Article: Standing Pat as a Strategy

[gunnarthor]

 

I respectfully disagree with, well, everything. First, I remain a fan of the front office. They have done a lot to rebuild the minors. And last year many on this site were enthused by their free agent signings.

I'm confused about the thin returns during a playoff run. Are you talking about 2017 when their trades seemed to light a fire and the Twins made it to a wild card game. Or 2018, when they were well out of it, and received (in my opinion) some really nice pieces.

As for Molitor, do you think Flavine had a choice?

Finally, just as the most popular sports figure in any city is the backup quarterback, almost universally the least popular is the owner.

Hey, if you've paid attention to the last 25 years of this team and still think the Pohlad family is a good thing .... well, you'd be just wrong. Our owners are horrible.

 

As for the trades, the 2017 returns look awful and the Pressly/Escobar trades look pretty good, it's too early to tell of course.

 

As for building up the minors, eh. That is a good thing, of course, but it's not nearly as strong as it was four five years ago and this FO hasn't shown it knows how to build around a strong core of prospects in the first place. Is the plan to punt on the Sano/Buxton/Berrios/Kepler/Rosario/Polanco group? That seems like the plan unless the players force the issue.  The FO also traded away draft picks for payroll relief and 2m in international money for middling prospects (see first paragraph) so, while the 2017 draft looks pretty good, the 2018 draft wasn't nearly as good as it could've/should've been.

 

Lastly, yes, I do think the FO should have had the power to not hire Molitor. If the FO can clear out players on the last year of their contract while contending for a playoff spot, they can move off a manager in the same situation. It was clear that the team was winning despite Molly in 2017 and he was horrible at dealing with young players, especially the pitchers. If the owners forced the FO to rehire him then see first paragraph.

[gunnarthor]

 

When was the last time this organization made a high risk high reward trade?  2003?  1989?  We have had nothing for what feels like 15+ years now of low risk low reward trades and acquisitions.

 

Come on guys, where is the fire, the passion.. the demand for this?  Have things gotten so bad in Twins land, that we are really entertaining this as a "strategy"?

Span was probably the last high reward trade.

[mikelink45]

 

I think reality setting in may be the emphasis behind these moves. The Twins are in a precarious position with what they planned to be the core of the team at this time having for the most part under performed and disappointed, but still probably exhibiting enough talent and potential to be worth waiting for. Unfortunately, I think they believe the coaching staff that had been in place, as well as those in the developmental levels below have failed to bring the best out of these players.

So, with little choice but to see if new coaching can bring the talent out of these players, it makes little sense to make long term commitments to free agents that might not be enough to push them over the top.

Their preferred choice of using trades to suppliment the existing team probably has been unfruitful as well, given that most of the Twins prospect talent is at lower levels and not going to be at peak demand at this point.

Some of the trades I see happening don't make a lot of sense. Carlos Santana was supposed to be a Twins target since Philly was motivated to move him to free up a spot for Hoskins. Given that he was already being overpayed and the expensive end of his contract yet to come, it made sense that Philly would need to eat a lot of money and/or give up prospect capital to get him off their books. But in the end they turned Santana into Segura and Pazos, and only had to chip in Crawford. Any wonder the Twins weren't in on that?

I saw a suggestion here that the Twins try to get Santana from Seattle by trading Cave and a couple prospects. Why? Santana is being over paid. He has negative trade value. Why would the Twins do that?

I think the FO may be correct to just look for bargain pieces for this year, try to put a team on the field that can be competitive if the players perform, and see how things shake out.

There are a lot of pitching pieces that need to be evaluated before they will really know where they are. Would it make sense to start trading any of those pieces away before they had a better idea what they really have? Seems like that would be a bigger gamble than just letting things develop and shake out.

Give me some back up at 3B that can start when Sano gets injured or cannot find the ball with his bat.  Let the pitchers work things out, but the starting lineup needs to be 9 decent or better players and not seven players and two sets of crossed fingers.  

