Article: Trading Places

[Nick Nelson]

The Royals are at it again.

 

After a somewhat slow start, the defending champs have come on strong, charging to the top of the division with 10 wins in their last 13 games, including five against the White Sox club they just blasted past. The Royals can do no wrong.

 

Meanwhile, the Twins remain mired in last place and can do no right. Oh, how the tides have turned.Ten years ago, in 2006, the Twins were at the apex of a successful run in the AL Central. They won 96 games with an upstart squad that featured the American League's MVP, batting champ and Cy Young. They would have had the Rookie of the Year, too, if Francisco Liriano didn't tear his UCL.

 

Terry Ryan had guided the franchise to its healthiest point in more than a decade and the future looked awfully bright.

 

Things weren't so rosy for the Royals. They were enduring a third straight 100-loss season and were amidst a stretch of 17 finishes below .500 in 18 years.

 

That June, Dayton Moore took over as Kansas City's general manager.

 

It's been a long and slow road, but under Moore's administration, the team has transformed from baseball's laughing stock to its shining pinnacle. To watch the Royals now, the idea that they were a bungling catastrophe in the not-so-distant past seems preposterous.

 

The last couple of weeks have been perfectly emblematic of how enchanted this ballclub has become. Two Sundays ago, Alex Gordon and Mike Moustakas collided in the outfield while chasing a fly ball behind third base. The results were calamitous: Gordon had broken his wrist and Moustakas had torn his ACL. In a split-second, Royals had lost two key staples in the lineup – one for at least a month and one for the year.

 

What has happened since that fateful incident? Oh, the Royals have just won eight of 10, scoring 68 runs in the process. They're crushing the ball all over the field, leaving opponents muttering. The bullpen is impenetrable as usual. The rotation has been no one's idea of stable, but it doesn't even matter. Like I said, the Royals can do no wrong.

 

On the very opposite end of the spectrum, we have the Twins. The same day Byron Buxton injected a mild spark of excitement into this nightmarish campaign by returning after a blistering stint at Triple-A, Miguel Sano went down with a hamstring injury, almost on cue. One day later, the Athletics completed a sweep of the Twins in Oakland, Minnesota's eighth in a season that is just two months old (that isn't counting the shortened two-gamer against the Baltimore in early May). In 2014, when they lost 92 games, the Twins were swept seven times total.

 

Sano had been the best producer in a bad lineup, save for maybe Joe Mauer. Ideally, others would step up in the slugger's absence over the next few weeks, but then, no one has really stepped up on this entire roster over the first third of the season.

 

And that's where the Twins now stand. If the 2016 season continues in the direction it's headed, it will not only be the organization's fifth 90-loss effort in six years, it will be a 110-loss debacle that easily surpasses any precedent in franchise history.

 

The game of baseball – with its meticulous nature, its marathon seasons, its rules for competitive balance – will always be one of ebbs and flows. Peaks and valleys are to be expected. But the paths that the Twins and Royals have followed represent some of the most extreme examples you will come across.

 

Is there a lesson to be learned from all of this? I don't know. Hopefully it doesn't take the Twins as long to dig themselves out of the dregs as it did the Royals. History doesn't dictate the future so we needn't immerse ourselves in parallels between the current swoon here and the one that lingered for so long in KC, even if those parallels are sometimes conspicuous.

 

It's also worth noting that it took Dayton Moore the better part of 10 years to turn the Royals from a cellar-dweller to an unstoppable force. And Terry Ryan is the same man who put the Twins in that enviable position they were at when Moore took over.

 

When he was seven years into his stagnating rebuild, few would have said that Moore was the man for the job. Now, no one would suggest otherwise. That's not so much a defense of TR, but a call for perspective. This situation is a lot bigger than the GM, no matter how much you want to simplify it.

 

That's why I personally believe that the first step to getting this Twins franchise back on track is a rethinking of the front office structure rather than reactive firings to appease an angry fan base.

 

Click here to view the article

[old nurse]

The 2006 Royals  had a young John Buck and an injury year for Greinke.  That is how long a rebuild can take.

[Seth Stohs]

The irony is that the Royals used the Twins model for their rebuild. They took their time, trusted scouting, and let guys play. Like the Twins from 5 years ago, the Royals had to rebuild their system, and had a lot of high picks to do that. Gordon, Moustakus and Hosmer were all Top 5 picks, and they complemented them well. 

 

 

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

To put my negative hat on ...

 

I totally get the comparison on a roster, market/payroll size, organizational development standpoint, but it's hard to call it apples-to-apples based on results:

 

2000s Twins: 1 playoff series win

2014-2015 Royals: 2 AL Pennants, 1 World Championship

 

Give me an extended rebuild with a World Series ring over multiple division titles after a shorter drought any day. Plus, let's not forget most of the 1990s were equally disastrous for both teams. So this current Twins downfall is not isolated by a huge amount of time.

