Article: On The Twins' Cheapness And Showing Your Work

[Otto von Ballpark]

Feldman was the one guy who (really) worked out. Young didn't pitch in the majors and Marcum blew out in a couple of months, as I'm sure the Twins realized he would. I remember the big debate over Marcum and it was all silly because of the medicals.

 

So yes, Twins did not sign the one upside guy that would have been a good signing - though I'm skeptical they would have turned him into Arrieta either.

Kazmir?

 

Turning a couple months of Feldman into just Pedro Strop wouldn't have been bad either.

[old nurse]

 

My only point to make was that there was a pitcher to get that year that had more upside.  The problem the Twins have isn't necessarily the "who" but the "why".  

 

They are content to go for virtually no upside as long as they think the floor is high enough, but in 2012 that was a really bad way of approaching it.  

More upside, less than a 25% chance of working except in hindsight. You end up with a rotation dependent on PJ Walters. Hughes signing later was for upside. As was somewhat Ervin. Nolasco was at best a hope for a below 4 ERA with starts going through the 6th (Your floor signing,)

Edited February 22, 2016 by old nurse

[Mike Sixel]

 

More upside, less than a 25% chance of working except in hindsight

 

But Pelfrey and Correia had a 0% chance of working out......that's the point. If you take the guy with no upside, you get "meh" or worse nearly every time*. If you take the guy with upside, you have a chance at something.

 

*when talking about 1 year filler types....

[TheLeviathan]

 

More upside, less than a 25% chance of working except in hindsight. You end up with a rotation dependent on PJ Walters. Hughes signing later was for upside.

 

Didn't we anyway?

 

And yes, Hughes was a much better upside move.  I completely agree.  It was one of the best FA signings the Twins could have done that year and I applauded them for it.

 

But Correia?  That signing remains indefensible because it had no upside.

[USAFChief]

 

Success? If that is the tried and true method, maybe it is time to change things up.  Seeing as they have not won a playoff game in 11 years, and have won 1 playoff series in 25 years.  

Also seeing as the last time they actually experienced success, they did so with FA stars on the team.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Also seeing as the last time they actually experienced success, they did so with FA stars on the team.

 

Yup, something people seem to forget all the time. Where is that team without Jack Morris (one of the biggest FA contract ever, at the time?)?

[Vanimal46]

 

Yup, something people seem to forget all the time. Where is that team without Jack Morris (one of the biggest FA contract ever, at the time?)?

shhh. You're bringing facts and logic into this.... It doesn't fit into the narrative that the Twins are home grown kids and signing FA's hardly ever work out! 

[drjim]

 

But Pelfrey and Correia had a 0% chance of working out......that's the point. If you take the guy with no upside, you get "meh" or worse nearly every time*. If you take the guy with upside, you have a chance at something.

 

*when talking about 1 year filler types....

 

I don't agree that Pelfrey had 0% chance. I thought it was an acceptable risk to take at the time and he actually had an OK season, actually pretty close to what Feldman did.

 

They should have went with another - and at the time they said they actually offered more money for Joe Saunders.

[drjim]

 

My only point to make was that there was a pitcher to get that year that had more upside.  The problem the Twins have isn't necessarily the "who" but the "why".  

 

They are content to go for virtually no upside as long as they think the floor is high enough, but in 2012 that was a really bad way of approaching it.  

 

And I agree. I accept one of Correia, but they should have signed another to go with Pelfrey (who in hindsight wasn't a terrible signing that year, the problem was the extension).

[drjim]

 

Kazmir?

Turning a couple months of Feldman into just Pedro Strop wouldn't have been bad either.

 

Forgot about Kazmir. I'll give the Tribe credit for signing him after 2 years off.

[Platoon]

I tend to agree with you. I am not a huge free agent guy, and even if I was, it would never work with this FO. Why? Because it's not there operating platform. And to go out willy nilly and buy a guy here and there is not going to work. It's an all the time process. This FO prefers to develop talent, and I agree. My differences with them is their apparent acceptance of mediocre veterans over high upsid youth. It often takes and injury to get rid of a middling vet, and heaven forbid that they would ever trade one when his value is at its peak! I think they know talent, but seem to relish the security and comfort a veteran provides, vs the potential for upside, and yes downside a younger player provides. This will play out in Nolasco v Duffey this spring, and in the BP!

