Article: The Discard Pile

[Richie the Rally Goat]

 

I would not be fair of me to ask for examples of teams where trades for established players and high end free agent acquisition were big contributors without offering an example of teams who's success had little or nothing to do with this type of acquisition. In other words, teams that have proven that the opposite of what is being promoted here is the best path to success.

 

Atlanta had 4 position players at 3 WAR or higher but they had Inciarte at 2.9 so I will include him.

Freddie Freeman - 5.2 WAR – Drafted by the A’s with the 78th pick.
Ozzie Albies- 3.8 WAR - Signed as an Int free agent for $350K.
Ronald Acuna - 3.7 WAR - Signed as an Int free agent for $350K.
Johan Camargo - 3.3 WAR – Signed as an Int free agent for $42K.
Ender Inciarte - 2.9 WAR – Acquired by trading away a proven middle of the rotation SP (Miller) The braves also got a top 10 prospect in Danby Swanson. In other words, the exact opposite approach being supported by many here.

The Brave’s position players are a result of good drafting and International signings. None of the International draftees were particularly high profile. The total expenditure for all three was just under $500K

 

They had 1 good SP and two decent SPs. Their best SP (Mike Foltynewicz) was acquired by trading away an established player (Gattis) when Foltynewicz had not yet established himself at the MLB level. He finally stepped up in 2018. Their 2nd best SP was Sanchez who the Twins cut. He was not great and certainly is not the type of difference maker acquisition being called for here. The other Sp to log decent innings was Sean Newcomb who the A’s traded Andrelton Simmons to acquire. Again the opposite practice being called for here by many.

 

The Braves roster was built trading away established talent for prospects or MLB players that have never deliver a 3 WAR season. There are no big $ free agents or high $ International signings. None.

 

I will be happy to offer another if someone can give an example of a successful team with similar financial resource that utilized the practices suggested here. I am not even sure if you could fund an example of any team with similar revenue that trade away top 50 prospects after a season under 500.

the Braves blew it up in 2014 and rebounded 4 years later. The Twins never blew it up, this rebuild has already been going for 8 years. Does it need to go 13? 20?

 

The Braves aren't a bad model, but it's too late to go that route now. The franchise would be ruined. 

[Major League Ready]

I am sure the Brewers will be mentioned as an example and their two most important players were acquired by trade and free agency. They are an example of trades/FA working but a weird one. They only had 2 pitchers over 2 WAR and one was a RP. He was drafted. The only SP with 2+WAR was Chacin and he is the type of signing being hated on here.  They only had four 2WAR+ position players of which Yehlich and Cane led the way. It yielded 96 wins last year but I am not sure how. 

[ewen21]

I am going to be somewhat of a dissenter here.

 

I am not disappointed in Falvey and Levine all that much because I don't think all that much of them or the Twins right now  I can totally see why they are using this strategy because the young players that were so often bragged about are now in their mid 20s and have not really distinguished themselves as major leaguers.  These were the guys they were planning on building around and these young players: Sano, Buxton, Kepler, etc....just have not been as advertised (bragged about).

 

We really need to get over it and move on from "XYZ propsect has a ________ ceiling" or "his numbers at this stage of his career are the same as Torii Hunter's so we need to believe he can do the same thing"

 

It is high time we treat prospects as assets and that we stop getting so attached to them.  This team is where it is because these alleged blue chip guys aren't "all that" as it turns out.  Now we have our new coach making personal visits just to see where their heads are at.  I am far more concerned about where the culture is than I am with the FA market.  Sorry.  THat FA market isn't going to save us AND if the culture here doesn't change we are going to be able to do much better than what we did last winter and this winter for a long LONG time.  

 

The young players not living up to the hype (I did not create the hype, nor did I buy into it) is what the problem is right now.  If they approached anything resembling where the pundits said they'd be by now I am certain our GMs would be more aggressive in the FA market.  I, quite frankly, don't see it as a smart strategy to outbid the market just to sign a name guy.  Not unless the team is going someplace. 

[kab21]

 

The future of this team is the Lewis-Kirilloff-Berrios core with the hope that prospects from the set of Rooker, Gordon, Romero, Thorpe, Gonsalves, Enlow, Larnach, Jeffers, Arraez amongst others can play strong supporting roles.   Then hope that at least a couple of the previous highly touted group Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Polanco can join Rosario to fill out that team. Make a smart trade here and there, find a gem in Rule 5, add a hustle guy like WIllians Astudillio and that is the team you hope has a chance.

