Article: Can Falvey Learn Anything From the Cubs' Turnaround?

[Tom Froemming]

With the Twins expected to officially announce the hiring of Derek Falvey as President of Baseball Opportunities any day now, I thought it would be worthwhile to take a look back at how the Cubs' rebuild got started. Now the envy of the baseball world, the Cubs had fallen on hard times prior to hiring their current PBO, Theo Epstein.

 

Epstein took over in October 2011 and his first move was to hire Jed Hoyer, his former right-hand man in Boston, to serve as his general manager. And it was all butterflies and rainbows in Wrigleyville from there, right?

 

Well ... not so much.The first major league signing under the new regime was, drum roll please, David DeJesus! Not exactly a big splash, franchise-defining move. Their first trade didn't work out so well, either. They sent future All-Star, Gold Glover and possible 2016 NL batting champ D.J. LaMahieu to Colorado with Tyler Colvin for Ian Stewart (who hit .210/.292/.335 in one season for the Cubs) and Casey Weathers (who never made it out of the minors).

 

Ooops. Luckily for the Cubbie faithful, they didn't misfire on another big trade they made that winter.

 

On Jan. 6, 2012, the new-look Cubs front office, just a few months on the job, made a franchise-altering trade, though it didn't appear to be that impactful at the time. Despite the old adage that pitching wins championships, the Cubs sent young fireballer Andrew Cashner, the organization's first-round pick in '08, to the Padres for Anthony Rizzo.

 

It was essentially a challenge trade, swapping two young players, one of whom (Cashner) Epstein and Hoyer couldn't have known too well, for one whom they were extremely familiar with. Epstein was the general manager of the Red Sox when they drafted Rizzo and Hoyer was the GM of the Padres when they traded for him. He was their guy.

 

It wasn't exactly a popular trade at the time, seeing as Rizzo had just hit .141/.281/.242 in 49 games with San Diego, but it has turned out to be one of the better trades of the past 20 years. Over the past three seasons, only Mike Trout and Josh Donaldson have accumulated more fWAR than Rizzo's 16.3. Cashner never lived up to his lofty expectations.

 

But it's not like it was all smooth sailing even after the Rizzo trade. The next offseason, Epstein handed out his first big money free agent contract with the Cubs. In Jan. '13, the Cubs signed Edwin Jackson to a four-year, $52 million deal and he rewarded them with a 5.37 ERA. To Twins fans, that deal looks eerily similar to the Ricky Nolasco contract.

 

The Epstein-run front office had also struggled to find a manager. Only a couple of weeks after the new regime took over they fired Mike Quade (current Rochester Red Wings skipper) despite the fact he was under contract for the 2012 season. They brought in Dale Sveum as their hand-picked replacement, but his .392 winning percentage over two seasons didn't cut it.

 

In 2014 they replaced Sveum with Rick Renteria, who served only one year on the job after some odd circumstances led Joe Maddon to take the reins. Chicago's love affair with Maddon started on Day 1, as he famously offered to buy everyone shots at his hiring press conference. The .619 winning percentage the team has posted since doesn't hurt either.

 

To summarize, thing's didn't just turn over for the Epstein-led Cubs at the flip of (GM) switch, and their record was indicative of that. In the first season under the new regime, the Cubs actually lost 101 games. They didn't post a winning record until just last season, which was the fourth under Epstein's leadership.

 

But ask any Cubs fan and they'll tell you it doesn't matter how long it took to get here. It was well worth the wait. Along with making improvements to Wrigley Field to ensure it will be a viable ballpark for the future, the Cubs have built both an elite roster and farm system. And best of all, this team appears to have a window of contention about as large as the windows that open up on the Vikings' new stadium.

 

The Cubs have baseball's best record, but even if they can't break their 107-year World Series drought this season, when the bleacher bums say "there's always next year" instead of it being a sheepish rallying cry, they can really mean it this time. They appear to be well equipped for an extended stay atop the NL. For their efforts, the Cubs just gave extensions to Epstein, Hoyer and player development guru Jason McLeod.

 

Looking at the Cubs' turnaround, the first thing that stands out to me is how little it mattered that the new regime was able to hire their own manager. They didn't really get their guy (Maddon) until the team was ready for contention.

