Does Terry Ryan have what it takes to lead the Twins in 2015?

[benji21]

 

I am in the camp that thinks Ryan is a good GM for a veteran laden team. He will be able To find you that fill in guy to get you over the hump. In fact he is so fond of veterans he keeps signing them to a non contemder. The Hunter signing wasn't dumb, it was absurd. And signing Dozier for 4 years and not getting anything in return was suspect. This is a insular hidebound orginisation that puts up with mediocricy. I doubt unless Jim Pohlad pulls the trigger it will change.

 

Can you expand on why you believe he is a good GM?  We have had veteran-laden teams in the past, playoff teams even, that he would not or could not supplement to tip them over the top.  Remember the Johan years?  We were saying we're just one big bat from a World Series.  He did nothing.  He has never gotten the 'one guy' to get us over the hump.  Bill Smith was way better at supplementing, not so good at other things.  For all the reasons you listed, you should not be in that camp.  TR is a dreadful GM, dreadful.  Among the worst in the league.  You can't have his record and call him a good GM.  I can't even call him a good scout.  Not anymore, not with his tired beliefs.  He is antiquated.  Pohlad needs to get some stones and erase him.  Biggest problem the Twins have an a macro level is loyalty.  Pohlads are loyal way beyond a fault.  They destroy themselves with loyalty.  It's past time for TR to go. 

[chopper0080]

 

Two pages ago, you were criticizing the Twins for trading Span for Meyer, because Meyer has not produced yet and because we didn't have a suitable replacement.   Meyer didn't pan out and Hicks failed, therefore it was a bad trade.

 

 

 

Now you are advocating that we should have traded Suzuki, Perkins, Hughes, Doumit, and Willingham.  That begs the question, who were the replacements we had at catcher, starter, LF, and closer? 

 

 

For these five trades to work out by the bar you have set, wouldn't we have needed a suitable replacement AND the players acquired to pan out?

Doumit...Suzuki

Willingham...Arcia/FA

Hughes...Berrios/FA

Perkins...Soria or another FA (does it matter when you aren't winning games.)

 

You can't state you are rebuilding, and then state you are competing.  IMO, we are three years away if we commit now to just rebuilding through our farm system.  In that regard...you trade Hughes knowing you have Santana and Nolasco under contract as well as Pelfrey, Gibson, and May.  Trading Perkins now is dumb, so you probably hold on to him until he regains some value.  I promote Hicks for his athleticism knowing Buxton is a year or two away and probably will struggle a bit.  I keep Plouffe as a viable defensive 3B.  If I like Polanco's progress, I might move Dozier in the offseason or next year (I understand the contract, and that isn't the Twins norm). 

 

If I want to win and compete next year, I trade prospects for a legitimate outfielder, Desmond Jennings comes to mind.  I call up Hicks, and have an outfield of Arcia, Jennings, and Hicks which should be able to handle the outfield, and when Buxton is ready, he will push someone to a reserve role.  I trade another prospect or two for a legitimate relief pitcher, Sergio Romo might be an option.  Brian Matusz.  Essentially, I do everything I can to acquire major league assets that improve my defense and relief pitching by dealing from my farm system.  I understand Reed and Burdi and maybe Meyer will be in relief roles by the end of this year, or will have earned a spot next year.  Once I can field and limit late game runs, I am confident that my bats and starting pitching can do enough to keep us from losing 90 games in 2016.

 

Whichever way we go, we just need to commit to it.

[Rosterman]

All this talk about Revere and Span. Who did the Twins have as starting pitcher prospects last year (*Gibson was 2013). May and Meyer. Who do the Twins have as realistic starting prospects this year, 2015. Meyer/May. 

 

Would Revere/Span have contributed more wins to the Twins, basically meaning the Twins didn't need Willingham in the mix. Would the Twins still have signed the same starters they signed, or even more. 

 

They saw a strength (at the moment) in the system with Hicks, Benson and Mastroianni. If Mastro hadn't been injured, Hicks might've gone to AAA faster. If Benson hadn't flamed out, and been the 5-tool prospect, or even a decent placesetter, the Twins would've been sitting really pretty.

