Article: Don't Panic Over Bad Breaks For Twins Rotation

[Nick Nelson]

 

Falvine wanted Gimenez and couldn't get THAT done?

Even I don't think they're that incompetent.

Why are you oversimplifying things so much? They weren't going to sign Gimenez in the blind hope that it'd prompt Darvish to sign, creating another roadblock for Garver in the process. I wish people would stop operating under the assumptions that A) The Twins had complete control over this situation, and B ) They were unaware at all times of Darvish's mindset/leaning.

 

By all accounts they'd moved on from Darvish weeks ago and have been working other angles. 

 

 

Panic is the wrong word. Disappointing and hoodwinked are the words.

Last offseason you'd convinced yourself the Twins were going to trade Dozier to the Dodgers. This offseason you apparently convinced yourself they'd sign Darvish. On both occasions, when it didn't happen, you had a little meltdown on this forum. Maybe your own unrealistic expectations are the cause of your being disappointed and hoodwinked?

 

The Twins made earnest efforts to pull off a Dozier trade that makes sense, and to sign Darvish. There is zero evidence that either of these things aren't true. The front office drew lines in the sand (we're not giving up Dozier for any less than X, we're not going to add a sixth year for a 32-year-old non-elite pitcher), and they stood by them. These are good things. They aren't obliged to do whatever's necessary to pull off a move you want to see.

[DaveW]

Why are you oversimplifying things so much? They weren't going to sign Gimenez in the blind hope that it'd prompt Darvish to sign, creating another roadblock for Garver in the process. I wish people would stop operating under the assumptions that A) The Twins had complete control over this situation, and B ) They were unaware at all times of Darvish's mindset/leaning.

 

By all accounts they'd moved on from Darvish weeks ago and have been working other angles.

 

 

Last offseason you'd convinced yourself the Twins were going to trade Dozier to the Dodgers. This offseason you apparently convinced yourself they'd sign Darvish. On both occasions, when it didn't happen, you had a little meltdown on this forum. Maybe your own unrealistic expectations are the cause of your being disappointed and hoodwinked?

 

The Twins made earnest efforts to pull off a Dozier trade that makes sense, and to sign Darvish. There is zero evidence that either of these things aren't true. The front office drew lines in the sand (we're not giving up Dozier for any less than X, we're not going to add a sixth year for a 32-year-old non-elite pitcher), and they stood by them. These are good things. They aren't obliged to do whatever's necessary to pull off a move you want to see.

Interested where this so called meltdown exists in re: Darvish?

 

So criticizing a team for failing to bring in Darvish on a reasonable deal is having a meltdown? And thus asking if the Twins will ever sign a top FA?

 

I mean I don’t have super high requests, just want us to win a playoff series more than once every 25 years. When those extremely modest expectations aren’t met I feel like the criticism is very much warranted. Hell at this point I will take a single playoff game WIN.

Edited February 12, 2018 by DaveW

[Vanimal46]

Why are you oversimplifying things so much? They weren't going to sign Gimenez in the blind hope that it'd prompt Darvish to sign, creating another roadblock for Garver in the process. I wish people would stop operating under the assumptions that A) The Twins had complete control over this situation, and B ) They were unaware at all times of Darvish's mindset/leaning.

 

By all accounts they'd moved on from Darvish weeks ago and have been working other angles.

 

 

Last offseason you'd convinced yourself the Twins were going to trade Dozier to the Dodgers. This offseason you apparently convinced yourself they'd sign Darvish. On both occasions, when it didn't happen, you had a little meltdown on this forum. Maybe your own unrealistic expectations are the cause of your being disappointed and hoodwinked?

 

The Twins made earnest efforts to pull off a Dozier trade that makes sense, and to sign Darvish. There is zero evidence that either of these things aren't true. The front office drew lines in the sand (we're not giving up Dozier for any less than X, we're not going to add a sixth year for a 32-year-old non-elite pitcher), and they stood by them. These are good things. They aren't obliged to do whatever's necessary to pull off a move you want to see.

