LEN3 Throws Cold Water on Hot Stove

[nicksaviking]

 

I remember there being quite a discussion between the two sides and there were two sides. 

 

 

And it seems to me the two side were, "That was a terrible trade!" and "That was a terrible trade, but eh, Hicks".

 

I don't think anyone really thought that Murphy was at all a good return.

[Riverbrian]

And it seems to me the two side were, "That was a terrible trade!" and "That was a terrible trade, but eh, Hicks".

 

I don't think anyone really thought that Murphy was at all a good return.

There were a few but I suspect they were part of the scouting department who recommended the trade to Terry Ryan.

[bird]

 

And you ignore the success stories. And, the alternative is? Slegers types like the last five to ten years? Odorizzi types , also not difference makers, and had no shot to be. Darvish got hurt. Sometimes that happens. But he had a shot to be great, and still might be. Ohtani got hurt too. Was that a bad signing? If the goal is to not take risks and be mediocre, the Twins are the poster children.

 

 

But let's not pretend there isn't an alternative to Arietta on one side and Slegers on the other.

 

We all share the frustrations about how long it's taking to produce a winning team. Personally, I'm interested in what steps they take. The never-ending references to how it's taken less time for some other team is tiresome, boring, and frankly terribly limited in relevance.

 

Why would you bring up Slegers in December 2018 when the better options to him, right now, are Gonsalves, Stewart, Mejia, Thorpe, Littell, and De Jong? One might expect Slegers advances your argument? As does a continued clinging to 5-10 years of mostly useless history?

[KirbyDome89]

 

But let's not pretend there isn't an alternative to Arietta on one side and Slegers on the other.

 

We all share the frustrations about how long it's taking to produce a winning team. Personally, I'm interested in what steps they take. The never-ending references to how it's taken less time for some other team is tiresome, boring, and frankly terribly limited in relevance.

 

Why would you bring up Slegers in December 2018 when the better options to him, right now, are Gonsalves, Stewart, Mejia, Thorpe, Littell, and De Jong? One might expect Slegers advances your argument? As does a continued clinging to 5-10 years of mostly useless history?

Have this FO made steps that you can point to as evidence that the Twins are on the right track, or any track at all for that matter?

 

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here. Yes, the Twins are unique (as is every franchise) and they ultimately control their own ability to succeed or fail, so by that token comparisons to other clubs aren't particularly useful. That said, holding them up against other organizations that have turned things around much more quickly is a way of measuring where MN stands as as organization, which IMO is relevant. It's difficult to watch competitors lap you and pay no attention to it. 

 

So far the last three years feels like a lot of what we've seen previously from the Twins. There have been some small improvements and other changes that haven't gone over as well. I think we all had high hopes when Falvey took over that we'd see more tangible change by this point. Maybe we still will, and hopefully this offseason is the launching point for that, but I think there's a growing contingent for whom the luster of "new," has worn away and what's left is unfortunately familiar. 

[Mike Sixel]

But let's not pretend there isn't an alternative to Arietta on one side and Slegers on the other.

 

We all share the frustrations about how long it's taking to produce a winning team. Personally, I'm interested in what steps they take. The never-ending references to how it's taken less time for some other team is tiresome, boring, and frankly terribly limited in relevance.

 

Why would you bring up Slegers in December 2018 when the better options to him, right now, are Gonsalves, Stewart, Mejia, Thorpe, Littell, and De Jong? One might expect Slegers advances your argument? As does a continued clinging to 5-10 years of mostly useless history?

How many in that list were added by this FO? Littel....I hope they aren't hoping on him. One guy, in three years, in that list.

[yarnivek1972]

I remember there being quite a discussion between the two sides and there were two sides.

 

I know because Chief and I were on one side.

 

I stand here with hindsight, foresight, and just plain ole' sight. In my opinion, the trade was terrible at the time it happened and has advanced to gruesomely painful as of December 21, 2018.

 

We traded a 5 tool player who was just starting to figure it out for a one tool position scarcity overpay catcher.

 

Our track record with these 5 tool CF's is beyond gruesomely painful.

 

Aaron Hicks should be in a General Managers pamphlet explaining how to get absolutely no value from your 1st round pick.

 

The Twins rushed him to the big leagues before he was ready... gave him the starting CF job with no safety net for 3 years straight and he looked completely lost at the plate in the process.

 

and then when he finally started to produce... and you could even see that he wasn't looking lost at the plate like before. They trade a 20/20 maybe 30/30 potential player for a catcher that could maybe hit 10 home runs if everything went perfect.