 

Did the Twins just give up on Worley? He didn't prove himself in the major. The Twins didn't want another Blackburn in the minors and he was basically worthless, but they got cash or something for him. COnsider him a throwin for Morneau that saw us go thru three Pirates and keeping none.

 

But without the centerfield trade, the Twins would be calling Logan Darnell and Taylor Rogers the top starting prospects in the system, with Mark Hamburger waiting for a chance.

 

 

[tobi0040]

 

Doumit...Suzuki

Willingham...Arcia/FA

Hughes...Berrios/FA

Perkins...Soria or another FA (does it matter when you aren't winning games.)

 

You can't state you are rebuilding, and then state you are competing.  IMO, we are three years away if we commit now to just rebuilding through our farm system.  In that regard...you trade Hughes knowing you have Santana and Nolasco under contract as well as Pelfrey, Gibson, and May.  Trading Perkins now is dumb, so you probably hold on to him until he regains some value.  I promote Hicks for his athleticism knowing Buxton is a year or two away and probably will struggle a bit.  I keep Plouffe as a viable defensive 3B.  If I like Polanco's progress, I might move Dozier in the offseason or next year (I understand the contract, and that isn't the Twins norm). 

 

If I want to win and compete next year, I trade prospects for a legitimate outfielder, Desmond Jennings comes to mind.  I call up Hicks, and have an outfield of Arcia, Jennings, and Hicks which should be able to handle the outfield, and when Buxton is ready, he will push someone to a reserve role.  I trade another prospect or two for a legitimate relief pitcher, Sergio Romo might be an option.  Brian Matusz.  Essentially, I do everything I can to acquire major league assets that improve my defense and relief pitching by dealing from my farm system.  I understand Reed and Burdi and maybe Meyer will be in relief roles by the end of this year, or will have earned a spot next year.  Once I can field and limit late game runs, I am confident that my bats and starting pitching can do enough to keep us from losing 90 games in 2016.

 

Whichever way we go, we just need to commit to it.

 

I would just say that both options would lead to ridicule of TR by posters at TD.  Plan A has more playing time for HIcks and Pelfrey.  Those two are probably top 3 in terms of ridiculing the GM over the last 2-3 years.

 

I question whether plan B is a good enough team. Desmond Jennings is an OK player, but teams that trade with the Rays usually get ripped off.  And you still have Hicks and Arcia in the OF.  Hasn't the OF defense been one of the biggest issues for the Twins?  Is this hypothetical team good enough to make a difference and does that justify moving prospects?

 

[jharaldson]

One thing that makes me question if Ryan is the right guy or not to lead this team into a new age is this quote from just prior to the season:

 

 

“I’ve said many times, the only thing that’s broken in this organization is our major league record. Everything else is in order. Ownership is stable. We have a president who gets it and who wants to do things the right way. The minor leagues are in good shape. International scouting, amateur scouting, we’re fine.”

 

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/298680161.html

 

If I am a leader in an organization that has failed for the past 4 years I don't sound so self satisfied about everything in the org.  I would be working in all avenues and questioning all levels to find problems.  This smugness about the org makes me think he can't see all the problems that are causing the Twins to continue to fail.  

[bird]

 

Thank you very much. That helps me a lot. What had also led to confusion is that another moderator, ashburyjohn, had liked the first comment, so I really needed some clarification. 

  Please accept my sincere apology if you found my post to be offensive to you. It was intended to be in fun.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The biggest FA signing in 2013 was Greinke. He signed a 6 year deal for $147M. Let's just throw out the fact that he would have chosen the Dodgers over the Twins anyway for a second.

 

Had we signed Greinke and Kept Span, and not signed KC.

 

2013 - Greinke 3.9 WAR + Span 2.2 WAR - KC's 1.6 WAR = 4.5. Add 4.5 wins to the 63 we had in 2013 and you have 67.5 wins.

