Article: Less Is More?

[Tom Froemming]

During this week's Winter Meetings we've seen the Chicago White Sox trade two of their premier players, Chris Sale and Adam Eaton, for a total of seven prospects. The moves have skyrocketed the White Sox farm system, which has been rated in the bottom third of baseball for several years.

 

With Sale and Eaton both being very valuable thanks to their ages and team-friendly contracts, the White Sox managed to land both quality and quantity in terms of the prospects they acquired. For the Twins, it's likely the front office will have to choose between quality and quantity in their deals this winter.It's not difficult to imagine Derek Falvey & Co. making a couple of similar deals, though on a slightly smaller scale. But with a solid young foundation already in place and more help on the way with the No. 1 pick in this upcoming June's draft, should the Twins be more focused on top quality in their returns?

 

The Brian Dozier trade winds continue to swirl, but things have been curiously quiet on the Ervin Santana front. Maybe neither of them get traded this offseason, but it seems obvious that if one goes there's not much reason to hold on to the other. So why not try to move them both in the same deal?

 

There are rumored to be multiple teams interested in Dozier, but the most smoke has been surrounding the Los Angeles Dodgers. And, like most teams, the Dodgers could use another starting pitcher. This would be the ultimate putting all your eggs in the same basket deal, but how about offering Dozier and Santana for 20-year-old wonder boy Julio Urias?

 

Getting third and fourth starters, middle relievers or solid everyday players is never all that difficult. Every year those types of players can be acquired on the free agent market, and with a core of cheap young players coming up and Joe Mauer's contract coming off the books soon the Twins should have spending room in the future.

 

Getting aces, shutdown closers or stud hitters is extremely difficult. Even when those players become available you either have to sell your farm system just to get them as a half-season rental or sign them to ridiculous free agent contracts that are two or three years longer than you'd like.

 

As with any young player, Urias is a lottery ticket, but his odds of giving you a jackpot are as high as they get. And if Urias hits you would have a player who is great, young and under extended team control.

 

Of course, all this is assuming the Dodgers would even agree to the swap. Despite facing more advanced hitters his entire minor league career, the Mexican lefty dominated. Urias has a 2.66 ERA and 10.5 K/9 over 267 1/3 innings in the minors. He got the call to the show last season as a 19-year-old and did not experience much of a learning curve. Over 77 innings with the Dodgers, Urias had a 3.39 ERA and averaged 9.8 K/9.

 

That's the kind of player who is next to impossible for the Twins to acquire under normal circumstances. Jose De Leon, the most rumored centerpiece in purposed Dozier deals, looks completely ordinary next to Urias.

 

But still, it's much more likely Dozier is traded for a package of youngsters. And to be fair, both Falvey and GM Thad Levine have first-hand experience acquiring some really impressive players in such packages. But when those trades don't work out, well ... we all remember the Johan Santana trade.

 

Maybe the Urias scenario isn't realistic, but what do you think about the idea in general? Should the Twins shoot for the moon and package Dozier and Ervin in the same deal, or should they try to diversify their returns and trade them in separate deals for packages of prospects?

 

Click here to view the article

[twins_89]

Aren't the Dodgers trying to dump Kazmir and McCarthy? If they are already looking to offload vet pitchers I doubt they are interested in Santana. While he would be a clear upgrade for the end of the Dodgers rotation I think they are looking to use their money on a 3rd baseman and a closer.

[theBOMisthebomb]

Diversify and get as much talent as possible and reload that farm system. With the return the White Sox received this week the Twins should be emboldened to hold out and maximize their return if they choose to deal Dozier and/or Santana.

[Mr. Brooks]

I'd be shocked if the Dodgers would even consider that deal.

If they would, you obviously take it.

[DaveW]

I'd be shocked if the Dodgers would even consider that deal.

If they would, you obviously take it.

They wouldn't think about it for a minute IMHO.

 

Though the article does make some good points overall! I would love if they could somehow snag that deal, I just wish it was San Diego we were trading with!

Edited December 9, 2016 by DaveW

[The Wise One]

Urias has probably pitched enough in the majors to not be considered a prospect. Offering more veterans is not going to get Urias. Now if you were offering Sano and Dozier for Urias and prospects, the Dodgers might consider it.

[Tom Froemming]

 

I'd be shocked if the Dodgers would even consider that deal.
If they would, you obviously take it.

