Article: BREAKING: Nelson Cruz Agrees To Deal With Twins

[Riverbrian]

 

I will only argue that slash stats don’t give a good picture of performance. They are far too heavily influenced by BABip and other factors not independent to the batter.

I look forward to measures derived from the pitch level and batted ball data. Baseball Prospectus has a new DRC+ that I want to dig into. I would love to see how Kepler, Rosario and Cave measure up. I expect teams are designing even better models.

Before the Cruz deal, Kepler was projected for the most WAR among the Twin position players (fangraphs/steamer) for 2019. That projection is based on his numbers the last three years.

As always I appreciate the your thoughtful responses. Thanks for the debate.

 

On that we agree.

 

Up in North Dakota a 20 degree temperature doesn't mean much by itself. 

 

When you add in wind speeds, that's when you really start getting a sense if you need a coat. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Rushing players to the big leagues doesn't cause "damage".  Sorry, but players all over the major leagues and throughout major league history have been "rushed' to the majors. 

 

Kent Hrbek went from A+ ball to the major leagues.  The claim, made often here, that modern baseball development is different is specious.  By 1984, he was the runner up in MVP voting in a year that with the current Twins approach to development would have put him in AAA ball without any major league at bats.  

 

Aaron Judge was in the major leagues in his 3rd professional season;  in 2014 he was in A and A+ leagues.  In 2015 he was in AA and AAA.  In 2016 he started in AAA and finished in major leagues.    Alex Bregman was in the majors in his 2nd professional season.

 

And, as I have pointed out over and over again, what makes those rosters (check out how they developed their players) different from the Twins is that somehow they move their players up through the minors and into their starting lineups and develop them into STAR players on teams that are actually good and very competitive.  WHen was the last college player that the Twins drafted that made their major league debut at 22?    

 

Brent Rooker is already 24 years old.  

 

The claims of "rushing" these players is specious.

You can't imagine a scenario where a prospect could be rushed?  Basically, it's the phenomenon where the lack of the player's skillset results in the development of bad habits and/or the loss of  confidence.  I think we can see that the entirety of the MLB recognizes this with how few talented players make their debuts at young ages or shortly after being drafted.  Clearly the minor leagues serve some purpose.   You point to the exceptions, but they prove the general rule: don't rush your prospects. 

 

Rooker's age is a red hearing.  He's had less than two years of pro-ball.  Just because he's older doesn't mean the consequences of him being exposed to the major leagues too soon will be erased.  In any case, whether he's rushed or not, he should not be penciled in the lineup when there's an affordable asset like Cruz which can be obtained. 

 

Even if we had not signed Cruz, or picked up Cron, I have a hard time imagining a scenario that would have Rooker as an opening day 1b/DH in 2019.

[Don Walcott]

 

This move does nothing but accelerate "the rebuild", whatever that is. (To me, it's a useless label). Cruz is another huge asset and it didn't cost anything but cash.

 

This move is not being made in a vacuum.

 

This move blocks absolutely no one. Do you really believe that plugging Rooker into the lineup here in 2019 makes a lot of sense? There's still a very solid chance Rooker flops at the next level. Who knows, he may not be as good as Todd Sears or Paul Sorrento were. 

 

What hat was that 82 win number pulled from?

 

This team wasn't all that far away from mediocrity LAST year. And that happened with a below-average manager and coaching staff, Sano and Buxton disasters, Polanco caught cheating, Erv injured, Lynn and LoMo pouting on their locker room stools, and with about a zillion rookies getting their first taste of the big lights.

 

Sano, Buxton, Rosario, Kepler, Polanco, Castro and Schoop. Not all will improve in 2019 over 2018 unless we experience a perfect storm. Some will, no?

 

Cron, Cruz, Garver, Cave, Austin, maybe Astudillo. Not all of them will do worse in 2019 than they did in 2018, right?

 

Pitching still needs a boost, no question, although the situation's not as bad as some portray it. I'd love to find wagers where I could bet the pitching will statistically be league average in 2019.

 

Cheer up. 