[mikelink45]

 

Maybe standing pat is the best call. 2018 season felt like a disappointment from the get go. But take a step back and look at the difference in record -- 7 games. 2017 85 - 77 Second place Central Div 2018 77 - 84 Second place Central Div How many walk-off losses were there - ~7 games or so. A few balls bouncing differently, or an additional hit here and there, and the boys could of been in the hunt with Cleveland. Only to lose in the first-round AGAIN! Sure Gardy and Co. won Division Titles, but where did that get us - nowhere. Remember 2006, we had the MVP, Cy Young Winner and the Batting Champ - ALL on the same team. Only to be swept in the First-round by the Mighty A's. Remember that each year Hope Springs Eternal. Here to better years ahead.

Somehow, celebrating second place in an historically bad division does not seem exciting or satisfying.  

[Major League Ready]

 

Give me some back up at 3B that can start when Sano gets injured or cannot find the ball with his bat.  Let the pitchers work things out, but the starting lineup needs to be 9 decent or better players and not seven players and two sets of crossed fingers.  

 

They will probably put Schoop at 3B if Sano is out for a few games. Petit is their AAA depth. If you are looking for a starting caliber 3B just in case does not get it together, that will have to be a mid-season move because there just are not enough roster spots unless you follow Riverbrians plan to have an exceptionally flexible roster. 

[Riverbrian]

They will probably put Schoop at 3B if Sano is out for a few games. Petit is their AAA depth. If you are looking for a starting caliber 3B just in case does not get it together, that will have to be a mid-season move because there just are not enough roster spots unless you follow Riverbrians plan to have an exceptionally flexible roster.

I wish they would. Castellanos is on the trade block by all reports. Castellanos can insure Sano and Kepler at the same time and probably could be acquired for a prospects not in the top 5.

 

The problem right now will be roster space. If Cron and Austin or Cron and Cruz get roster spots I’m not sure they’ll have a spot for a Castellanos.

 

Unless they move Austin to the OF and that will shut the door on a Cutch or Brantley signing.

 

As for Schoop playing 3B. I’m ok with that but then I’m going to need an upgrade over Adrianza to replace Schoop at 2B when Schoop replaces Sano at 3B.

 

I’m going to wait until the off season is complete to worry or not worry but at this early stage it sure looks like they are setting up for all eggs in the Sano and Buxton Basket without a sufficient safety net.

 

That’s an unnecessarily risky roulette wheel spin that doesn’t take into consideration the many years of the ball hitting black with your bet on red.

 

Safety in numbers. If they are projecting X performance from player Y to get Z amount of wins and I believe they are trying to do that with algorithms. They will eventually learn that they will have a better chance of getting the projected X performance if they have multiple players attempting it.

[KirbyDome89]

 

It's not easy to add long term talent outside of the draft and "sell" trades, but I agree I would like to eventually see some results in that regard with this front office.

 

If you have a bad division, doesn't that mean you don't have to be as aggressive, in a way? I might regret saying this, but Cleveland seems like our only real threat in 2019. If they falter at all, we're in pretty good position, even with our modest/conservative approach (like we almost were at points in 2018). As opposed to, say, the AL East or NL Central, where there have generally been multiple teams ready to prevail should one top dog falter.

 

Obviously we can still seek upgrades and try to close the gap with Cleveland, but maybe it's not such an immediate need to pay Corbin 6/130 right now, or offer Romero in trade for Goldschmidt, etc.

I don't know if anything about their job is "easy," but we're in year 3 now of essentially "standing pat." 

 

That's the "aim low and hope it works out," approach again. Like I said, if the goal is to maybe sneak into the playoffs and have no real chance to advance then sure, cross your fingers that Cleveland slips up and the Twins catch a few breaks. 

 

This team has holes all over the place. I wasn't screaming for them to find a legit front end starter, 2-3 elite bullpen arms, a reliable 4th OFer, a true SS (Polanco moves to 2B) and a solid 1B all in the same offseason. That would've been incredible albeit unlikely, but there continues to be nothing stopping them from checking off at least a couple of those boxes. We agree that it's incredibly hard to fill all those holes in one offseason. That's precisely why they should be looking to plug some of them each year. When the cycle repeats next offseason it'll once again be "too hard," to fill every hole. I can't sympathize with a self inflicted problem like that. 

 

Maybe your patience level exceeds mine. Maybe over the next few months the FO brings in the pitching help this team desperately needs, but as of right now, "standing pat," is the opposite of smart. 

