Article: Dear Twins: Don't Sell!

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

That part was about the board as a whole...I should have been more clear.

They didn't turn anything around. They played Baltimore and Kansas City..... Baltimore is historically bad. I really think people are ignoring that, when looking at the recent record.

No one against selling was ignoring that, not any more than your side is ignoring the sweep in Toronto, win in Boston, and the upcoming games against Cleveland. Right?

[nicksaviking]

 

I am sympathetic to this, somewhat; the story of KC and Houston was losing 100 games a year in order to get high draft picks.

But we already have those top picks. Royce Lewis, Rooker, and Larnach (or Kirilloff), are already in the organization. We don't need to "re-blow it up." I don't see how retaining Escobar would have interfered with their development.

 

But I don't think they are re-blowing it up. Cashing out your rental players in a losing season is what all teams do. Pressly is a bit of a different story, but the Twins are looking at about $80M in available free agent money with Kimbrel, Familia, Herrera, Britton, Allen and Matt Belisle available on the free agent market. 

 

The players they got back are lotto tickets, they can keep them and see if the multitude of them produce some good players in the future, or they might use them to go get JT Realmuto in the off season. Or a starting pitcher. Or a shortstop. They're just giving themselves so many more avenues to make the team better in the next couple of years.

 

And for what it's worth, La Velle has reported that the Twins tried to extend Escobar prior to trading him.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Mlb put one new guy at eleven, and one at fifteen, with the others all in the top thirty. It made the system better. Did it give them a future mlb player? We don't know yet, but it increased the odds.

How much? And how much does that affect a future contending Twins season? I understand it's hard to put numbers on that, but honestly, when you look at prospect odds and the uncertainty inherent in long-term projections in general, I think it's actually pretty comparable to our odds of catching Cleveland in 2018. (And if the market is working like it should, then they should be pretty close, no?)

 

That's not to say, my way (play it out) is right and your way (sell) is wrong. But neither is the reverse true. It's just different preferences at this particular juncture. Heck, I'm not even that stridently on the "play it out" side -- I'm much closer to a fence straddler that was simply leaning that way on that particular day. Had we sold after the Cubs series, or the Milwaukee series, or the KC sweep, I probably would have been leaning in your direction.

[alarp33]

 

 

 

Although a 2% drop, on 8% odds to begin with, is a 25% drop relative to where we were before. (And frankly, I'd also disagree with that limited drop in the odds. Sano doesn't look ready to take anyone's place right now, much less Escobar's, and Prospectus just compared Pressly favorably to Chapman, Hader, and Diaz -- the downgrade for the next 2 months to Moya, a guy who apparently couldn't beat out Belisle for mop-up duty all summer, is perhaps not captured well by the projections. For a team in a position where we need every marginal win we can get to actually pull off the upset, this was more than a 2% drop. It was a bigger sell-off than Kintzler and Garcia, for sure.)

 

2% is 2%, 2 out of 100. You are intentionally being disingenuous with numbers when you try to say "25%". 

 

Presley had 8 "shut down" performances for the Twins this year, and 11 "meltdowns".  So because a website compared him to Chapman, Hader or Diaz are you ignoring the actual performance he's provided this year, and his entire career?

[Twodogs]

They now have a losing record against Boston (3-4) and they're 2-1 against Houston, so that doesn't mean a whole lot. It is odd how they haven't played their best against the AL Central outside of Cleveland...

Yeah and that Boston record would probably be 4 - 3 in favor of the Twins had they still had Pressly in game 2 of that series. Nonetheless, it does seem weird how they have played against good teams and then they have just crumbled against the poor teams in the AL Central. Maybe they get all pumped up for Cleveland and then they go into KC and just assume they are going to win?? That's all I can think of??

[Mike Sixel]

 

No one against selling was ignoring that, not any more than your side is ignoring the sweep in Toronto, win in Boston, and the upcoming games against Cleveland. Right?

 

My side? I said pick a side, either trade for more MLB talent, or trade off impending FAs. My only "side" was not to sit in the middle.

[Mike Sixel]

 

How much? And how much does that affect a future contending Twins season? I understand it's hard to put numbers on that, but honestly, when you look at prospect odds and the uncertainty inherent in long-term projections in general, I think it's actually pretty comparable to our odds of catching Cleveland in 2018. (And if the market is working like it should, then they should be pretty close, no?)

 

That's not to say, my way (play it out) is right and your way (sell) is wrong. But neither is the reverse true. It's just different preferences at this particular juncture. Heck, I'm not even that stridently on the "play it out" side -- I'm much closer to a fence straddler that was simply leaning that way on that particular day. Had we sold after the Cubs series, or the Milwaukee series, or the KC sweep, I probably would have been leaning in your direction.