 

2014 - Grinke 4.3 WAR + Span 3.6 WAR - KC's WAR = .2 = 7.7 We won 70 games, now you have a 77 win team.

 

Span is sitting in his last year of his deal. He is 31 and probably is looking at 12-13M a year on a multi year deal to keep him here. Greinke is 31.5 and owed $100M over the next four years. And people are complaining that we are not rebuilding.

Not my point, but:

 

Not sure why you would subtract KC, he and Greinke are not mutually exclusive. There was plenty of room for both him and another FA pitcher in our 2013-2014 rotations. Greinke could have displaced one of the negative WAR rotation spots those two years. (Actually signing someone like Greinke makes it less likely that we need to sign someone like Nolasco and/or Santana, lessening the burden of his contract.)

 

Also, Span almost certainly would have displaced negative WAR outfielders, so that would be an additional couple wins too.

[jokin]

 

  Please accept my sincere apology if you found my post to be offensive to you. It was intended to be in fun.

 

It seems pretty clear... I don't think H2O said anything about being offended, just perplexed.

[chopper0080]

 

I would just say that both options would lead to ridicule of TR by posters at TD.  Plan A has more playing time for HIcks and Pelfrey.  Those two are probably top 3 in terms of ridiculing the GM over the last 2-3 years.

 

I question whether plan B is a good enough team. Desmond Jennings is an OK player, but teams that trade with the Rays usually get ripped off.  And you still have Hicks and Arcia in the OF.  Hasn't the OF defense been one of the biggest issues for the Twins?  Is this hypothetical team good enough to make a difference and does that justify moving prospects?

Who cares if it is ridiculed by fans...your front office shouldn't be dictated by fans.  If it doesn't work, or the time frame takes too long, then you should be fired.  If it works, great.

 

Plan B is a good enough team to compete...not much more but it isn't losing 90 games a season.  We have decent if inconsistent hitting.  Same goes with starting pitching.  What we lack is the defense and bullpen to consistently keep games close.  Plouffe is a solid fielding 3B.  Santana should develop into a decent SS.  Dozier and Mauer are average defensive players.  Where we lack is an outfield that can limit extra bases and bloop hits.  Hicks and Jennings have the athleticism to be assets in Target Field.  Arcia is ok if you have speed to limit the area he needs to cover.  You probably need to add more than one good arm in the bullpen, but I don't know if you want to give up the needed prospects or maybe our guys in AAA can provide quality innings. 

 

Next offseason you can add a better C or SS or SP/RP if you want/need, but you will at least have created an environment where our youth has to play themselves into starting spots, and are supported by talent around them.  I still argue that trading Hughes for multiple, advanced, young arms or advanced position players might be the best scenario with how unpredictable pitching can be.  His value will reach it's peak if he keeps pitching well this year, and it would be the opportune time to move him.

[notoriousgod71]

Let's also not forget that Ryan is the one that walked out on the job and left Smith to deal with the Johan, Hunter, and Mauer situations.

 

That is a terrible place for a new guy, particularly someone with no GMing experience to have to start.

[jokin]

 

Let's also not forget that Ryan is the one that walked out on the job and left Smith to deal with the Johan, Hunter, and Mauer situations.

 

That is a terrible place for a new guy, particularly someone with no GMing experience to have to start.

 

Especially when it's the wrong guy, who had no business being in the GM chair.

[ashbury]

 

This could very well be self depricating, versus him speaking what he thinks.  Just about every person that retires says something along these lines, or jokes that the company will be better off.

I found a link to what is probably the original. Read it and see what you think in the fuller context.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aLt7tPfSjQ1g

[jokin]

 

This could very well be self depricating, versus him speaking what he thinks.  Just about every person that retires says something along these lines, or jokes that the company will be better off.

 

 

From the Bloomberg article:

 

 

``I don't have it in me anymore,'' Ryan, 53, said during a televised news conference. ``The last thing I want is to pretend I am jumping ship. It's necessary for the well-being of my sanity.''

