Article: Twins Claim 1B CJ Cron

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

That's all well and good, if you believe WAR actually tells you anything.

 

If you believe Cruz, coming off three consecutive seasons of .900+ OPS prior to last years .850 is only a little better hitter than Cron, coming off three part time years of .700+ OPS's the three prior years. 

 

Or if you're trying to win the WAR/$ championship, rather than the WS.

No one is saying that Cron > Cruz.

 

Everyone recognizes there's a limited budget to fill all of our needs and that based on where they are career wise, Cruz is not a slam dunk. 

[Major League Ready]

 

It simply isn't true that "the same people complaining" wanted Cruz.....you know, like me, nicksaviking, and vanimal, for instance who wanted a rotation of guys currently on the roster. And, for the money to be spent on difference makers at SP and an OF that they could trust (and rotate into DH some).

Sorry mike. You are right.  That was poorly stated. I should have said "some of" instead of generalizing.

[Major League Ready]

 

That's all well and good, if you believe WAR actually tells you anything.

 

If you believe Cruz, coming off three consecutive seasons of .900+ OPS prior to last years .850 is only a little better hitter than Cron, coming off three part time years of .700+ OPS's the three prior years. 

 

Or if you're trying to win the WAR/$ championship, rather than the WS.

 

We have had this argument before. There is an exceptionally high correlation between WAR/Payroll dollar and winning a Championship for any team with less than average revenue. It is a mathematical certainty. Please feel free to prove this theory incorrect.  There are teams that can afford to spend $2.5M/win to produce a 100 win team. It would be an extreme push to say the twins could spend $1.5M to do the same. Therefore, there is absolutely no denying thay pl;ayers that cost $10-12M/WAR are counter-productive if the goal is to produce a contender.

 

The inability for some fans to understand this absolute certainty is the reason we have these ridiculous debates about why can't the Twins just sign the most expensive guys. It takes very little analytical skill to go back through prior year signings and conclude the most expensive FAs go to the teams with the most revenue. What a revelation ... The guys with the most money are far more likely to sign expensive players. Who would have guessed.

 

Edited November 27, 2018 by Major League Ready

[RedBull34]

In regards to other teams passing on Cron, the only team that passed on him that suprises me is the Rangers.

 

Everyone else has decent 1B options (White Sox, Blue Jays) or prohibitively expensive options there already (Tigers and O's)

[Vanimal46]

In regards to other teams passing on Cron, the only team that passed on him that suprises me is the Rangers.

 

Everyone else has decent 1B options (White Sox, Blue Jays) or prohibitively expensive options there already (Tigers and O's)

How dare you forget our friends down I-35, the Royals! They're still starting a wet paper bag at 1B.

[RedBull34]

How dare you forget our friends down I-35, the Royals! They're still starting a wet paper bag at 1B.

I thought they get relegated to AAA???

[KirbyDome89]

If Austin's time with the Twins last season is a SSS (it is) then I have a hard time buying Cron's career year in 18' as a "track record." I'll take the guy making 500K who fails to control the strike zone, has zero positional flexibility, and is an average fielder at best over the guy making 5M with nearly identical attributes.

 

Also I laughed my a** off at the notion that the Twins will simply cut bait with Cron in ST. This ownership literally sold a 2nd round pick rather than just rid themselves of a player who had proven over the course of 2 years he wasn't a capable MLB pitcher. They aren't going to simply piss away 500K no matter how insignificant we might feel it is in the big picture....

[Lasorda_This_Out]

For what it's worth, MLBRadio/SiriusXM had these comments re: Minnesota Twins this afternoon ( rare when the even mention):

 

1. Sano a "bust" and left at that...

2. Players like Kepler and Grossman good but not the type to contend in a winnable Division..

3. FO should go all in on Robinson Cano..

4. FO should also go all in on Edwin Diaz..

 

That was it....

[yarnivek1972]

I don't know if it's wrong to project Austin and Cron producing similar numbers in a scenario where they each have 500 ABs...

 

Also, admittedly I'm still a little jaded from the past regime's handling of players without options remaining. Mainly, they stuck like glue, roster construction be damned. I haven't paid as close attention to how Falvine handles players without options. If there's redundancy, I want a quick resolution.

Well, Vargas was outrighted and spent all of 2018 in AAA.

[gunnarthor]

 

For what it's worth, MLBRadio/SiriusXM had these comments re: Minnesota Twins this afternoon ( rare when the even mention):

 

1. Sano a "bust" and left at that...

2. Players like Kepler and Grossman good but not the type to contend in a winnable Division..

3. FO should go all in on Robinson Cano..

4. FO should also go all in on Edwin Diaz..

 

That was it....

I wonder what the difference is between Sano and Kepler and Grossman. I can see one difference off the top of my head.

 

Twins should stay clear of Cano.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

This is reminiscent of Park and not in a good way.