[wabene]

So offer it now with a signing bonus given by all appearances payroll will be significantly lower this year. They have one other proven SP (Berrios) signed for next year.

Everybody talks about the need for 7-8 starters. How the hell can you get rid of Gibby? We have three rite now that you can reasonably count on. Sign him now! I personally believe he is a late bloomer on a sustainable path to success. Plus I'd like to add that I would wager Gibby wants to be here. He is a Midwestern boy and he was just finally feeling the confidence to lead a little bit. Build around him.

[caninatl04]

While reading this, I started thinking back to last year that there seemed to be a lot of games the Twins scored enough runs by say the 5th or 6th inning to be in good position to win the game. Then looked back and added up all the blown saves. I was blown away. 26!!!!!! Uff-Dah! How many other games did we have a good lead and couldn't hold it, thru innings 5, 6, 7, or 8? Pitching. Pitching. Pitching. I do realize errors could play a part in this, but not that often. 

 

Pretty self explanatory where the need is at.

I'd e curious how that ranked.

[USAFChief]

 

I'd e curious how that ranked.

I watched most of them. Trust me, they were rank.

[IndianaTwin]

 

I'd e curious how that ranked.

 

Actually, baseball-reference.com says the number was 30. Second place was the Angels at 26, followed by the Tigers and Royals at 24.  

 

Once more, this time with feeling...

 

Edited December 11, 2018 by IndianaTwin

[frightwig]

 

 

That's the "aim low and hope it works out," approach again. Like I said, if the goal is to maybe sneak into the playoffs and have no real chance to advance then sure, cross your fingers that Cleveland slips up and the Twins catch a few breaks. 

 

"Aim low and hope it works out" is about the size of it.

 

Today, one of the Twins writers on Twitter was touting Falvine's "buy low" approach, because at least the upside is more interesting than signing guys like Pelfrey and Correia, and it struck me that a "buy low" strategy can be sound process if the club is betting that a recent poor season was an anomaly in an otherwise good track record. However, the Twins are doing the inverse with Cron and Schoop. They're betting on the positive outlier proving to be for real. If either of them works out, I'm sure that we'll hear the crowing, but the odds are against them.

 

And for some reason the Twins are doing this while they supposedly have the budget to aim much higher. Really, is there a good reason why they're not serious contenders for Machado, Harper, or any other top free agent this winter? And I don't mean, "let's lowball a big name and claim, 'at least we tried,'" like they usually do. I mean, put in some real bids, maybe actually go get a game-changer. They have the money.

 

It doesn't look like the Twins care to aim higher than, "we might take Nelson Cruz if the price is right (the Rays don't want to pay him)," though.

 

[ChrisKnutson]

If giving out 1 year deals was the plan going into the offseason then I really don’t under stand why the FO didn’t trade Gibson and Odorizzi at the deadline last season. However, with the Winter Meetings going on, the opportunity still presents itself with playoff teams like the Yankees, A’s, and the Astros all in the market for starting pitching. And because you can’t predict injuries, a down year, or the possibility that the last season was an anomaly, right now might be the last chance to capitalize on Gibby and Odorizzi’s value.

 

Getting value out of Odorizzi may be tough since he’s expected to make $9.4M in 2019, which is a little expensive for mediocrity, but it’s still possible depending on who else you add to the deal (Cave/Hildy). However, when it comes to dealing Gibby, there’s no reason why he wouldn’t bring back a quality return. He’s coming off a career year and is expected to make $7.9M, which is more than reasonable for the way he pitched last season, which is why Gibby should atleast be worth a B prospect and a average ML ready piece.

 

And since Oakland literally has no SP depth (or quality arms), and isn’t really in the FA market looking for starting pitching, they seem like the perfect match (Richie Martin/Frankie Montas/Yerdel Vargas).

[Major League Ready]

 

If giving out 1 year deals was the plan going into the offseason then I really don’t under stand why the FO didn’t trade Gibson and Odorizzi at the deadline last season. However, with the Winter Meetings going on, the opportunity still presents itself with playoff teams like the Yankees, A’s, and the Astros all in the market for starting pitching. And because you can’t predict injuries, a down year, or the possibility that the last season was an anomaly, right now might be the last chance to capitalize on Gibby and Odorizzi’s value.