I would also suggest that with an outfield of Buxton, Rosario and Kepler, some more experience and stability in the infield, and Jason Castro catching, the pitching statistics are bound to improve.

 

That said, even though I'm happy with this move and the Schoop move, I'd like to see us get either Kikuchi or Greinke and a couple of relievers, one of whom I'd like to be Ottavino. Then, I'd be really happy.

[Don Walcott]

 

You can't imagine a scenario where a prospect could be rushed?  Basically, it's the phenomenon where the lack of the player's skillset results in the development of bad habits and/or the loss of  confidence.  I think we can see that the entirety of the MLB recognizes this with how few talented players make their debuts at young ages or shortly after being drafted.  Clearly the minor leagues serve some purpose.   You point to the exceptions, but they prove the general rule: don't rush your prospects. 

 

Rooker's age is a red hearing.  He's had less than two years of pro-ball.  Just because he's older doesn't mean the consequences of him being exposed to the major leagues too soon will be erased.  In any case, whether he's rushed or not, he should not be penciled in the lineup when there's an affordable asset like Cruz which can be obtained. 

 

Even if we had not signed Cruz, or picked up Cron, I have a hard time imagining a scenario that would have Rooker as an opening day 1b/DH in 2019.

To put Rooker into context, Nelson Cruz didn't debut in the Majors until he was 25, and didn't have a full season of ML ABs until he was 28/29. Not every All-Star slugger started out like Ken Griffey, Jr.

[ashbury]

On that we agree.

 

Up in North Dakota a 20 degree temperature doesn't mean much by itself. 

 

When you add in wind speeds, that's when you really start getting a sense if you need a coat. 

The presence or absence of a minus sign also plays a role.

[Mike Sixel]

To put Rooker into context, Nelson Cruz didn't debut in the Majors until he was 25, and didn't have a full season of ML ABs until he was 28/29. Not every All-Star slugger started out like Ken Griffey, Jr.

The league is getting younger, that's just a fact. And no one is asking for Rooker to be an all star.... Plenty of players are promoted quickly these days, they seem to work out better elsewhere...

[Don Walcott]

 

The league is getting younger, that's just a fact. And no one is asking for Rooker to be an all star.... Plenty of players are promoted quickly these days, they seem to work out better elsewhere...

I suspect the league getting younger has more to do with players not being able to compete as well at older ages than it does with players starting their careers younger. There have always been guys who were able to make it right away at a young age, and others who needed time to mature into major league players. I haven't done an exhaustive study, but I'm willing to bet that the age that players break into the league hasn't changed that much since the 1970s (when I specifically remember Robin Yount and Butch Wynegar breaking in as teenagers).

 

Correction: Wynegar was just turned 20 when he debuted.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Don Walcott

[tarheeltwinsfan]

 

I am going to play devil's advocate. We picked up an aging player who can only play DH. We picked up a 2nd basemen who not only couldn't hit last year but he couldnt field either, and we picked up an average first baseman.

Now I am hearing from people on this board that we could won 100 games or more? From what? 3 players ? Buxton is a bust get passed that, Sano is very close to being a bust since he cant layoff the outside ball, and that leaves Mauer....oops gone. This team has rental player to appease the fans so they by tickets until July .

They haven't addressed our horrid in field with two key losses by picking up Cron and Schoop. Am I happy they actually did something? Sure, do I think it will help this team win the division? Absolutely not unless they pick up some pitching.

It's not that bad.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Likewise, "earning" it is an idiotic concept for a team trying to build into contention.  

 

So what exactly? Give them a scholarship? Have we not learned anything from Buxton's success in the majors?

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Cheer up?  In most ways I could care less.  The ownership of this team has screwed their fans over for decades now, with the only exception being the short generation of 1987-1991.  

 

Even when the team was quasi-competitive in the 2000's, the ownership was too cheap to put the money into making a true competitive team when even $15-20 million more in payroll may have made those Mauer-Mornea teams truly competitive, not jsut a team that won in the weakest division in the majors and then got swept in the playoffs.  

