Article: Dollars And Sense

[Nick Nelson]

As we close in on the month of February, the Twins have remained quiet on the Hot Stove front. In terms of spending, it has been one of the most conservative offseasons we have seen from this franchise in some time.

 

Byung Ho Park is the only addition that has really cost them anything. Outside of a few escalating contracts and arbitration raises, they haven't added payroll anywhere. With Torii Hunter and a couple others coming off the books, that leaves them slightly short of last year's Opening Day mark of $108 million, barring further moves.Following a season in which the Twins finally turned the corner and set their long-awaited contention blueprint into motion, the lack of aggressiveness on the market this winter has left many fans scratching their heads. An article by Jack Moore for Baseball Prospectus this week discussing Minnesota's misapplied label as a "small market" rankled plenty of folks, as evidenced by the nine pages of discussion on the topic in our forums.

 

Personally, while I have been critical of the front office's timid approach at times in the past, I'm not too riled up by the sparsity of moves, for a couple of reasons.

 

For one thing, there was Park's posting fee. At $12.85 million, it was very large, in the contexts of both this organization's past and the Korean market standards. While you might not technically construe this as a payroll expense, for all intents and purposes it is. They spent many millions of dollars to add immediate talent to the major-league roster.

 

So if you prorate that money over the four years of Park's contract, the 2016 payroll figure jumps to about the exact same level it was at a year ago. That number ranked the Twins 18th in baseball last season, and while it might rank a bit lower this time around, it'll still be fairly close to the middle of the pack. It's not unreasonable for a club that falls on the lower end of the mid-market category in terms of revenue.

 

The other thing is that the Twins seem to be committing to a more youth-focused approach. While it's difficult to have absolute confidence in the present bullpen array, I'd much rather allow the younger internal options to take jobs and run with them, as opposed to seeing them blocked by mediocrities like Tim Stauffer. Last year, he came in and had just about the worst spring you could possibly imagine, but still made the club and received a relatively long leash, on the basis of his guaranteed contract and veteran status. No more of that.

 

But while we're on the subject, let's talk about Stauffer for a moment. Last offseason, he was Minnesota's most expensive bullpen addition, with his $2.2 million commitment ranking as the 23rd-largest given to a free agent relief pitcher by an MLB club (per MLB Trade Rumors).

 

There is a "you get what you pay for" dynamic in play here. Nearly every reliever who signed a bigger deal than Stauffer last offseason performed better than he did. Given that the Twins missed the playoffs by only a few games, and given that Stauffer performed miserably almost literally every time he took the mound, you could certainly argue that aiming a little higher with their veteran bullpen upgrade might have made a big difference.

 

But instead of aiming higher here in an offseason where the bullpen is an obvious area of need, the Twins haven't so much as set their sights, at least not with any urgent intention of pulling the trigger.

 

We're getting the same explanatory arguments as usual: Terry Ryan and the Twins simply don't like any of the free agents that much. Tony Sipp? Too many years. Antonio Bastardo? Overpaid. This is about evaluation, not spending. It's a line that's being echoed by media members.

 

But of course this overlooks the fact that, so many times in the past, those players that the Twins "haven't liked" ended up having successful seasons in which they could have been difference-makers for the club. Meanwhile, many of the players that they liked enough to sign, who invariably ended up being on the second or third tier in terms of monetary commitments, panned out as poor investments.

 

These payroll arguments that come up every year (usually around this time) are tedious and frustrating in part because they become so repetitive but even more so because people on opposite sides tend to cling to outrageous extremes.

 

The fact that the team isn't spending aggressively and adding big contracts does not necessarily indicate a lack of desire to win, nor is it a surefire sign that ownership is interested only in hoarding cash.

 

At the same time, nobody is arguing that the Twins should "spend money just to spend money," and to dismiss the reality that it costs more to acquire more established and coveted players is ridiculous.

 

So if we're going to have these discussions, let's at least try to be reasonable and realistic. I'm on board with what the Twins seem to be doing, but I'm also running out of patience with watching the same conservative strategies come up short. If the front office's decision to eschew the open market and look inward while their competitors pile up relief talent backfires, there needs to be some accountability.

 

Click here to view the article

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Your bullpen comments are a real gut check. I agree with you on the bullpen controversy this year, though it's yet to be seen how that turns out.

 

I could honestly care less how high or low the team payroll is, so long as they are putting the best players on the field and winning. Most of the best players are making the least amount, anyway.

[tobi0040]

I see a team that tries to piece together a Pen from April and June and hope and pray guys emerge. That was the plan last year and we had to trade for Jepsen when it failed.