[old nurse]

 

But Pelfrey and Correia had a 0% chance of working out......that's the point. If you take the guy with no upside, you get "meh" or worse nearly every time*. If you take the guy with upside, you have a chance at something.

 

*when talking about 1 year filler types....

Pelfrey has enough upside that the Tigers gave him 16 million. His upside was that of a number 3 starter.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

While I hate May in the bullpen, Berrios has a better chance of becoming an ace.

 

Hell, I'd argue that Meyer has a better chance of becoming an ace.

 

Trevor May has almost zero chance of becoming an ace. His ceiling is a very good #2 if everything breaks right. That's an extremely valuable pitcher - and one that should be in the rotation - but it's not an ace by any definition other than "the guy who starts on Opening Day". A Brad Radke-style "ace", that is.

 

With a K/9 over 9?  I think you're underselling May a bit.  I'd put money on May being a better starter than Meyer at this point.  Radke was a good pitcher and in a different era, but you really undersell May on this one.

[Brock Beauchamp]

With a K/9 over 9? I think you're underselling May a bit. I'd put money on May being a better starter than Meyer at this point. Radke was a good pitcher and in a different era, but you really undersell May on this one.

I'm not underselling May. I think he's a good pitcher with good upside but he simply does not have the stuff to be a real ace.

 

It's likely May will have a better career than Meyer but Meyer has a better chance to become an ace. He has the nasty stuff to do it, he just hasn't put it together (and probably won't). May doesn't. He'd need a few more MPH on his fastball, a better breaking ball, etc. That's not a knock on May, a pitcher can be very good and very valuable without being an ace.

[TheLeviathan]

Pelfrey has enough upside that the Tigers gave him 16 million. His upside was that of a number 3 starter.

Pelfrey has no upside. As a Twins fan I heartily endorse their choice to sign Pelfrey.

[jimmer]

I WISH the pitching market in today's game would get you a #3 starter for 2 yr/16M.

 

Pelfrey going to the Tigers is a 'blessing' for Twins fans (if you believe in blessings).

Edited February 23, 2016 by jimmer

[dgwills]

 

With a K/9 over 9?  I think you're underselling May a bit.  I'd put money on May being a better starter than Meyer at this point.  Radke was a good pitcher and in a different era, but you really undersell May on this one.

What's your argument? Above average pitcher who gives you 200+ innings a year is a good upside  for May. I've never heard anyone say he has the stuff to be any better than that. I'll be doing cartwheels if he makes it that far.

[beckmt]

Couple of notes here.

Players have to want to take your money to join the Twins,  this was a hard sell when they were losing 90+ games a year. 

Twins TV contract is not good.  Twins spending will be constrained until a new TV(and much better TV) contract is signed. 

Twins have the minor league talent that to keep all of the best of them could lead to close to $200 million a year.  (In the 2020's).  Plans have to be made for that time.  Most of the Twins best players will still be in their 20's when their 6 years are up(if the new CBA does not cut that to 4-5 years).  Money will need to be spent wisely(hindsight is 20/20)

Lireano was offered more money to return here than Pittsburg, he did not want to come back(and I do not blame him).

Some players will want to stay, some will not.  Clubs that are winning have an easier time attracting top flight talent.  Twins just need to get there.

When Nolasco was signed it was said, he was the first to take the Twins offer, do not forget this.

[bird]

 

Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it? We won't be good, so let's not try to be good, see, we couldn't be good!.........

 

There has never been a time I've come here, when people didn't say "there are all these reasons not to spend money, and the Twins are right not to, and they aren't cheap, even though we just paid millions to increase their revenue for them through taxes"......when do we read "the Twins are contenders, and they should be spending money on legit, big time, players to fill holes"? 

