Twins Trade Curtiss to Angels for Daniel Ozoria

[USAFChief]

 

The Twins DFAd John Curtiss and got something for him. They weren't going to get a Top 50 prospect for any team, probably not a Top 80 guy. So I can't imagine anyone would expect more, or expect someone "exciting". If guys signed at 16 get to AAA, that's a HUGE success for a team's player development... and hey, maybe he can be a big league utility player someday. Or, maybe he grows a little more and can become Dee Gordon. For a guy they just DFAd. 

Huh?

 

Reaching AAA is a "huge" success??

[Doomtints]

It seems like the very best players skip AAA or are only in it for a blink of an eye. Finding those players is the "huge" success.

 

Over half of any given AAA roster is filler with limited MLB potential, no?

[howieramone2]

 

I have no opinion of John Curtiss. I'm gonna trust the front office because they should know more than I do and the margins are really thin on these type of decisions. 

 

I've seen him throw some fairly non-impressive innings in the bigs but not many innings and a small sample size isn't really fair to the player in my opinion. This simply has me wondering... how would he have looked with some more innings? Did he get a chance to get the nerves out of his system? 

 

And that makes me wonder why Matt Belisle got innings last year instead. 

 

The season plug was pulled and then we took a long look at Belisle instead of Curtiss... This type of thing has to stop. 

 

If Curtiss performs decently for the Angels... the memory of Belisle in 2018 will not keep me warm. 

After 6-15 -2017 Belisle had the best ERA on our favorite team. Hindsight is so cool..

[Seth Stohs]

 

Huh?

 

Reaching AAA is a "huge" success??

 

For a 18-year-old from the Dominican who was 5-9 and 133 pounds when he signed, and who hit .195 in his Stateside debut. If they get him to AAA, that should absolutely be considered a success... Or a guy in rookie ball who was obtained for a just-DFAd player?

 

Reality is that very few minor leaguers reach the big leagues, ,and that percentage drops off when you take out first round picks and huge international signings. 

[ashbury]

Reality is that very few minor leaguers reach the big leagues

It's true. And that's why deciding that a player, who has reached the big leagues (briefly) and is only 25, isn't going to make it, and needs to be DFA'ed to make room for someone else, and is traded for a guy much further back on the timeline toward reaching the majors, can't be viewed as a successful outcome. Can it? What we did get back is making the best of the situation, but that's all. And to my mind, Curtiss had better not amount to much with the Angels, or else this sequence of decisions is going to be very bad, no matter how Ozoria turns out, because of the nature of such lottery tickets.

 

I can still root for this young kid to achieve his dream, without abandoning the skeptical view of how we got him.

[lukeduke1980]

Did Curtis have a low spin rate, or some peripheral stats/attributes that might have give the FO the impression that his ceiling probably wasn't much higher than AAA?

[Seth Stohs]

 

It's true. And that's why deciding that a player, who has reached the big leagues (briefly) and is only 25, isn't going to make it, and needs to be DFA'ed to make room for someone else, and is traded for a guy much further back on the timeline toward reaching the majors, can't be viewed as a successful outcome. Can it? What we did get back is making the best of the situation, but that's all. And to my mind, Curtiss had better not amount to much with the Angels, or else this sequence of decisions is going to be very bad, no matter how Ozoria turns out, because of the nature of such lottery tickets.

 

I can still root for this young kid to achieve his dream, without abandoning the skeptical view of how we got him.

 

Again, I've pointed out many times that I could name 5-8 players I personally would have DFAd ahead of Curtiss... but that Twins front office decided (based on their analytics and reports) that Curtiss was the guy to be DFAd. OK ,so that's done and we move on. 

 

Now that he's DFAd, they may have had a couple of teams reach out to them about acquiring Curtiss via trade so that he doesn't go somewhere else via claim when he is put through waivers. So, its' possible that the Twins had a couple of other offers from teams. Clearly they made the decision that their best offer via trade for Curtiss was Ozoria ,again, based on reports or analysis and probably both. 

 

The other option, once we've accepted the fact that Curtiss was the choice to be DFAd, is to just put him through waivers and let him get claimed (the fact that he was traded tells you that at least one team would have claimed him). If they had gone that route, then they would get nothing for Curtiss. 

 

So the options are ... 1.) take the best trade offered or 2.) let him go for nothing. 

 

They went with option #1. 

 

And, I really hope that Curtiss does get an opportunity with the Angels. Not because it may make my take on him look smarter but just because he's a good dude and I like when players succeed. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Do not understand. Do not like.

 

If the front office goes out and signs a legitimate upgrade to the bullpen, I no longer care about this deal.

 

But that ain't happened yet, so... Do not understand. Do not like.