You're right, even combining both Dozier and Ervin probably isn't enough to get Urias. But if you swap in Alex Reyes of the Cardinals or Tyler Glasnow of the Pirates or whoever you feel is the best guy that combo could possibly net, would you rather do that or try to trade Dozier and Santana separately for more prospects?

 

I guess the bottom line is I'm wondering if there's any avenue in which the Twins can land a young pitcher better than Jose De Leon, or is that the highest we can realistically hope for. No disrespect to him, De Leon would be a huge add for the future of the rotation, but I just wonder. I'm sure that's the question Falvey is trying to find an answer to right now.

[Cory Engelhardt]

I think if the Twins want to acquire a potential future ace, they have to look more at guys like Yadier Alvarez, who is also in the Dodgers system. Yes, Urias is closer to being an ace, but for the Twins to acquire someone who has that potential, they have to look a rung or two lower in the minors to find someone to mold.

I don't even know if the Dodgers would trade Alvarez, but he absolutely has the build, along with a plus fastball and a plus slider, to potentially be that top of the rotation guy in maybe 2018 or 2019.

[Linus]

I've been saying all along that they need to target elite pitching and nothing else. We can patch holes in the lineup and you can always find third starters.

[Cory Engelhardt]

Or, to piggy off Brandon Warne's post from about a week ago or so, why not target someone younger who has already had a season or so in the majors who took some lumps already? Archie Bradley would be PERFECT for this team, and would absolutely be cheaper than acquiring someone like Urias.

[ashbury]

but it seems obvious that if one goes there's not much reason to hold on to the other.

One has little to do with the other.

 

Dozier is a trade candidate because of an excess of MLB talent at his position. Much the same as we traded AJ when Mauer was ready.

 

It might be true that something could be obtained for ESan, and I won't protest if the return is good, but we are not dealing from an excess at his position, and we don't have any productive use I know of for the salary a trade would likely free up.

 

I advocate trying to improve the major league roster going into each season - except for the case at the beginning of a rebuild when the prospect shelf is bare, and that is not us now. Worst to first is rare, so I want improvement this year; there is value in not subjecting our several good young players to a losing atmosphere.

 

Falvey has been quoted that he needs to be overwhelmed in order to trade Dozier, but for me Santana is the real case where a trade offer would need to surprise me.

 

All that said, if ESan was the additional key that unlocked Urias, I would not hesitate. I just doubt it.

[mazeville]

Twins aren't getting Urias. Dodgers wouldn't trade him for Chris Sale. So there's no reason to believe they'd trade him for a combination of Dozier and Santana. 

 

That said, I definitely get the sentiment: The Twins need high upside talent. They need a top-flight starter, not yet another No. 3 starter. But I'd be on board with them getting someone who is not quite major league ready if they get that No. 1 starter type. They're not competing next year, anyway.

[Cory Engelhardt]

Plus, really, let's say Falvey's training methods help develop pitchers at a better rate than we have, since, well, forever. That is going to be noticeable probably not this year, but in the coming 2-3 years.

Adding someone like Yadier Alvarez (I'm not saying that is possible, just saying) along with a Fernando Romero, or a Kohl Stewart (with new techniques) or Gonsalves or Jay etc, along with #1 overall pick, comp round A pick and #1 pick in the 2nd round. Well, let's just say, hopefully by 2018 or 2019 we are seeing real change to the pitching staff in one form or another.

[Doomtints]

The Twins changed their tune a bit and said they'd kind of like to keep Dozier.  Of course, this was likely a bargaining tactic.

 

I would have to give the Twins some kudos if they decided to walk away rather than rush into a deal that they felt wasn't good enough.  This doesn't mean a trade still won't happen, but it's a good sign that the Twins are open to walking away from the table if the deal isn't to their liking yet.  

 

Though it of course must be brought up that there will be some roster problems to sort out if Dozier stays.  Polanco gets blocked or Escobar goes away, and the Twins will still have the holes that could be shored up a bit through a Dozier trade.  

 

This reminds me a bit of the Santana trade, where it took a hell of a long time to get the deal done, though in that case the Twins still didn't get what they wanted.  

Edited December 9, 2016 by Doomtints

[markos]

When it comes to pitching, I prefer quantity-over-quality, for three reasons:

 

1) The Twins are pretty bad right now. Though I think their overall talent is better than the record indicated last year, they still have way too many below-average spots on the roster - and nowhere is that more obvious than in the rotation. Yes, there are a lot of good and interesting pitching prospects coming up, but the failure rate is really high on pitchers. If the Twins want a rotation with five average-or-better starters, they probably need something like 15+ legitimate pitching prospects.