That is why the development process of those World Series teams needs to be followed by the current rebuild, and frankly, it is not.

I'm confused about this. The ownership just out bid a WS contender and another potential playoff team for one of the best pure bats on the market and you'd rather them not and push towards a rebuild?

[ashbury]

The league is getting younger, that's just a fact.

Baseball-reference.com provides average age for batters, weighted by PA and games (in some mixture). A quick sampling across the past century:

 

1918: 28.1

1938: 28.4

1958: 28.4

1978: 27.7

1998: 28.9

2018: 28.1

 

Pitching is roughly similar. If I had better database skillz I'd draw you a graph using every year. Anyway I'm not seeing a definitive trend - we're about where we were 100 years ago. I'm actually surprised by that, since a long time ago it was commonly said that a player didn't reach his prime until 30. Turns out they didn't actually believe it.

[Kelly Vance]

 

I agree that there’s only spot but based on last year, Cave has already won it to start the season. Much higher OPS, OPS+, more power, more SOs but those come down with time, and was the manager’s choice to play CF meaning he is as good or better in the field than Kepler. Cave should get the initial shot in RF with Kepler and his .727 OPS (after two years below .740) at a position that demands at least .775 on a good team as the LH hitting 1B and 4th OF while Cave gets 150 ABs to see if last year was real. If it’s not or if Buxton fails again, then Kepler gets another chance. Kepler has had 3 years and 1500 ABs to win a starting OF job and he has failed to hit enough to win that job. Cave hit well enough in half a season to earn that same chance. Performance matters. Handing jobs to guys who don’t perform is why this team has been consistently mediocre or worse. It needs to stop and it needs to stop NOW.

Im of a mind to say let the best man win. Cave has potential. Whether he has the job remains to be seen. Maybe go with the hot bat, if one of them gets hot.  

[Kelly Vance]

 

Apology for what? And, his agent said they made the best offer. I think players should choose money, so I have no idea what I'd apologise for. Help me understand.....

The best offer could mean a lot of things. Money, term, option buy out, a cool rental house, for example.  Maybe guided walleye fishing trips....

 

you have a theory about what an at best ambiguous statement means. I, like others, interpreted it as a diss, like he is a paycheck player. You don't dis a guy when he is walking through the door.

I think he is and deserves better than that. 

[DrNeau]

I would have a serious problem with Austin not making the team just because the Twins want to guarantee starting spots for guys who do not perform. We should be telling our players to have a good battle in spring training for jobs, rather than telling Buxton he's starting. Unbelievable. Austin should get a look in RF this spring. If he could pull that off, our lineup would be insane. If we only carry 12 pitchers, Austin can make the team. I would actually start him over what's-his-ding... Cron. 

 

I don't know why we let Ramos slip by and I also don't know why we are not signing relievers left and right.

Edited December 30, 2018 by DrNeau

[Kelly Vance]

 

Money in ownership's pocket means more money available in the future when the team develops its core players and needs to fill the remaining holes to be competitive.  

 

There is one reason why this delays the rebuild.

 

The next is that it delays the development of the next level of prospects.  Players like Brent Rooker who now will sit behind a 38 year old and be pushed back to the minors.  Getting these players up and developing on the MLB level needs to be the priority, not signing aged players that will not contribute to any type of success the team will have in the future.  

 

If Brent Rooker, and Lewis, and Kirilloff are not bona fide players, all the Nelson Cruz's int eh world are not going to turn around this franchise.

Sorry, I am with the Chief on this one. 

 

Your first paragraph -- my answer:  "In what world?"

If ownership wanted to have that kind of team, nothing is stopping them. Money in ownership hands --most would agree --- means they ain't investing in success.  

 

Nobody is holding Rooker back. He isn't ready yet or he would already be the DH. 

 

Your point about Rooker, Lewis and Kiriloff makes no sense. Those guys were never going to play in the show this year anyway. They will be in AA or AAA. Those three weren't in 2019 plans before Nelson was signed. Cruz is on a 1 year contract with an option. Lewis might make it up in September 2020.  Rooker, maybe this September. Same Kiri.  Cruz doesn't block those guys. But even if they were ready, he should. He has been consistently among the top RBI and HR producers in the past 5 years. This isn't a Morrison one year bullet.  