I'm pretty lukewarm on this deal (but hey, free stuff and whatever) but that's a bit unfair to Cron. For whatever reason, he just doesn't get playing time... but when he plays, his hits pretty well (career 112 OPS+ and only one season under 100 at 98).

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Rooker should not enter into the calculus regarding any moves for 2019. As the 35th selection, his statistical odds of becoming a factor in MLB are way less than 50%, and he lasted until the 35th selection for a reason, probably related to risks about his contact skills. I think banking on Rooker to make it as a productive big-leaguer is ill-advised. If he does, it'll be a pleasant, mild surprise. We'll pretty much know his eventual fate by the end of 2019 though. 

 

Trading Austin or Cron to make room for a better player would be great. Important even.

You make a reasonable point about Rooker not contributing in 2019. However I can't quite reconcile that he will both 1. not be part of the calculus in 2019, but 2. the Twins will nevertheless know his fate by the end of 2019. I'd put his odds at greater than 50/50 that he debuts in 2019 (assuming good health, etc).

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

For what it's worth, MLBRadio/SiriusXM had these comments re: Minnesota Twins this afternoon ( rare when the even mention):

 

1. Sano a "bust" and left at that...

2. Players like Kepler and Grossman good but not the type to contend in a winnable Division..

3. FO should go all in on Robinson Cano..

4. FO should also go all in on Edwin Diaz..

 

That was it....

To put it as gently as possible, I'm glad those "analysts" aren't running the team.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Rooker should not enter into the calculus regarding any moves for 2019. As the 35th selection, his statistical odds of becoming a factor in MLB are way less than 50%, and he lasted until the 35th selection for a reason, probably related to risks about his contact skills. I think banking on Rooker to make it as a productive big-leaguer is ill-advised. If he does, it'll be a pleasant, mild surprise. We'll pretty much know his eventual fate by the end of 2019 though. 

 

Trading Austin or Cron to make room for a better player would be great. Important even.

Frankly, it's irrelevant how good or bad Rooker looks. He hasn't played a game above AA and the Twins just picked up a year-by-year player.

 

When dealing with up-and-coming prospects, the correct way to proceed most of the time is to pretend they don't exist in any single year. You pick up players to fill the necessary roles (but maybe avoid 3+ year deals) and then be happily surprised when said prospect takes the job and forces out the stop-gap player.

[TheLeviathan]

I'm pretty lukewarm on this deal (but hey, free stuff and whatever) but that's a bit unfair to Cron. For whatever reason, he just doesn't get playing time... but when he plays, his hits pretty well (career 112 OPS+ and only one season under 100 at 98).

For me the comparison is more along the lines of roster construction. Adding Park seriously hindered that rosters flexibility.

 

If they keep Cron and Austin I see the same problem. If they only keep Austin...why do this at all? If they keep Cron we spent 5M for a marginal (if that) upgrade and still need a DH.

[IndianaTwin]

mikelink45, on 26 Nov 2018 - 6:35 PM, said:

How can I comment intelligently...

 

 

Is this a requirement?

 

Still new here, huh?

[IndianaTwin]

 

4 year old and 18 months

 

25 and almost 23. Essential to keep reading this one to them. Then when they complain about their day as a nine-year-old, you can say, "Let's just move to Australia."

[dgwills]

 

I believe that the Rays won 90 games last year.  How many did the Twins win?

The Twins won 78 games last year.

[RedBull34]

 

For what it's worth, MLBRadio/SiriusXM had these comments re: Minnesota Twins this afternoon ( rare when the even mention):

 

1. Sano a "bust" and left at that...

2. Players like Kepler and Grossman good but not the type to contend in a winnable Division..

3. FO should go all in on Robinson Cano..

4. FO should also go all in on Edwin Diaz..

 

That was it....

Yea I agree with none of these.

 

1. Sano had one bad year.  Hardly gonna write him off.

2. Kepler and Grossman are probably overutilized to win the division, but even teams like the Astro's and Dodgers have their weak points.  They just don't have as many.

3. I would rather the Twins went all in on Goldschmidt before Cano, and preferably all in on no one.  It should be a measured purchase.  I just don't think that the Twins should trade Kirilloff and Lewis for any player in a reasonable trade (I mean, yea I'm dealing them for Acuna, but that's not happening.)

[Doomtints]

 

For me the comparison is more along the lines of roster construction. Adding Park seriously hindered that rosters flexibility.

 

That's true. My first reaction to Park was, why? The Twins had 1Bs and DHs of equal or better value.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

For me the comparison is more along the lines of roster construction. Adding Park seriously hindered that rosters flexibility.

If they keep Cron and Austin I see the same problem. If they only keep Austin...why do this at all? If they keep Cron we spent 5M for a marginal (if that) upgrade and still need a DH.

That's fair, though you could probably work up an interesting system where you keep both Austin and Cron but sub in Kepler at first base occasionally, then rotate someone else through DH and OF.

 

Like I said, I'm not impressed much by this deal but I'll wait it out and see what else is planned.