 

2) I'm not certain how much having an Ace helps if the rest of the roster (and rotation) is weak, even in the playoffs. In this team's own recent history, there is a very good argument that Johan was the best pitcher in baseball from 2004-2007, yet in those 4 years the Twins only made the playoffs twice, won only one game in the playoffs, and they went 1-2 in the 3 games Johan pitched (even though Johan only gave up 3 runs combined in those three games).

 

3) Cashing in all of your trade chips for a single young pitcher with "Ace potential" seems like a good way to ensure that you end up without any decent pitchers at all. Johan is a good example; pitching development is unpredictable, non-linear and, frankly, seemingly random. Who knows what currently unheralded young (or not so young) pitcher will make a small mechanical change, or add a pitch, or remove a pitch, or change a grip, or slide on the rubber, or something else that seems completely random, and go from just a guy to a GUY. Corey Kluber was just kind of interesting as a 24yo AA pitcher, and he was a year removed from having as many walks as strikeouts when he was traded. But somewhere along the line he learned/developed an unhittable cutter/slider and is one of the top pitchers in baseball. Carlos Carrasco passed through waivers. Jake Arrieta was below-average - arguably replacement level - for 4 years before becoming one of the best pitchers in baseball at age 28. Kyle Hendricks was an uninspiring 22yo in A+ when he was traded. Did all four of those pitchers, at their respective nadirs, have "Ace potential"? Even at the time of their acquisitions, only Carrasco clearly had "Ace potential", though I can see an argument that Arrieta might have.

 

So looking at a couple hypothetical trade packages from the Dodgers:
1) Alvarez
2) De Leon, Brock Stewart, Mitch White

 

I am not convinced that the odds of Alvarez becoming an Ace are that much better (if any better) than the odds of ONE OF De Leon, Stewart, or White becoming an Ace. I am convinced that the total expected value of package 2 will exceed package 1. So to me it is pretty clear that package 2 is better. I recognize that a strategy of quantity-over-quality depends a lot on the pitching development of the organization, but I'm optimistic that Falvey can put a good program in place.

[Doomtints]

True.  The Twins are in a situation where quantity over quality is prudent.  It would be better for them to get this step over with as soon as possible so that in future years they can focus on quality.

[Cory Engelhardt]

 

When it comes to pitching, I prefer quantity-over-quality, for three reasons:

 

1) The Twins are pretty bad right now. Though I think their overall talent is better than the record indicated last year, they still have way too many below-average spots on the roster - and nowhere is that more obvious than in the rotation. Yes, there are a lot of good and interesting pitching prospects coming up, but the failure rate is really high on pitchers. If the Twins want a rotation with five average-or-better starters, they probably need something like 15+ legitimate pitching prospects.

 

2) I'm not certain how much having an Ace helps if the rest of the roster (and rotation) is weak, even in the playoffs. In this team's own recent history, there is a very good argument that Johan was the best pitcher in baseball from 2004-2007, yet in those 4 years the Twins only made the playoffs twice, won only one game in the playoffs, and they went 1-2 in the 3 games Johan pitched (even though Johan only gave up 3 runs combined in those three games).

 

3) Cashing in all of your trade chips for a single young pitcher with "Ace potential" seems like a good way to ensure that you end up without any decent pitchers at all. Johan is a good example; pitching development is unpredictable, non-linear and, frankly, seemingly random. Who knows what currently unheralded young (or not so young) pitcher will make a small mechanical change, or add a pitch, or remove a pitch, or change a grip, or slide on the rubber, or something else that seems completely random, and go from just a guy to a GUY. Corey Kluber was just kind of interesting as a 24yo AA pitcher, and he was a year removed from having as many walks as strikeouts when he was traded. But somewhere along the line he learned/developed an unhittable cutter/slider and is one of the top pitchers in baseball. Carlos Carrasco passed through waivers. Jake Arrieta was below-average - arguably replacement level - for 4 years before becoming one of the best pitchers in baseball at age 28. Kyle Hendricks was an uninspiring 22yo in A+ when he was traded. Did all four of those pitchers, at their respective nadirs, have "Ace potential"? Even at the time of their acquisitions, only Carrasco clearly had "Ace potential", though I can see an argument that Arrieta might have.