 

 

 I've been a good pal of yours throughout the lean times, Mike. Even though a lot of people never fault the elected officials and instead place all the blame on the Pohlads for the stadium deal and for their own resulting personal tax burden, I have attempted to frame any discussion I personally engage in pertaining to "payroll" within a hypothetical context that one would hope could take that supercharged aspect out of the discussion. 

 

I'll offer the same hypothetical I have on other occasions in the past. Indulge me, and set the annual payroll number at $125M. Now, start in the off-season between 2010 and 2011 and tell me what you would have done in free agency each year to produce a division winner. Be honest about it. If you would have signed Pujols or Cliff Lee or Hamilton, admit it.

 

So far, there has never been a time around here when people didn't say spend Pohlad's money, they're cheap, we deserve it...

 

And yet, I can honestly say I cannot recall a halfway pragmatic proposal, in any past year, that I believe would have produced a divisional champion in that year, even including 2015. People often portray any resistance to spend by the Pohlads in brutally unfair ways. In reality, the relationship between spending and wins is complex, and most of us on TD are pretty good about not going off the rails one way or the other, because we recognize this. 

 

I think the goalposts have been in the same place all the time, for almost all of those of us who have endorsed the strategy that's finally about to pay off (hopefully). No one connected with the Twins can be accused of moving the goalpost either, unless people want to disingenuously label past "we'll be competitive" talk as a promise of a division title or something.

 

The prevailing argument that you've been hearing in past years about why limiting spending made sense given the long-term strategy to build a sustainable level of excellence primarily via the farm system could not have been articulated much more clearly and consistently by a number of intelligent, thoughtful members of TD. Likewise, there have been a number of very well-articulated arguments by equally thoughtful and intelligent people about why spending a lot more would have been warranted. I personally have some of these positions memorized. In fact, my own view has changed as a result of some of those spending arguments. However, I always come back to the need for a governor or two to be in place in order for the discussion to be something other than a sloppy mess, and those two governors are avoiding the whole "we deserve more" stuff, and a hypothetical agreement about reasonable spending ($125M?), what it buys you and what it saddles you with.

 

So there you go. $125M. YOU tell US if the Twins are contenders in 2016.

[Danchat]

 

I WISH the pitching market in today's game would get you a #3 starter for 2 yr/16M.

 

Pelfrey going to the Tigers is a 'blessing' for Twins fans (if you believe in blessings).

I believe in blessings.

 

This was one of them. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Whining that they’re cheap and run by billionaires just doesn’t cut it; they’re losing ninety-plus either way. Show your work.
 

Great article but that's quite an assumption. I'm not sure the Twins were destined to lose 90+ for all those seasons.  

 

Lots of people in the 2009-2012 time period were already discussing when to move Mauer out from catcher. Maybe the Twins part ways with Gardy a lot sooner. Maybe they invest in analytics earlier. But none of this really relates to spending on players, so I will bow back out.  

 

[bird]

 

Yeah.  From 2012-2014, the Twins seemed to be committed to getting low-variability immediate performance results from their FA investments.  Sometimes that is defensible to add some stability or fill out a roster, but it doesn't seem wise as an exclusive FA strategy, especially during rebuilding years.

 

This might be the best description I've seen of the 2012-14 FA strategy.

My own theory about some of the meh choices is that they were fixated on how terribly depleted the pipeline had gotten. This explains the choice of say, Correia over the choice of say, Brett Anderson or that guy I can't help Brock remember.

[bird]

 

Thank you. Marcum was the name I was trying to remember earlier in the thread.

me too

 

[tobi0040]

Bird,

 

I remember during the SNL debates in 2000 when Al Gore interrupted the moderator and said "I am going to answer that question as if it were asked to me". In this case I will be Al Gore.

 

The reality is you can never gaurantee a division title. One of the predictors last year had KC at 72 wins. But I think you could put a much better team on the field.

 

We are at $108m now. I would have not tendered Milone, Fein, and I would have traded Plouffe. That brings me to $95m.

 

Player moves - May is in the rotation. Sano is at 3b. The Plouffe trade brings me a dominant reliever, replacing May. If nolasco isn't tearing it up in ST he does not make the team. If he does he is in the pen. If he isn't lighting the world on fire by May 1, he is DFA'd.