I don't think that's fair to say at all. Darvish was the hope being sold all winter long... We discussed creative ways to sign him, discussed signing him regardless of the price, broke him down to the studs, and discussed the open windows Minnesota has to make a move such as this.

 

It sounds like you got inside information weeks ago to make this news easier to handle. Many of us simpletons that followed this all winter just learned about it yesterday.

 

When we were sold hope on him all winter and it doesn't happen aren't we allowed to be frustrated about it?

[DaveW]

I don't think that's fair to say at all. Darvish was the hope being sold all winter long... We discussed creative ways to sign him, discussed signing him regardless of the price, broke him down to the studs, and discussed the open windows Minnesota has to make a move such as this.

 

It sounds like you got inside information weeks ago to make this news easier to handle. Many of us simpletons that followed this all winter just learned about it yesterday.

 

When we were sold hope on him all winter and it doesn't happen aren't we allowed to be frustrated about it?

Bingo.

[Nick Nelson]

 

When we were sold hope on him all winter and it doesn't happen aren't we allowed to be frustrated about it?

This "sold hope" narrative makes it seem like there was something dishonest or misleading going on. It is pretty clear here that the Twins DID make a 5-year offer worth $100M+, which would be unprecedented in the franchise's history. I know everyone has these built-in suspicions about the Twins brass but why is to hard to accept that they were legitimately interested, gave legitimate pursuit, and legitimately got beat out by a franchise that always had an intrinsic edge over them?

 

Be frustrated, sure. But there's so much "woe is me, we're screwed" going on here, as if Darvish was the only player out there with a chance to improve this club. The point of this article was to look forward and extract a few positives from a bummer of a situation. 

[Nick Nelson]

 

So criticizing a team for failing to bring in Darvish on a reasonable deal is having a meltdown? And thus asking if the Twins will ever sign a top FA?

If you need to have it explained to you why starting a thread called "Are we wasting our time? Will the Twins ever sign a top free agent?" -- which turns into a 20-page airing of grievances (to put it kindly) -- immediately after they came up short by offering someone $100M+ comes off as petulant, I dunno what to tell ya.

 

You were wrong about the Dozier deal last year. They were right. Maybe give them a little credit that they know what they're doing?

[DaveW]

I think Falvine know what they are doing, I think they really wanted to land Darvish but the Pohlads and co gave them a hard “max” to offer. They tried their best but came up 20-30 mil short. The 6th year isn’t even that big a deal when the AAV was only $21 million! That’s basically just a super cheap almost free year added on if it was a 5 year $25 AAV type deal

 

In general it’s not wise to bet against Epstein anyways....so apparently not everyone thinks that a 6th year to Darvish is so foolish and dumb. Unless you don’t think Epstein and his FO have earned any benefit of the doubt?

Edited February 12, 2018 by DaveW

[Mike Sixel]

If they ever actually do something to improve the team, then those of us questioning them are likely to compliment them. Some people are capable of both complimenting the good, and criticizing the bad.

 

No one is saying the Twins lied, when we take about being sold hope. They never sign big free agents. They said Darvish was a priority. That creates hope. Losing out on that is disappointing, because they created hope where normally none would exist. Why is it hard to understand that some people would be disappointed?

[FormerMinnasotan]

This "sold hope" narrative makes it seem like there was something dishonest or misleading going on. It is pretty clear here that the Twins DID make a 5-year offer worth $100M+, which would be unprecedented in the franchise's history. I know everyone has these built-in suspicions about the Twins brass but why is to hard to accept that they were legitimately interested, gave legitimate pursuit, and legitimately got beat out by a franchise that always had an intrinsic edge over them?

 

Be frustrated, sure. But there's so much "woe is me, we're screwed" going on here, as if Darvish was the only player out there with a chance to improve this club. The point of this article was to look forward and extract a few positives from a bummer of a situation.

For me is a larger picture issue than just Darvish. I mean as of now Jake Arrieta, Lance Lynn, and Alex Cobb are available. All are at worst a # 3 in most rotations (probably a #1 or 2 for us). But in all reality we’ll probably be stuck with the bottom barrel pitchers like Tillman, Garcia, or Wade Miley. Signing any of those pitchers won’t help us as they may not even last an entire year with the Twins. If the Twins sign any of the top 3 pitching free agents I will be satisfied, but if they sign a low level free agent it will look to us fans like the Twins aren’t trying.