[ashbury]

 

Again, I've pointed out many times that I could name 5-8 players I personally would have DFAd ahead of Curtiss... but that Twins front office decided (based on their analytics and reports) that Curtiss was the guy to be DFAd. OK ,so that's done and we move on. 

 

Now that he's DFAd, they may have had a couple of teams reach out to them about acquiring Curtiss via trade so that he doesn't go somewhere else via claim when he is put through waivers. So, its' possible that the Twins had a couple of other offers from teams. Clearly they made the decision that their best offer via trade for Curtiss was Ozoria ,again, based on reports or analysis and probably both. 

 

The other option, once we've accepted the fact that Curtiss was the choice to be DFAd, is to just put him through waivers and let him get claimed (the fact that he was traded tells you that at least one team would have claimed him). If they had gone that route, then they would get nothing for Curtiss. 

 

So the options are ... 1.) take the best trade offered or 2.) let him go for nothing. 

 

They went with option #1. 

 

And, I really hope that Curtiss does get an opportunity with the Angels. Not because it may make my take on him look smarter but just because he's a good dude and I like when players succeed. 

I don't think anything you said is at odds with what I said. I agree, once they decided Curtiss was the guy to be replaced, choices were limited.

 

I guess I'm taking issue, along with Chief, with the notion that Ozoria reaching AAA would be a huge success. Because Curtiss had done exactly that (reaching the majors, actually), and we have now cut ties with this huge success.

[Riverbrian]

After 6-15 -2017 Belisle had the best ERA on our favorite team. Hindsight is so cool..

2017 has nothing to do with 2018.

 

We ran with Belisle last year in a lost season instead of Curtiss or anybody else who could possibly increase in value. Belisle is then predictably not resigned and the return on the investment is zero and Curtiss is Taken off the 40 man leading to a trade of questionable return. No value from Belisle and Minimum value from Curtiss and back into the pile you go with absolutely no ground gained.

 

It was a lost season with selling at the trade deadline. Curtiss is the one who could increase in value. Belisle would not increase in value. They gave MLB work to the wrong guy.

 

Multiply Belisle times all the other players who we’ve let go with exhausted value for a decade or longer and the hindsight kinda hits you right between the eyes.

[Otto von Ballpark]

For a 18-year-old from the Dominican who was 5-9 and 133 pounds when he signed, and who hit .195 in his Stateside debut. If they get him to AAA, that should absolutely be considered a success... Or a guy in rookie ball who was obtained for a just-DFAd player?

 

Reality is that very few minor leaguers reach the big leagues, ,and that percentage drops off when you take out first round picks and huge international signings.

Success for the player, sure. That's relative to other 16 year old amateurs. As you say, very few of them make it that far.

 

Success for the team, not so much. That is relative to other teams. Every team signs a few 16 year old amateurs that eventually make it to AAA.

 

Now, some teams might have more 16 year old amateurs reach AAA than other teams, but you would need a much more expansive analysis to look at that.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Did Curtis have a low spin rate, or some peripheral stats/attributes that might have give the FO the impression that his ceiling probably wasn't much higher than AAA?

25.4% K rate at AAA last year. For a reliever, 25 years old, repeating the level, versus a league average of 22.0%, it's not very good. (Curtiss was around 35% K rate in the minors in 2017.)

[howieramone2]

 

2017 has nothing to do with 2018.

We ran with Belisle last year in a lost season instead of Curtiss or anybody else who could possibly increase in value. Belisle is then predictably not resigned and the return on the investment is zero and Curtiss is Taken off the 40 man leading to a trade of questionable return. No value from Belisle and Minimum value from Curtiss and back into the pile you go with absolutely no ground gained.

It was a lost season with selling at the trade deadline. Curtiss is the one who could increase in value. Belisle would not increase in value. They gave MLB work to the wrong guy.

Multiply Belisle times all the other players who we’ve let go with exhausted value for a decade or longer and the hindsight kinda hits you right between the eyes.

RB, why the chagrin over Curtiss? If he had a future with our favorite team, they would have used him in September. Stewart. May, and IMHO Gonsalves pitched themselves into the mix. I like him, but i believe Hildy pitched himself out of the mix.

 

This is off topic, but I expect Astudillo to replace Castro and Gordon to replace Adianza in the not too distant future.

 

I hope things go well for you. Steve Earle rocks!.

 

 

 

 

[Doomtints]

 

RB, why the chagrin over Curtiss? If he had a future with our favorite team, they would have used him in September.

 

No one show this to Buxton.

[Riverbrian]

 

RB, why the chagrin over Curtiss? If he had a future with our favorite team, they would have used him in September. Stewart. May, and IMHO Gonsalves pitched themselves into the mix. I like him, but i believe Hildy pitched himself out of the mix.