 

It just seems like such a meager investment to me. Really a no-brainer. And unfortunately the games in April count the same

[Otwins]

How much would you expect Clippard to cost? I would think he would be the only free agent worth looking in to. Otherwise may have to trade. I agree with you on aiming higher or just going in house. Glad they moved on from Boyer and Duensing.

[James Richter]

It looks to me like they have a lot of confidence in the in-house guys. I hope that turns out to be warranted.

 

It also looks like they're not going after it this year, like they're waiting for/hoping a few more of the prospects will arrive and seize jobs. I hope they will, too. But with the division projecting to be so competitive, any little edge they could add from day one could make a difference in taking a postseason spot a year earlier than expected.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm pretty certain that they expect some of the kids to step up and be on the roster in shorter order.  Not sure many (other than maybe Rogers and Melotakis) have a chance to break with the club, but I suspect that is the plan, like it or not. 

[DaveW]

 

I'm pretty certain that they expect some of the kids to step up and be on the roster in shorter order.  Not sure many (other than maybe Rogers and Melotakis) have a chance to break with the club, but I suspect that is the plan, like it or not. 

Fortunately for the Twins, April games only count as 50% much as August and September games!

[Bill Brown69]

I have no issues with the "lack" of spending/moves this offseason but I expect/hope that they use these "low" payroll years to go higher than they are really comfortable with when all the young guys need a Mauer type contract. Not expecting them to keep the whole band together but I do expect them to keep several of them.

[tobi0040]

 

It looks to me like they have a lot of confidence in the in-house guys. I hope that turns out to be warranted.

 

It also looks like they're not going after it this year, like they're waiting for/hoping a few more of the prospects will arrive and seize jobs. I hope they will, too. But with the division projecting to be so competitive, any little edge they could add from day one could make a difference in taking a postseason spot a year earlier than expected.

 

I just don't think Terry can deviate from his tendencies.  We can talk all get excited that the young guys are coming, or we will turn around Abad because we saw that he was tipping his pitches, but these seem like excuses to use the same strategy.  I can't remember a single bullpen addition in free agency that was over $4M annually or a 2 year deal.  This is a team that has won several division titles in the last 15 years and we haven't found one player in free agency that could help those teams get over the hump that required $4M or a two year deal.

 

Regarding the young guys.  Melotakis didn't pitch last year.  Burdi and Chargois have limited time above A ball (43 IP for Burdi and 33 for Chargois).  Both struggled with control when they were above A ball, Burdi had a 6.6 BB rate and Chargois had a 5.5 rate.  I just don't see Terry moving guys like this quick.

 

Most metrics had our pen about 23rd last year.  We are an injury or two away from the worst pen in the league. 

Edited January 27, 2016 by tobi0040

[mazeville]

I liked this post, in general. But I do have a real problem with people complaining simply that the Pohlads are "cheap" and "should spend more money" because it's a tired, old argument that just doesn't hold water. The Twins are conservative, not cheap. Their problems are with strategy, not spending.

 

The best sign that the team is not cheap came this summer, when they opted not to trade Plouffe, who will make more than $7 million a year, rather than play Sano at third, who makes a rookie contract. Instead, they are oddly moving Sano to the outfield, where the team has a lot of young talent (and where the cheaper Aaron Hicks and his defense probably would have been the better option, or perhaps Oswaldo Arcia and his left-handed power bat would have been good).

 

I'd also remind people that they signed three free agent starters to multi-year deals in the previous two seasons when the smart strategy might have been to use those rotation spots for young players who might grow into reliable starters. That certainly would have been the cheap strategy.

 

I would LOVE to see the Twins make a big free agent splash now and then, too. I think they should have signed a quality late-inning reliever rather than trade for one. I just don't think their decisions recently have been cheap. They've been the decisions of a conservative front office building mostly with young players.

[tobi0040]

 

I liked this post, in general. But I do have a real problem with people complaining simply that the Pohlads are "cheap" and "should spend more money" because it's a tired, old argument that just doesn't hold water. The Twins are conservative, not cheap. Their problems are with strategy, not spending.

 

The best sign that the team is not cheap came this summer, when they opted not to trade Plouffe, who will make more than $7 million a year, rather than play Sano at third, who makes a rookie contract. Instead, they are oddly moving Sano to the outfield, where the team has a lot of young talent (and where the cheaper Aaron Hicks and his defense probably would have been the better option, or perhaps Oswaldo Arcia and his left-handed power bat would have been good).