 

Cruz is one of those old guys who knows how to hit and he will teach a lot of young guys how to be better. You miss that completely

[Kelly Vance]

 

Are all 3 players replacing just Mauer?  Or are they replacing Dozier, Escobar and Mauer (37 2018 homeruns)?  More like 30 HR increase.  Nice pickups though.

I liked my numbers better.  They were 40 Cruz, 30 for Cron and Schoop each. 

 

 

[DrNeau]

Cruz is freaking sweet. I can't believe we got him. 

[bird]

 

The best offer could mean a lot of things. Money, term, option buy out, a cool rental house, for example.  Maybe guided walleye fishing trips....

 

you have a theory about what an at best ambiguous statement means. I, like others, interpreted it as a diss, like he is a paycheck player. You don't dis a guy when he is walking through the door.

I think he is and deserves better than that. 

 

In partial fairness, the first reason Nelson's agent mentioned as to why he picked the Twins was that we made the best offer, and I think we can safely conclude that this meant a higher number in the base contract. But then, he went on to mention all kinds of other considerations, and mentioned at least twice that Nelson felt like the Twins wanted him and valued him more highly. I suppose one could conclude that Cruz deduced this from the contract offer alone, but his agent spoke about the ongoing conversations between Thad Levine and Cruz, about the text exchanges Cruz had with Schoop that influenced him, and maybe one or two other factors as well IIRC. Walleyes were not mentioned.

 

So while I don't think Mike is necessarily wrong that money trumped other considerations, I'm not at all comfortable with a generalization that it's always a "follow the money" scenario. This kind of generalization just invites the kind of unfounded or at least unsubstantiated mantras we get around hear all the time, which is that if the cheap bastards had simply submitted the highest bid, then the FA would have signed a contract. That notion is as equally far-fetched as the notion that players just can't ever be convinced to come here. There's a grain of truth to both "sides" of that endless debate. The problem is, we don't know the truth. We just like to think we do. 

 

Generalizations are our constant companion in these parts. I find them to frequently be specious. 

Edited December 30, 2018 by birdwatcher

[Mike Sixel]

Baseball-reference.com provides average age for batters, weighted by PA and games (in some mixture). A quick sampling across the past century:

 

1918: 28.1

1938: 28.4

1958: 28.4

1978: 27.7

1998: 28.9

2018: 28.1

 

Pitching is roughly similar. If I had better database skillz I'd draw you a graph using every year. Anyway I'm not seeing a definitive trend - we're about where we were 100 years ago. I'm actually surprised by that, since a long time ago it was commonly said that a player didn't reach his prime until 30. Turns out they didn't actually believe it.

Interesting, as I read just a few weeks ago it was younger.

[Mike Sixel]

The best offer could mean a lot of things. Money, term, option buy out, a cool rental house, for example. Maybe guided walleye fishing trips....

 

you have a theory about what an at best ambiguous statement means. I, like others, interpreted it as a diss, like he is a paycheck player. You don't dis a guy when he is walking through the door.

I think he is and deserves better than that.

I literally said I agreed with his choice. How is that a dis?

 

And why assume a negative? Why assume it was a dis? Baffled by this whole conversation.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Mike Sixel

[DocBauer]

Rushing players to the big leagues doesn't cause "damage".  Sorry, but players all over the major leagues and throughout major league history have been "rushed' to the majors. 

 

Kent Hrbek went from A+ ball to the major leagues.  The claim, made often here, that modern baseball development is different is specious.  By 1984, he was the runner up in MVP voting in a year that with the current Twins approach to development would have put him in AAA ball without any major league at bats.  

 

Aaron Judge was in the major leagues in his 3rd professional season;  in 2014 he was in A and A+ leagues.  In 2015 he was in AA and AAA.  In 2016 he started in AAA and finished in major leagues.    Alex Bregman was in the majors in his 2nd professional season.

