Cap'n Piranha

After this and Gausman, I'm pretty frustrated with the FO. I assumed it was going to take $25M/year to sign either of them (and was perfectly happy with that pricepoint), so the fact that both went for less... Falvine is really betting on that pitching pipeline working out.

In 2017, the team did make the playoffs, so clearly trading away the players who were barely positive in WAR didn't prevent the team from making the playoffs. In 2018, the team performed better after trading away the big league talent--either the replacements for those players were better, or the rest of the team played better. If it's the latter, we could hypothesize that keeping those players they traded, when added to the better performance from the rest of the team, would have made a difference. Except that the Twins were 48-54 when the trades started happening, and would have needed 91 wins to tie the Indians for the division (Cleveland had the worst record of any AL playoff team). Even with Esco, Dozier, Pressly, et al, do you think the Twins could have gone 47-17 to finish that season? For reference, that is approximately the same winning percentage of the 2001 Mariners, who had the best regular season of all time. You wonder about what could have been; I see what never was going to be.

Lot to unpack here. I used .2 because that is the approximate difference between AL starters FIP/xFIP and NL starters. The fact that there are more pitchers with low FIP/xFIP in the NL cannot just blindly be attributed to their presence in the NL--for example, Yu Darvish had his FIP and xFIP go UP when he went to the NL; Blake Snell's FIP went down, but his xFIP went WAY up. It is very rare for any team to go through it's order more than 5 times (teams averaged 37.4 PAs in 2021, which is barely 4), so the idea that pitchers are constantly hitting just is not real. Even if a starter hits twice, every NL team will absolutely use 2-3 bench players to hit for relievers, and with double switches, they might not even need to use that many. Kepler and Polanco were both signed through their Arb years, but also some FA years. By my estimation, absent the extension, Kepler would be a FA right now (next year at the latest), and the Twins have him through 2023 with an option for 24, so they bought out at least one FA year, and potentially 3. Polanco by my estimation would have been a FA next year, and he is also signed through 2023, with options in 24 AND 25, so again, 1-3 years of FA bought out. Sano would be a FA right now if not for the extension, so they only bought out one arb year, but either 1 or two FA years. The Twins could still sign a starter this offseason, and look at it as having a pitcher about as good as Berrios, for the same price as Berrios, but also have two premium prospects to boot. That would be a win, and something a smart team should always do. The CBA changing is a slightly more realistic scenario than Berrios dying in a plane crash. Just slightly. Chris Davis was worth that contract the Orioles gave him. If he wasn't, the Orioles wouldn't have offered it to him. No one is saying Berrios isn't good, or that the Twins shouldn't have kept him. I'd have been perfectly happy if this extension was announced on July 1, 2021. What people are saying is that this contract is a risk, because Berrios produces more like a number two starter, but can be considered a number one starter because he's been so durable. But if Berrios is not durable, which is not exactly an improbable possibility, then this contract, particularly the back end, is an issue. Toronto is gambling, and good on them for doing that, but it is a gamble.

Of course there's a lot of supposing here--none of us are embedded with the Toronto FO. That said, it seems logical that when an organization on the rise trades two high end prospects, they will be under pressure to show it was the right move. For example, if in 2019 the Twins had traded Royce Lewis and Jordan Balazovic for a starter, and said starter led the way to a 2019 title, would any of us bemoan the trade? On the flip side, if that acquired starter had pitched like a number 3, and the Twins had bombed out in the first round, wouldn't there be some questioning about if the Twins had made the right decision?

I mean, if you don't understand that innings pitched are tied to promotions (no pitcher gets moved a level or two if they're not putting up significant innings), then that's on you. Winder went from 38 IP in 2018 to 125 in 2019 Ober went from 28 IP in 2017 to 75 in 2019 Varland went from 8.2 IP in 2019 to 103 in 2021 SWR was at 53 IP last year, and that's despite taking 2+ weeks off between May 22 and June 9, and didn't pitch at all between Jul 15 and Sep 4, which is almost 7 weeks, due to being part of the Olympics. If healthy, he would have easily hit the 100 IP mark, so your idea that it will take until 2024 for him to pitch 120 innings is not rooted in reality.

It's really not. RBIs are very much dependent on whether or not runners are on base, and as such are warped by that. Rosario was good at getting RBIs because he got to hit third or fourth for essentially all of his PAs. In 2019, the whole league had 79,734 PAs with runners on, and 45,470 of those had runner(s) in scoring, out of 186,516 PAs in total. Eddie Rosario in 2019 had 285 PAs with runners on, and 173 with RISP, out of 590 total PAs. As such, Rosario had 48.3% of his PAs with a runner on, 29.3% with RISP, whereas the league was at 42.7% with runners and 24.3% with RISP. No wonder Eddie had a lot of RBIs--he got more opportunities than the rest of the league.