 

And then they hand the CF job to a younger Byron Buxton, rushing him to the big leagues with no safety net for 3 years straight and he looks completely lost at the plate in the process.

 

Make the same mistakes over and over again.

 

And before that... Carlos Gomez was another example of rushing with no patience.

 

How many times can we repeat the same mistake over and over again has become a legitimate question.

 

Yeah... I was against the trade... still am. Kinda pissed about it actually. Then and Now.

Torii Hunter would be another example of a 5 tool CFer rushed to the bigs who looked lost. Although it was only about 2 wasted years for him. One in which he played and one in which he spent most of the year in the minors - but his option clock started ticking early because of it.

[bird]

 

How have the AAA players they've relied on worked out? Never adding long term assets means every year you have 5-7 holes filled with AAAA players, or 1 year deal guys, over and over. It's how you have sustained lack of success for almost the entire last decade. 

 

Did you hate the Castro signing, which is the kind of signing I'm mostly asking for?

 

 

So let's talk 2019. If, and I say IF, Falvey doesn't make a single additional move before spring training, how many holes will this team be filling with AAAA players?

 

I'm struggling to name even one, quite frankly. Maybe you'd say Hildenberger? Moya? Austin?

 

I guess I'm not really sure what actions or inactions you're criticizing. RP FA signings, I suppose?

 

Personally, I could care less about the length of a contract. Who cares if three or four holes open up in 2020? We might fill 5-7 holes in 2019 via FA. Big deal. Yes, we'd all like even better alternatives to Cron and Schoop. I'm pretty sure the FO is betting on Kirilloff and Lewis, maybe Rooker too. Who did we pass on that was going to be such a big and certain upgrade over those two?

 

We almost universally agree they have a desperate need for a RP that tiers in with May/Rogers or better. No one doubts how wonderful it would be to have one more starter to give you #1 or #2 performance. Major League Ready has made a fact-filled case as to why satisfying that desire is fraught with incredibly long odds. And many of us make the case that we simply don't need another option to slot in at #4 and #5.

 

Again, yes, they can sign players to multi-year contracts and then replace them with Thorpe or Romero or whomever, but FA contracts, as you've pointed out yourself, are rich. There's a solid argument to be made for avoiding a McCutcheon 3/50 deal if you really believe you have an equal or better alternative, or even if you believe the guys you have in Kepler/Cave are adequate until 2020 when perhaps Kirilloff/Larnach emerge. And in any case the next FA option will be out there if your internal guys both fail you. I wanted them to go after and overpay McCutcheon, knowing it would be a crappy contract for a player TD'ers will probably bitch about a lot in year two and three. I understand why they didn't.

 

But the thing is, signing one year deals was not the problem. It was signing mediocrity, and having way too many holes to fill. If Sano and Buxton, who unlike, say, Correa and Benintendi, missed full seasons to injury, finally DO in fact fill holes, I think we can put all this talk about ancient history from another regime to bed, right? This FO is working with what it has, and while yeah, it would be sweet if they signed a Harper or Paxton or whomever, I don't see history repeating itself other than a couple of irrelevent short contracts at easily replaceable positions.

 

Who in today's starting lineup are you're absolutely certain won't give us 2 WAR? Castro? If they sign Cruz to a multi-year deal, does that detach Falvey from talk of what happened in the 2011 off-season? Please? 

[yarnivek1972]

So let's talk 2019. If, and I say IF, Falvey doesn't make a single additional move before spring training, how many holes will this team be filling with AAAA players?

 

I'm struggling to name even one, quite frankly. Maybe you'd say Hildenberger? Moya? Austin?

 

I guess I'm not really sure what actions or inactions you're criticizing. RP FA signings, I suppose?

 

Personally, I could care less about the length of a contract. Who cares if three or four holes open up in 2020? We might fill 5-7 holes in 2019 via FA. Big deal. Yes, we'd all like even better alternatives to Cron and Schoop. I'm pretty sure the FO is betting on Kirilloff and Lewis, maybe Rooker too. Who did we pass on that was going to be such a big and certain upgrade over those two?

 

We almost universally agree they have a desperate need for a RP that tiers in with May/Rogers or better. No one doubts how wonderful it would be to have one more starter to give you #1 or #2 performance. Major League Ready has made a fact-filled case as to why satisfying that desire is fraught with incredibly long odds. And many of us make the case that we simply don't need another option to slot in at #4 and #5.