 

And, as I have pointed out over and over again, what makes those rosters (check out how they developed their players) different from the Twins is that somehow they move their players up through the minors and into their starting lineups and develop them into STAR players on teams that are actually good and very competitive.  WHen was the last college player that the Twins drafted that made their major league debut at 22?    

 

Brent Rooker is already 24 years old.  

 

The claims of "rushing" these players is specious.

I truly appreciate your passions and opinion. I really do.

 

Heck, forget Hrbek. Let's talk about Gaetti and Laudner and Faedo and the top catcher at the time...I want to say it was a kid named Baker, but memory slips. And Puckett! Let's not forget he had a couple cups of coffee before jumping to the ML level!

 

But last we forget how Faedo and Baker turned out. Lauder was solid, but never great. Anyone remember Oelkers? He was a top LHSP rushed and never did much of anything. Remember Eisenreich? Rushed to the majors and it was discovered later he suffered from a version of Tourette syndrome. Not saying more time would have discovered this sooner, but it's a possibility to consider.

 

Context is vastly important! When Hrbek, Gaetti, Puckett and others were jumped to the ML level, it was a different time and different ownership. Some swam, some treaded water before learning to swim, and some drowned. Because Hrbek did it, an All time Twins great, Rooker or anyone else as a top prospect should do the same? I'm sorry, I just don't buy it. In the entire history of baseball there have been, still are, those guys who just escalate more rapidly than others. Some turn out to be studs. Some flame out.

 

Forget who was in charge of the FO at the time, doesn't matter in the context you are presenting. Let's use CF as an example as it js a lightening rod for the organization. Hunter was a stud prospect brought up early, struggled, was sent to the minors, brought back up, and finally found himself. Gomez was brought up too soon, traded to the Twins, trusted to replace Hunter, struggled, and was traded before finding himself. Hicks is the exact same example, as is Buxton, though each player is different in their own way.

 

Have you actually looked at milb games played before promotion for Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, etc? I have. And the Twins have been pretty aggressive with those guys and others. To hand pick a few examples of guys who seem to have made it in their early 20's is very much cherry picking.

 

The milb system has been in place for how many years now? And jts been in place for a reason. TONS of not high draft selections have turned out to be studs. An equal amount of top picks have fizzled. Rooker, Lewis and Khirilloff all have a season and a half of professional ball under their belts, regardless of age. But because each shows so much talent and potential they should thrust in to a make or break opportunity at some point in 2019? Sorry, I just don't buy it, though I appreciate your enthusiasm.

 

The current FO promoted several guys. Romero was promoted earlier than I expected. I was stunned when Stewart went to AAA and then the major when and how he did. I haven't liked every move the new FO has made. And I've been surprised by some of the moves they have made. But they have seemed to be pretty aggressive in a lot of promotions thus far. And I really hope they continue to be that aggressive.

 

But to compare Hrbek, or Judge, or a select few others vs others and aggressive promotion would be similar to promoting Garver two years ago when he was the Twins milb hitter of the year and ask him to sink or swim to be the next starting catcher for the Twins based solely on potential. He just wasn't another Mauer. And no matter how good he may be, trying to predict Lewis as the next A-Rod is also silly. Extreme examples I know. And I'm all about pushing prospects and developing what you have.

 

But there is a difference in being aggressive and just blindly promoting talent and hoping they can figure it out.

[Squirrel]

In partial fairness, the first reason Nelson's agent mentioned as to why he picked the Twins was that we made the best offer, and I think we can safely conclude that this meant a higher number in the base contract. But then, he went on to mention all kinds of other considerations, and mentioned at least twice that Nelson felt like the Twins wanted him and valued him more highly. I suppose one could conclude that Cruz deduced this from the contract offer alone, but his agent spoke about the ongoing conversations between Thad Levine and Cruz, about the text exchanges Cruz had with Schoop that influenced him, and maybe one or two other factors as well IIRC. Walleyes were not mentioned.