 

If those prospects were selected well and we get some good luckwith the other players, then we have a chance to put together a competitive team.  If they were not selected well and/or we have some bad luck, then it might be a continuation of the same. 

 

But, we are not going to build a team on these discards.  That is what you wait for once you get your group of prospects established to fill holes.  Using historical Twins, guys like Chili Davis, Carl Willis, Juan Berengar, Shane Mack, and Brian Harper.  

If your plan is to wait until a core of prospects all come up together to make any significant moves then the Twins will be bad for a very long time. 

I like value shopping as much as anyone. Sometimes is works and sometimes it is Morales/Lynn but but that doesn't mean the Twins can never identify a player that they really want and choose to overpay. All avenues should be looked at for player acquisition and just because the Twins are merely a mid market team that doesn't mean that they should ignore making big moves. And the Twins should definitely stop operating like a small market team from the 80s and 90s regardless of the results of 2 of those teams.

[Major League Ready]

 

the Braves blew it up in 2014 and rebounded 4 years later. The Twins never blew it up, this rebuild has already been going for 8 years. Does it need to go 13? 20?

 

The Braves aren't a bad model, but it's too late to go that route now. The franchise would be ruined. 

 

The fact that the Twins have not succeeded is not in question, not even a little. However, that failure has absolutely nothing to do with best practices or what strategies they should follow going forward. This argument drives me out of my mind. Following less productive strategies because they have failed to execute good strategies is the definition of incompetence.

 

The fact that it is faster would only be relevant if it had an equivalent or even close to equivalent chance of working. There is a reason the entire league is emphasizing drafting and development. There are reasons why you constantly hear team X is interested in player Y but won't part with top prospects. There are reasons why long-term contracts, especially for 30 or 30+ players are being avoided. To ignore all of the trends because we want gratification now is horribly ill-conceived strategy.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by Major League Ready

[CBtwinsfan]

To me the Twins are between a rock and a hard place with their roster.  What happens if Buxton, Sano, Berrios, or even Kepler lives up to their potential.  Buxton hits for a 290 average with his usual defense, Sano hits over 40 bombs and has a 270 batting average, Berrios wins 20 games with over 200 strike outs and Kepler hits 30 bombs with at 270 batting average.  You spend 20 plus million dollars over 7 years on someone like Manny Machado and what do you do with our own if the switch flips and they produce like everyone thinks they should.  Unfortunately the Twins are not able to have the payroll of the the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers have and would have to get rid of a couple of them.  What happens if Gibson all of a sudden figures it out and wins 20 games.  its all possible and it could all happen next year if the stars align.  The problem is the Twins have too many young players with high ceilings, and high ceilings means big payroll in the near future and Falvey and Levine have to keep that in mind when they put this years roster together.

[birddog]

I did not expect Twins would be major factors in the free agent market. Machado and Harper never even crossed my mind, but I did expect Twins would be active in the trade market. Quite a while ago a post about a trade with the Diamondbacks for Goldschmidt (and possibly Grienke) had me excited that may be the case.

 

When I saw the other teams interested in Goldy, I knew it would never happen here since we value our prospects-who-never-pan-out way too much to trade them for established players even though we have the money to do it. No Goldschmidt? No problem. Cron will be just as good and we can use the money saved on other washed up rejects. I love baseball, and I love my Twins and this is what makes the path of this regime so repulsing. Buxton/Sano--Buckno!--not panning out so let's just wait for the next wave of prospects-the-Twins-won't-develop-into-stars.

 

Normally this time of year I am so excited for the Twins to report to spring training I can hardly stand it. This year, nothing but apathy.

[Nick Nelson]

 

But, we are not going to build a team on these discards.  That is what you wait for once you get your group of prospects established to fill holes.  Using historical Twins, guys like Chili Davis, Carl Willis, Juan Berengar, Shane Mack, and Brian Harper.  

Here's my problem with the "Wait until the right moment and push your chips in" stance: Nobody knows when that right moment will be. 

 

The Twins won 71 games in 1986. They won 74 in 1990. 