Getting value out of Odorizzi may be tough since he’s expected to make $9.4M in 2019, which is a little expensive for mediocrity, but it’s still possible depending on who else you add to the deal (Cave/Hildy). However, when it comes to dealing Gibby, there’s no reason why he wouldn’t bring back a quality return. He’s coming off a career year and is expected to make $7.9M, which is more than reasonable for the way he pitched last season, which is why Gibby should atleast be worth a B prospect and a average ML ready piece.

And since Oakland literally has no SP depth (or quality arms), and isn’t really in the FA market looking for starting pitching, they seem like the perfect match (Richie Martin/Frankie Montas/Yerdel Vargas).

 

If he produces an identical WAR value this year the cost will be $3.73M per 1 WAR. That is far better than any of the highly touted free agents. You still might be right but he is a good value.

 

[Mr. Brooks]

"Aim low and hope it works out" is about the size of it.

 

Today, one of the Twins writers on Twitter was touting Falvine's "buy low" approach, because at least the upside is more interesting than signing guys like Pelfrey and Correia, and it struck me that a "buy low" strategy can be sound process if the club is betting that a recent poor season was an anomaly in an otherwise good track record. However, the Twins are doing the inverse with Cron and Schoop. They're betting on the positive outlier proving to be for real. If either of them works out, I'm sure that we'll hear the crowing, but the odds are against them.

 

And for some reason the Twins are doing this while they supposedly have the budget to aim much higher. Really, is there a good reason why they're not serious contenders for Machado, Harper, or any other top free agent this winter? And I don't mean, "let's lowball a big name and claim, 'at least we tried,'" like they usually do. I mean, put in some real bids, maybe actually go get a game-changer. They have the money.

 

It doesn't look like the Twins care to aim higher than, "we might take Nelson Cruz if the price is right (the Rays don't want to pay him)," though.

Why are Machado and Harper taking the Twins phone call? Those two guys, uniquely to almost every other free agent, are getting paid no matter what. They are going to a big market, proven contender, or both.

[frightwig]

 

Why are Machado and Harper taking the Twins phone call? Those two guys, uniquely to almost every other free agent, are getting paid no matter what. They are going to a big market, proven contender, or both.

 

If the Twins are serious, why not take their calls seriously?

 

They have a good crop of players in their mid-20's, with more well-regarded prospects on the way. They don't have any other big contracts on the books, so they're free to create an ambitious plan to take the next step up, and could present that to any targeted centerpiece of the plan. Minnesota is a nice place to live during the baseball season. And some of the big-market clubs are either a notorious mess or seem to be disinterested. So, step in. Be bold.

[Battle ur tail off]

It's flat out silly to not go out and sign the 2 best relief pitchers out there in free agency. This can be done for a fairly decent price, and generally low on years. They should not be looking at guys like Soria, they should be ALL IN for Britton, Familia and Herrera, or whomever they feel are the absolute best guys out there. 

 

NOT, who is "value" or "payroll friendly". Get the best guys, period. Someone offers 3/40? Offer 3/55. Get some damn balls and bring in some studs that throw hard and strike guys out. 

 

Get the turds off your roster who just take up space and chew bubble gum out there behind the outfield fence. 

 

 

[Mr. Brooks]

If the Twins are serious, why not take their calls seriously?

 

They have a good crop of players in their mid-20's, with more well-regarded prospects on the way. They don't have any other big contracts on the books, so they're free to create an ambitious plan to take the next step up, and could present that to any targeted centerpiece of the plan. Minnesota is a nice place to live during the baseball season. And some of the big-market clubs are either a notorious mess or seem to be disinterested. So, step in. Be bold.

Minnesota is a great place to live. But most people can't comprehend that until they live here.

Plus, these two are young guys. Minnesota can't compete with the lifestyle that they can find in an LA or NY or Chicago, etc.

Any contract that we can offer them, one of those markets can easily match.

 

And, other teams have good young players and prospects too. "We might be good someday" can't hold a candle to, "we won 90 games last year."

 

I'll believe that interest is tepid when April comes and they're begging for a one year deal.

[howieramone2]

 

This is on the nose.