 

My big take away from the Royals rebuild is that they hired somebody with experience and a track record for success from outside the organization who implemented a long-term plan/philosophy from the very beginning. Hoping Terry Ryan turns over a new leaf this late in his career is foolhardy. No plan is apparent at this point.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The irony is that the Royals used the Twins model for their rebuild. They took their time, trusted scouting, and let guys play. Like the Twins from 5 years ago, the Royals had to rebuild their system, and had a lot of high picks to do that. Gordon, Moustakus and Hosmer were all Top 5 picks, and they complemented them well. 

Not sure if this is fully accurate.  Those 3 guys you name are hardly cornerstones that the Royals success is built upon -- when they went to the World Series two years ago, Moustakas had a 75 OPS+, Hosmer 99.  Gordon has been better, particularly defensively, but he's only a 109 OPS+ since they returned to relevance in 2013.  Cain and Davis have arguments to be their team MVP in recent years, and both were acquired in trade.

 

I'd argue that the Royals success owes more to a plan to exploit market inefficiencies around defense, limiting strikeouts at the plate, and dominant relief pitching, than simply waiting around for draft picks to develop.  They were still mired in losing when they shipped out Greinke for Cain and Escobar, as well as when they sent out a top prospect in Myers for Davis and Shields.

 

I'm not sure that's ever been the Twins model for rebuilding.

[Seth Stohs]

I just said they were top 5 picks. Of course they had other high-quality players. But most of it was drafting and trading vets for minor leaguers and letting them develop. 

 

[wsnydes]

 

To put my negative hat on ...

 

I totally get the comparison on a roster, market/payroll size, organizational development standpoint, but it's hard to call it apples-to-apples based on results:

 

2000s Twins: 1 playoff series win

2014-2015 Royals: 2 AL Pennants, 1 World Championship

 

Give me an extended rebuild with a World Series ring over multiple division titles after a shorter drought any day. Plus, let's not forget most of the 1990s were equally disastrous for both teams. So this current Twins downfall is not isolated by a huge amount of time.

 

My big take away from the Royals rebuild is that they hired somebody with experience and a track record for success from outside the organization who implemented a long-term plan/philosophy from the very beginning. Hoping Terry Ryan turns over a new leaf this late in his career is foolhardy. No plan is apparent at this point.

I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I do think that both approaches were similar.  It's just that the Royals were able to actually execute it properly and have the results to show for it.  Most FA moves the Twins make are disasters or aging vets that are on their last legs.  Big money deals the Royals made worked out for them, they haven't for the Twins.  That's the biggest difference IMHO.

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

 

They were still mired in losing when they shipped out Greinke for Cain and Escobar, as well as when they sent out a top prospect in Myers for Davis and Shields.

 

 

As a big Johan Santana fan, I still shutter to compare what the Twins got in their trade with the Mets versus what KC got for Greinke (franchise SS and CF, Jake Odorizzi, who was packaged in the deal that got them their franchise closer in Wade Davis).

 

I think sometimes an organization's sustained success can come down to one deal.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I just said they were top 5 picks. Of course they had other high-quality players. But most of it was drafting and trading vets for minor leaguers and letting them develop. 

Most MLB teams are built from drafting, though, no?  It's not like the Twins are particularly unique in that regard, or that the Royals had to specifically emulate the Twins to achieve that.

 

Would you say the Mets and Giants teams that the Royals recently faced in the World Series also "used the Twins model" for their rebuilds too?

[alarp33]

 

I just said they were top 5 picks. Of course they had other high-quality players. But most of it was drafting and trading vets for minor leaguers and letting them develop. 

 

Well the Twins don't really trade vets, at least not at the right time.  And I think every team in MLB drafts.. the bad ones draft at the top.  This isn't a "Twins model", its just how baseball works.  

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

 

 they sent out a top prospect in Myers for Davis and Shields.

 

I'm not sure that's ever been the Twins model for rebuilding.

 

I was living in KC when the Myers deal went down. Everyone flipped out. I think an apt comparison would be if the Twins shipped Buxton. They had similar minor league track records and were considered future cornerstones of the franchise. But Dayton Moore had a plan and he executed the deal in spite of the public backlash.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Well the Twins don't really trade vets, at least not at the right time.  And I think every team in MLB drafts.. the bad ones draft at the top.  This isn't a "Twins model", its just how baseball works.  

 

But in the late-90s, they did trade vets, like Dave Hollins (Ortiz), Roberto Kelly (Mays), Aguilera, Knoblauch, Pierzynski, etc.

 

The Twins aren't the model now, but they certainly were 15 years ago... which is relavent to where the Royals were 8-10 years ago.