[Twodogs]

The Twins realistically are in the same position as they were last year. There was a ton of hope going into last season that they had the pieces to win the Central, not necessarily to win the WS but to be able to make the playoffs. Now had they been in the hunt, who knows what they would have brought on board at the deadline to push them over the top, we will only know if they can get there this year. There is no reason why with everything that went wrong last year that some of that could go right this year. No matter how much everyone says they know that this guy will be the difference maker they just don't know. Remember Yu Darvish? Pretty sure almost everyone on here thought they knew that he was the difference last year, but how'd he do? As bad a Lynn was to begin with he still out produced Darvish. Nonetheless, if some of Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Rosario etc... Go on and do even just a little better this year then the Twins could be in the thick of it come July and August and that's when they should overspend for a Greinke, Baumgarner, something to put them over the top. Right now, in my opinion all they really needed to add were pieces to the bullpen so they have a better shot at pulling out those close wins?? But otherwise I feel overall they are probably better with their signings than what they were last year? Schoop I think will be better than Dozier was last year, Cruz will be better than Morrison, and Cron and Mauer will be a wash, Mauer prob had a little more production but loses out when he has to miss long stretches because his brain was acting up. So all in all, if the core does just a little better I believe the new version of FA's are better than the 2018 version?

 

JMO, still Perez is a little curious, when I think they just need to add to the Bullpen until the deadline?

 

Now if they go out and overspend right now and that core doesn't produce, just like last year, they they overspent for nothing, the core has to produce before you go and add those 1 or 2 giant pieces.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Twodogs

[Riverbrian]

I don’t care who they sign or where they come from. My only focus is how they perform and are deployed.

 

If the Twins try to get 150 innings out of Martin Perez with a 4.80 ERA. Then I will take issue.

 

My concerns are strictly fundamental at this point. 25 players on the roster who are all given the opportunity to compete for playing time and whoever performs the best gets the playing time.

 

I simply won’t suffer through another year like last year where under performers get to walk past the lineup card without checking It because they going to be playing.

 

I don’t care where they come from scrap heap or 200 million dollar free agents or straight from Ft. Myers.

 

So the front office can sign who they want. Roll the dice how they want to roll it. I’ll simply be watching the playing time allocation afterwards and that’s when I’ll applaud or complain.

[sweetmusicviola16]

It hasn't really been hit on here, but imo part of why this team continues to struggle is this constant dipping into the discard pile for a huge % of it's pieces. Looking at the potential opening day roster half of the players haven't even played a full season of ML ball together. This is a huge problem and Falvey continues to magnify it. I'm a huge proponent of using the FA system. It is one of the pieces needed to put together a winning team and shouldn't be ignored. But it shouldn't be used as a revolving door system either. Focus in on a couple of guys needed to supplement those already in your system. Same thing with trades, which we seem to hardly use. Use some of the excess milb talent you have and bring in that final needed piece or two, Odorizzi is the type of trade I'd like to see more of. But lets find a way to stop this high turnover of the roster year after year please.

[Mike Sixel]

The fact that the Twins have not succeeded is not in question, not even a little. However, that failure has absolutely nothing to do with best practices or what strategies they should follow going forward. This argument drives me out of my mind. Following less productive strategies because they have failed to execute good strategies is the definition of incompetence.

 

The fact that it is faster would only be relevant if it had an equivalent or even close to equivalent chance of working. There is a reason the entire league is emphasizing drafting and development. There are reasons why you constantly hear team X is interested in player Y but won't part with top prospects. There are reasons why long-term contracts, especially for 30 or 30+ players are being avoided. To ignore all of the trends because we want gratification now is horribly ill-conceived strategy.

No one is arguing against development being the primary route to success. No one on this site ever has. Ever.

[sweetmusicviola16]

And lets be honest, Cron, Schoop, Parker, Torreas and Perez are all dipping into the discard pile.

[Mike Sixel]

Here's my problem with the "Wait until the right moment and push your chips in" stance: Nobody knows when that right moment will be.

 

The Twins won 71 games in 1986. They won 74 in 1990.

And in 2017 Sano and Buxton were good..... And they still didn't push the chips in.

[Aerodeliria]

Things happen during seasons that are unexpected. The 1987 team was hardly a juggernaut on paper. The Twins grabbed a playoff spot only because they only slightly less awful than the Royals, and Detroit was going to clean to their clocks in the opening round. (I even remember Brent Musburger saying that the series would now go to four games instead of three--because the Tigers had lost the opener--assuming that the Twins would lose three straight.) We all know what happened.

