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

[Penthang]

I want to see them add at least one high end starter and back of the pen reliever this offseason, but I think the most important thing they might do this offseason is extending the young core. As for some of the comments about them doing what other front offices would do I’d like to point out that the Yankees had more bonus pool money than the Twins and you haven’t seen there front office do anything with it once they were eliminated from the Otani sweepstakes. I believe that adding the two higher end draft picks from last year who’s bonuses were already paid by giving those team the ability to spend money that they didn’t have plans for was a great move. Between the Yankees, Rangers, Angels, and Mariners I guarantee that a good chunk of bonus pool money will go unspent because there aren’t identified players out there worth spending it on. Still the Twins have some left if they choose to try and resign Marte or try to get one of the remaining Braves prospects. Or maybe they can leverage a prospect from the Rangers?

 

Maybe it’s a little early for some to say they are “Killing it” but I’m ok with that assessment and I look forward to see they’re next move.

[markos]

 

What evidence do we have that other teams would've made the same moves in this case? Are there examples of any team making moves like this -- where they traded solely international cap space to acquire legitimate young prospects? Honest question. I have never seen it before so that's a dubious assertion to me.

The Orioles, White Sox, Mariners, and Dodgers have all acquired legitimate prospects (show up on the team's prospect list) in exchange for international bonus pool money. It doesn't happen a lot (and these might be the biggest international money trades made so far), but it isn't unheard of.

https://www.lonestarball.com/2017/7/15/15976792/texas-rangers-trade-yeyson-yrizarri-for-international-bonus-pool-money
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/mariners-trade-thyago-vieira-to-white-sox-for-international-bonus-money.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/07/orioles-acquire-yefry-ramirez-from-yankees-for-international-bonus-money.html
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bs-sp-orioles-international-bonus-trades-20170802-story.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/rangers-acquire-international-bonus-slot-from-mariners.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/blue-jays-acquire-slot-money-from-dodgers.html

[mike8791]

Nice writeup Nick.  "Crushing it" is a bit hyperbolic at thios point, as others hjave pointed out, but their small moves have impressed so far - from the draft to their multiple player transactions to their recent use of intl. dollars.  Compared to the Ryan regime, these moves appear almost miraculous.

 

But before we annoit the new team the saviors of Twins baseball they face the most important month, December, in their year + regime.  With the MLB meetings next week, you can expect to see a flurry of activity.  From past years,one can expect the quality FA's and major trades to be completed by Xmas(although the Ohtani ordeal threatens some delay in the timing).  The Twins need one top-of-the-rotation starter, another starter that can slot in at #4 or #5, at least two and preferably three shutdown relievers, and one RH DH/1B who can fit into the middle of the order.

 

Yes,I know, this is a major shopping list but the time is right for the move.  The lineup is expected to improve, the veterans, Santana, Mauer, and Dozier have one, maybe two years left, and our pitching staff is substandard.  If the Twins fail to get one of the widely acknowledged top four FA starters they must do something that Ryan never did(at least with a successful outcome), that is, trade for a top starter, starting with names like Archer, Cobb, Stroman or Gerritt Cole by agressively packaging their prospects.  This would not only bring the Twins closer to contention for playoff success but show the players, fans and organization that this is a managment committed to winning it all.  That's why they were brought in(at least that was the hype) and if they fail in this task this offseason, then any accolades bestowed upon them will be just fluff.

 

I like the way this new mgt. has built the farm system so far but for now these are just crumbs.  They've really made three major decisions so far - hiring Rowson and Alston and rehiring Molitor.  The Rowson hiring is too soon to grade, though last year's improvement in hitting was encouraging(was this Rowson's doing or the young core learning from more abs?).  Molitor's rehiring was a gimmee after the Twin's 26 win improvement leading to MOY award.  The Alston hiring is still troubling as the Twins whiffed on hiring one of 3 or 4 well established pitching coaches available this offseason.  Hiring a proven pitching coach could only have hel;ped in attracting a better class of FA's.  Do the wonder boys know more that other exdecutives by bypassing these proven PC's or awere they just a little too full of themselves in trying to outsmart the competition.  Only time will tell but if they whiffed on the Alston pick the needed pitching improvement will be that much more difficult.  Was it worth the risk?

[jimmer]

 

Haha, i was thinking the same thing.  Depending on how you look at that statement and the overall context of the piece it appears to just ooze arrogance.  That if you aren't super impressed with whats been done so far by the FO and are waiting for a high profile signing that you are somehow a casual bandwagon fan.....just insulting.  