 

This is off topic, but I expect Astudillo to replace Castro and Gordon to replace Adianza in the not too distant future.

 

I hope things go well for you. Steve Earle rocks!.

 

My chagrin isn't over Curtiss. 

 

It's over Belisle. 

 

I have no choice but to trust the organization to do their very best with the miles of data they have to make the right decisions with Curtiss and everyone. I fully understand that every organization has to make razor thin calls on players like Curtiss every year and sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong and most times it simply doesn't matter. I'm only saying that if the Angels get something out of Curtiss... I'm gonna look at Belisle and say he was clearly opportunity denied for Curtiss or anybody else and the end result was no value remaining from Belisle. 

 

However... I'm at the point where I have no choice but to NOT trust the organization when it comes to overall asset management. If it was just Belisle I could laugh it off but it's not... I've looked at the end result of every rosterer'd player since 2011. We either exhaust our assets/players from average to nothing left or our assets/players are denied opportunity to increase in value so we can exhaust our assets/players from average to no value left and this has been happening since 2011. 

 

I have no idea if Curtiss is worth anything but the Angels just might give him a shot and if they do... it will be a shot that we didn't give him... Belisle... he got a shot though. 

 

No more extended run outs for 38 year old players with an ERA over 8 please. Especially in a lost season. 

 

BTW... Hildy... I agree with you. He pitched himself back to AAA in my opinion. He still has the chance to increase in value but he has 3 options left so it's not like we have to throw him away. 

 

They kept giving him the ball. Which takes his value and nosedives it. 

 

Players increase in value when they perform well enough to increase in value. If a player isn't performing... try someone else. 

 

[Nick Nelson]

 

Do not understand. Do not like.

 

If the front office goes out and signs a legitimate upgrade to the bullpen, I no longer care about this deal.

 

But that ain't happened yet, so... Do not understand. Do not like.

Right. The fact that they kept Matt Magill, knowing that he's out of options, indicates to me that they either, 1: Are waiting to sign another bigger-name reliever and DFA him (perhaps they thought Curtiss had a better chance to clear at this point in time?) or, 2: They actually think he has a chance to make the roster out of camp.

 

If it's the former, that's gravy. If it's the latter, that's unacceptable.

[Thrylos]

 

For a 18-year-old from the Dominican who was 5-9 and 133 pounds when he signed, and who hit .195 in his Stateside debut. If they get him to AAA, that should absolutely be considered a success...

 

I think that there are two different contexts in "success".   Indeed, in a personal context a player who gets to AAA has beaten the odds and should be considered a personal success. 

 

As far as the Minnesota Twins (the MLB club) go, any player who did not make it to the majors and/or resulted to a major leaguer in a trade, is irrelevant, since he did not contribute to the potential success of the club in the major leagues. 

 

The goal of an organization is to develop players and prospect in order to win major league games.  Not development for development's sake.

 

But as far as the personal context goes, I agree 100%.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Success for the player, sure. That's relative to other 16 year old amateurs. As you say, very few of them make it that far.

Success for the team, not so much. That is relative to other teams. Every team signs a few 16 year old amateurs that eventually make it to AAA.

Now, some teams might have more 16 year old amateurs reach AAA than other teams, but you would need a much more expansive analysis to look at that.

 

I just think that if the expectation for every player that is signed or acquired by an organization is the big leagues or it's a failure by the organization, that's just not true. It can't' be.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I just think that if the expectation for every player that is signed or acquired by an organization is the big leagues or it's a failure by the organization, that's just not true. It can't' be.

Sure, I can agree with that. Most aren't failures, although most aren't successes either. The vast majority of player outcomes don't even register, and I suspect this guy will be in that group. Curtiss probably will be too (although maybe a tiny bit of a failure considering the opportunity cost of his draft position).

[cmoss84]

 

Right. The fact that they kept Matt Magill, knowing that he's out of options, indicates to me that they either, 1: Are waiting to sign another bigger-name reliever and DFA him (perhaps they thought Curtiss had a better chance to clear at this point in time?) or, 2: They actually think he has a chance to make the roster out of camp.

 

If it's the former, that's gravy. If it's the latter, that's unacceptable.

Do you think Curtiss is better than Magill or do you just like Curtiss more because of the options?

Magill was pretty solid for us the first half, and was maybe a bit overused...leading to his 2nd half decline.

(not saying I'm crazy about Magill-but he is an okay back of the bullpen guy)

[h2oface]

 

As far as the Minnesota Twins (the MLB club) go, any player who did not make it to the majors and/or resulted to a major leaguer in a trade, is irrelevant, since he did not contribute to the potential success of the club in the major leagues. 

 

The goal of an organization is to develop players and prospect in order to win major league games.  Not development for development's sake.

 

Amen! This ain't high school!