 

I agree with that first sentence in teh last paragraph. But, the ONLY thing I didn't want was fence straddling, though.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Mike Sixel

[alarp33]

 

You should rethink which side that angst is coming from. The original poster acknowledged that the players have failed to this point. But, there were signs, like last year, that the players were starting to turn it around. The original poster wanted the front office to let the season play out. I agreed completely.

That's basically it.

 

Last year the games to be made up were far less, and the team that was being chased was FAR worse

[Major League Ready]

 

nitpic: Getting to the big leagues does not guarantee they "will contribute for 6 years or more." Lots of players make it to the big leagues, but do not have 6 yr careers.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/sports/baseball/15careers.html

 

And there is the very real possibility, of course, that they won't make it to the big leagues at all, the fate suffered by most minor league players.

 

If we're talking odds, you're ignoring lots of information here.

 

I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star.

 

If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series.

 

This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Major Leauge Ready

[Loosey]

 

4 of the 5 prospects we acquired were rated by Fangraphs preseason at 40 FV, and the other was not rated. We already had 30 prospects rated at 40 FV or better, before the latest draft.

 

Fangraphs had this to say before the season: "The Twins have a deep system with promising players at all levels, featuring a variety of profiles and pedigrees. They’re positioned well, with a competitive, mostly young big-league team and a farm system that has at least one solid contributor emerging each year to fill holes."

 

How much did that really change with these 2 trades?

Probably not much.  But does having Escobar and Pressly guarantee this team makes run to the playoffs?   I loved Eduardo, he was my favorite player on the team, but now they have added to their minor league system, and they can go ahead and re-sign Eduardo in the off-season of both sides want that.  

 

There are no guarantees in baseball, the one guarantee the Twins had is Escobar's contact expired this year and he didn't sign an extension before he was traded.  That shows me the Twins like him enough to try to sign him again in the offseason, the question now is will he come back?  If not, they at least received a consolation prize of prospects.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

They didn't turn anything around. They played Baltimore and Kansas City..... Baltimore is historically bad. I really think people are ignoring that, when looking at the recent record.

But in MLB, even historically bad teams can win 30% of the time. Baltimore is 5-5 versus the Yankees this season, KC has beaten them twice too in 7 tries. (Heck, the Twins are 6-3 versus Cleveland so far ) Going 9-2 in any MLB stretch, even with 7 games against those two squads, isn't something to dismiss entirely.

 

Not that I am basing my opinion on that stretch alone, or just the Toronto series, or just the Gibson gem vs Boston. They had a rotten few months, absolutely. But perhaps getting Polanco back helped? Garver getting comfortable, maybe Cave too. The return of Erv. And I'm not totally sold on Cleveland either, they still have some weak spots -- their lineup is pretty top-heavy, they are still missing Miller, a guy named Bieber is starting tonight.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I agree with that first sentence in teh last paragraph. But, the ONLY thing I didn't want was fence straddling, though.

At this point it's fence straddling if they do not go whole hog and trade Dozier, Morrison, Rodney and Lynn.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

2% is 2%, 2 out of 100. You are intentionally being disingenuous with numbers when you try to say "25%". 

Just saying that 2%, relative to 8%, is more significant than the same 2% relative to, say, 50%. I thought that was clear. No intent to be disingenuous at all, I thought I was pretty clear about my position in the rest of my post.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Presley had 8 "shut down" performances for the Twins this year, and 11 "meltdowns".  So because a website compared him to Chapman, Hader or Diaz are you ignoring the actual performance he's provided this year, and his entire career?

No, just that if we're going to go for that 8% or whatever, or even try to improve on it, trying to leverage Pressly might have been our best bet. His presence made me feel better about that 8% than, say, if Casey Fien was in his spot providing that performance. I too was surprised by that BP article, it's an interesting piece if you haven't seen it:

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41401/rubbing-mud-cant-help-falling-in-love-with-ryan-pressly/

 

(Interestingly, I too cited Pressly's shutdowns/meltdowns in a recent TD thread about Pressly's trade value. The Astros were apparently intrigued enough beyond that, though?)

Edited July 30, 2018 by spycake

[alarp33]

 

No, just that if we're going to go for that 8% or whatever, or even try to improve on it, trying to leverage Pressly might have been our best bet. His presence made me feel better about that 8% than, say, if Casey Fien was in his spot providing that performance. I too was surprised by that BP article, it's an interesting piece if you haven't seen it:

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41401/rubbing-mud-cant-help-falling-in-love-with-ryan-pressly/

 

(Interestingly, I too cited Pressly's shutdowns/meltdowns in a recent TD thread about Pressly's trade value. The Astros were apparently intrigued enough beyond that, though?)