Nick says he didn't mean it the way it came off to at least some of us, and I believe him.

 

And, honestly, I like a lot of what this FO has done.  For me, it's a welcome change in FO ways. So I wasn't really offended.  I just worry those kind of statements hurt overall conversation (which, again, I don't think Nick intended after he made his clarifying post) which is why I pointed it out.

[Nick Nelson]

 

Haha, i was thinking the same thing.  Depending on how you look at that statement and the overall context of the piece it appears to just ooze arrogance.  That if you aren't super impressed with whats been done so far by the FO and are waiting for a high profile signing that you are somehow a casual bandwagon fan.....just insulting.  

I mean the comment has already been addressed and that's not the intended takeaway at all, but ok?

 

Saying that casual Twins fans aren't going to be excited much by these kinds of roster moves is not the same as saying everyone who's not impressed is a casual fan. Chill out. 

[Mike Sixel]

Is the window open this year to try to win now? Or, should we wait another year to see pitching? Crushing it seems a bit over the top. They've added a bunch of c level prospects and had one draft. Other than that, not much has happened in the player acquisition front, imo. Nice work, but little earth shattering.

[KirbyDome89]

 

There seems to be an emerging view that unless this front office somehow brings in a superstar starting pitcher such as Darvish, many will be disappointed by the “failure”. With a bit of circuitous logic, I guess it is a healthy sign that fans have moved on so quickly to greatly elevated expectations.

It isn't bringing in Darvish that has posters concerned. It's the fact they've done nothing to address the major issues in the rotation. The evaluation period is over and it's time for moves to start being made. I think that's all some want to see. Hopefully we have some clarity in the next few months. However, until some of those needs are addressed I don't thinks it's unfair to withhold applause for the new FO. 

[USAFChief]

 

I agree 100% with Nick.

Not nearly everyone agrees that the deadline moves were a "blunder", jim. I think they were great moves. Yet, you keep stating it as if it were fact.

Count me as 100% agreeing the deadline blunders were indeed, blunders.

 

The Twins had been in contention for a playoff spot all season long.  The FO traded FOR help just a week before trading away pitching.

 

Regardless what happened after that point--whether events played out as they did, or the team failed to make the playoffs--not bolstering the team's chances was a blunder.

 

I really don't understand any argument otherwise.  The goal is not "adding talent."  The goal is winning.

[The Wise One]

 

The Orioles, White Sox, Mariners, and Dodgers have all acquired legitimate prospects (show up on the team's prospect list) in exchange for international bonus pool money. It doesn't happen a lot (and these might be the biggest international money trades made so far), but it isn't unheard of.

https://www.lonestarball.com/2017/7/15/15976792/texas-rangers-trade-yeyson-yrizarri-for-international-bonus-pool-money
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/mariners-trade-thyago-vieira-to-white-sox-for-international-bonus-money.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/07/orioles-acquire-yefry-ramirez-from-yankees-for-international-bonus-money.html
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bs-sp-orioles-international-bonus-trades-20170802-story.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/rangers-acquire-international-bonus-slot-from-mariners.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/blue-jays-acquire-slot-money-from-dodgers.html

your list of trades makes me think that Falvey and Levine did well for their trades

[gunnarthor]

 

Is the window open this year to try to win now? Or, should we wait another year to see pitching? Crushing it seems a bit over the top. They've added a bunch of c level prospects and had one draft. Other than that, not much has happened in the player acquisition front, imo. Nice work, but little earth shattering.

The window is open now. It might be wider in 2019 but there is no reason to not expect the playoffs this year. 

[DocBauer]

I also won't say "crushing it" until I see the moves made before next season. And to me, "crushing it" doesn't have to mean Darvish.

 

Adding to the talent pool, something they have most definitely done, creates depth, competition, and more numbers/players to sort through to find the gems. (Pure percentage chance). It also creates more opportunity to trade prospects and ML players to build the roster without gutting the farm.

 

They have been thoughtful and aggressive in various moves and decisions. I believe a couple smart moves, via FA or trade, that bring in a couple quality pen arms, and a quality SP just might make me agree with the "crushing" sentiment. But even if they don't acquire a true top of the rotation arm, isn't adding another really good one a needle mover for the overall, daily, competitive nature of the team? Don't get me wrong, I want that top arm as well. But you can't simply dial up a player or team and just make it happen. Overall improvement is the biggest takeaway for me.