 

So while I don't think Mike is necessarily wrong that money trumped other considerations, I'm not at all comfortable with a generalization that it's always a "follow the money" scenario. This kind of generalization just invites the kind of unfounded or at least unsubstantiated mantras we get around hear all the time, which is that if the cheap bastards had simply submitted the highest bid, then the FA would have signed a contract. That notion is as equally far-fetched as the notion that players just can't ever be convinced to come here. There's a grain of truth to both "sides" of that endless debate. The problem is, we don't know the truth. We just like to think we do.

 

Generalizations are our constant companion in these parts. I find them to frequently be specious.

Here, here! You could post that last sentence in just about every thread and I think it would be true. Although without it many of us would be far less entertained with a lot less to rail about.

[Riverbrian]

 

Interesting, as I read just a few weeks ago it was younger.

 

Two weeks younger

[amjgt]

Baseball-reference.com provides average age for batters, weighted by PA and games (in some mixture). A quick sampling across the past century:

 

1918: 28.1

1938: 28.4

1958: 28.4

1978: 27.7

1998: 28.9

2018: 28.1

 

Pitching is roughly similar. If I had better database skillz I'd draw you a graph using every year. Anyway I'm not seeing a definitive trend - we're about where we were 100 years ago. I'm actually surprised by that, since a long time ago it was commonly said that a player didn't reach his prime until 30. Turns out they didn't actually believe it.

Polio and TB weeded out the over 30 crowd Edited December 30, 2018 by amjgt

[mlhouse]

 

Your arguments about rushing minor leaguers, or not rushing them, are opinions, and you are certainly entitled to them.

But your argument about saving money for future years is demonstrably false, both through history and through the direct statements of the team itself. They don’t put available payroll in a rainy day account. Either it’s spent this season, or it’s gone.

 

Wrong.     If this ownership wastes money today they will be less inclined to spend money in the future.  That is how all business work and the Twins ownership looks at this team as a business, not a competitive sports team.  

[mlhouse]

 

You can't imagine a scenario where a prospect could be rushed?  Basically, it's the phenomenon where the lack of the player's skillset results in the development of bad habits and/or the loss of  confidence.  I think we can see that the entirety of the MLB recognizes this with how few talented players make their debuts at young ages or shortly after being drafted.  Clearly the minor leagues serve some purpose.   You point to the exceptions, but they prove the general rule: don't rush your prospects. 

 

Rooker's age is a red hearing.  He's had less than two years of pro-ball.  Just because he's older doesn't mean the consequences of him being exposed to the major leagues too soon will be erased.  In any case, whether he's rushed or not, he should not be penciled in the lineup when there's an affordable asset like Cruz which can be obtained. 

 

Even if we had not signed Cruz, or picked up Cron, I have a hard time imagining a scenario that would have Rooker as an opening day 1b/DH in 2019.

 

 

I get taht the Twins FO isn't going to move Rooker up in 2019.  But, how well has their decisions really panned out so far, as well as the previous FO?   

 

What the mistake you and the Twins front office make is that significant development for a rebuilding team MUST take place at the major league level.  Throughout this 8 year "rebuilding" the Twins simply have not committed to rebuilding.  They employed Ron Gardenhire, a manager that showed no interest or skill in developing young talent, for 4 consecutive 90+ loss seasons.  Then they replaced him with Paul Molitor who probably is a good manager for a team with developed talent but showed the same committment to mediocre veterans.

 

The reason you need to do the development at the higher level is that if you plod your prospects one step at a time through the system it takes too much time to weed out the ones who will be major league baseball players from the ones that will not.  

 

Again, the 1982 Twins are the only model for rebuilding this team should look to.  The starting Twins CF at the start of the rebuild in 1982 wasn't, as everyone knows, Kirby Puckett, but Jim Eisenreich.  Eisenreich went from the A Midwest League in 1981 to starting in CF at the Metrodome in 1982.  His health conditions made it difficult for him and he eventually became a decent MLB player with a career OPS+ of 103,  but if he was in the Twins system now he would not have made the major leagues until 1984 or 1985.  And while this may seem insignificant, it also would have meant that Kirby not reacing the majors until 1985-86 range.