 

I'd also remind people that they signed three free agent starters to multi-year deals in the previous two seasons when the smart strategy might have been to use those rotation spots for young players who might grow into reliable starters. That certainly would have been the cheap strategy.

 

I would LOVE to see the Twins make a big free agent splash now and then, too. I think they should have signed a quality late-inning reliever rather than trade for one. I just don't think their decisions recently have been cheap. They've been the decisions of a conservative front office building mostly with young players.

 

So keeping Plouffe when a cheaper player is available is evidence they are not cheap....but letting young players come up is a smart conservative strategy. 

 

And Hicks and $10M Hunter will likely be backfilled by cheaper players.

 

 

[Vanimal46]

 

I'd also remind people that they signed three free agent starters to multi-year deals in the previous two seasons when the smart strategy might have been to use those rotation spots for young players who might grow into reliable starters. That certainly would have been the cheap strategy.

Remind me what young pitchers were ready to come up and contribute before they signed Nolasco, Hughes, and Santana? 

It wasn't strategy. It was pure desperation as there was nothing at all in the organization to help the MLB club. 

[mazeville]

 

Remind me what young pitchers were ready to come up and contribute before they signed Nolasco, Hughes, and Santana? 

It wasn't strategy. It was pure desperation as there was nothing at all in the organization to help the MLB club. 

 

Yeah, you know, probably not many because the team's farm system was in complete disarray for a long time. But the "cheap" strategy would have been to sign cheaper players for shorter-term deals rather than someone like Nolasco or Santana. 

[mazeville]

 

So keeping Plouffe when a cheaper player is available is evidence they are not cheap....but letting young players come up is a smart conservative strategy. 

 

And Hicks and $10M Hunter will likely be backfilled by cheaper players.

 

Yes, it is. And their payroll is up by more than a third since 2013 with only one good season to show for it. And $10 million Hunter was replaced by Byung Ho Park. Payroll counting the posting fee the Twins had to pay for Park is down only slightly from last year. 

[Cris E]

 

Remind me what young pitchers were ready to come up and contribute before they signed Nolasco, Hughes, and Santana? 

It wasn't strategy. It was pure desperation as there was nothing at all in the organization to help the MLB club. 

 

Well now you want it both ways: not signing FAs is bad strategy, but signing them is not strategy either. So if the bullpen is in the shape you say it is (similar to the rotation a few years ago) then signing FAs would once again be desperation instead of strategy.  I'm not confident you'll be happy with anything TR does.

 

Ryan has two things to invest/spend/allocate: dollars and playing time. When you have holes you focus on investing dollars to get guys, but when you have young players you focus on allocating playing time. There's usually a lot of grey in these cases, but when you have a Sano or a Rosario or even a Duffy you want to give them a chance to take a job before dredging up a Bourne or Stauffer to fill the spot, regardless of money.  Mazeville is talking about broad philosophy, not specific players, and he's right.

[tobi0040]

 

Yes, it is. And their payroll is up by more than a third since 2013 with only one good season to show for it. And $10 million Hunter was replaced by Byung Ho Park. Payroll counting the posting fee the Twins had to pay for Park is down only slightly from last year. 

 

Well, if keeping a veteran is proof they are not cheap, but playing a rookie isntead of signing a veteran is just a great conservative strategy then we won't see eye to eye

[tobi0040]

 

Yeah, you know, probably not many because the team's farm system was in complete disarray for a long time. But the "cheap" strategy would have been to sign cheaper players for shorter-term deals rather than someone like Nolasco or Santana. 

 

They did go that route though.  Correia and Pelfrey were cheap and short term deals.  They contributed to the horrible play on the field, propelling the other signings.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Well now you want it both ways: not signing FAs is bad strategy, but signing them is not strategy either. So if the bullpen is in the shape you say it is (similar to the rotation a few years ago) then signing FAs would once again be desperation instead of strategy.  I'm not confident you'll be happy with anything TR does.

 

Ryan has two things to invest/spend/allocate: dollars and playing time. When you have holes you focus on investing dollars to get guys, but when you have young players you focus on allocating playing time. There's usually a lot of grey in these cases, but when you have a Sano or a Rosario or even a Duffy you want to give them a chance to take a job before dredging up a Bourne or Stauffer to fill the spot, regardless of money.  Mazeville is talking about broad philosophy, not specific players, and he's right.

 

And who did they have at RP last year, that should not be blocked, that stopped them from spending? 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Personally, while I have been critical of the front office's timid approach at times in the past, I'm not too riled up by the sparsity of moves, for a couple of reasons.

For one thing, there was Park's posting fee.