 

This may be a lot of things, but it's fair to say this is most certainly neither about self-deprication or flippant hilarity.

[notoriousgod71]

Also this:

 

``The game has changed since I entered,'' said Ryan, who joined the Twins' front office in 1986. ``It's for bright, energetic negotiators more so than anything I possess. I have a bit of a shorter fuse than they do.''

[h2oface]

 

But without the centerfield trade, the Twins would be calling Logan Darnell and Taylor Rogers the top starting prospects in the system, with Mark Hamburger waiting for a chance.

 

I still consider Berrios a top prospect.  I am betting you do, too, and just forgot to include him here.

[h2oface]

 

  Please accept my sincere apology if you found my post to be offensive to you. It was intended to be in fun.

I didn't find your post offensive at all. I took it as fun and banter with a bite. I was just getting some clarification from chitown. I think this has been a fun and informative discussion. I will try to use words i mean, and I hope that others don't put any in my mouth... or at the tip of my fingers... and I will try to do the same.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Doumit...Suzuki

Willingham...Arcia/FA

Hughes...Berrios/FA

Perkins...Soria or another FA (does it matter when you aren't winning games.)

 

You can't state you are rebuilding, and then state you are competing.  IMO, we are three years away if we commit now to just rebuilding through our farm system.  In that regard...you trade Hughes knowing you have Santana and Nolasco under contract as well as Pelfrey, Gibson, and May.  Trading Perkins now is dumb, so you probably hold on to him until he regains some value.  I promote Hicks for his athleticism knowing Buxton is a year or two away and probably will struggle a bit.  I keep Plouffe as a viable defensive 3B.  If I like Polanco's progress, I might move Dozier in the offseason or next year (I understand the contract, and that isn't the Twins norm). 

 

If I want to win and compete next year, I trade prospects for a legitimate outfielder, Desmond Jennings comes to mind.  I call up Hicks, and have an outfield of Arcia, Jennings, and Hicks which should be able to handle the outfield, and when Buxton is ready, he will push someone to a reserve role.  I trade another prospect or two for a legitimate relief pitcher, Sergio Romo might be an option.  Brian Matusz.  Essentially, I do everything I can to acquire major league assets that improve my defense and relief pitching by dealing from my farm system.  I understand Reed and Burdi and maybe Meyer will be in relief roles by the end of this year, or will have earned a spot next year.  Once I can field and limit late game runs, I am confident that my bats and starting pitching can do enough to keep us from losing 90 games in 2016.

 

Whichever way we go, we just need to commit to it.

You and I may not agree on Meyer for Span, but you definitely have a point here. I think at point, simply admitting where you are (and committing to it) would have been beneficial. Rebuilds are risky things, and when Span and Revere were traded, this signified to me at least that this is where the club was going... but you're right in that they didn't go all in here. I think there's something to be said for what value could have been gotten. I suspect there was little out there for Hammer and Suzuki. I was pleasantly surprised for what they got for Doumit, but that return is now in another organization as it wasn't very good... But Perkins... I have a tough time believing we couldn't have gotten something similar to Meyer, or a bat a higher level, for Perk.

 

The flip side to this approach is that there are a lot of minor league FAs getting time in MN while the prospects develop, especially if those buy low 1 year deals fail (as many do) and the ones that succeed are traded at the deadline. Believe it or not, committing to it would likely have put an even worse product on the field than what we saw last year. Personally, I'm not necessarily against that, because if you're going to be bad, you may as well do it the way Houston did and get the first overall pick to get the best overall talent. Question to me is whether or not the Pohlads or the fans were OK with that...

 

I think you're right on this though... They should have made a plan and stuck with it. That is where the front office failure is magnified. I don't see how they could have built a competitive team through FA given the holes they had, and I don't think Ryan saw that either.

[tobi0040]

 

Not my point, but:

Not sure why you would subtract KC, he and Greinke are not mutually exclusive. There was plenty of room for both him and another FA pitcher in our 2013-2014 rotations. Greinke could have displaced one of the negative WAR rotation spots those two years. (Actually signing someone like Greinke makes it less likely that we need to sign someone like Nolasco and/or Santana, lessening the burden of his contract.)