 

Many have argued that Jim Pohlad's insistence that Paul Molitor remain as manager is a cataclysmic mistake. It probably isn't the wisest move, but at the same time it probably won't really matter. It seems there's a very good chance Falvey will able to hire his manager for the 2018 season, at the latest.

 

Of course, every team and every front office is different, and Twins fans shouldn't expect Falvey to take the Cubs rebuild as a blueprint. It is, however, worthwhile to note that what may eventually go down as one of the greatest turnarounds and front office tenures in baseball history took three years to get off the ground.

 

Given the year we've suffered through, it may be painful to accept the fact the Twins may have a few more lean years ahead. But, if Falvey and company (whoever that may be) can deliver an extended run of championship-caliber teams it will be well worth the wait, however long it may be. That should be the ultimate goal, regardless of what it means for the 2017 season.

 

Click here to view the article

[old nurse]

It pays to have high draft picks

It pays to have players other teams want to overpay for when going for it

If you are going to be bad, be really bad.

Be in a market where they turn out when the team loses.

[SarasotaBill]

Blueprint:

Steal players in trades: Jake Arrieta and Rizzo

Sign big time and costly Int'l Free Agents (think more Sano)

Be at top of draft and get sure impact college players (Bryant & Schwarber)

Know your timeline and trade older players for top prospects (Russell - SS)

When close to contending sign a Ace (Lester)

 

[ken]

Can't be afraid of trading veteran players at peak performance. Dozier and Santana should be moved this off-season.

[Cory Engelhardt]

Any chance of signing SS/3B Lourdes Gurriel? Probably not, but he could help. Talented and young, and wouldn't have to give up anything but money.

[mazeville]

In some ways the Twins are actually ahead of where the Cubs were back when Epstein and Co. took over -- they already have a cache of young talent here that just needs to be reconfigured a bit and supplemented with strong pitching. 

 

But I think the fundamental thing is that the team needs patience, and it needs to be smart about draft picks and aggressive in making trades and signing international free agents. And Falvey must be willing to take risks. Those are the things the Cubs did the past few years. 

[HitInAPinch]

But, as the PoBO, will Falvey actually being the guy making the trades?

 

All I'm saying is, it'll be interesting to see what the FO structure will look like.

[Doomtints]

If it were me, I would hire MacLeod.  You know, someone who was part of the Cubs as the turnaround occurred.  Someone who was earlier with an impressive run with the Red Sox.  

 

Cleveland, if anything, has underperformed from what was expected from them over the past three years -- and this isn't one of the tougher divisions in baseball.  The Cubs have to contend with St. Louis every year -- a team so consistently good where they still could knock the Cubs out of the playoffs in spite of the Cubs dominating the regular season (note:  I don't think this will happen).  

 

The talent on the Cubs team truly is impressive.  They're not a mirage.  If the Twins want to duplicate that, that's where they should pull front office talent from.

 

Pulling talent from Cleveland is not tragic, mind you.  But in my opinion it's not hiring the best available.  2nd best, maybe.  But why not go with the best?

 

So I think asking if Falvey can replicate what happened with the Cubs is a bad question.  He had nothing to do with that and we can bet he will have a different way of doing things than the Cubs front office.  A better question is whether he can replicate what happened with the Indians ... nevermind that the Indians will be already replicating it in the same division as the Twins.  If this were chess, I would call it a stalemate.  

 

</rant>

Edited September 30, 2016 by Doomtints

[gunnarthor]

Probably makes more sense to look at Cleveland's run the last few years - you know, where Falvey worked.  

 

The Cubs turn around involved some very nice trades but it also involved spending lots of money on high impact free agents.  They have 16 guys on their roster who have managed 1.0 WAR or more - 8 of them were free agents - including 3 of their 5 starters (Lackey, Lester and Hammel).  They've also been extremely healthy this year - 5 starters have made 29 or more starts.  

[blindeke]

The other thing to learn is that it's OK to trade away your best pitcher (e.g. Samadzija) if they're not going to help you down the road.

[beckmt]

Would also have picked McLeod. Think it will depend on money Pohlad will spend. Need an ace plus two end of bullpen pieces to give kids time to develop. Bullpen this year, ace next winter. That will be pricey.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Is there anything saying that McCloud cannot be the GM?

[DocBauer]

Interesting read, but not sure how the Cubs situation plays to the Twins status at this time. Other than maybe some NOT to do items, such as big FA contracts. At least not now. Of course there really isn't a big name SP that would help the Twins this year anyway.

