction going to be "oh man, we just got a guy who will be in the bigs in 2 years!"? Or are you going to be on here complaining about how the FO has no idea what they're doing and just got screwed by giving up a major leaguer for a rookie ball pitcher? I'm not giving blame or passes, I'm saying there's a lot of context missing here.

The Brewers have a top 3 that are all better than Berrios right now. They love their pitching over there, but Burnes, Peralta, and Woodruff all start playoff games before Berrios in that rotation.

Think there needs to be some pretty big qualifiers on this. Major leaguer for major leaguer trades don't happen too often anymore. So going by major league WAR stats is going to make almost any trade within the first couple years look like a bad decision for the team getting prospects. James Shields had accumulated 2.0 bWAR with Chicago in 2017 and 2018 while Fernando Tatis Jr had accumulated 0 with San Diego. That's considered one of the most lopsided trades in MLB history. Tom says "for now" or "there's a lot to be determined yet," but to title the article the way it's titled and use WAR as the determining factor on success of these trades is really misleading. If Duran turns into an ace, or even a #2 or 3 starter the Twins crushed that deal. That doesn't even account for Maciel and De La Trinidad. Pressley went to Houston and watched his breaking ball spin rate go through the roof while being shown on camera spraying his arm with illegal substances. Ynoa had a 5.26 ERA in rookie ball when he was dealt. Lance Lynn had been a malcontent and pretty awful at pitching during his time here and wasn't going to be brought back the next year (late signing who was cranky he didn't get a big deal). Pressley, Ynoa, and Lynn are the only 3 guys on this list who the Twins could have used since they've been gone. That's 1 rookie ball pitcher they traded away in a "win now" move that fans around here beg for constantly, 1 veteran who wasn't pitching well and wasn't going to come back the next year on an under .500 team. And 1 reliever who I wish we still had, but started cheating when he went to his new team. If Alcala was performing the way his pure stuff suggests he should that trade would already be a wash. They got exactly what they were looking for with Romo and added a top 20 prospect for Lewin Diaz. They got a top 5 system and top 100 global prospect back for an Escobar rental. They certainly haven't crushed any of the trades yet, but they've also only dealt veteran rentals, low level prospects, and a reliever. What do you expect to get out of those deals beyond what they did? Title and feel of this article don't seem to match the reality of these trades in my opinion.

Are the Twins good at driving in runs? That's the question here right? Does the RBI stat tell you if someone is good at driving in runs? That's what the whole debate is about. Many people (myself included) say it doesn't give you a good description of how good someone is at driving in runs because there are too many variables outside that player's control (ie how many opportunities they get with guys in scoring position). Many people believe it is still a good measure of player talent/ability to drive in runs. Minnesota Twins stats from this current season: 13th in baseball in RBIs at 363. Tied for 25th in baseball in BA/RISP at .229. So are the Twins good at driving in runs? RBIs say they're league average at it. BA/RISP says they're among the worst in the league. Which is it? The earlier post presented numbers about what the 2 teams hit today with men in scoring position. Your response was a sarcastic (I assume) comment about RBIs not mattering. Those are 2 different things and I just gave you the Twins season stats on the 2. So are they average at driving in runs like RBIs say they are, or are they terrible at it like BA/RISP says they are?

I do question their decision making, but the talk around here and on other sites and amongst those I talk to in the real world is that there's a question of whether or not this FO can build a pitching staff and they use this season to say "see, they're awful and have no idea what they're doing" while ignoring the previous 4 seasons. I wasn't thrilled to see May leave. Not sure what other "key pieces of the bullpen" they let go that you're upset about. 38 year old Romo and his 4.55 ERA? Matt Wisler who was already cut this year by SF? Tyler Clippard who hasn't thrown a pitch this season? Were Duffey and Rogers not key pieces? Their top 3 starters were Berrios, Maeda, and Pineda. All of which came back this year. Did you mean Rich Hill who was the exact type of signing you've spent the last 3 months complaining about? You're proving my point. You're using 20/20 hindsight, and not even very well. May and Hill are the only guys from last year's staff who would be helping this year. You think that makes them 10 games better to this point or what? Of course I question their decisions. But acting like they're completely incompetent and have shown no ability to build a pitching staff is completely ignoring 4 years in favor of 3 months. Not a great strategy in my opinion.