 

So looking at a couple hypothetical trade packages from the Dodgers:
1) Alvarez
2) De Leon, Brock Stewart, Mitch White

 

I am not convinced that the odds of Alvarez becoming an Ace are that much better (if any better) than the odds of ONE OF De Leon, Stewart, or White becoming an Ace. I am convinced that the total expected value of package 2 will exceed package 1. So to me it is pretty clear that package 2 is better. I recognize that a strategy of quantity-over-quality depends a lot on the pitching development of the organization, but I'm optimistic that Falvey can put a good program in place.

 

I don't know if the Twins can get Alvarez for Dozier. That may be unrealistic.

 

That said, if the Twins are going to get Alvarez, it wouldn't be a 1 for 1, and they could probably add a Brock Stewart in that deal. Hypothetically. Or, at least, another pitcher in the lower levels.

[Tom Froemming]

 

When it comes to pitching, I prefer quantity-over-quality, for three reasons:

 

1) The Twins are pretty bad right now. Though I think their overall talent is better than the record indicated last year, they still have way too many below-average spots on the roster - and nowhere is that more obvious than in the rotation. Yes, there are a lot of good and interesting pitching prospects coming up, but the failure rate is really high on pitchers. If the Twins want a rotation with five average-or-better starters, they probably need something like 15+ legitimate pitching prospects.

 

2) I'm not certain how much having an Ace helps if the rest of the roster (and rotation) is weak, even in the playoffs. In this team's own recent history, there is a very good argument that Johan was the best pitcher in baseball from 2004-2007, yet in those 4 years the Twins only made the playoffs twice, won only one game in the playoffs, and they went 1-2 in the 3 games Johan pitched (even though Johan only gave up 3 runs combined in those three games).

 

3) Cashing in all of your trade chips for a single young pitcher with "Ace potential" seems like a good way to ensure that you end up without any decent pitchers at all. Johan is a good example; pitching development is unpredictable, non-linear and, frankly, seemingly random. Who knows what currently unheralded young (or not so young) pitcher will make a small mechanical change, or add a pitch, or remove a pitch, or change a grip, or slide on the rubber, or something else that seems completely random, and go from just a guy to a GUY. Corey Kluber was just kind of interesting as a 24yo AA pitcher, and he was a year removed from having as many walks as strikeouts when he was traded. But somewhere along the line he learned/developed an unhittable cutter/slider and is one of the top pitchers in baseball. Carlos Carrasco passed through waivers. Jake Arrieta was below-average - arguably replacement level - for 4 years before becoming one of the best pitchers in baseball at age 28. Kyle Hendricks was an uninspiring 22yo in A+ when he was traded. Did all four of those pitchers, at their respective nadirs, have "Ace potential"? Even at the time of their acquisitions, only Carrasco clearly had "Ace potential", though I can see an argument that Arrieta might have.

 

So looking at a couple hypothetical trade packages from the Dodgers:
1) Alvarez
2) De Leon, Brock Stewart, Mitch White

 

I am not convinced that the odds of Alvarez becoming an Ace are that much better (if any better) than the odds of ONE OF De Leon, Stewart, or White becoming an Ace. I am convinced that the total expected value of package 2 will exceed package 1. So to me it is pretty clear that package 2 is better. I recognize that a strategy of quantity-over-quality depends a lot on the pitching development of the organization, but I'm optimistic that Falvey can put a good program in place.

This is great stuff, thanks for taking the time to comment. To your point, even De Leon, a former 24th-round-pick, wasn't a heralded prospect as recently as a couple years ago.

 

You've definitely swayed my thinking some, and in general I have to agree with you. But when I think specifically about the Twins position right now I would still be inclined to go high risk/high reward. I feel like with Berrios, Gonsalves, Romero, Jay, Stewart, Mejia and the like all coming up and other options in Gibson, Duffey and even May the Twins should have no problem finding options to fill out the rotation.

 

While the guys I just listed have either under performed or haven't yet cracked the majors, that's still already nine options. And who knows, maybe one or two of those guys can be one of the type of pitchers who turns into a complete stud with a new pitch/mechanical tweak. I guess you can never have enough pitching, but I'm still inclined to shoot for the moon and focus on just trying to get the best pitcher possible instead of the best package.

[eLee612]

All I want for Christmas is Urias in a Sota uniform... but Santa always marks my letters "Return to Sender."

[Tom Froemming]

 

One has little to do with the other.

 

Dozier is a trade candidate because of an excess of MLB talent at his position. Much the same as we traded AJ when Mauer was ready.

 

It might be true that something could be obtained for ESan, and I won't protest if the return is good, but we are not dealing from an excess at his position, and we don't have any productive use I know of for the salary a trade would likely free up.