[Nick Nelson]

 

In general it’s not wise to bet against Epstein anyways....so apparently not everyone thinks that a 6th year to Darvish is so foolish and dumb. Unless you don’t think Epstein and his FO have earned any benefit of the doubt?

The Cubs can afford to absorb a few bad years at the end of that deal much more easily than the Twins. This is a very basic market reality. Epstein understands this. Not much else to be said. 

 

 

Why is it hard to understand that some people would be disappointed?

It is not hard to understand and no one is telling you not to be disappointed. I'm disappointed. But there are more productive things to do than sit around and sulk about how disappointed we are. This thread was meant to be a counterbalance to the aforementioned 20-page misery fest in the forum but sadly it's just been turning into the same thing.

 

Come on people: Buck up!

[nicksaviking]

 

Why are you oversimplifying things so much? They weren't going to sign Gimenez in the blind hope that it'd prompt Darvish to sign, creating another roadblock for Garver in the process.

 

 

He only got a minor league deal though and the Twins don't currently have a 3rd catcher. I'd think re-upping him would have been just fine even had he not swung Darvish in their favor. But possibly swinging Darvish in their favor would have definitely been a reason to do it.

[TheLeviathan]

It is not hard to understand and no one is telling you not to be disappointed. I'm disappointed. But there are more productive things to do than sit around and sulk about how disappointed we are. This thread was meant to be a counterbalance to the aforementioned 20-page misery fest in the forum but sadly it's just been turning into the same thing.

 

Come on people: Buck up!

 

Ok, so you want to balance the bitterness.  Wouldn't a far better tact to have been an article titled, and themed, "Ok...here's what we can still do" and then go on to discuss our options in the wake of a disappointing result?

 

Instead, in the face of disappointment to try and sell the idea that Ervin Santana not pitching is a good thing (among a host of other arguments that make "silly person" Monty Python memes seem insufficient) just seems desperate.  Or disingenuous.  Or insulting.  Or a host of other unpleasant adjectives.  That doesn't balance the bitterness, it only enflames it.  

Edited February 12, 2018 by TheLeviathan

[Twins33]

If they ever actually do something to improve the team, then those of us questioning them are likely to compliment them. Some people are capable of both complimenting the good, and criticizing the bad.

No one is saying the Twins lied, when we take about being sold hope. They never sign big free agents. They said Darvish was a priority. That creates hope. Losing out on that is disappointing, because they created hope where normally none would exist. Why is it hard to understand that some people would be disappointed?

I'm with you on the fact that the Twins could have and should have offered a contract as high as 6/150 and/or added opt outs, but how are you not dead inside? You're a MN sports fan! Why would you allow hope to creep in before actually acquiring the player? This is the first time the Twins have ever gone after a top FA, but I still saw no reason for hope.

 

I thought the Twins had a 15% chance of signing Darvish, even with them calling him a priority and all that. I would have loved if it would have happened. I was all for it, which I guess could be taken as a small bit of hope, but in no way did I ever allow myself to truly believe it could happen/would happen. I think a lot of your wound is self inflicted. Darvish signing with the Cubs is exactly what I thought would happen, so why would I get my hopes up? I was right. It certainly ended up being cheaper than I thought, but nothing else was surprising no matter what the front office said about going after Darvish.

 

I'm completely with you on the fact that the Twins need to sign or trade for better players, particularly pitching. Just don't get your hopes up for it because 99% of the time (or higher) you're only going to hurt yourself.

[KirbyDome89]

 

This "sold hope" narrative makes it seem like there was something dishonest or misleading going on. It is pretty clear here that the Twins DID make a 5-year offer worth $100M+, which would be unprecedented in the franchise's history. I know everyone has these built-in suspicions about the Twins brass but why is to hard to accept that they were legitimately interested, gave legitimate pursuit, and legitimately got beat out by a franchise that always had an intrinsic edge over them?