Not sure how RISP stats is proving your point here. That's BA/RISP which is what the majority of us who don't care about RBI say is the important stat. You're so amped up to complain about advancements in understanding of the game that you're using the new stat to prove the point that it's a better stat than the one you want to use. Weird tactic.

I guess my question is did you feel this way last year when they had the 4th best ERA in baseball? Or the year before when they were 9th best in baseball? This regime took over after 2016. In 2016 the Twins finished 29th in baseball in ERA. Since then they've gone 19th, 22nd, 9th, 4th and now the wheels have completely fallen off and this year is a disaster. Team ERA went from 5.08 in 2016 to 4.59, 4.50, 4.18, 3.58. Now we're back up to 5.02. So as they built their system and brought the team from one of the worst staffs in the league to top 10 did you feel scouting and/or coaching were substandard? This year is total system failure and the staff is an embarrassment, but there's a lot of 20/20 hindsight and ignoring of the last 4 years going around Twins territory these days.

Donaldson has a 133 OPS+ (same as last year, and even higher than in Atl the year before). 125 wRC+ (slightly below where he was the last 2 years). His bat is why they'd trade for him, not his glove. He doesn't need to bounce back in terms of the production they'd be looking for, his contract is just too high so the Twins would have to eat a bunch of money most likely.

For more context Celestino and Wander Javier were both more highly regarded international prospects the year he was signed and subsequently traded. He's the anomaly of all anomalies when it comes to trades. Had never played a game in America before he was traded and turns into this. Nobody in the Padres' organization were predicting he'd become a top 10 player in the sport.

Oh I'm certainly not predicting they move him. No idea if that happens or not. Just saying his value is just as high as it would be in a normal year and, if the expectations are reasonable, they should be able to get a very good return for him and the concerns Tom presented shouldn't hinder that. I have no idea if they have reasonable expectations of a return or not. Although asking for sky high prices right now seems smart. If the Mets are the only team making a real attempt to trade for an impact player right now you have to ask for crazy high prices. Then adjust as the deadline gets closer and teams start feeling the heat more. It's why most deals don't get done until the 11th hour. The deadline itself motivates and forces teams to put their truly best offer out there. Hopefully Falvine has realistic expectations, and also don't settle for scraps simply to get something.

I posted that a minute after my last post to you yesterday as I'd forgotten to put it in that post. So, don't worry, I did stop. But thanks for permission.

Berrios is likely the most in demand player on the market this season. His extra year of control at a very cheap-for-his-production rate makes him incredibly valuable on the trade block. With every team needing more arms I'd argue it puts the Twins in an even better place than usual (for him specifically). What team would rather have a AAA pitcher for this season than Berrios? I don't see anyone giving up multiple high end AAA, or AA, arms for him, but I'd certainly think any contender would be happy to part with one AAA, or AA, arm for him. How good that arm is would determine the rest of the package. Maybe you can get another high level bat, or maybe its a handful of lower level, "lottery ticket" type guys. But, when it comes to Berrios specifically, I think his value is just as high as any other year. The rest of the Twins' pieces are a different story and they're probably looking to bring back a bunch of low level fliers for them. But that's still the move to make in a lost season. Why not take on half a dozen toolsy, but raw, low A guys for players that won't be with the team next year anyways? Just adds to the chance of having another wave of prospects in 5 years. The Rays seem to do pretty well with constantly stocking their system with great athletes and arms by never losing a ML player for nothing.