[alarp33]

 

But in the late-90s, they did trade vets, like Dave Hollins (Ortiz), Roberto Kelly (Mays), Aguilera, Knoblauch, Pierzynski, etc.

 

The Twins aren't the model now, but they certainly were 15 years ago... which is relavent to where the Royals were 8-10 years ago.

 

I'm sorry if I'm not going to pat the Twins on the back for the Royals success.  Bad teams trade veterans, that was nothing new when the Twins did it 20 years ago.  

 

I would like the Twins to follow the Royals plan in looking for new ways to win (Defense, contact, bullpen) and get out in front of a trend for once. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

The 2006 Royals  had a young John Buck and an injury year for Greinke.  That is how long a rebuild can take.

 

Honestly, I enjoy your commentary but it's becoming really hard to understand what you're saying.  I literally have no clue what the hell this means.

[TheLeviathan]

I think the lesson to be learned here is - there is a team that prizes defense in your own division, pretty much using your own model, and is succeeding.  

 

We could make up a lot of ground if we just stopped believing anyone can play the OF whenever we decide to shove them out there.  Let's just start there and work our way up.

[Seth Stohs]

 

I'm sorry if I'm not going to pat the Twins on the back for the Royals success.  Bad teams trade veterans, that was nothing new when the Twins did it 20 years ago.  

 

I would like the Twins to follow the Royals plan in looking for new ways to win (Defense, contact, bullpen) and get out in front of a trend for once. 

 

Again, I didn't say that it was something to credit the Twins for... just an ironic thing that the Royals talked publicly about their plans to model the Twins. 

 

And, I think most here would agree that when the Twins were winning from '01-10, it was based on defense, making contact (being piranhas), and their strong bullpens. 

 

The Royals deserve all the credit for their success... No one is disputing that. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

But in the late-90s, they did trade vets, like Dave Hollins (Ortiz), Roberto Kelly (Mays), Aguilera, Knoblauch, Pierzynski, etc.

 

The Twins aren't the model now, but they certainly were 15 years ago... which is relavent to where the Royals were 8-10 years ago.

Not all "vets" are created equal.  Hollins and Kelly were rental players (the kind that no longer brought aggressive trade returns anymore 10 years ago).  The modern equivalent trades are Willingham, Carroll, etc., and have returned virtually nothing, and have been meaningless to the Royals most recent rebuild.

 

That's not who the Royals traded in Greinke, although Knoblauch way back when is a fair comp.

 

And the Royals certainly didn't pattern their Myers trade after the Twins!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Again, I didn't say that it was something to credit the Twins for... just an ironic thing that the Royals talked publicly about their plans to model the Twins.

But it wasn't until they clearly broke from those plans (Myers trade, Cueto trade) that they actually achieved any success.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

And, I think most here would agree that when the Twins were winning from '01-10, it was based on defense, making contact (being piranhas), and their strong bullpens. 

In generic platitudes, maybe.  Where was the emphasis on defense when we trotted out an aging Shannon Stewart to protect a late inning lead in a playoff game?  Cuddyer at 2B?  Cuddyer and Rondell White manning the corner OF spots?

 

Heck, even the "piranha" stuff was more talk than action -- the Royals have actually emphasized SPEED to achieve those results, not just relied on Nick Punto's fluctuating BABIP.

 

And while the Twins had successful bullpens during that run, they were really nothing like the Royals recent pens.  Davis is a BEAST, and Herrera is becoming one too.  And they still bolstered those guys with Madson last year, and Soria this year.  Meanwhile, various "valued contributors" to our pen were blowing playoff leads annually, it seems, and our reinforcements were, what, Todd Jones and Matt Capps?

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

 

 

I'd argue that the Royals success owes more to a plan to exploit market inefficiencies around defense, limiting strikeouts at the plate, and dominant relief pitching, than simply waiting around for draft picks to develop.  They were still mired in losing when they shipped out Greinke for Cain and Escobar, as well as when they sent out a top prospect in Myers for Davis and Shields.

 

I'm not sure that's ever been the Twins model for rebuilding.

 

With the exception of the strikeouts at the plate, that was the exact model of the Twins in the early 2000s.

[Mike Sixel]

They have switched. The biggest difference in approach was the finish. TR never dealt prospects like Wil Myers (top 5-10 prospect in the game) for big time players, and never put a bundle of prospects together for a guy like Cueto. Ever. That remains my biggest complaint, they never finished.

 

It's fascinating how the FO defenders talk about build thru the draft is the right way, but also defend the starting rotation being 80% guys they did not draft (at the start of the year). The issue, imo, remains the same. Not going big. Three mediocre SP =/= one great SP. Trading a bad OF for a bad catcher does not fix catching.

 

yes, patience is needed. No argument. What we can't seem to agree on is any kind of timetable at all. Forever is too long to wait, 2 years are too few......other than that, there seems to be massive disagreement on how long (and whether or not it should ever be this bad this long).