 

Be frustrated, sure. But there's so much "woe is me, we're screwed" going on here, as if Darvish was the only player out there with a chance to improve this club. The point of this article was to look forward and extract a few positives from a bummer of a situation. 

This is an honest question. If they had moved on from Darvish weeks ago, why did they submit an offer just a few days back? If they had essentially bowed out, I'm guessing it was because they thought Darvish was getting that 6th year and/or the opt out, or their price limit had been exceeded, and they weren't willing to match. So why come back later and offer $100+ M / 5? They would've had to know at that point that their offer wasn't going to get it done, right? If it was a "nothing to lose, lets just take a shot," move then I guess in that sense they're right. 

 

Nobody is questioning the Twin's interest in Darvish, they were vocal about going after him. There is no doubt they were legitimately beaten in their pursuit either. The questions raised have to do with how serious they were about making an offer that would entice Darvish. 

[Han Joelo]

I felt kind of weird anytime I let myself actually think the Twins were getting Darvish.  Do I really want to be a fan of THAT kind of team?  The kind that actually signs big free agents?  I'm an Idahoan, which kind of made me a sports fan free agent growing up.  I chose the Twins in '87 (and reinforced in '91) because of their somewhat underdog persona.

 

I was also a Miami Dolphins fan, because of Marino and Shula.  I tried really hard to stay a Dolphins fan, but they've churned through owners, GM's, coaches, and philosophies to the point of being unrecognizable as the team of Shula/Marino.  Signing Suh a few years to the enormous contract accomplished nothing.  I know, apples and oranges, but I tend to root for what the organization represents to me, rather than the logo.  

 

This development is par for the Twins course.  Falvey and Levine showed restraint in the Dozier discussions and the Darvish dealings, as well as in the free agent relief pitching market.  In 2 out of 3 cases, they were right, and in the third, the jury is still out.

 

Darvish would have been a step in the right direction of having a WS caliber pitching staff, but by himself, he wouldn't have been the difference, and perhaps the FO had a tipping point where they determined the improvements he could bring would be negated by the future limitations his contract would represent.  I'm going to root for whatever they end up putting out there.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

By all accounts they'd moved on from Darvish weeks ago

 

What accounts? genuinely curious

[Nick Nelson]

 

Instead, in the face of disappointment to try and sell the idea that Ervin Santana not pitching is a good thing (among a host of other arguments that make "silly person" Monty Python memes seem insufficient) just seems desperate.  Or disingenuous.  Or insulting.  Or a host of other unpleasant adjectives.  That doesn't balance the bitterness, it only enflames it.  

No one's selling that idea. Again, the portion on Santana led with this statement: "Losing your top starter for a chunk of the season hurts, there's no other way to slice it."

 

Giving Santana's arm extra rest, creating more ST flexibility, and forcing the front office to plan around not having a top-of-rotation impact from him (rather than planning around the possibility) are legit silver linings. That doesn't mean the development in general is a good thing -- it's not. I'm pretty tired of rehashing these inaccurate interpretations.

 

If you want to argue that Santana's injury is nothing but a crippling, devastating hit to the team's fortunes so be it. I don't see it that way.

 

 

What accounts? genuinely curious

Here's an example:

 

 

There were a number of similar allusions from the press around that time in late January. 

[Nick Nelson]

 

This is an honest question. If they had moved on from Darvish weeks ago, why did they submit an offer just a few days back? If they had essentially bowed out, I'm guessing it was because they thought Darvish was getting that 6th year and/or the opt out, or their price limit had been exceeded, and they weren't willing to match. 

I'm just theorizing here, but my guess is that Darvish's camp was coming close to a decision, and communicated to all remaining suitors "Submit your best offer" so the Twins did, despite knowing it probably wasn't enough. 

[rdehring]

Pitchers and catchers report tomorrow, can we please move on to something that matters?

 

We have Santana coming back in early May and May coming back later in May.  So by late May we could have a starting rotation of Santana, Berrios, Gibson, Mejia and May.  Personally, I have no problems with that five, especially if Berrios/Mejia take that next step, Gibson is like he was late last year and May is close to the pitcher he was pre-injury.  Should this happen, that could be one good rotation.  