I don't know if it's the worst team I've ever seen at these things, but it is certainly bad. And Rocco's "nothing is mandatory" rule when it comes to infield practice, BP, whatever else is something I've questioned. I questioned whether they did pitcher fielding practice during spring training because of how brutal and confused the pitchers looked when trying to field their position. Even last night when Sano tried going to 3rd on a grounder in front of him I said to my buddies that I can handle an untalented Twins team getting smacked nightly, but the way this team loses has very little to do with talent (pitching has some talent/performance issues this year) and a lot to do with playing undisciplined, sloppy baseball and it's awful to watch. That being said, I'm not sure how much to put on the manager and how much is an organizational problem. By the time a player gets to the majors they should know the fundamentals and be able to perform them without thinking. I think the manager and big league staff need to continue to preach them and make sure the team stays sharp, but I wouldn't put it all on the manager. This season seems to be out of the norm from the last couple when it comes to the amount of "mental errors" and I'm starting to question the organizational approach to preparing for the season and staying sharp. These "little things" are what win, and lose, games in the playoffs when the talent is much more balanced and you have to bring your A game every night. I mean the Dodgers cost themselves a world series game with a terrible last play of the game. Luckily for them it didn't cost them the series, but they were also the most talented team in baseball and could make up for it. I won't complain about a guy getting caught looking, a pitcher giving up a bomb, or a fielder booting a ball every now and then, but mental errors from multiple guys every night is unacceptable from a group of professional athletes making a combined 130+ million dollars. I don't know if it's Rocco or the FO or what, but I'd think it's certainly within the manager's job description to ensure his team is mentally prepared to play every day and put processes in place to limit the number of fundamental mistakes the team makes.

36 homeruns tied him for 18th in baseball in homeruns in 2019. Feels a little extreme to say they're not very valuable. They don't make him a superstar on their own (which I've never seen anyone on these forums claim him to be), but they were, and are, certainly valuable. If your 6,7,8,9 hole hitter (where Kepler belongs in a good lineup) is hitting 36 jacks a year you're in very good position as an offense.

Not to mention that the argument of "the matchup was all off" goes directly against the complaint that he is just using the metrics/data/spreadsheets as those things he has have far more information about how good the matchup is than you or I will ever have.

I'm not a huge Rocco fan, and wouldn't be upset if he was relieved of his duties at the end of the season, but I don't follow the logic of "entire team is failing, but if manager puts in different reliever with 12 ERA or hitter with .120 average the results would be better." All I'm saying is that to put all, or even a majority, of the blame on the manager for this debacle of a season while saying he had no part in the success the previous 2 years seems to be misguided at best. That argument is basically stating the team was so unbelievably talented the last 2 years they could make up for his blunders, but now, with largely the same makeup, they're so bad they can't overcome any of his blunders. Doesn't track for me. Especially if you're going off April when the reliever he was putting out there and watching get destroyed was one of the best relievers of the last 5+ years (Colome). So, yeah, I put far more on the players than the manager when the manager is following "common baseball knowledge."

I think following the metrics/data/spreadsheets is "common baseball knowledge" in 2021. The average team makes many of their decisions that way. That's why the manager doesn't have a huge impact on the game these days. For example, the Twins get 5.0 innings per start out of their starters this year. League average is 5.1. The very top is 5.7 (Oakland). League average pitches per start for starting pitches is 84. The Twins average 84. Average number of games where the starter threw less than 80 pitches for the league is 26. The Twins have 25. Starts between 80 and 90 pitches from the starter? Average is 47, Twins have 47. 100-120 pitches? Average is 12, Twins with 11. That's about as common as you can get right there. That's why I don't put as much on him. He's following 2021 common baseball knowledge. Can certainly discuss the merits of 2021 common baseball knowledge, but pretty hard to argue he isn't following it. If the starters or pen were clearly better than the other you'd expect to see some variance there, but with everyone not named Berrios or Taylor being pretty awful at one point or another this year he's awfully limited on his choices. For what it's worth Berrios is averaging 5.9 innings a start. So he's not just following a cookie cutter set of rules.

Schwarber is a slugger over a hitter, but the rest of them are very good all around hitters. Story will likely be the #1 FA this offseason and is currently the #1 trade target. Lindor just got paid a boatload. Goldschmidt is a perennial MVP candidate (although he's not the same player anymore, getting old). Abreu won the AL MVP last "season." Castellanos is hit over power, but also brings the boom pretty good. A team with those 6 at the top of their order is sitting very well in terms of all around hitting and power.