 

Again, yes, they can sign players to multi-year contracts and then replace them with Thorpe or Romero or whomever, but FA contracts, as you've pointed out yourself, are rich. There's a solid argument to be made for avoiding a McCutcheon 3/50 deal if you really believe you have an equal or better alternative, or even if you believe the guys you have in Kepler/Cave are adequate until 2020 when perhaps Kirilloff/Larnach emerge. And in any case the next FA option will be out there if your internal guys both fail you. I wanted them to go after and overpay McCutcheon, knowing it would be a crappy contract for a player TD'ers will probably bitch about a lot in year two and three. I understand why they didn't.

 

But the thing is, signing one year deals was not the problem. It was signing mediocrity, and having way too many holes to fill. If Sano and Buxton, who unlike, say, Correa and Benintendi, didn't miss full seasons to injury, finally DO in fact fill holes, I think we can put all this talk about ancient history from another regime to bed, right? This FO is working with what it has, and while yeah, it would be sweet if they signed a Harper or Paxton or whomever, I don't see history repeating itself other than a couple of irrelevent short contracts at easily replaceable positions.

 

Who in today's starting lineup are you absolutely certain won't give us 2 WAR? Castro? If they sign Cruz to a multi-year deal, does that detach Falvey from talk of what happened in the 2011 off-season? Please?

Without further acquistions, there will be 5 AAAA in the bullpen alone. May and Rogers are okay. Everyone else is meh. Astudillo and Austin have to be considered AAAA. Frankly, so do Sano and Buxton. So that’s 9. Out of 25.

[Mike Sixel]

I'll try again....if you don't sign FAs, and rely on your minor league team only....and don't make trades....see the "where does the talent come from" thread....you are going to rely on bad minor league players (or players not ready). How is that any better than taking a chance on a FA (not the highest, but how about the next tier?)?

 

And, in one paragraph you say it doesn't matter how many holes they have, then in a later one you say they were bad last year because there were too many holes to fill (unless I misunderstood, which is possible). Again, having 7-10 holes, or 40% of your roster, makes it very, very hard to plan, because you don't know which FAs you can sign or not in the future....

 

Also, if multiple teams continue to sign FAs, that is the market rate. Multiple smart teams, like the Dodgers, Red Sox, Yankees, Cardinals, Cubs, Brewers. The ones that are winning, and lapped the Twins in their rebuilds.....

 

This FO has added nothing of consequence to the MLB roster in three years. Castro is about it. Unless you believe in Odo or Reed, he's it for more than 1 year of help to this roster. 

[bird]

 

Without further acquistions, there will be 5 AAAA in the bullpen alone. May and Rogers are okay. Everyone else is meh. Astudillo and Austin have to be considered AAAA. Frankly, so do Sano and Buxton. So that’s 9. Out of 25.

 

 

Well, you have a pretty dim view of things. But I get your viewpoint. Your AAAA label is someone else's question mark.

 

So, if they sign two good RP's and Cruz, will you still be unhappy?

[bird]

I'll try again. Exactly what FO are you talking about when you infer that NO FA's are being signed? What FO is relying on minor leaguers only? Or even relying exclusively on their own system? Not Falvey's, obviously, when Pineda, Odor, and Mejia make up his pecking order in front of Romero, Gonsalves, Stewart, Littell, De Jong, and Thorpe.

 

How are either Cron or Schoop something other than the next tier? Which next tier FA's are such obviously better alternatives? I'm not terribly excited about those guys either, but I don't exactly have a big list of better options.

 

They struggled in previous years, back in the ancient history you like to mention, because, as I said, Ryan had too many holes to begin with, and then he filled them with mediocrity. Falvey isn't filling ten holes. He has lots of resources that aren't always there: cash, valuable-enough prospects, half the holes to fill, A half-dozen B prospects on the cusp.

 

Last year, Falvey filled holes fairly adeptly. He gets a C+ grade from me. Stuff happened. Morrison turned into a pouty anchor with nagging injuries. Lynn showed up unready. Rodney and Duke served their purposes. Last season sucked because Sano and Buxton sucked, Polanco cheated, Erv was a mess...practically a perfect storm of bad news. You want to blame one year contracts on that mess? That played such a minor role. 

 

I'm not sure. specifically, what you'd suggest they do all that differently, Mike. I get it that evry signing, to you, is another one that went to a smarter FO, a FO that wants to win whereas this one doesn't. I guess. I see a lot of generalities. Or lamenting about the distant past.

 

This is Falvey's third off-season. He gets a bit of a mulligan from me on his first, and he gets the benefit of the doubt from me until this off-season is concluded and the 2019 season results are in.