 

The "strategy" that the FO is telegraphing at this moment is essentially telling the roster that they have no faith in them - that there's no good reason to invest in real talent to supplement them - that it's a better "strategy" to just let ownership pocket an extra $40 million.

That's one interpretation, but it is certainly not mine. You do realize there is still all kinds of time to make moves? Calm down, take a deep breathe. 

 

There were fundamental changes in free agency last off-season. No one knows how many or if any of those fundamental changes are permanent. Let it play out. Plenty of time to panic later.

[howieramone2]

 

Trading Gibson isn't standing pat, it is picking a direction. If they aren't serious about contending this year, why keep Gibson and not get some great minor league talent for him? Or, they can keep him, and get around the 40th pick next year (a pick which has an almost 5% chance of mattering, give or take).

This is simple. If Gibson regresses trade him at the deadline. If he continues to shine, extend him 2-3 years or give him a QO.

[howieramone2]

 

What I'm interested to see is if we get to the end of July and Sano and/or Buxton are failing/have failed, what this front office does then. 

Cave is a reasonable replacement for Buxton. Cron and Cruz should be able to replace Sano's production. You put the pieces together now, you don't wait til July.

Edited December 12, 2018 by howieramone2

[Mike Sixel]

 

That's one interpretation, but it is certainly not mine. You do realize there is still all kinds of time to make moves? Calm down, take a deep breathe. 

 

There were fundamental changes in free agency last off-season. No one knows how many or if any of those fundamental changes are permanent. Let it play out. Plenty of time to panic later.

 

Every player signed so far has received more than people projected. And the Rays just signed a guy for $15MM per year......so, maybe there weren't fundamental changes after all. And, how did signing all those bargains work out last year?

[Mike Sixel]

 

This is simple. If Gibson regresses trade him at the deadline. If he continues to shine, extend him 2-3 years or give him a QO.

Who's going to trade for him if he's bad, and even if they do, what awful prospect would the Twins get back?

 

And, what if he doesn't want to sign here, since as Torii and Johan once said, they always play for a future that never comes? What if he gets hurt? 

[Mr. Brooks]

Who's going to trade for him if he's bad, and even if they do, what awful prospect would the Twins get back?

 

And, what if he doesn't want to sign here, since as Torii and Johan once said, they always play for a future that never comes? What if he gets hurt?

I'm sure SD would take him off our hands, if we ship them a 2nd round pick.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm sure SD would take him off our hands, if we ship them a 2nd round pick.

Ha. Worst trade ever.

[S.]

 

This is simple. If Gibson regresses trade him at the deadline. If he continues to shine, extend him 2-3 years or give him a QO.

If Gibson pitches as well as last year, or better, there is no way in hell he is signing a 2 year extension. And there is probably no way in hell he's signing a 3 year extension without testing free agency. He'll be 32, that will be his last chance for a significant multi year deal. If he regresses he is a 5 ERA pitcher and nobody gives a **** or offers more than a bag of balls in a trade.

[DocBauer]

I wish they would. Castellanos is on the trade block by all reports. Castellanos can insure Sano and Kepler at the same time and probably could be acquired for a prospects not in the top 5.

The problem right now will be roster space. If Cron and Austin or Cron and Cruz get roster spots I’m not sure they’ll have a spot for a Castellanos.

Unless they move Austin to the OF and that will shut the door on a Cutch or Brantley signing.

As for Schoop playing 3B. I’m ok with that but then I’m going to need an upgrade over Adrianza to replace Schoop at 2B when Schoop replaces Sano at 3B.

I’m going to wait until the off season is complete to worry or not worry but at this early stage it sure looks like they are setting up for all eggs in the Sano and Buxton Basket without a sufficient safety net.

That’s an unnecessarily risky roulette wheel spin that doesn’t take into consideration the many years of the ball hitting black with your bet on red.

Safety in numbers. If they are projecting X performance from player Y to get Z amount of wins and I believe they are trying to do that with algorithms. They will eventually learn that they will have a better chance of getting the projected X performance if they have multiple players attempting it.

Had to like and quote as it carries over some thoughts I just put down in the "Cruz" thread.