Yeah, the idea that Polanco can't possibly hurt his ankles again so long as he stays away from shortstop just doesn't seem rooted in any kind of reality to me. It's entirely possible that Polanco is not at any greater risk than any other player vis-a-vis ankle injuries when not playing shortstop, but that doesn't mean he CAN'T hurt his ankles again. We've seen what happens to Polanco when he's got bum wheels, so if you truly can get a global top-15 prospect AND a top-100ish pitcher for him, that's not a terrible idea, especially if you're not going to be competitive in 2022.

If Berrios was honest about his desire to test FA, then he probably wouldn't have taken much less than this deal in 2018/2019, unless it was only buying out his arb years. so he could still hit FA as a 27/28 year old. If indeed that was the case, then there's no upside for the Twins to pay Berrios $40M over 4 years (say 2019-2022) instead of $20M. If prior to 2019 the Twins wanted to give him 6-7 years in order to make it worth their while, then I'm sure Berrios was insisting on at least $110M to $120M

Definitely the player option makes it less team friendly--clearly that/years 6-7 are where the sticking point came if the reason an extension wasn't reached is on the Twins side (that is, Berrios' demands are not lower now than in July, and Berrios was willing to sign an extension with the Twins). I think I would characterize the player option as having minor upside for the team, but major downside for the team. If Berrios is good enough that he thinks he can do better than 2/$48M in 2027/2028 when he will be 33/34, then the Jays just got 5 years of frontline starting pitching for the price of good third starter. That's minor upside, as the inclusion of the option clearly convinced Berrios to leave some money on the table. However, if Berrios starts getting hurt and declining, and Jays may be paying $24M a year for a 5th starter in 2027/2028. That's a real possibility, and I can completely understand why the Twins would be leery.

Correct--that's why I'm saying the hang up with the Twins (if indeed that's where the hangup was) had to have been based on years 6 and 7, whether the amount to guarantee, or the very existence of them. I was not saying 5/$83M was on it's own a legitimate offer. That said, since that is the maximum amount Berrios is guaranteed before his opt-out, on a certain level, 5/$83M IS a legitimate offer for Berrios.

And as we all know, ankles once healed after injury become invulnerable to further injury.

In essence, Toronto while having Berrios for the next 5 years at a total of $83M (as has been mentioned in this thread), and potentially 7 at a total price of anywhere from $131M to $141M (essentially, Berrios can opt in or out of a contract worth a minimum of 2/$48M and a maximum of 2/$58M). What this breakdown tells me is that something has very much changed for Berrios, or he was not being honest about his reasons for not signing an extension with MN (or that the Twins were very much opposed to the risk of a 7 year deal barring a lower price point). I can't imagine the Twins wouldn't have been happy to sign Berrios for 5/$83M, so either Berrios' contract demands have come down significantly in the last 4 months, Berrios never wanted to be in MN long-term and used "I want to test FA" as a cover so as not to upset the fans, or the Twins were adamant about not including years 6/7, or having them be incentive based rather than the most expensive years of the contract.

See below from MLBTR. 12:45pm: Sportsnet’s Shi Davidi reports that Berrios received a $5MM signing bonus and will be paid $10MM next season (Twitter link). He’ll then earn salaries of $15MM, in 2023, $17MM in 2024, $18MM in 2025-26, and $24MM in 2027-28. That breakdown indicates Berrios’ opt-out decision will come with a total of $48MM remaining on the contract. However, Davidi adds that escalators based on Berrios’ 2025-26 stats could boost his 2027-28 salaries by $5MM apiece. If he triggers all the escalators, Berrios would decide between the remaining two years and $58MM or reentering the market in advance of his age-33 season.

Randy Dobnak signed from Independent ball in August 2017, and in August of 2019 he was pitching in the bigs. Bailey Ober was drafted in 2017, and was in the bigs after only 2.5 years in the minors. Josh Winder pitched at three levels this year. Louis Varland and Jordan Balazovic both pitched at multiple levels this year The tired screed of the Twins moving their prospects slowly is just that--tired.

Sometimes I feel like certain posters on here are riding the Drunk Train from HIMYM.

I don't get this either. It's like being mad the Chief of Surgery at Mayo thinks he's the best surgeon in the room. Why in the heck wouldn't he? Furthermore, why would you prefer that he doesn't?

This. A Twins team that wins 105 games and the World Series will have far better attendance the next year than a team that signed Berrios and Buxton, but proceeded to lose 85 games and miss the playoffs.