 

While I think he'd be well-served with three more roster additions, ones he can readily make, I just don't think he's dealing with 9 AAAA players like Yarn does. Maybe 3? Ones that two RP's and Cruz would solve?

 

Again, betting on Sano and Buxton is the right decision for 2019. I can't imagine not doing that. Falvey will be an idiot if those guys wet the bed and a genius if they come through.

 

To make a rather myopic statement about how this FO has done nothing of consequence because the roster additions still in place are Odo, Reed and Castro? No mention of Cave or any other valuable role player? No mention of the 5 new B prospects in the system? The new coaching and training staff additions?

 

 

[Riverbrian]

 

Torii Hunter would be another example of a 5 tool CFer rushed to the bigs who looked lost. Although it was only about 2 wasted years for him. One in which he played and one in which he spent most of the year in the minors - but his option clock started ticking early because of it.

 

 

 

[bird]

 

How many in that list were added by this FO? Littel....I hope they aren't hoping on him. One guy, in three years, in that list.

 

 

Come on, Mike, this is almost silly.  You want to play games with a discussion about 7 B grade pitching prospects as if that  tells the story? I'll respond to this and to Kirby too:

 

1. First of all, the talent on the MLB roster is far better than their 2018 record. Far better. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see 2+ WAR from 6 position players in 2019. The average MLB team has 4.666 such players. The average MLB team has fewer than 3 pitchers that reach the 2+ WAR milestone. 

 

2. This FO has kept themselves in a very advantageous position to make headway. They've got "financial flexibility", or cash. They now have at least a modicum of trade-able talent. If they don't take advantage (soon, yes) of this FA supply, I'll fault them. Not now though.

 

3. They have over 20 prospects who get B grades. This is a prospect "with a good chance of a successful career". MOST players who earn this grade make it to the majors. Two of them are A grade guys. Most teams, not some, have ZERO of these. I don't much care when guys were added as long as they're managed well. But since you're asking, Falvey and gang added 5 B prospects after the deadline. It's a top 5 farm system, and frankly, I'm not so sure we won't be a top 10 MLB team in power rankings at some point in 2019. Not that many of the smart teams you mentioned earlier will be in better shape in terms of overall asset value. And more critically, with the financial capacity to keep that talent in place.

 

4. There have been revolutionary improvements in "infrastructure": Observational technologies, analytics software, analytics personnel, information systems and support for both scouting and development functions. Huge increases in the budget, upgraded processes, an impressive injection of talent.

 

5. Coaching upgrades from top to bottom, dead weight replaced with energetic updated thinking, new coaching tools, tons of changes underway in assessment, teaching, monitoring, etc.

 

6. New hires in training, nutrition, medical, and other realms in support of development of talent.

 

I could go on. But I'd love to wager that improvement at the major league level will be noticeable and notable for even the most dour and pessimistic and history-obsessed among us.

 

But trust me, I know that it feels like too much of the same old same old. I'm not 100% sure myself, but it feels similar to me to other business turnarounds I saw back before I got old and crabby.

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Come on, Mike, this is almost silly.  You want to play games with a discussion about 7 B grade pitching prospects as if that  tells the story? I'll respond to this and to Kirby too:

 

1. First of all, the talent on the MLB roster is far better than their 2018 record. Far better. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see 2+ WAR from 6 position players in 2019. The average MLB team has 4.666 such players. The average MLB team has fewer than 3 pitchers that reach the 2+ WAR milestone. 

 

2. This FO has kept themselves in a very advantageous position to make headway. They've got "financial flexibility", or cash. They now have at least a modicum of trade-able talent. If they don't take advantage (soon, yes) of this FA supply, I'll fault them. Not now though.

 

3. They have over 20 prospects who get B grades. This is a prospect "with a good chance of a successful career". MOST players who earn this grade make it to the majors. Two of them are A grade guys. Most teams, not some, have ZERO of these. I don't much care when guys were added as long as they're managed well. But since you're asking, Falvey and gang added 5 B prospects after the deadline. It's a top 5 farm system, and frankly, I'm not so sure we won't be a top 10 MLB team in power rankings at some point in 2019. Not that many of the smart teams you mentioned earlier will be in better shape in terms of overall asset value. And more critically, with the financial capacity to keep that talent in place.

 

4. There have been revolutionary improvements in "infrastructure": Observational technologies, analytics software, analytics personnel, information systems and support for both scouting and development functions. Huge increases in the budget, upgraded processes, an impressive injection of talent.

 

5. Coaching upgrades from top to bottom, dead weight replaced with energetic updated thinking, new coaching tools, tons of changes underway in assessment, teaching, monitoring, etc.