[Nick Nelson]

 

I really don't understand any argument otherwise.  The goal is not "adding talent."  The goal is winning.

In what world are these goals at odds?? Is it Freaky Friday or something?

 

1) They did win. Enough to make the playoffs one year after losing 100 games. The players they gave up were nonessential (clearly). 

 

2) Adding talent is how you keep winning. The Twins have added quite a bit over the past several months while giving up essentially nothing to get it. 

 

I mean are you guys really advocating for making 'Buy' moves at the deadline anytime you have a fraction of a chance to make the playoffs? Because that's a pretty terrible and short-sighted way to run a franchise like this one. 

[Mike Sixel]

In what world are these goals at odds?? Is it Freaky Friday or something?

 

1) They did win. Enough to make the playoffs one year after losing 100 games. The players they gave up were nonessential (clearly).

 

2) Adding talent is how you keep winning. The Twins have added quite a bit over the past several months while giving up essentially nothing to get it.

 

I mean are you guys really advocating for making 'Buy' moves at the deadline anytime you have a fraction of a chance to make the playoffs? Because that's a pretty terrible and short-sighted way to run a franchise like this one.

How about this off season? Can we expect them to buy now? Or keep waiting?

[Vanimal46]

Falvine are probably "crushing it" in other aspects of their jobs that we as fans don't really care about. They built an actual analytics department, hired different coaches that made an immediate impact, and showed more creativity in trades than the previous regime. 

 

As far as moves that have impacted the MLB team, call me a stickler. I'm waiting for more than a Castro signing, and a couple of trades for prospects in the 20-30 range before jumping on the crushing it! bandwagon.

[wsnydes]

I like these moves, but I'm not getting all that excited yet.  I think these types of moves need to be made as part of the larger picture, but before I get overly excited about anything I need to see some improvement to the MLB roster or near ready guys that can contribute in 2018.  This is a step in the right direction and I really like the shrewd moves with the international money for prospects, but I still need to see more.  I am encouraged though.

[SF Twins Fan]

 

How about this off season? Can we expect them to buy now? Or keep waiting?

 

If they don't buy this offseason then yes absolutely the FO has missed an opportunity to really change the direction of this franchise. 

[USAFChief]

 

In what world are these goals at odds?? Is it Freaky Friday or something?

 

1) They did win. Enough to make the playoffs one year after losing 100 games. The players they gave up were nonessential (clearly). 

 

2) Adding talent is how you keep winning. The Twins have added quite a bit over the past several months while giving up essentially nothing to get it. 

 

I mean are you guys really advocating for making 'Buy' moves at the deadline anytime you have a fraction of a chance to make the playoffs? Because that's a pretty terrible and short-sighted way to run a franchise like this one. 

1.  The fact they DID make is not an argument supporting trading AWAY pitching at the deadline.  It's exactly the opposite.  Clearly, Falvine misjudged the team at the time.  I'd bet a lot of money, if they could have somehow known where the team would sit one month later, they would NOT have traded either pitcher.  

 

2.  Adding talent would always be secondary to a playoff spot.  Always.  And for the record, I don't agree they've added "quite a bit" anyway.  

 

I'd certainly advocate "buy" any time the Twins are in the position they were in last July...in contention for a spot.  I care 100 times more about a current chance in hand than about the chance a relatively nondescript minor leaguer or two are added to the system and might one day amount to more than a trivia answer.

 

For the record, I'm certainly not advocating firing them. I'm more than happy to give them time, acknowledge I like some of the behind the scenes stuff they've done (although it's pretty tough to prove the effectiveness of that, one way or the other), and have high hopes they'll one day actually "crush it."

 

But IMO they certainly haven't done so yet, and certainly erred last July.

[KirbyDome89]

 

The relievers were just fine in that game it was Santana and Berrios that gave up seven runs in five innings. Adding a veteran bat and a solid reliever wouldn't have helped, they needed a front of the rotation starter, and unless it was truly possibly to get Justin Verlander to waive his no trade clause to go to Minnesota when he knew that he could go to a better spot in Houston, there didn't appear to be any options for the Twins.

 

Early exits will continue to happen if the team doesn't significantly beef up the front of the rotation. If they don't do it this off season I'm going to be disappointed, but it did not appear possible to do what was necessary last July to actually win a championship.

Why can't it be a case of making an ill advised move but getting a positive result?