[Nick Nelson]

 

Do you think Curtiss is better than Magill or do you just like Curtiss more because of the options?

Magill was pretty solid for us the first half, and was maybe a bit overused...leading to his 2nd half decline.

(not saying I'm crazy about Magill-but he is an okay back of the bullpen guy)

The options. And the fact that he's 4 years younger.

 

For Magill, I think regression to the mean is about as likely as him being overused. He's a 29-year-old minor-league journeyman.

 

 

[ashbury]

The options. And the fact that he's 4 years younger.

 

For Magill, I think regression to the mean is about as likely as him being overused. He's a 29-year-old minor-league journeyman.

His OPS-against was .809, on a pretty routine .303 BABIP. Magill doesn't even need to regress.

 

Curtiss's AAA OPS was just above .600. Even accounting for the difference in opponent level (I tend to add .100 just as a rule of thumb), and a slightly favorable BABIP, that's a better season.

[Nick Nelson]

 

His OPS-against was .809, on a pretty routine .303 BABIP. Magill doesn't even need to regress.

 

Curtiss's AAA OPS was just above .600. Even accounting for the difference in opponent level (I tend to add .100 just as a rule of thumb), and a slightly favorable BABIP, that's a better season.

Oh yea, Magill's season as a whole was not good by any measure other than ERA (5.08 FIP, eek).

 

I just meant he regressed to the mean after his strong start with the Twins.

 

Magill in 12 appearances through 5/31: 1.53 ERA, .619 OPS

Magill in 28 appearances after 6/1: 4.85 ERA, .886 OPS

 

Based on his history and, ya know, just the eye test, I think we can safely conclude which version's closer to the real Magill. It's hard for me to conceive that they actually view him as a viable candidate for the Opening Day roster, which means they're gonna need to pass him through waivers one way or another. Why not just do it now and hang on to Curtiss?

 

This is what makes me think another MLB reliever signing has gotta be coming.

[Mr. Brooks]

I just think that if the expectation for every player that is signed or acquired by an organization is the big leagues or it's a failure by the organization, that's just not true. It can't' be.

Why does it have to be a success or a failure though?

I don't think anyone said it's a failure if every prospect doesn't make it to MLB. I think some take issue calling AAA a success though.

I just don't see how it can be called a success for the team, unless said player is traded for an MLB asset.

As Thrylos said, every dollar and every hour the team spends on development is with the goal of helping the MLB team, not as a community service.

In the case of a 16 year old signee, or later draft pick topping out at AAA, I'd say it's in a gray area. Not a failure, because they weren't expected to make it, but not a success for the team either.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Why does it have to be a success or a failure though?
I don't think anyone said it's a failure if every prospect doesn't make it to MLB. I think some take issue calling AAA a success though.
I just don't see how it can be called a success for the team, unless said player is traded for an MLB asset.
As Thrylos said, every dollar and every hour the team spends on development is with the goal of helping the MLB team, not as a community service.
In the case of a 16 year old signee, or later draft pick topping out at AAA, I'd say it's in a gray area. Not a failure, because they weren't expected to make it, but not a success for the team either.

 

This is a weird topic for argument.

 

But, if a player is deemed to have a High-A ceiling and he gets to AAA, does the team not deserve at least some credit (along with the player) for maximizing his potential?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Do you think Curtiss is better than Magill or do you just like Curtiss more because of the options?

Magill was pretty solid for us the first half, and was maybe a bit overused...leading to his 2nd half decline.

(not saying I'm crazy about Magill-but he is an okay back of the bullpen guy)

I’m higher on Curtiss but it’s relatively close. I don’t really love either of them. At least Curtiss has age and untapped potential on his side.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This is a weird topic for argument.

 

But, if a player is deemed to have a High-A ceiling and he gets to AAA, does the team not deserve at least some credit (along with the player) for maximizing his potential?

Yes, but it’s irrelevant to the spectating crowd. If a team is good at development, those A players will become AAA players but no one cares except the player, his family, and the coaches involved.

 

But a good development team will also see AA players become backup MLB players and AAA players become MLB contributors.

 

I guess the only difference is if you look up- or down-stream.

[Mr. Brooks]

This is a weird topic for argument.

 

But, if a player is deemed to have a High-A ceiling and he gets to AAA, does the team not deserve at least some credit (along with the player) for maximizing his potential?

Sure, they deserve some credit, but I still don't see how it can be considered a success if never ends up impacting the MLB team.

[USAFChief]

 

This is a weird topic for argument.

 

But, if a player is deemed to have a High-A ceiling and he gets to AAA, does the team not deserve at least some credit (along with the player) for maximizing his potential?

If they're bringing in players deemed to have a High-A ceiling, they need new people responsible for bringing in players.