 

And sometime this summer, either Romero or Gonsalves could be ready to contribute should they need a fill-in.  

 

So they need to fill the hole between April 1 and mid-to-late May.  Whether that is from outside the organization or they catch a break with someone like Slegers or Enns, we will all know in 45 days.  And who knows, maybe they are getting good reports on that forgotten man, Phil Hughes.  Let's stop ragging on each other and get ready to hear the best two words in the English language..."play ball."

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Here's an example:

 

https://twitter.com/MikeBerardino/status/955846806235205633

 

There were a number of similar allusions from the press around that time in late January.

 

by the way, what ever happened about the Twins wanting to make Darvish their highest paid player? The front office said that at the start of the offseason.

[rdehring]

 

I'm just theorizing here, but my guess is that Darvish's camp was coming close to a decision, and communicated to all remaining suitors "Submit your best offer" so the Twins did, despite knowing it probably wasn't enough. 

 

Or were they using offers from the Twins/Brewers to get the Cubs and or Dodgers to up their offers?  Would expect an agent to do something like that.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Pitchers and catchers report tomorrow, can we please move on to something that matters

 

Feel free to do that yourself.

 

This matters, a lot.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'm just theorizing here, but my guess is that Darvish's camp was coming close to a decision, and communicated to all remaining suitors "Submit your best offer" so the Twins did, despite knowing it probably wasn't enough. 

But when you turn around and say that contact "would be unprecedented in the franchise's history", when you know it's a lost cause, isn't that a bit more of "selling hope", in a disingenuous way?

Edited February 12, 2018 by spycake

[TheLeviathan]

 

No one's selling that idea. Again, the portion on Santana led with this statement: "Losing your top starter for a chunk of the season hurts, there's no other way to slice it."

 

Giving Santana's arm extra rest, creating more ST flexibility, and forcing the front office to plan around not having a top-of-rotation impact from him (rather than planning around the possibility) are legit silver linings. That doesn't mean the development in general is a good thing -- it's not. I'm pretty tired of rehashing these inaccurate interpretations.

 

If you want to argue that Santana's injury is nothing but a crippling, devastating hit to the team's fortunes so be it. I don't see it that way.

 

I'm not arguing it's crippling.  I just wouldn't spend any time trying to argue it as a positive.  We lost our best pitcher for a month, spinning that into positives is just silly.  There is a wide gulf between "Crippling" and "let me try to sell you this rock and tell you it's a lump of gold"  I'm in that wide gulf.  

 

And I'd suggest the degree of silliness required to try that argument might be indicative of the value of your overall effort.  Maybe, rather than go down paths that absurd, it would've been better to just try something else entirely.  

 

Or, at least, understand why people aren't buying your sales pitch that the rock is really gold.

Edited February 12, 2018 by TheLeviathan

[KirbyDome89]

 

I'm just theorizing here, but my guess is that Darvish's camp was coming close to a decision, and communicated to all remaining suitors "Submit your best offer" so the Twins did, despite knowing it probably wasn't enough. 

Fair enough. The negative response to the Twins not beating an offer they could've or should've is certainly better than the backlash they would've received for not even making an offer. 

[Han Joelo]

How fun, though incredibly unlikely, would it be if at the end of all this the Twins signed Tillman on the cheap, and he pulled a Rich Hill?  (cue the Tillman/Hill comps are invalid responses.)

[jud6312]

http://autobinaryrobots.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/robot.png

 

It's fine, you guys. Whoever they bring it, I'm sure it'll work out just fine. Missing out Darvish simply takes this team from 95 wins to 92 or 93.

 

 

[Rosterman]

I will say that Ervin pitched GREAT for the Twins the past two seasons and lost many a heartbreaker, to the bullpen or modest offense.

 

I doubt that he will have any trouble finding a job in 2019, as well as 2020.

[Riverbrian]

 

 (among a host of other arguments that make "silly person" Monty Python memes seem insufficient) 

 

 

 

[Riverbrian]

Hey Nick,

 

Ran into a bit of a sandstorm in your travels Eh?