 

I was pushing for decisiveness at the deadline one way or another. Either sell big or bring in real help. Instead it was another "middle of the road," trade deadline for the Twins. 

 

I'm assuming we can agree that the team was better with Kintzler than some low level prospect. The way the game played out in October isn't particularly relevant to the argument being made against the decision making. The point was that the team was still in contention for that WC spot when the move was made. They had no idea if they would reach the WC game and if they did how much they would have to rely on the bullpen. If you're not making significant moves in one direction or another why trade away a late inning bullpen piece? Aren't you better off just keeping Kintzler at that point?

[Mike Sixel]

Why can't it be a case of making an ill advised move but getting a positive result?

 

I was pushing for decisiveness at the deadline one way or another. Either sell big or bring in real help. Instead it was another "middle of the road," trade deadline for the Twins.

 

I'm assuming we can agree that the team was better with Kintzler than some low level prospect. The way the game played out in October isn't particularly relevant to the argument being made against the decision making. The point was that the team was still in contention for that WC spot when the move was made. They had no idea if they would reach the WC game and if they did how much they would have to rely on the bullpen. If you're not making significant moves in one direction or another why trade away a late inning bullpen piece? Aren't you better off just keeping Kintzler at that point?

Spot on.

[kab21]

The reality is that Lavine is using the same roadmap that Ryan used but so far his moves are working out. And that's basically what we should expect. Both stayed cheap in FA, signed discount bullpen arms. Both signed rule v picks and made waiver claims, let young guys play, traded off upcoming FA, etc. 

 

Our payroll was bottom third last year. I expect it will remain bottom third for the foreseeable future. So Levine is going to have to make trades, find FA bargains and rely on young players. That's more or less been what the Twins have had to do for 25 years and it'll continue. I liked last years draft but I'm not ready to put it ahead of 2012 or 2016 (the secret of all three drafts was the number of picks in the first few rounds, not necessarily high draft position). IBP money for prospects is fine with me. I'd have been fine with them signing someone, too. Just so long as they use it. We won't know how good Lavine is for several years but I like him a lot and think he'll be a very good GM. But I do think we should wait a little bit for all this excitement.  

 

 

 

 

Being restricted in the same way is not the same as operating the same way. My biggest encouragement with the new FO is that they attempting to find every little advantage that they can instead of walking the line. The new FO was very creative going underslot/overslot to get players that they wanted and maximize the draft. They were creative and turned Ynoa and 4M into two better prospects. They traded Kintzler for a prospect and int'l cap money. They have a lot of surplus int'l cap money due to some sort of fiasco (I am suspicious of something...) and they turned it into two legit prospects that they didn't even have to spend money on.

 

These moves don't even need to work out and in fact none of them have yet. We can see however that they aren't restrained to thinking inside a box.

[gunnarthor]

 

 

 

 

Being restricted in the same way is not the same as operating the same way. My biggest encouragement with the new FO is that they attempting to find every little advantage that they can instead of walking the line. The new FO was very creative going underslot/overslot to get players that they wanted and maximize the draft. They were creative and turned Ynoa and 4M into two better prospects. They traded Kintzler for a prospect and int'l cap money. They have a lot of surplus int'l cap money due to some sort of fiasco (I am suspicious of something...) and they turned it into two legit prospects that they didn't even have to spend money on.

 

These moves don't even need to work out and in fact none of them have yet. We can see however that they aren't restrained to thinking inside a box.

 

This wasn't the first year the Twins used the bonus pool to nab extra talent - they did it in 2015 and 2016 as well. And they traded Kinztler, a pending FA, at the deadline. I'm not sure that's different than the other deadline deals like Liriano for Hernandez and Escobar. They've used all their bonus pool money every year (assuming they do something with the 1.25 they have left this year). I'm not sure that Littell and Enns is better than Ynoa and 4m but I'm not sure they aren't, either. Maybe they could have done something else with that 4m? 

 

The IBP money fiasco this year isn't, in my mind, an example of them being creative. They went from a top Latin American prospect to two c prospects with a few failed targets in between. 

Edited December 8, 2017 by gunnarthor

[gocgo]

Making a "splash" for Darvish might be the beginning of drowning in a dead contract.

 

I'm not a big fan of signing guys north of 30 to long term (greater than 2 years) contracts.  Darvish is 31.  It's just not worth the risk to me.  Granted, Erv has worked out great, but I feel like he is the exception to the rule.

