Article: One Year In, Rebuilt Twins Front Office Is Crushing It

[gunnarthor]

 

Well the odds that 2 marginal guys like Garcia and Kintzler are going to have a meaningful impact on the last 2 months of a season are also very small.

Well, Kintzler was actually pretty good, so ....

 

I think there are two issues and one is being ignored or missed. The first issue was "is trading Kintzler good for the season?" That's been addressed. Team had 5% chance of making playoffs, yada, yada, yada. But the second question, "is a weakened bullpen a problem if we make the playoffs", is being ignored. 

 

And let's remember that we didn't get a great prospect back for him. We got a c-level prospect. He'll be 21 next year and likely pitching in high A ball. He didn't make Sickels top 20. MLBpipeline seems to be the highest on him and has him at 18 in our system. According to them, his fastball rarely touches 90. He has no plus pitches, he has control problems. They think he still has some room for projection left as he grows into his body but I suspect that part will change in their next write up. Other writers have been less kind.

 

And that's the prospect that the FO decided was worth getting in exchange for weakening a bullpen in the post-season.

[KirbyDome89]

It sounds like people are conflating the dislike for the Kintzler move with a desire to "go all in," at the deadline. It's possible to agree that gutting the farm for a short term rental is a bad idea, and at the same time realize removing the top bullpen piece for a marginal prospect probably wasn't the best decision either. 

[Monkeypaws]

 

It sounds like people are conflating the dislike for the Kintzler move with a desire to "go all in," at the deadline. It's possible to agree that gutting the farm for a short term rental is a bad idea, and at the same time realize removing the top bullpen piece for a marginal prospect probably wasn't the best decision either. 

 

Look at the Wild - Fletcher loves to swap picks for rentals, and so far it hasn't resulted in deeper playoff runs.  Going all in guarantees only one thing: a weaker farm system.

[Mike Sixel]

Look at the Wild - Fletcher loves to swap picks for rentals, and so far it hasn't resulted in deeper playoff runs.  Going all in guarantees only one thing: a weaker farm system.

Never going all in is no better. That's how you get Tyner at DH.....or a bunch of one and outs.

[howieramone2]

 

If someone can explain the masterstroke in last winter's Rule-5 draft, where we chose Miguel Diaz and then hilarity ensued all the way through July 24, I will be more inclined to decide on crushing versus non-crushing. What did we net, in exchange for the investment of a 25-man roster spot for more than half a season during which we wound up in post-season contention?

By half a season, I assume you're referring to 16 innings, We took a shot at Haley and missed. Happens all the time to every team.

[Mike Sixel]

By half a season, I assume you're referring to 16 innings, We took a shot at Haley and missed. Happens all the time to every team.

It doesn't happen to every team that they waste a roster spot for dozens of games on a rule five player.

[Monkeypaws]

 

Never going all in is no better. That's how you get Tyner at DH.....or a bunch of one and outs.

I'm sure there is evidence to support both sides, but only one team wins it all, so going all in is more likely to fail than succeed.

 

Just build a good team that doesn't need help at the deadline, like the Twins in 87 and 91.

[USAFChief]

By half a season, I assume you're referring to 16 innings, We took a shot at Haley and missed. Happens all the time to every team.

I'm going to assume Ash was referring to starting out with the first pick in the draft and ending up with the 8th pick, for no apparent benefit.

[Doomtints]

 

Look at the Wild - Fletcher loves to swap picks for rentals, and so far it hasn't resulted in deeper playoff runs.  Going all in guarantees only one thing: a weaker farm system.

 

Blockbuster trades seem to be more about $$$, as in one team once to unload. A team gutting its farm system for a couple of short term players seems to be the exception to the rule. It doesn't happen often. A team might give up a prospect it likes, but I don't see many teams having all of their worthy minor league players sent packing.

Twins fans seem to be particularly bad at using the Appeal to Extremes fallacy. It's pretty much guaranteed this card will be played in any discussion about acquiring talent or payroll. We hear this so often anyone brings up free agency, you would think there were a snowball's chance in hell this team could go bankrupt. Worrying about cash for this team is something none of us should be doing. Ditto with the horror scenarios thrown around by making trades. When was the last time you remember the Twins being BUYERS for a trade? Even the Nathan trade was the actually the Twins trying to unload somebody else. Maybe we can let them try it just once before we declare doomsday.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Doomtints

[ashbury]

I'm going to assume Ash was referring to starting out with the first pick in the draft and ending up with the 8th pick, for no apparent benefit.