I think it's possible the Twins had a payroll cap in mind this winter, and blew it all on Park.

 

I'm not too concerned about payroll, but I am about priorities.

[Vanimal46]

I just want to clear up this posting fee goes to payroll nonsense. Every where I look says the same thing. "The transfer fee is not included when calculating an MLB team's total payroll..."
 

It is an expense, no question about it. But we may be the first team in MLB history that is justifying the posting fee as a payroll expense, and giving the benefit of the doubt that it is included in the payroll. Please let me know if I am wrong. 

[Vanimal46]

 

Well now you want it both ways: not signing FAs is bad strategy, but signing them is not strategy either. So if the bullpen is in the shape you say it is (similar to the rotation a few years ago) then signing FAs would once again be desperation instead of strategy.  I'm not confident you'll be happy with anything TR does.

 

Ryan has two things to invest/spend/allocate: dollars and playing time. When you have holes you focus on investing dollars to get guys, but when you have young players you focus on allocating playing time. There's usually a lot of grey in these cases, but when you have a Sano or a Rosario or even a Duffy you want to give them a chance to take a job before dredging up a Bourne or Stauffer to fill the spot, regardless of money.  Mazeville is talking about broad philosophy, not specific players, and he's right.

I'm kind of impressed you drew that long of a conclusion just from my last post. I was merely pointing out that the cause of signing those 3 pitchers was from the system being completely barren of young talent to help out.

No where on that post did I rip the Twins for giving out those contracts. I am glad they at least tried to fix the situation. It's a little different in 2016 compared to 2013 and 2014 when the Twins signed those guys.

 

In response to the bullpen, what would have made me happy was signing 1 legitimate bullpen arm. I've presented the examples of Storen, Sipp, Bastardo in several threads before. The Twins have the most fluid bullpen in the MLB with only Perkins signed beyond this year. I'm certainly not alone with my concern that only 3 proven guys (Perk, May, Jepsen) and seeing what else sticks is a great way to go into a new season.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Well now you want it both ways: not signing FAs is bad strategy, but signing them is not strategy either. So if the bullpen is in the shape you say it is (similar to the rotation a few years ago) then signing FAs would once again be desperation instead of strategy.  I'm not confident you'll be happy with anything TR does.

I think you're reading it wrong.  It's about avoid situations where you have to act out of desperation.  The Twins didn't do that from 2012-2014 with their rotation, they didn't do it with their 2015 bullpen, and they're not doing it now for 2016.  The moves the Twins made in those situations weren't all bad -- I liked the original Hughes deal, and the Jepsen trade -- but when in desperate situations, the solutions you find are often a mixed bag or not enough.

 

A 2/12 type reliever acquisition isn't a desperation move (yet), it's a prudent proactive move to reduce the likelihood of imminent desperate situations.  That's the kind of activity I would like to see next from TR.

Edited January 27, 2016 by spycake

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'm pretty certain that they expect some of the kids to step up and be on the roster in shorter order.  Not sure many (other than maybe Rogers and Melotakis) have a chance to break with the club, but I suspect that is the plan, like it or not. 

I think they'd like that, and we'd obviously all like for those new guys to step up, but I'm not sure it's an honest evaluation of those chances that is driving our inactivity.  In fact, their 2015 approach with Rogers and other past bullpen moves suggest they're content to count less on potential excellence from our youth, and more on mediocrity from vets.

 

(Also, Melotakis hasn't thrown a competitive pitch in 17 months, with 16 innings at AA as his highest previous level of experience.  No level of "secret weapon in our instructional leagues" could give him a meaningful chance to break camp with the club this spring.)

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Fortunately for the Twins, April games only count as 50% much as August and September games!

 

Yeah... hehehehe..  I do think that this may cost them a few games in 2016. Lots of question marks in the pen and in the OF that only time will fix.  The problem I see is that there's no way TR blocks those guys, so we'll suffer a bit in April/May. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Yeah, you know, probably not many because the team's farm system was in complete disarray for a long time. But the "cheap" strategy would have been to sign cheaper players for shorter-term deals rather than someone like Nolasco or Santana. 

 

The problem with that is that you get guys like Mike Pelfrey looking to make good due to injury or ineffectiveness.  Good pitchers don't take short term deals. 