[drjim]

 

This wasn't the first year the Twins used the bonus pool to nab extra talent - they did it in 2015 and 2016 as well. And they traded Kinztler, a pending FA, at the deadline. I'm not sure that's different than the other deadline deals like Liriano for Hernandez and Escobar. They've used all their bonus pool money every year (assuming they do something with the 1.25 they have left this year). I'm not sure that Littell and Enns is better than Ynoa and 4m but I'm not sure they aren't, either. Maybe they could have done something else with that 4m? 

 

The IBP money fiasco this year isn't, in my mind, an example of them being creative. They went from a top Latin American prospect to two c prospects with a few failed targets in between. 

 

They also did a good job with the draft pool in 2013, helped them to nab Gonsalves as an overslot 4th rounder. And as mentioned, they just quietly and without drama spent their full allotment of international money each year.

 

The big difference was the trade deadline machinations, but obviously I don't see that as a point in the new front office's favor. Doing nothing (perhaps the outcome of a Ryan front office) would have been a better outcome.

[Mike Sixel]

Making a "splash" for Darvish might be the beginning of drowning in a dead contract.

 

I'm not a big fan of signing guys north of 30 to long term (greater than 2 years) contracts. Darvish is 31. It's just not worth the risk to me. Granted, Erv has worked out great, but I feel like he is the exception to the rule.

So, basically, never sign a free agent and the owner pockets the money? We worry a lot about efficiency, but if the alternative is more profit, how is that good?

[gocgo]

 

So, basically, never sign a free agent and the owner pockets the money? We worry a lot about efficiency, but if the alternative is more profit, how is that good?

No, notice that I said to a "long term deal" which is what Darvish would demand.  Erv has worked out, but the math doesn't lie.  30+ years is not prime time and 4 years of not prime time for a lot of money is not a good investment.

[nicksaviking]

 

Why can't it be a case of making an ill advised move but getting a positive result?

 

I was pushing for decisiveness at the deadline one way or another. Either sell big or bring in real help. Instead it was another "middle of the road," trade deadline for the Twins. 

 

I'm assuming we can agree that the team was better with Kintzler than some low level prospect. The way the game played out in October isn't particularly relevant to the argument being made against the decision making. The point was that the team was still in contention for that WC spot when the move was made. They had no idea if they would reach the WC game and if they did how much they would have to rely on the bullpen. If you're not making significant moves in one direction or another why trade away a late inning bullpen piece? Aren't you better off just keeping Kintzler at that point?

 

If it was a positive result, then maybe it was an astute move? If not astute, than perhaps just dumb luck? The bullpen improved once Kintzler was gone, but it doesn't much matter. 

 

We can argue about the Twins deadline moves all off season but I don't see how they made a lick of difference. The Twins were heading into the playoffs with a high contact, homer-prone Ervin Santana leading the way while the other clubs were leading off with Sale, Verlander, Severino and Kluber. Getting upset about Kintzler and Garcia is like getting into a car accident because you ran a red light and the cop at the scene says, "Hey, your tail light is out too." No matter how it's sliced, Kintzler, Garcia and the tail light had nothing to do with the wreck of the post season.

[Mike Sixel]

No, notice that I said to a "long term deal" which is what Darvish would demand. Erv has worked out, but the math doesn't lie. 30+ years is not prime time and 4 years of not prime time for a lot of money is not a good investment.

Good free agents aren't signing short deals. So, only flyers or old or bad free agents?

[gocgo]

 

Good free agents aren't signing short deals. So, only flyers or old or bad free agents?

Definition of a "good free agent"...I think that is where we disagree.  A good pitching free agent to me is 28 and in his prime.  Not 31 and near or at the end of his prime.  The odds of guys pitching with success past 32 is small.  Why make a big bet on those small odds?

[Mike Sixel]

Definition of a "good free agent"...I think that is where we disagree. A good pitching free agent to me is 28 and in his prime. Not 31 and near or at the end of his prime. The odds of guys pitching with success past 32 is small. Why make a big bet on those small odds?

Very, very, few players under thirty are ever free agents. Good luck if that is your rule. Go look at the lists the last few years, and see who makes your cut.

[nicksaviking]

 

Definition of a "good free agent"...I think that is where we disagree.  A good pitching free agent to me is 28 and in his prime.  Not 31 and near or at the end of his prime.  The odds of guys pitching with success past 32 is small.  Why make a big bet on those small odds?

 

So Drew Hutchison or Jacob Turner then? 

 

28-year-old free agents starters are rare. Useful ones are even more rare.