 

he really has two major things to accomplish at this time, and neither affects the on the field product directly One is to make a sound choice at GM who shares his vision, (who WILL have an affect on the on the field product), and then to do a wholesale review of the analytics, scouting and milb departments.

 

I believe changes need to be made, and very probably additions made as well. Personally, I don't believe any portion of the Twins are being run by a collection of stooges or keystone cops, but there do appear to be disconnects here and there from scouting to preparation.

 

Remember, the Twins minor league side of things is and has been well regarded in reference to prospects. And the Twins don't and can't tell anyone what to think or how to rank. They do that themselves. But there does seem to be a disconnect in preparation at all levels.

[Tom Froemming]

 

Probably makes more sense to look at Cleveland's run the last few years - you know, where Falvey worked.  

 

You can check out Nick's piece, What Do We Know About Derek Falvey? or Gleeman's piece at Baseball Prospectus, or La Velle's write up or Berardino's for more on Falvey/Cleveland.

 

The tough thing about analyzing anything in concern to the Indians is we're not sure what can be attributed to Falvey and what should be credited to Mark Shapiro/Chris Antonetti/Mike Chernoff/etc, you know, the guys who were actually running the Indians.

[chpettit19]

The beginning of the Cubs rebuild and the principles behind the whole thing are things Falvey or any front office can learn from. It's easy to point at Lester and Lackey and say they make too much and the Pohlads will never pay that money. But those were "put us over the top" signings. The Cubs looked deep into pitching analytics and went out and got guys they felt were underperforming, but could be very good pitchers. The 4 big arms they brought in (Arrieta, Lester, Lackey, Hammel) are all outperforming their career numbers. Obviously Lester and Lackey were big time pitchers before they stepped foot in that clubhouse, but Arrieta was awful and Hammel was pedestrian at best. The Cubs have targeted certain analytics and skills in pitchers and have a program to help build those pitchers into above average players. They also have the clubhouse atmosphere that breeds healthy competition and hard work.

 

Offensively they built around big time prospects and crushing every pick at the top of the draft. They know high end college bats are the most likely to turn out to be the players you want. High school arms are the least likely. So they stocked their system with high end college bats and mixed that with trading away any player worth anything that they didn't expect to be around once they got good. The overabundance of impact bats in their system put them in a position to make deadline deals during the seasons they expect to compete for a championship. They went out and got the best closer in the game without putting a dent in their long term window for success.

 

Those are all things Falvey can learn from. I have high hopes for his ability to build a pitching staff, as that's what he focused on in Cleveland. The Twins are at a different stage of their rebuild as they have their big time prospects already in the bigs and need to do things quickly to improve the pitching staff before the Sanos and Buxtons of the world leave in free agency. The thing the Cubs did best was time their rebuild. They got everyone to the bigs around the same time and built it all together. The first thing Falvey needs to do is get an accurate read on the timeline for serious contention.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The Cubs turn around involved some very nice trades but it also involved spending lots of money on high impact free agents.  They have 16 guys on their roster who have managed 1.0 WAR or more - 8 of them were free agents - including 3 of their 5 starters (Lackey, Lester and Hammel).

Hammel and to an extent Lackey hardly fit the description of "spending lots of money."  Their combined guarantee ($52 mil for 4 player seasons) falls right between Nolasco (4/49) and Santana (4/55), and also less per year than the Hughes extension (3/42).  Zobrist is in that department too (4/56).  Other Cubs free agent acquisitions with 1+ bWAR include Fowler (1/13) and Ross (2/5).

 

If a new Twins front office can better target guys in that range, more power to them!

 

Lester I will grant, as well as Heyward, although the latter clearly hasn't contributed much if anything to the Cubs turnaround so far.  Take away those two, the Cubs still make the playoffs this year and last, with a payroll in 2011 Twins territory.

Edited September 30, 2016 by spycake

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Is there anything saying that McCloud cannot be the GM?

McLeod's brand-new 5 year contract with the Cubs probably precludes it.

[TheLeviathan]

Epstein was a realist and asked Cubs fans to be the same.  Took a little time, but the payoff is what matters.  

 

The Twins NEED to be realists this offseason, like they failed to be last offseason.  And hopefully we'll enjoy the payoff in a few seasons too.