 

You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

 

The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

At this point it's fence straddling if they do not go whole hog and trade Dozier, Morrison, Rodney and Lynn.

 

given my opinion of all those players, except Dozier.....it might not bad for this year.....

[Vanimal46]

But in MLB, even historically bad teams can win 30% of the time. Baltimore is 5-5 versus the Yankees this season, KC has beaten them twice too in 7 tries. (Heck, the Twins are 6-3 versus Cleveland so far ) Going 9-2 in any MLB stretch, even with 7 games against those two squads, isn't something to dismiss entirely.

 

Not that I am basing my opinion on that stretch alone, or just the Toronto series, or just the Gibson gem vs Boston. They had a rotten few months, absolutely. But perhaps getting Polanco back helped? Garver getting comfortable, maybe Cave too. The return of Erv. And I'm not totally sold on Cleveland either, they still have some weak spots -- their lineup is pretty top-heavy, they are still missing Miller, a guy named Bieber is starting tonight.

I felt that way most of the season in regards to Cleveland. They're not that good and Minnesota had a chance to make a run. I wish they were more aggressive and made the moves in June when there was more games remaining. Alas, here we are 104 games in and under .500 still.

 

The FO made an honest assessment of the season, and I'm sure everything you're discussing was taken into account before selling off Pressly and Escobar.

 

If your job was reliant on making a call this year to go for it or sell, you would go for it with those odds? Because know that if they did go for it and fail, you're most likely on thin ice with the person who signs your checks.

[Mike Sixel]

 

You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

 

The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

 

Correct amundo.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Last year the games to be made up were far less, and the team that was being chased was FAR worse

There were also more teams between us and that goal last year.

 

At the 2017 deadline, Fangraphs "season to date" projection mode gave us 7.3% chance of making the postseason. This season, at the time of the Escobar/Pressly trades, that figure was 8.4%.

 

There is definitely some room for nuanced opinions around that, so please don't quote just a snippet of my post again and say I am being disingenuous or that I am claiming these numbers are "super meaningful". Please consider the context of my complete posts! Just saying there is room for two sides in this matter.

[yarnivek1972]

The Twins will basically be remaking their entire bullpen in 2019.

 

Hildenberger is the likely closer. Keep in mind there was some wonder if he should have made the team out of ST at all and he struggled the first couple weeks.

 

He’s really the surest thing the Twins have. Rogers is a good loogy, but he hasn’t been as good against LHB as in previous years. After that there are a whole boatload of “if”s and “maybe”s.

 

Sound like the bullpen of a legitimate contender to you?

 

Free agency? How did that work out this year?

 

Trades?

 

Teams that are planning to contend aren’t going to trade bullpen arms. Non contenders probably have either kids they won’t trade or has beens no one wants.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

My side? I said pick a side, either trade for more MLB talent, or trade off impending FAs. My only "side" was not to sit in the middle.

I totally get that. I would have liked to see some more changes earlier, even if just internal ones. We could have definitely auditioned new pitchers in the Belisle role -- maybe a starter coming up from the minors in a relief role? Maybe a bargain external buy -- Washington got Herrera pretty cheap last month. Venters and Brach were pretty cheap too. Asdrubal Cabrera at DH, maybe?

 

I wasn't necessarily opposed to a "soft sell" either -- Rodney, like Kintzler before him? Lynn, like Garcia? Especially paired with a interesting minor league promotion.

 

I liked getting Polanco and Erv back, calling up Cave, but yeah, I could see a desire for more, if we weren't going to sell.

[nicksaviking]

 

At this point it's fence straddling if they do not go whole hog and trade Dozier, Morrison, Rodney and Lynn.

 

My assumption is they will unless no one wants them. I can't see anyone wanting Morrison, Rodney and Lynn are probably borderline and might need the Twins to eat their salary; possibly August trade guys. But Dozier and Duke should be moved by tomorrow at the very least to avoid fence straddling. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I totally get that. I would have liked to see some more changes earlier, even if just internal ones. We could have definitely auditioned new pitchers in the Belisle role -- maybe a starter coming up from the minors in a relief role? Maybe a bargain external buy -- Washington got Herrera pretty cheap last month. Venters and Brach were pretty cheap too. Asdrubal Cabrera at DH, maybe?

 

I wasn't necessarily opposed to a "soft sell" either -- Rodney, like Kintzler before him? Lynn, like Garcia? Especially paired with a interesting minor league promotion.

 

I liked getting Polanco and Erv back, calling up Cave, but yeah, I could see a desire for more, if we weren't going to sell.