[SirLoin]

 

Sano had been the best producer in a bad lineup, save for maybe Joe Mauer.

 

Or the guy tied for 4th in the AL in Batting Average.....

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

With the exception of the strikeouts at the plate, that was the exact model of the Twins in the early 2000s.

I addressed this upthread, but there were some sizable holes in the early 2000s Twins commitment to defense.

 

And while the Twins pen was solid and serviceable for much of the decade, I don't recall it ever being considered a weapon for the team.  It was rarely better than two-deep anyway, as far as arms you would trust in a playoff game (and even those arms blew their share of games).

 

And while it does seem like limiting strikeouts at the plate may not be a huge deal, that (plus speed) is a definite offensive identity for the Royals.  Even when they had some good hitters, the Twins never really had an offensive identity, and perhaps that showed in their lackluster postseason efforts -- having a real, thorough "piranha" game plan, rather than counting on BABIP luck, might have helped those lineups focus and produce more runs when it mattered?

[diehardtwinsfan]

Hawkins, Balfour, Rincoln, Guardardo, and Nathan.... I think we forget just how good the pens were during the early 2000s... we rarely lost a lead in the late innings.

[alarp33]

 

Hawkins, Balfour, Rincoln, Guardardo, and Nathan.... I think we forget just how good the pens were during the early 2000s... we rarely lost a lead in the late innings.

 

That misses the previous posters point.  Nathan didn't pitch with Guardado, Balfour or Hawkins.  

 

In '02 + '03 Hawkins, Balfour, Rincon and Guardado were together.  Rincon wasn't good yet, Balfour was never good as a Twin (not sure why he's included in here). Hawkins and Guardado were good those years. Hardly a dominant bullpen that could even be mentioned in the same breath as what the Royals are doing

[diehardtwinsfan]

The Twins consistently had shutdown pens during that timeframe.  I just mentioned a few names.  One of the going theories on teams that overperformed their pythag numbers came from the Twins and their pen.  We may not have the Royals pen today, but the early 2000s Twins had some very good bullpens.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Hawkins, Balfour, Rincoln, Guardardo, and Nathan.... I think we forget just how good the pens were during the early 2000s... we rarely lost a lead in the late innings.

They didn't have any more than 2 of those guys at once, really.  Hawkins and Guardado were gone by 2004, which was the first season for Nathan and the first year where Rincon had graduated from long relief.  Balfour never really did much of anything for us, outside of that one playoff game vs NY -- 4.63 ERA in 68 IP across two seasons, in neutral leverage.

 

No doubt they were very good pens, probably league-leading some years, but they were never really a "weapon" like the recent pens the Royals have created.  The Twins were seemingly always content with a solid closer and setup man, and then filling in solid but unspectacular performers around them.  To say that the recent Royals pen is modeled after the old Twins one is just not true.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The Twins consistently had shutdown pens during that timeframe.  I just mentioned a few names.  One of the going theories on teams that overperformed their pythag numbers came from the Twins and their pen.  We may not have the Royals pen today, but the early 2000s Twins had some very good bullpens.

Not really disputing any of this.  But it's not really comparing bullpen quality vs the current Royals, it's comparing bullpen plans, composition, expectations, deployment, etc.  The Twins pen was good, but was really just viewed as another piece on a solid all-around team (pieces which often seemed to fail us at crunch time, sadly).

 

The Royals have invested in their whole pen as a weapon, to explicitly carry the team.  The Twins never did that.

 

Just like the Royals also invested in contact, speed, and defense to help do the same.  The Twins never did that either, at best they seemed to luck into good BABIP seasons from piranha bench players (who they then rewarded with DH assignments in the playoffs, future starting roles, etc.).

 

Again, not saying the Twins were bad or any component of the team was bad, but the Twins plan and construction isn't particularly comparable to that of the current Royals.

[beckmt]

Shutdown bullpen was the new part designed by the Royals.  Other bullpens have been good,but not great at least since Cinncinatti in the 70's.  It can work, but needs decent,but not great starters, and a good offense to get leads, with very good defense.  Tough to get that together at one time.  It will take a couple to three years to see what this run has cost the Royals,  guess is that after a time(2-4) years they will get old and go back to the bottom.  Tigers are heading there now.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Shutdown bullpen was the new part designed by the Royals.  Other bullpens have been good,but not great at least since Cinncinatti in the 70's.  It can work, but needs decent,but not great starters, and a good offense to get leads, with very good defense.  Tough to get that together at one time.  It will take a couple to three years to see what this run has cost the Royals,  guess is that after a time(2-4) years they will get old and go back to the bottom.  Tigers are heading there now.

 

It cost them winning the WS, isn't that the goal? Or, is coasting to 85 wins and no playoff victories the goal?