Using RBI as the only metric by which to judge offensive value is not a serious approach. To wit--in 2019/2020 Eddie Rosario had more RBIs than Mike Trout despite having fewer PAs. Are you prepared to argue that 2019/2020 Rosario was a superior offensive player than 2019/2020 Mike Trout?

Here's the MLB players that I can see they traded away (according to ESPN). 2017 John Ryan Murphy (in the middle of a -0.4 WAR season, best remaining season was 2018, at 0.9 WAR) Jaime Garcia (in the middle of a 1.9 WAR season, 0 WAR in 2018, hasn't pitched since) Brandon Kintzler (in the middle of a 1 WAR season, 0.2 WAR in 2018, peaked at 0.9 WAR in 2019) 2018 Eduardo Escobar (has been quite good since, with the exception of 2020; -0.5 WAR) Ryan Pressly (good since the trade, never quite elite) Zach Duke (in the middle of a 0.9 WAR season, -0.4 WAR in 2019, hasn't pitched since) Brian Dozier (in the middle of a 0.9 WAR season, put up 1.9 WAR in 2019, -0.3 in 2020, and retired) The Twins traded nothing of value prior to or during 2017, so you can't argue trades is what drove that playoff run. They traded no one in 2018 until July, and were 48-54 at the time of the trades; they finished 78-84, meaning they played to a better record WITHOUT the players they traded--please explain how the sell-off caused an 8 win decline in 2018 when the team was better after the trades than before them.

Brock--are you actually confused about why it takes less money to sign players with years of team control left and no ability to negotiate with other teams than to sign players with 0 team control, and the ability to negotiate with EVERY team? Trevor May last year posted 0.5 WAR (tied for 73rd amongst qualified relievers, and identical to Jose Ruiz, Caleb Smith, and Anthony Misiewizc). He was 61st in FIP, and 54th on xFIP--is that really the kind of production the Twins should be paying $7M+ for?

I also think it's worth noting that Toronto might have felt more pressure to sign Berrios after not making the playoffs as well. If Berrios goes out, leads the charge to a wild card, and then goes 6-0 across 7 starts in the postseason with a 1.40 ERA and 62 k's in 51 IP as the Jays win the WS, Toronto no longer has to justify the trade. But what if the Jays didn't make the playoffs in 2021, and they don't in 2022 either, and Berrios then leaves, with no QO attached as it was eliminated in the new CBA? All of the sudden, the decision to trade two top prospects for 0 playoff appearances starts to get called into question.

I imagine it is an extremely rare occurence to face a pitcher 3-4 times in a game--for that to happen, the opposing team's lineup has to be getting a ton of baserunners, or the opposing pitcher has to be pitching into the 8th or 9th inning. Certainly it's easier pitching in the NL, but even if you shave .2 off of Berrios' FIP and xFIP (the approximate difference between AL and NL starters in 2021), he is still 19th amongst qualified starters in the last 5 seasons on FIP, and 24th-ish on xFIP (he would pass some pitchers, other than all the pitchers he's passing spent at least some, if not most/all of their time in the AL in those years as well, and would therefore also need to be adjusted). The Donaldson contract was indeed a gamble. Why was it ok to sign Donaldson, but not Berrios? AT the time of Donaldson's signing the Twins were coming off a 103 win season, and wanted to win a WS in the next 2 years, and were willing to overpay a little in 2020/2021, and probably a lot in 2022/2023 in order to do that. At the time of Berrios' signing, the Twins are coming off an 89 loss season, and there's reasonable debate about if they can/should even compete for the playoffs in 2022 (for what it's worth, that question was being asked on this site in June/July BEFORE Berrios was traded). Seems like a relevant distinction, no? As for the Twins not caring about their players, your logic makes no sense. Players don't want to come to Minnesota in free agency because the Twins won't give them an extension? The Twins have extended Kepler, Polanco, Sano, and Dobnak, while making multiple offers to Buxton and Berrios (we can quibble about if those offers were "serious", but if the Twins truly didn't care, why would they make offers in the first place?). Cruz, Pineda, Romo, Castro, Gonzalez, and Donaldson were all perfectly happy to sign here, in some cases, multiple times.

Be careful what you wish for.

If the Twins truly are not willing to pay Buxton $14M a year REGARDLESS of performance (miss 140 games, put up 1 WAR? Fourteen Million. Play 150 games, put up 8 WAR, win MVP? Fourteen Million)...then I just don't know what to say.

How do you know they lowballed him in 2018/2019/2020? Do you know what the Twins offered? Do you know what Berrios wanted? Source? If the Twins are buying out multiple years of arbitration, and potentially rookie years, the contract is not going to get to a $100M level. If Berrios was intent on testing FA (as has been shown on this site), he was never going to accept less than $100M. This is what is called an impasse.