 

I know I'd move more starters in the minors to the bullpen faster than this org has......Taylor Rodgers being an obvious recent example. That's an area I'd have liked to see explored more earlier this year. IF the manager would, you know, let them pitch. And, imo, Cave should have been up sooner too, but they finally got that one right (not that he's great, but he's better than Grossman, if you include defense, and maybe even just offense).

 

Trevor May should be here, in MN, as a RP right now. 

 

One of the new prospects they got could be a RP in a year or two, but he's much further away as a starter, from what I read.

[nicksaviking]

 

There were also more teams between us and that goal last year.

 

 

Houston, Boston, New York, Cleveland, Seattle and Oakland are all between us and our goal.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

You are referencing 8% coin flip odds. What does it matter if Presley is on the team or not for those odds? If I'm understanding the coin flip odds correctly, it's not based on player projections or performance. So having Casey Fien or Ryan Presley wouldn't make a difference. 

 

The odds that include projections based on the actual roster were 1.2% on the Friday the trade was completed. 

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong about the 8% you keep referencing. 

You are wrong. No worries, though, I have referenced a couple different figures.

 

8.4% odds was Fangraphs projections, weighted a bit more to "season to date stats" (what Fangraphs calls them, hence why I try to include that phrase when referencing them too). I think their "normal" projection uses preseason projections pretty heavily, which isn't necessarily bad, but it can obscure some new info and keep some old biases, so I try not to rely exclusively on that:

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds/season-to-date/div?date=2018-07-26

 

"Coin flip" mode odds were actually 12.5%, and I also tried to include that phrase in those references. I cited that previously just as one illustration of how much we still control our destiny, comparable to San Fran, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh -- our record is worse, but we've only got one team to target and a lot of head-to-head games left:

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds/coin-flip/div?date=2018-07-26

 

(Also, FYI, when you select a date on Fangraphs playoff odds page, it includes the results of games played that date. So to judge pre-Escobar trade, you'd want to select "7-26-2018" since the trade happened before the 7-27 game. Probably pre-Pressly trade too, since he apparently became unavailable during that night's game. Not that I'm putting a ton of stock in one day's difference or anything, just a best practice.)

Edited July 30, 2018 by spycake

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The FO made an honest assessment of the season, and I'm sure everything you're discussing was taken into account before selling off Pressly and Escobar.

If your job was reliant on making a call this year to go for it or sell, you would go for it with those odds? Because know that if they did go for it and fail, you're most likely on thin ice with the person who signs your checks.

I absolutely agree the front office made an honest assessment. But I still think I can reasonably disagree.

 

I don't think the front office was in too much danger in this instance. I mean, I don't think the assistants/scouts have much sway in the decision -- it's pretty much Falvey's and Levine's decision to make and own. And the Pohlads probably don't care too much either way, relative to the good will Falvey and Levine have bought so far (with 2017, and saving a few bucks on Hughes).

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Houston, Boston, New York, Cleveland, Seattle and Oakland are all between us and our goal.

Hey now, the context of the post was postseason odds.

 

If you want to move the discussion to pennant odds, fine, but please don't imply again that I am somehow being disingenuous in my posts.

[USAFChief]

 

I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star.

 

If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series.

 

This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

What is the cost benefit analysis of watching meaningful baseball games through August and September?

 

I, too, want the Twins to win a WS. But I also want to watch meaningful regular seasons. And this season wasn't lost yet. 

 

And for the record, as Spycake has pointed out "all of the GMs" in situations similar to, or worse than, the current Twins HAVEN'T sold yet. Do you suppose you're overestimating your particular expertise in the area of how MLB teams operate?

 

 

[Vanimal46]

I absolutely agree the front office made an honest assessment. But I still think I can reasonably disagree.

 

I don't think the front office was in too much danger in this instance. I mean, I don't think the assistants/scouts have much sway in the decision -- it's pretty much Falvey's and Levine's decision to make and own. And the Pohlads probably don't care too much either way, relative to the good will Falvey and Levine have bought so far (with 2017, and saving a few bucks on Hughes).

I think the Pohlads do care if their front office makes a call to go for it and they fail. The only example we can point to of a FO that goes for it was the brief Billy Smith regime. Made some aggressive signings and trades to go for it, fell victim to the injury bug, and was quickly demoted again.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think the Pohlads do care if their front office makes a call to go for it and they fail. The only example we can point to of a FO that goes for it was the brief Billy Smith regime. Made some aggressive signings and trades to go for it, fell victim to the injury bug, and was quickly demoted again.

Maybe if we were big buyers, sure. Another Ramos for Capps would absolutely draw the spotlight of the ownership, or even another Delmon Young / aggressive challenge type trade. I was thinking more minor moves (like Smith did in 2009) or standing pat (like Smith did at the deadline in 2008). There would have been little or no risk to the front office's job standing in that.