[Doomtints]

 

 

The tough thing about analyzing anything in concern to the Indians is we're not sure what can be attributed to Falvey and what should be credited to Mark Shapiro/Chris Antonetti/Mike Chernoff/etc, you know, the guys who were actually running the Indians.

 

Probably doesn't matter.  If Falvey is a smart guy, he will have learned by watching what those guys were doing.  

[gunnarthor]

 

Hammel and to an extent Lackey hardly fit the description of "spending lots of money."  Their combined guarantee ($52 mil for 4 player seasons) falls right between Nolasco (4/49) and Santana (4/55), and also less per year than the Hughes extension (3/42).  Zobrist is in that department too (4/56).  Other Cubs free agent acquisitions with 1+ bWAR include Fowler (1/13) and Ross (2/5).

 

If a new Twins front office can better target guys in that range, more power to them!

 

Lester I will grant, as well as Heyward, although the latter clearly hasn't contributed much if anything to the Cubs turnaround so far.  Take away those two, the Cubs still make the playoffs this year and last, with a payroll in 2011 Twins territory.

Right, but when they make a 50m signing, they go make another.  Those 8 FA that have managed 1 WAR are making nearly 93m this year.  That doesn't count the nearly 20m the Cubs are paying for FA that have been worth less than that or were released but who they are still paying.  

 

And even if you take out Lester and Heyward, their payroll is still over 125m which is roughly 20m more than the Twins.  I'm honestly not sure how anyone can look at the Cubs and appreciate how much the ability to buy has helped this team.  

[gunnarthor]

 

 

 

Offensively they built around big time prospects and crushing every pick at the top of the draft. They know high end college bats are the most likely to turn out to be the players you want. High school arms are the least likely. 

 

That narrative is incorrect.  Since Epstein and Hoyer took over, they've had 5 guys make the majors that they've drafted and only one, Bryant, is a "crushed pick".  Obviously, too early to say the others won't be good but they are not the reason the Cubs are winning 100+ games this year. They've built around free agents and great trades.  

[chpettit19]

The Cubs are an enviable team because they are set up for success for years because of how they built their team.Their draft picks are not the main reason they're great this year, but drafting an MVP caliber player (Bryant), an All-Star caliber player (Schwarber), a very likely every day player (Almost) and a consensus top 50 prospect with your 4 first round picks is crushing it at the top of the draft and is how you build a long term competitive team. And if that's what we want in MN then the narrative is not incorrect. The draft is 1 of several parts of building a successful franchise, but it's a huge one in a smallish market when you're drafting in the top 10. You need to make those picks count. And the Cubs have.

[chpettit19]

Almora is the everyday player, not Almost. Sorry, autocorrect got me on that one.

[FireFalvey]

Man, I forgot that Epstein was at the helm when they made the Edwin Jackson signing. A great way to set the bar low, I suppose.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Right, but when they make a 50m signing, they go make another.  Those 8 FA that have managed 1 WAR are making nearly 93m this year.  That doesn't count the nearly 20m the Cubs are paying for FA that have been worth less than that or were released but who they are still paying.

Again, I think "another, and another" exaggerates.  Outside of Lester and Heyward, they've made exactly two $50 million signings -- Zobrist and Edwin Jackson.  If you want to combine Lackey and Hammel into one $52 mil signing, fine, but that puts them at 3 which is basically no different than the three the Twins have signed in the same period (Nolasco, Santana, and extending Hughes).

 

 

And even if you take out Lester and Heyward, their payroll is still over 125m which is roughly 20m more than the Twins.  I'm honestly not sure how anyone can look at the Cubs and appreciate how much the ability to buy has helped this team.  

 

Twins were probably around $125 mil in 2011, adjusted for a few years of inflation.  I think we'd be thrilled with ~$125 mil payroll and back to back playoff appearances, which is where the Cubs would be at right now even without Lester and Heyward.

 

I have no doubt the Cubs have an ability to buy, and it will help them, but it hasn't helped them a ton yet.  Lester is about it, and as has been noted, they still have a great starting staff without him.  The value will come if Lester puts them over the top, or if they can still make more moves even if Heyward remains a dud, etc.

[gunnarthor]

 

Again, I think "another, and another" exaggerates.  Outside of Lester and Heyward, they've made exactly two $50 million signings -- Zobrist and Edwin Jackson.  If you want to combine Lackey and Hammel into one $52 mil signing, fine, but that puts them at 3 which is basically no different than the three the Twins have signed in the same period (Nolasco, Santana, and extending Hughes).