 

Same with the shortstop Lenny Faedo.  The issue is you need to identify the players quickly so that you can discard the players who cannot play and find replacements for them.  Pushing that reckoning off while playing players that will not contribute over the long run just pushes when you will be competitive.

[ashbury]

Wrong. If this ownership wastes money today they will be less inclined to spend money in the future. That is how all business work and the Twins ownership looks at this team as a business, not a competitive sports team.

There's agreement here that the owner is not a sportsman in the sense we had a century ago for some teams. The team is treated as a for profit business.

 

But only a business with cash flow problems would let a perceived financial mistake limited to a prior year affect their decision making for a coming year. Decisions are made based on market forecasts etc. And conversely a windfall profit doesn't carry forward.

 

Pohlad does not have cash flow problems, and he's been explicit in the past about not carrying over unused payroll.

 

The way Chief stated it fits my understanding as well.

[mlhouse]

 

So what exactly? Give them a scholarship? Have we not learned anything from Buxton's success in the majors?

 

 

Exactly, you have to pay the price of having hte young guys "earn it" at the major league level.  You lose the ball games while they get the experience.  The make mistakes.  They don't play as well as they are going to once they develop.  But, even though Frank Viola has a 5.21 ERA in 1982 s a 22 year old you put him out there the entire year and then keep him on the mound for 210 innings in 1983 despite his 5.49 ERA and 1.590 WHIP.   Compare how the Twins management stuck with Viola to how the current FO handled Romero.

 

As far as Buxton's "success", whatever his problems are it isn't a matter of rushing him through the minors.   What does Byron Buxton have to prove in the minors?  He has a .901 OPS at AAA level and career minor league .874 OPS.   If you look statistically, sending him back to the minors isn't helping him either because his overall statistics are declining.   Obviously, part of his problems is that he cannot remain healthy and the 2017 season gave a glimpse of what he can potentially do.  But, how long do you remain hopeful?   

 

This is the deal if the Twins ever want to have a real contending team.  They need to have a plan.  They need to plug guys into the lineup and develop them, take the losses, and hopefully their talent choices they made will pay off.  

[sweetmusicviola16]

Three things come into my mind with the Cruz signing.

 

1. The club wants to create some excitement in the fan base. That is happening. That has to be taken into account from the perspective of the FO.

 

2. They see something about Rooker and others that tell them he is not ready yet for the show. Hence the Cruz and Cron signings. Cruz and Cron or anyone else for that matter is not in Rookers way, he's just not ready yet.

 

3. The FO sees 2019 as a window of oppurtunity, which they should and it is. The established Cruz bat makes our lineup sooo much better. 2019 in AAA and Rooker could well be ready. Cruz has a great 2019 and with his option becomes a great trade piece next Nov. Cruz has a bad 2019 and is washed up and he costs an additional 300k. Cut ties. 

 

This is really a no lose signing. 

 

 

[mlhouse]

 

There's agreement here that the owner is not a sportsman in the sense we had a century ago for some teams. The team is treated as a for profit business.

But only a business with cash flow problems would let a perceived financial mistake limited to a prior year affect their decision making for a coming year. Decisions are made based on market forecasts etc. And conversely a windfall profit doesn't carry forward.

Pohlad does not have cash flow problems, and he's been explicit in the past about not carrying over unused payroll.

The way Chief stated it fits my understanding as well.

 

1.  Sorry, but Pohlad being "explicit" is just a PR statement.  It is meaningless.  The Pohlads have short changed this team since they owned it.

 

2.  Sorry, but your claims about "financial mistakes" are wrong.  When a business makes financial mistakes it hurts their ability in the future to be able to respond with the same financial flexibility.  If I blow $15 million today, I will be less inclined to potentially blow $15 millin tomorrow, particularly since that $15 million is spent.

 

3.   The concept of signing these short term free agents makes terrible sense over the long run.  If the player proves they can still play at a high level, they will go somewhere else.