[Platoon]

The Twins seem neither to sign top flight FA's, nor agressively promote in house talent. Instead they diddle the first two months of the season away feeling out mediocre veterans, hoping that one will turn from a pumpkin to a gilded carriage. Whether this is the result of financial constraint, or a desire for Ryan to prove he can find his annual needle in a haystack, it puts the team in the worst possible spot. It leaves them losing valuable games, with no real chance of upside. Essentially a nice high floor, and a very low ceiling. A guarantee of not being all you could have been. And, whether intentional or not, allows an escape from the kind of all or nothing decisions that a conservative clan like the Pohlads abhor. Safe solid investments, eschewing risk is a great investment strategy. But used as a philosophy for running a competitive MLB team, it will always leave you looking both up, and down, on what could have been!

[Brock Beauchamp]

Great article, Nick. I'm disappointed with the offseason thus far.

 

When the Twins were a 66 win team, I didn't really care about payroll. Pick up a few scrapheap/reclamation guys and expect to be bad. Get that draft pick and wait for the farm to build the team into a legitimate contender. As the farm approaches maturation, pick up a guy here and there so you're ready to contend when the youngsters take the field.

 

Well, I didn't agree with some of the ways the Twins chose to get to that point but they got there, posting an 83 win season in 2015.

 

Well, good!

 

But now is the time to start building a contender. The Twins don't have to go for broke and Park was an interesting acquisition. Not the one I would have lobbied for but an interesting acquisition.

 

But come on, not addressing the bullpen in a meaningful fashion? Yuck. Now is the time to find role players and the Twins badly need a role player in the pen. Next season, Jepsen comes off the books so signing a bullpen arm for 2-3 years is no big deal.

 

I don't need a $130m payroll but I expect the team to spend what it takes to stay on the gas. That includes at least a few million to acquire a legit bullpen arm.

[alarp33]

Offseason ways to improve club

 

1) FA signings

2) Trades

 

The Twins chose none of the above.  There were plenty of ways to improve this roster, beyond just straight up FA signings... but it would have taken money, something the Pohlads seem unwilling to spend, and creativity with the roster, something Terry Ryan seems incapable of.  

 

They could have; Cut bait with Nolasco, take on half his salary or more and give him away.  He doesn't want to be here, the roster spot could be better used elsewhere.  My proposal - Offer Doug Fister 1 year, $12/ million w/ incentives.  Berrios will still be next man up

 

They could have; Traded Plouffe - it's been beaten to death, but he makes very little sense with this current roster.  Sano to 3B, Arcia in a platoon to start the year with cheap FA who can hit lefties.  This also would have opened up the possibility of Alex Gordon, Cespedes, etc.  The market seemed to undervalue these guys, would have been worth looking into.  When Kepler is ready in May/June, you can flip Rosario (who I'm personally not sold on yet)

 

Instead, they signed A DH, the one position they already had plenty of options at.  

[nicksaviking]

 

I just want to clear up this posting fee goes to payroll nonsense. Every where I look says the same thing. "The transfer fee is not included when calculating an MLB team's total payroll..."
 

It is an expense, no question about it. But we may be the first team in MLB history that is justifying the posting fee as a payroll expense, and giving the benefit of the doubt that it is included in the payroll. Please let me know if I am wrong. 

 

I agree, that $12.5M posting fee is no different than the Twins spending $12.5M adding a new bar to Target Field. Park doesn't have to claim that on his taxes, it's not payroll.

 

I agree with the bullpen approach though. The Twins can't get guys that throw 97 MPH in free agency, they can get them in AA though.

 

I understand folks' concerns about losing extra games in April/May because the team may not have the stones to call up the hard throwers right out of the gate.

 

I know it may not be popular, but I'm fine with losing a few extra games in 2016 if it means we actually get to see these guys in 2016 instead of having to wait another year because the bullpen is stocked with guys who aren't good enough to be a part of the solution, but not bad enough to lose their jobs.

 

The team has had a history of being so conservative that that last sentence should be a real concern. Loyalty to veterans and fear of the unknown may be this team's biggest problem. I like thinking that the team may be putting themselves into the position where they cannot fall back into their comfort zone. 30-year-old relievers are definitely part of their comfort zone.

[tobi0040]

 

I agree, that $12.5M posting fee is no different than the Twins spending $12.5M adding a new bar to Target Field. Park doesn't have to claim that on his taxes, it's not payroll.

 

I agree with the bullpen approach though. The Twins can't get guys that throw 97 MPH in free agency, they can get them in AA though.

 

You had four candidates for that.  Jones, Chargois, Burdi, and Meyer.  

 

Jones is gone now. 

 

Chargois and Burdi walked 5.5 and 6.6 per 9 last year and have limited time above A ball.  We have no track record of promoting guys with BB rates like that.

 

Meyer is new to the pen and has had his share of control issues too