 

I am signing mark Lowe and Steve Cishek (add $10m). And denard Span is coming home (10m).

 

Not sure about the other $10m. I suppose you could find about the best pure bat out there not named Cespedes. I think we could have Arcia hit lefties and sign a platoon DH that can hit lefties. That should not cost much.

 

I think relative to the team we field this year, our pen and OF defense is much better. The rotation is the same. And the DH we could sign will outhit Park.

[bird]

No fair, tobi. You have to start in 2010. Hell, maybe you screwed up and your payroll is at $122M with four contract obligations for guys not playing that run out through 2018.

 

But, despite how easy it is to poke massive holes in your plan for 2016, I like it, especially the Lowe signing for a premium over what he got to convince him to come here. And the DH does not outhit Park.

[tobi0040]

Yeah, me jumping to 2016 notes that I completely agree about 2012 to 2014. We weren't building a winner with 125m.

 

In hindsight maybe we could have in 2015 but a year ago did not seem like a lets go for it moment.

[Boom Boom]

The Hennepun County taxpayers (including myself) built the Twins a money-making machine. I think they're obligated to give us better than a Metrodome-quality product.

 

All that said, the first thing I would change would be to trade Cuddyer, Kubel, and Nathan at the 2011 deadline. The team wasn't going anywhere and that could have helped expedite the rebuild.

 

The Twins' loyalty to veterans has at times undermined their long-term strategy. I would cite the Hughes extension as another example.

 

I believe that to be successful building from within, you need to hurt feelings at times. Make Hughes prove himself again before rewarding him. Tell Joe Nathan that you don't care if he doesn't want to be traded. Take the PR hit of trading Cuddyer. It's all in the interest of putting together a better baseball team.

[alarp33]

The biggest issue with this front office's free agent "strategy" is the middle tier market, or washed up veterans seem to be the only place they shop.  There is absolutely no value in signing a Santana, Nolasco, Pelfrey, Correia, etc.  

 

Santana and Nolasco were #4 starters, paid to be #2/3 starters.  At best, they eat innings on a bad team. At worst, their contracts are unmovable, and they take rotation spots from younger, more deserving guys. 

 

You either take a flyer on diamonds in the rough like Hughes (young, upside), or overpay for stars.  They've obviously never done the latter, and other than Hughes (which they screwed up 1 winter later) I can't think of an example where they took a shot on someone looking to rebuild their value.  

Edited February 23, 2016 by alarp33

[drjim]

 

The Hennepun County taxpayers (including myself) built the Twins a money-making machine. I think they're obligated to give us better than a Metrodome-quality product.

All that said, the first thing I would change would be to trade Cuddyer, Kubel, and Nathan at the 2011 deadline. The team wasn't going anywhere and that could have helped expedite the rebuild.

The Twins' loyalty to veterans has at times undermined their long-term strategy. I would cite the Hughes extension as another example.

I believe that to be successful building from within, you need to hurt feelings at times. Make Hughes prove himself again before rewarding him. Tell Joe Nathan that you don't care if he doesn't want to be traded. Take the PR hit of trading Cuddyer. It's all in the interest of putting together a better baseball team.

 

I don't think the Twins are purposefully bad, if for no other reason than it has cost them a boatload of money. I"m sure they would love to put a better team out there.

 

And your 2011 trade deadline moves hypothetical is flawed. They were only 6 games back on July 31 and had been playing pretty good ball for 2 months - based on the history of the team it would have been especially aggressive to blow it up at that point.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't think the Twins are purposefully bad, if for no other reason than it has cost them a boatload of money. I"m sure they would love to put a better team out there.

 

And your 2011 trade deadline moves hypothetical is flawed. They were only 6 games back on July 31 and had been playing pretty good ball for 2 months - based on the history of the team it would have been especially aggressive to blow it up at that point.

 

6 games is a lot, and this team has traded players when they were in closer contention before.

 

I don't know if I would have done those or not......but I would have been a lot more aggressive in trading off veterans for sure. Perkins, for example.....

Edited February 23, 2016 by Mike Sixel