 

Twins were probably around $125 mil in 2011, adjusted for a few years of inflation.  I think we'd be thrilled with ~$125 mil payroll and back to back playoff appearances, which is where the Cubs would be at right now even without Lester and Heyward.

 

I have no doubt the Cubs have an ability to buy, and it will help them, but it hasn't helped them a ton yet.  Lester is about it, and as has been noted, they still have a great starting staff without him.  The value will come if Lester puts them over the top, or if they can still make more moves even if Heyward remains a dud, etc.

So, your argument is: Ignore Lester; Zorbist, Lackey, Hammel and Jackson = Santana, Hughes, Nolasco; Ignore Heyward; Ignore the other 40m on this years payroll for the other FA  and this makes them equal to the Twins in 2011 with inflation factored in?  Really?  (And it doesn't b/c inflation isn't that big).  

And we haven't even mentioned how their payroll advantages allow them to add on salary for guys like Chapman, Smith, Montero.  

 

The Cubs have done a lot of stuff right but they've been able to spend their way out of a number of mistakes.  That's a huge advantage that they have.  I have no idea why you are trying to minimize that other than to try and claim a level playing field that clearly doesn't exist.  They have a 185m payroll.  That's a huge asset which they have used very well.  But it's not a realistic plan for the Twins under the Pohlads.  

 

[jimmer]

Theo has been lucky.  It's all been luck.  Any GM could have done what he did with the Red Sox and now the Cubs :-)

[Mike Sixel]

 

Theo has been lucky.  It's all been luck.  Any GM could have done what he did with the Red Sox and now the Cubs :-)

 

It's all luck and money, jimmer. Can't expect the Twins to have either.....

[markos]

 

So, your argument is: Ignore Lester; Zorbist, Lackey, Hammel and Jackson = Santana, Hughes, Nolasco; Ignore Heyward; Ignore the other 40m on this years payroll for the other FA  and this makes them equal to the Twins in 2011 with inflation factored in?  Really?  (And it doesn't b/c inflation isn't that big).  

And we haven't even mentioned how their payroll advantages allow them to add on salary for guys like Chapman, Smith, Montero.  

 

The Cubs have done a lot of stuff right but they've been able to spend their way out of a number of mistakes.  That's a huge advantage that they have.  I have no idea why you are trying to minimize that other than to try and claim a level playing field that clearly doesn't exist.  They have a 185m payroll.  That's a huge asset which they have used very well.  But it's not a realistic plan for the Twins under the Pohlads.  

The argument for emulating the Cubs is that they have acquired and developed a cost-controlled core (Bryant, Rizzo, Russell, Baez, Arrieta, Hendricks) that you can basically pencil in for 30 WAR and will cost less than $25M both this season and next. At essentially any payroll level, that core is enough to put a team into contention. The Cubs financial resources are an advantage, but right now it is basically just pushing them from a 90+ team to a 100+ team. Of course, it will play a bigger roll after 2017 as they have to keep this core together.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

So, your argument is: Ignore Lester; Zorbist, Lackey, Hammel and Jackson = Santana, Hughes, Nolasco; Ignore Heyward; Ignore the other 40m on this years payroll for the other FA and this makes them equal to the Twins in 2011 with inflation factored in? Really? (And it doesn't b/c inflation isn't that big).

 

And we haven't even mentioned how their payroll advantages allow them to add on salary for guys like Chapman, Smith, Montero.

 

The Cubs have done a lot of stuff right but they've been able to spend their way out of a number of mistakes. That's a huge advantage that they have. I have no idea why you are trying to minimize that other than to try and claim a level playing field that clearly doesn't exist. They have a 185m payroll. That's a huge asset which they have used very well. But it's not a realistic plan for the Twins under the Pohlads.

The Cubs have awesome spending power. But the fact is, the Cubs flexed relatively little of it under Epstein, with the exceptions of Lester and Heyward relatively recently and to relatively minor effect so far. No matter how many times you keep citing David Ross as one of "8 free agents with 1+ WAR" doesn't change that. The bulk of the Cubs plan to date is absolutely something the Twins could try to emulate if they wanted.

 

I think we will see the Cubs financial power come into play more the next few years, as they maintain and build further on their success thus far.

Edited October 1, 2016 by spycake