 

I still like McCutchen or Brantley...they make more sense to me roster-wise...bjt I definitely see the appeal for Cruz. Either move improves the lineup, either move means some roster juggling as you can't just have Adrianza...who I actually like...as your lone infield reserve. Barring injury and roster fluctuation, either Austin or Cron is moved. (Unless Austin could somehow sneak through waivers).

 

THEN, you NEED to add another infielder. You mention Castellanos here, and mentioned other trade candidates in the other thread. All logical moves. What about Solarte, coming off a bad season, as a FA signing? Regardless of Cruz, or the OF many of us may prefer, you make some sort of move/decision on Austin or Cron. You make the move for an additional infielder. You have a pretty interesting roster, IMO. No room for Astudillo, who belongs, but has options and is probably the first guy recalled. What's wrong with depth and options?

 

Once again, in regard to the original topic, "standing pat" doesn't mean doing nothing. Even if the payroll does move back some, we are seriously linked to a potential Cruz signing, even after a pair of additions. I don't see this as penny-pinching. And the market is RIPE with bullpen pieces, and much depth.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm confused. Signing four or five players is not standing pat. Like, literally the opposite of doing nothing, which is what standing pat means.

[DocBauer]

Gibson will be 32 in 2020, and this board is full of people who say they wouldn't want Greinke because he is 34 and "on the downslope" of his career.

I liked your post, but selected this portion to address Gibson specifically.

 

I have always felt Gibson has gotten a bum rap in his Twins career for 2 reasons:

 

1] He slipped to the Twins due to an injury. Everyone thought/hoped we got a steal as a potential top of the rotation piece.

 

2] TJ surgery notwithstanding, he bounced back well. And everyone wanted him up ASAP to lead the staff and he had a poor premier. Surprise! (Same thing happened to Berrios, BTW).

 

But Gibson's first full season was really his rookie year, missing rookie status by 2/3 of an inning. And it was solid. His second season, across the board in everything but W-L record was better. Then came the disaster of 2016 when everyone, not just Gibby, had a poor year. His start to 2017 was also bad. But he learned, grew, adapted, changed his mind-set, and from mid 2017 he has performed like a legitimate #3 ML SP who looks like a real #2 some days.

 

His mind, body and arm are solid. The comparison to Greinke not only 2+yrs, but Greinke still has a couple 2-3yrs left on his deal for a massive dollar amount. Were I the Twins, I'd lock him up right now on a 3 or 3+1 deal. I'm not saying they shouldn't explore trades and future FA deals come 2020, but he and Berrios should provide a stabilizing influence in the rotation for the next few years, along with prospects. At some point in 2019, or the off season, we can make determinations about Pineda and Odorizzi.

[DocBauer]

I'm confused. Signing four or five players is not standing pat. Like, literally the opposite of doing nothing, which is what standing pat means.

I appreciate your post 100%! (Not sure if you were speaking to me directly or not, but I'm responding anyway, lol).

 

To me, when Nick was writing about standing pat, he was directly speaking about the core of the team: Sano, Polanco, Rosario, Buxton, Kepler, Garver, Berrios, etc. Not looking at blowing thjngs up. No Machado, Harper, Corbin, Evoldi, etc. No major trades of top prospects to bring in a Goldschmidt or anyone like that.

 

My interpretation. And Nick is free to correct me if I'm wrong. In fact, financially, Schoop and Cron come in, financially speaking, for less than Dozier and the "projected" arbitration value of Grossman. I believe the intent of the article is simply, "don't give up on or move the pieces on hand and make major moves to replace anyone because there are so many unknowns and so much potential on hand".

 

Considering obvious holes, most obvious being 1B and 2B, moves of some sort had to be made. (Arguments can, and have been made as to the additions there). And considering payroll for 2018, and arguments that the team could legitimately stretch payroll $20M further, "standing pat" would seem to indicate a reduction in payroll for 2019. (Very possibly allowing for extensions, future additions, etc).

 

Nowhere in this scenario did Nick ever state to not make improvements or not sign anyone. The Twins could, largely, "stand pat" with most of their roster, not make a trade of players or prospects, sign a couple nice BP options, add a quality bat, and still end up cutting payroll for 2019, while keeping the ML and milb core all in place.

 

Just my opinion, of course.