[Riverbrian]

But this is my issue ... is this even an improvement, even if incrementally small? I think it's debatable and no way to know. I also don't think an incrementally small improvement is the improvement the Twins need. An incremental improvement, imo, is not an improvement in the Twins' case. In this game increments might make the difference between top teams edging out the other, but a small incremental improvement does not make the difference for the Twins getting to the top. Even if it might nudge the needle, it's not enough. We don't need a needle nudger, we need needle pushers.

If forced to compare Cron and Austin as 1B/DH only. I dont see massive improvement if any but i like Austin. If Austin can play OF. Then the dynamic really changes and Austin wins hands down but you could still roster both and still sign anyone you want with the DH spot to play with.

 

Ultimately I would have preferred a 3B/OF over Cron but Tampa didn’t release one.

[Riverbrian]

 

I guess I'd suggest that this would be a problem if the wonder boys adopted a Ryanesque "buy and hold" attitude. I see signs that they have an opportunistic, traderly penchant. My gut tells me this FO won't get terribly attached to either Austin or Cron if a better option surfaces. If that's the case, small incremental upgrades aren't just feasible, but a positive part of the plan.

 

From your fingers to God's Eyeballs. 

[David HK]

I know this is old news now, but I was just thinking of Tyler Austin waking up and checking his twitter feed that morning....

 

"They signed who....? What th......? What am I, chopped liver here...?"

Edited November 29, 2018 by David HK

[Squirrel]

 

If forced to compare Cron and Austin as 1B/DH only. I dont see massive improvement if any but i like Austin. If Austin can play OF. Then the dynamic really changes and Austin wins hands down but you could still roster both and still sign anyone you want with the DH spot to play with.

Ultimately I would have preferred a 3B/OF over Cron but Tampa didn’t release one.

I'm not sure you are getting what I'm saying ... I'm saying we can and absolutely need to do better. It's not about either/or with Cron or Austin, it's not about how we can roster them both, it's not even about if either or both provide any kind of positional flexibility ... NEITHER provides enough improvement. I'll wait to see where we are at the end of March, but if this is an example of the moves we are to see this winter, (and I've got to believe better is coming, but also won't hold my breath) and nothing significantly better, the very small increment of improvement this move might make will make little to no difference to where we are now. You might say we are moving in the right direction ... I'm saying that movement isn't enough to matter right direction or not. Maybe we've moved enough so we aren't standing right ON the hornets' nest, but we still need to move significantly farther and away from it not to get stung.

[Riverbrian]

 

I'm not sure you are getting what I'm saying ... I'm saying we can and absolutely need to do better. It's not about either/or with Cron or Austin, it's not about how we can roster them both, it's not even about if either or both provide any kind of positional flexibility ... NEITHER provides enough improvement. I'll wait to see where we are at the end of March, but if this is an example of the moves we are to see this winter, (and I've got to believe better is coming, but also won't hold my breath) and nothing significantly better, the very small increment of improvement this move might make will make little to no difference to where we are now. You might say we are moving in the right direction ... I'm saying that movement isn't enough to matter right direction or not. Maybe we've moved enough so we aren't standing right ON the hornets' nest, but we still need to move significantly farther and away from it not to get stung.

 

I may have been misunderstanding you a little but at the same time... I've kinda always known that you felt this way. 

 

The only thing I can say. There are not a lot of needle movers (in that sense) that will be easily attainable. 

[Squirrel]

I may have been misunderstanding you a little but at the same time... I've kinda always known that you felt this way. 

 

The only thing I can say. There are not a lot of needle movers (in that sense) that will be easily attainable. 

And let’s hope we get a few of them ...

[TheLeviathan]

 

That's fair, though you could probably work up an interesting system where you keep both Austin and Cron but sub in Kepler at first base occasionally, then rotate someone else through DH and OF.

 

Like I said, I'm not impressed much by this deal but I'll wait it out and see what else is planned.

 

I don't know how a baseball team in 2018 keeps both Cron and Austin on the roster.  And if they do....it sure as hell looks a lot like the Park situation where we had Grossman, Arcia, Mauer, and Park on the roster.

 

I'd hope we all want those days to be over.  Having a DH is fine.  Having 2 or 3 of them.....not fine.

[USAFChief]

I'm not sure you are getting what I'm saying ... I'm saying we can and absolutely need to do better. It's not about either/or with Cron or Austin, it's not about how we can roster them both, it's not even about if either or both provide any kind of positional flexibility ... NEITHER provides enough improvement. I'll wait to see where we are at the end of March, but if this is an example of the moves we are to see this winter, (and I've got to believe better is coming, but also won't hold my breath) and nothing significantly better, the very small increment of improvement this move might make will make little to no difference to where we are now. You might say we are moving in the right direction ... I'm saying that movement isn't enough to matter right direction or not. Maybe we've moved enough so we aren't standing right ON the hornets' nest, but we still need to move significantly farther and away from it not to get stung.

concur. Concurconcurconcur.