Also, Span almost certainly would have displaced negative WAR outfielders, so that would be an additional couple wins too.

 

In 2013, Hicks was a +.4, Pressly -.4, and Mastro a -.9.  So Span adds an additional win there.

 

In 2014, Hicks was +.2, Schafer +.3, and Danny Santana actually had a WAR of 3.9, with 69 of his 104 games in center.  So Span actually is about a wash in 2014.

 

By backing out KC, I was going off the assumption that the buying a real pitcher would mean we would not have signed KC.  

 

Either way, here is my broader point, people criticize the Twins for making a rebuiding type trade, and for not fully committing to rebuilding, for rusing guys like Hicks, and for not signing a stop gap centerfielder, for trading Span,  and for blocking prospects.

 

The logical part of my brain can't solve for the contradictory nature of all the various lines of criticism. I think the Twins have not let the GM fully commit to a rebuild because they have been too worried about public criticism, but I would also argue the wants and needs of the loyal fan base here has been at least as wishy washy in what they are looking for.

[Mike Sixel]

My point.....either go all in rebuild, OR sign elite players that might make you good enough to deal prospects to be good nowish (or, you know, might still be here when you expected Buxton Sano up last year)......but DON"T sign mediocre players to LT deals. IMO, they chose the worst path.

 

Lots of paths were available:

sign youngish Cubans (passed)

sign several SP with upside to 1 year deals (done with Hughes)

trade everyone over 28 or so (passed)

sign lots of international guys to big bucks (passed, not clear they even spent to the max last year, but may have)

sign an elite player in 2012 and 2013, guys that might be here when you expected Sano/Buxton up last year (passed)

 

 

Not all of those are the same path....they chose, sign mediocre guys (KC, Pelfrey, Suzuki) with little upside, to longer deals (Nolasco and Santana both, you can do 1, but why do both?).

 

I don't like the plan. It went for the middle path.

 

Stauffer? Boyer? Pelfrey to a 2 year deal? Ugh.

 

edit: clearly I didn't list every move, this wasn't meant as book.....

[tobi0040]

 

My point.....either go all in rebuild, OR sign elite players that might make you good enough to deal prospects to be good nowish (or, you know, might still be here when you expected Buxton Sano up last year)......but DON"T sign mediocre players to LT deals. IMO, they chose the worst path.

 

Lots of paths were available:

sign youngish Cubans (passed)

sign several SP with upside to 1 year deals (done with Hughes)

trade everyone over 28 or so (passed)

sign lots of international guys to big bucks (passed, not clear they even spent to the max last year, but may have)

sign an elite player in 2012 and 2013, guys that might be here when you expected Sano/Buxton up last year (passed)

 

 

Not all of those are the same path....they chose, sign mediocre guys (KC, Pelfrey, Suzuki) with little upside, to longer deals (Nolasco and Santana both, you can do 1, but why do both?).

 

I don't like the plan. It went for the middle path.

 

Stauffer? Boyer? Pelfrey to a 2 year deal? Ugh.

 

edit: clearly I didn't list every move, this wasn't meant as book.....

 

I would have been most comfortable with the fully commit to a rebuid strategy as well.  So we throw Hicks out there and he fails over a few hundred games.  Now we have constant calls for Peter Bourjos. That is my point.  Both the Twins and many posters have waffled on the approach.  I don't know that the ownership or fans have what it takes to watch a true rebuild unfold, espcially in a new stadium

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

I don't think acquiring a CF after Hicks failed the first time is waffling on the approach at all. Not if that player is signed to a short term deal, or is an elite player to a long term deal. But, they failed to address that need at all.

 

THEIR PLAN last year was Jason Bartlett. Let that sink in for a moment.......