 

6. New hires in training, nutrition, medical, and other realms in support of development of talent.

 

I could go on. But I'd love to wager that improvement at the major league level will be noticeable and notable for even the most dour and pessimistic and history-obsessed among us.

 

But trust me, I know that it feels like too much of the same old same old. I'm not 100% sure myself, but it feels similar to me to other business turnarounds I saw back before I got old and crabby.

 

I agree, I think there was a lot of "behind the curtain" changes that were desperately needed.  And I want to give them time to see if their draft picks and trade acquisitions prove smart.

 

In the meantime, it'd be nice if our offseasons weren't so frustrating.

[bird]

 

I agree, I think there was a lot of "behind the curtain" changes that were desperately needed.  And I want to give them time to see if their draft picks and trade acquisitions prove smart.

 

In the meantime, it'd be nice if our offseasons weren't so frustrating.

 

 

No kidding. But we'll need to be able to celebrate not just Falvey-era trades and picks and signings, Levi. That won't be enough.

 

Sano, Buxton, Berrios, Kepler, Rosario, and Polanco. We need the first two to pan out for sure, and we need to be right on 3 of 4 of the others, probably, in order to NOT be set back any more than the Hicks and Ramos trades set us back. Lots of uncertainty about to become illuminated for us.

 

I actually like the odds. And I like that none of the top 30'ish first round draft choices the scouting people have made in the past 10 years is selling used cars yet. They're all alive in some shape or form. Lewis and Kirilloff hold promise similar to Sano and Buxton's, but so far without the injuries and the character questions. If all four amount to something, the vibe in these threads flip-flops. It's at least a possibility that this becomes reality in the next season or so.

 

[Battle ur tail off]

 

If the Yankees knew he wasn't any good why did he spend parts of 3 seasons with them? Hicks didn't break out until he was almost 28. Did you know David Ortiz was 15 years ago? Seems like just yesterday doesn't it.

 

Probably because they had nothing else. But they knew what he was. At best a AAAA player, couldn't hit a lick. Look at his numbers both major and minor leagues, he's the definition of not good. And they got a guy from our system that was an athlete, took good at bats and could play a really good outfield. Also thought of as a top prospect for quite some time. We got fleeced and it was terrible. 

[Battle ur tail off]

 

"Imagine having Hicks in our outfield and hitting towards the top of the order right now! If they were going to trade him, it should have been as part of a package when he was coming through the minors. "

 

Aaron Hicks and Wilson Ramos are perfect examples as to why you don't sell other than from surplus even when surplus is not in surplus. Don't create a hole to fill a hole, and that includes having no Plan B's.

 

Trading Gibson is a bad bad bad idea until two other pitchers are in place who can give you occasional stretches of #2 performance like he has done.

 

You can sell if you get something back in return. When you do as the Twins did and trade top prospects for guys that were never any good in the first place, this is what happens. Capp and John Ryan Murphy. Rather have those 2? or Ramos and Hicks???

[bird]

 

You can sell if you get something back in return. When you do as the Twins did and trade top prospects for guys that were never any good in the first place, this is what happens. Capp and John Ryan Murphy. Rather have those 2? or Ramos and Hicks???

 

Precisely the point. Half of it anyway. Have a plan B for the player you sell, and win the WAR war when trading much more often than not. Without a backup plan, mistakes are exasperated and set you back, some times for more than one season. They had no reliable Plan B for Hicks, Ramos, Revere, Gomez...

 

But those are transactions from the distant past.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

"What would you do different?"

 

That's a slippery question. I liked their moves going into 2017, not so much since then, and I really disagreed with them blowing it up last July though I can see the case for them doing that. That has been debated.

 

What would I do different? Well, doesn't adding Cron with Austin look a lot like the mistake they made adding Morrison last season, with Mauer already at first? So one obvious thing would be to part ways with either Cron or Austin before the spring games begin.

[bird]

 

"What would you do different?"

That's a slippery question. I liked their moves going into 2017, not so much since then, and I really disagreed with them blowing it up last July though I can see the case for them doing that. That has been debated.

What would I do different? Well, doesn't adding Cron with Austin look a lot like the mistake they made adding Morrison last season, with Mauer already at first? So one obvious thing would be to part ways with either Cron or Austin before the spring games begin.

 

 

Sure. In favor of?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Sure. In favor of?

I guess at this moment in time I'd go with *checks notes* ... Cron?

 

But I wouldn't have been seeking out a right handed first baseman only marginally better than what they had in the first place. That's kind of what I meant by "slippery".