That's the puzzling part. The rest just highlights that whatever it was, didn't work.

 

And as already stated, the 25-man roster spot was the more valuable resource, than just the 18 innings. They saved some face with a stint on the DL, presumably stalling to let him gain some more benefit from coaching, and threw in the towel when out of choices.

 

Take Haley first, I'm cool with that, because I'll trust that the FO felt he was the best pick to click. Monkey around during the draft like they did, and my tolerance for the misfire during the season is just that much less. Unless someone clarifies to me that it wasn't monkeying around at all. Even if it didn't work out like they hoped (because, say, some other team drafted in the interim in some unplanned way).

[howieramone2]

 

That's the puzzling part. The rest just highlights that whatever it was, didn't work.

 

And as already stated, the 25-man roster spot was the more valuable resource, than just the 18 innings. They saved some face with a stint on the DL, presumably stalling to let him gain some more benefit from coaching, and threw in the towel when out of choices.

 

Take Haley first, I'm cool with that, because I'll trust that the FO felt he was the best pick to click. Monkey around during the draft like they did, and my tolerance for the misfire during the season is just that much less. Unless someone clarifies to me that it wasn't monkeying around at all. Even if it didn't work out like they hoped (because, say, some other team drafted in the interim in some unplanned way).

Seth posted at one point in time that our favorite team received several offers for the first pick. They never announced what I'm sure was a minimal return to move down to #8. You stated he was with the team half the season, another member talked about dozens of games. 18 innings and 10 games are the winning answers. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize our favorite team, but there is not one anywhere close to this. Rule 5 is the ultimate lottery ticket and only costs $50,000 to play. Why not research the # of Rule 5 picks that make it every year? You do know they basically did the same thing when they took Johan.

Edited December 12, 2017 by howieramone2

[Mike Sixel]

Seth posted at one point in time that our favorite team received several offers for the first pick. They never announced what I'm sure was a minimal return to move down to #8. You stated he was with the team half the season, another member talked about dozens of games. 18 innings and 10 games are the winnings answers. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize our favorite team, but there is not one anywhere close to this. Rule 5 is the ultimate lottery ticket and only costs $50,000 to play. Why not research the # of Rule 5 picks that make it every year? You do know they basically did the same thing when they took Johan.

Dozens of games on the roster. It is the roster spot some of us didn't like.

[ashbury]

You stated he was with the team half the season, another member talked about dozens of games. 18 innings and 10 games are the winnings answers.

April 23 - onto the 10-day DL

May 9 - reinstated

May 30 - onto the 10-day DL

June 27 - to GCL for rehab

July 1 - to FSL for rehab

July 26 - returned to Boston

 

After he returned to Pawtucket, he performed as in the past. Who knows what the evaluators were seeing, during that last month of supposed rehab that dragged on and on.

 

So, ten games of low leverage innings, ending in failure like this due to physical issues combined with some unspoken dissatisfaction, makes sense if you're keeping a 22-year old like DIaz, who's understood to be not ready. I don't see the same excuse when it's a 25-year old starter whose limited upside is pretty well demonstrated already.

 

And I still have seen no answer to what the Twins gained from all the monkeying around during the draft, to end up with this outcome, instead of just drafting Haley in the first place.

 

What a waste of a 40-man spot. We might have used it to keep Stuart Turner, for instance - which arguably would have been better for his development, playing at AA or AAA, instead of rotting on Cincy's bench for a year. Or we should have just traded Turner (or similar) to Boston for Haley, and at least been able to option him. $50K isn't much, but the Haleys of the world don't cost much in trade either, and the inability to option someone is a large hidden cost.

[howieramone2]

 

Dozens of games on the roster. It is the roster spot some of us didn't like.

I don't know about you, but I heard many members screaming they wanted to see shiny new things. Not one member said shiny new things except Haley. Hindsight is a powerful tool.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't know about you, but I heard many members screaming they wanted to see shiny new things. Not one member said shiny new things except Haley. Hindsight is a powerful tool.

 

Lots of people questioned the Haley move, when he was taken/traded for, and during the year. This isn't simple hindsight. 

[Linus]

Lots of people questioned the Haley move, when he was taken/traded for, and during the year. This isn't simple hindsight.

I was one. They completely outsmarted themselves on that one. I'm getting more comfortable by the minute to disagree with "crushing it."