[diehardtwinsfan]

The logical part of my brain can't solve for the contradictory nature of all the various lines of criticism. I think the Twins have not let the GM fully commit to a rebuild because they have been too worried about public criticism, but I would also argue the wants and needs of the loyal fan base here has been at least as wishy washy in what they are looking for.

There's likely something to this as well. Falls on ownership. They could be the ones saying 'don't trade Perkins'. Not sure if this is the case or not, but that said, I'd think that once the season is lost, you'd see mid-season moves. Granted, I don't think they get much for most of those guys, it's a bad team. You won't get much for htem.

[tobi0040]

 

I don't think acquiring a CF after Hicks failed the first time is waffling on the approach at all. Not if that player is signed to a short term deal, or is an elite player to a long term deal. But, they failed to address that need at all.

 

THEIR PLAN last year was Jason Bartlett. Let that sink in for a moment.......

 

Is going with a plan B at all after 150 games for Hicks fully committing to a rebuild?  I would argue no, but most people here were calling for Hicks to be gone, criticizing the Twins for rushing him and not having a back up plan.

 

HIcks first 150 games.  OPS of .606  

 

Gomez first 150 games.  OPS Of .617.

 

The next 150 games for Gomez weren' much better either.  He was younger when he came up. But his OPS at the same age was .623 and then .655.  Not a ton better and at that point Gomez had 400 games under his belt.

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

Gomez was an elite fielder. Gomez didn't have historically bad splits. Gomez stole bases when he got on base.

 

there is really no comparison between the two at all.

 

And, no idea what that has to do with the argument to have a legit plan B, or not have one, as this FO has chosen.

[tobi0040]

 

Gomez was an elite fielder. Gomez didn't have historically bad splits. Gomez stole bases when he got on base.

 

there is really no comparison between the two at all.

 

And, no idea what that has to do with the argument to have a legit plan B, or not have one, as this FO has chosen.

 

Thru 150 games, Gomez glove was worth 1.2 more games according to BREF and he had 20 more stolen bases.  Thru his first five seasons, he topped 18 SB only one time. He stole 33 in 2008 making that 20 SB gap between the two more than it would have been at really any other time in his first five years.

 

And Gomez was not a switch hitter, so the split part is a little less relevant.  They averaged out to about the same OPS.

 

I contend that even the people that argue for a complete rebuild would abandon that thought if they really saw it through. We can disagree and that is fine.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

In 2013, Hicks was a +.4, Pressly -.4, and Mastro a -.9.  So Span adds an additional win there.

 

In 2014, Hicks was +.2, Schafer +.3, and Danny Santana actually had a WAR of 3.9, with 69 of his 104 games in center.  So Span actually is about a wash in 2014.

 

By backing out KC, I was going off the assumption that the buying a real pitcher would mean we would not have signed KC. 

You are comparing Span to most of our CF in 2013-2014, but there is no reason that Span could not have offset corner OF options instead.  For example, Fuld and Santana (and even Hicks) could have played the corners in 2014 -- Kubel and Colabello should have never had to sniff the OF (and perhaps not even the roster at all), and they were a combined -2 WAR in 2014 according to Fangraphs.  Doumit, Parmelee, Arcia, Herrmann, and Thomas are a few more guys who could have been more optimally deployed these past two years too.  (Also could have influenced the signing of Morales last year, if Willingham and others were more free to DH.)

 

And in 2013, we STILL had a wide-open rotation spot to begin the season, even after signing both Corriea and Pelfrey and trading for Worley (if you recall, Pedro Hernandez and then PJ Walters seemed to get that spot in the early part of that season, with another -1.6 B-Ref WAR).  No reason they couldn't have added an additional starter (and if fact probably should have, given the question marks and low upside in the rest of their rotation at the time).

 

I don't think it would have made us a contender or anything, but I think you are underestimating the benefit of having a very good player on one's roster.