 

I advocate trying to improve the major league roster going into each season - except for the case at the beginning of a rebuild when the prospect shelf is bare, and that is not us now. Worst to first is rare, so I want improvement this year; there is value in not subjecting our several good young players to a losing atmosphere.

 

Falvey has been quoted that he needs to be overwhelmed in order to trade Dozier, but for me Santana is the real case where a trade offer would need to surprise me.

 

All that said, if ESan was the additional key that unlocked Urias, I would not hesitate. I just doubt it.

I feel like if the team thinks they can compete by 2018 they should keep both Dozier and Ervin. If not, they both should be traded, regardless of replacement options. Plus let's say Dozier is traded for De Leon, then I would argue that there is in a way an excess, maybe not in terms of talent, but in numbers.

 

As it stands the rotation would be Ervin, Santiago, Gibson, Berrios and Hughes (if healthy) or maybe Duffey/May/Mejia with Gonsalves knocking on the door in Triple A. I'm skeptical he'll stick, but Rule 5 guy Justin Haley is another option. Toss in De Leon and it becomes difficult to try to work all these guys into a five-man rotation even with the expected injuries/attrition. Might as well trade Ervin at that point.

[jimmer]

 

I feel like if the team thinks they can compete by 2018 they should keep both Dozier and Ervin. If not, they both should be traded, regardless of replacement options. Plus let's say Dozier is traded for De Leon, then I would argue that there is in a way an excess, maybe not in terms of talent, but in numbers.

 

As it stands the rotation would be Ervin, Santiago, Gibson, Berrios and Hughes (if healthy) or maybe Duffey/May/Mejia with Gonsalves knocking on the door in Triple A. I'm skeptical he'll stick, but Rule 5 guy Justin Haley is another option. Toss in De Leon and it becomes difficult to try to work all these guys into a five-man rotation even with the expected injuries/attrition. Might as well trade Ervin at that point.

Um, remove Gibson, Remove Hughes, Remove Santiago, Duffey.  Easy.  Done.  What's the next obstacle for getting DeLeon?

[Dantes929]

I think middle of rotation guys are underrated here and the reason is that our middle of rotation guys have not pitched liked middle of rotation guys.    Santana the last couple years has pitched more like a solid #2 and the problem is all the rest have pitched like back of rotation and not even good back of the rotation.    Gibson had one year as a solid middle and May was certainly on track before being sent to the pen.  A better year from Berrios and adding Deleon and I would say we had a decent potential of 5 guys with   4.5 ERA or better and in some cases significantly better.    If that doesn't excite anyone just consider that we scored 4.4 runs a game and gave up 5.5 and that 4.5 on average is considered a quality start (6 innings and 3 runs). 

[mikelink45]

The winter meetings now over.  Big trades, big acquisitions and we wait.  Might be the best strategy for the Twins, but it is torture for the fans.  We speculate, look for any lively arm and wait.  Hard to do, especially when the leadership is too new for a track record.   

 

I would be in favor of 2 good arms, move out some of the 4/5 starters that we have in abundance (but not a good abundance).  An Ace is great, but not the answer, if it was the White Sox would be winning instead of trading.  It takes a team, it takes a level of competence and not just one stud. 

 

And in this age, it takes a good bullpen.  Look at how many transactions we have seen around the bullpen.  I do not believe that this is simply because there are a limited number of starters.   Sale may be the only starter worth talking about unless our Rule 5 guy blows us away.

[ashbury]

As it stands the rotation would be Ervin, Santiago, Gibson, Berrios and Hughes (if healthy) or maybe Duffey/May/Mejia with Gonsalves knocking on the door in Triple A. I'm skeptical he'll stick, but Rule 5 guy Justin Haley is another option. Toss in De Leon and it becomes difficult to try to work all these guys into a five-man rotation even with the expected injuries/attrition. Might as well trade Ervin at that point.

As I said, I am willing to trade from excess. I just feel we are several months away from knowing this, with regard to starting pitching. Hughes' recovery from surgery is not a lock, for instance.

 

With those additional months, we might have a clearer idea who the excess actually is.

[Mr. Brooks]

As I said, I am willing to trade from excess. I just feel we are several months away from knowing this, with regard to starting pitching. Hughes' recovery from surgery is not a lock, for instance.

 

With those additional months, we might have a clearer idea who is the excess actually is.

And with those additional months could also come a torn UCL, another positive test, or a 5.40 ERA.

I'm not saying you play scared and take the first offer that comes along, but I think there is a ton of risk to holding onto him.