[tobi0040]

 

You are comparing Span to most of our CF in 2013-2014, but there is no reason that Span could not have offset corner OF options instead.  For example, Fuld and Santana (and even Hicks) could have played the corners in 2014 -- Kubel and Colabello should have never had to sniff the OF (and perhaps not even the roster at all), and they were a combined -2 WAR in 2014 according to Fangraphs.  Doumit, Parmelee, Arcia, Herrmann, and Thomas are a few more guys who could have been more optimally deployed these past two years too.  (Also could have influenced the signing of Morales last year, if Willingham and others were more free to DH.)

 

And in 2013, we STILL had a wide-open rotation spot to begin the season, even after signing both Corriea and Pelfrey and trading for Worley (if you recall, Pedro Hernandez and then PJ Walters seemed to get that spot in the early part of that season, with another -1.6 B-Ref WAR).  No reason they couldn't have added an additional starter (and if fact probably should have, given the question marks and low upside in the rest of their rotation at the time).

 

I don't think it would have made us a contender or anything, but I think you are underestimating the benefit of having a very good player on one's roster.

 

We started the discussion based on not making the Span trade and having Span in CF.  So I was comparing Span versus what we had.  The initial complaint was that we made that trade without having a replacement.

 

My point is the same as your conclusion.  Span was a few wins better in 2013 and a wash in 2014.  To me, Meyer's upside was and still is worth that risk.

[jimmer]

I'm a huge Span fan, but I was okay with the trade when it was made.  IMO the move was right, but I think we'll find the wrong pitcher was picked up.  Kind of like how when the team thought it had surplus pitching, they traded Garza (of course, his issues with the staff helped make him easier to trade from a team perspective) for supposed slugger Delmon (a guy who was a #1 pick, 2nd in ROY voting) and that, also, didn't work out.

 

Again, IMO, the thought behind both of those trades were sound at the time even if neither one worked out.  Whether or not the right guys were targeted, that's obviously a big debate (I'd say both flop).

 

Now, not having a plan to replace Span, totally wrong. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

We started the discussion based on not making the Span trade and having Span in CF.  So I was comparing Span versus what we had.  The initial complaint was that we made that trade without having a replacement.

 

My point is the same as your conclusion.  Span was a few wins better in 2013 and a wash in 2014.  To me, Meyer's upside was and still is worth that risk.

That's my conclusion?  No.  Span was a few wins better in 2013, and likely a LOT of wins better in 2014 as more of our OF options turned disastrous.  With 2015 still to come.

 

I think there is a great argument that we didn't get enough for Span, simply because multiple seasons of control is not highly valued in most trades.  Austin Jackson, with less than half as much team control remaining (1.3 seasons, versus 3 for Span), netted David Price with equivalent team control, or many years of MLB ready Smyly/Franklin (depending on how you parse that 3-team trade).  We got one guy, BA's #59 prospect, with no experience above A-ball and who was by all accounts a year or two away from the big leagues, even assuming good health.

 

It's the same thing when people see a reliever get traded, and say "Think what we could get for Perkins and his X seasons of team control!"  But teams trading for closers and starting CF, presumably in win-now mode, don't have much incentive to pay full freight in trade for anything more than the next year or two.

 

I think TR undervalued Span.  Could be an extension of undervaluing defensive stats, as we have a lot of evidence of that since.

 

He also over-valued adding another lower-minors pitching prospect to the mix at that time.  When we traded Span, we had already drafted Berrios, Duffey, Rogers, among others, signed Thorpe and Hu, and had already guaranteed the favorable 2013 draft position that got us Stewart, Eades, Gonsalves, etc.  And a week later, we added May too (not to mention Gibson who was rated equally or higher than Meyer by most prospect lists and was basically ready to debut in MLB).

 

Not to say Meyer wasn't a better prospect than many of those guys, but 3 affordable years of Span was an awfully high price to pay to get him -- and only him -- at that point in time.  3 years of Span to buy a prospect who is at least a  year behind your top pitching prospect, and probably only a year ahead of your others.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I say this as someone who probably endorsed the Span trade, although I did have my reservations about getting only one prospect (ranked #59 by BA) in return.  It has been very interesting to re-visit the deal, though, especially given what we've learned about TR's approach since then.