 

Sure, I'd love the Twins to spend more, but with the signing of Cruz, I think the Twins become a much more fun team to watch...and who knows, one of those players may emerge and have a big year.

[Major League Ready]

 

No one is arguing against development being the primary route to success. No one on this site ever has. Ever.

 

Where in my post did I say they did. I said show me examples where the practices you harp on constantly have worked. Actually, what is relevant is the relative success of trading for prospects or unproven MLB talent vs trading for proven talent. What is also relevant is how much of a role higher end free agents of played and how often have they failed vs succeeded. This constant complaint about strategy is never backed with fact. Show me examples. I will give you Milwaukee last year but how they won 96 games with one SP over 2 WAR is beyond me. 

 

Show me 78 win teams with equivalent budgets who traded away top prospects. Show me teams with equivalent budgets who have found success signing top free agents, especially after a 78 win season. I have provided list after list of the failures. Show me the successes and we will compare the length of the lists. Trading for prospects or players not yet established at the MLB level has been far more influential than trading for established players, especially outside the top revenue markets. 

[Mike Sixel]

Where in my post did I say they did. I said show me examples where the practices you harp on constantly have worked. Actually, what is relevant is the relative success of trading for prospects or unproven MLB talent vs trading for proven talent. What is also relevant is how much of a role higher end free agents of played and how often have they failed vs succeeded. This constant complaint about strategy is never backed with fact. Show me examples. I will give you Milwaukee last year but how they won 96 games with one SP over 2 WAR is beyond me.

 

Show me 78 win teams with equivalent budgets who traded away top prospects. Show me teams with equivalent budgets who have found success signing top free agents, especially after a 78 win season. I have provided list after list of the failures. Show me the successes and we will compare the length of the lists. Trading for prospects or players not yet established at the MLB level has been far more influential than trading for established players, especially outside the top revenue markets.

I can show you decades of teams with 78 wins that didn't do those things, and then didn't win playoff games, ever. Cincy. Pittsburgh. Minnesota.

 

KC, who when they finally made trades of prospects did win it all. Decades of multiple teams who refused to trade prospects and sign any big free agents, who went on to not win.

 

The Twins signed Jack Morris to one of the biggest deals in MLB history, after a bad year, and won the world series.

 

Sitting around waiting for all the prospects to work.... How has that worked out for most of the mid market teams?

[saviking]

Making a blockbuster trade comes with great risk. With bold trades comes high expectations. The kind that cost GM's their jobs when they don't work. When you go into a sesonn with less than a 100 million payroll the expectations are much lower. A 500 season is acceptable. That said, I'm not exactly blaming the Twins for not making a big splash as even with a big splash they need to be on the right side of the trade. Nobody is going to risk their necks for a bad blockbuster trade. It may be that the right oe hasn't presented itself yet ..

[Jim Hahn]

The future of this team is the Lewis-Kirilloff-Berrios core with the hope that prospects from the set of Rooker, Gordon, Romero, Thorpe, Gonsalves, Enlow, Larnach, Jeffers, Arraez amongst others can play strong supporting roles.   Then hope that at least a couple of the previous highly touted group Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Polanco can join Rosario to fill out that team. Make a smart trade here and there, find a gem in Rule 5, add a hustle guy like WIllians Astudillio and that is the team you hope has a chance.

 

If those prospects were selected well and we get some good luckwith the other players, then we have a chance to put together a competitive team.  If they were not selected well and/or we have some bad luck, then it might be a continuation of the same. 

 

But, we are not going to build a team on these discards.  That is what you wait for once you get your group of prospects established to fill holes.  Using historical Twins, guys like Chili Davis, Carl Willis, Juan Berengar, Shane Mack, and Brian Harper.

 

Everybody understands/remembers that everyone mentioned in the last paragraph came off the same sort of discard pile that Cruz, Cron, Parker, Schoop, and Perez came off of.

 

They were all acquired during during the off season. All were acquired during a down period, if not necessarily the exact off season before a very good season. Most were short term acquisitions to fill a specific hole, although some were kept around for a few seasons.

 

Most teams do this. We just remember these specific decisions because they just worked so well.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

 

The fact that the Twins have not succeeded is not in question, not even a little. However, that failure has absolutely nothing to do with best practices or what strategies they should follow going forward. This argument drives me out of my mind. Following less productive strategies because they have failed to execute good strategies is the definition of incompetence.

 

The fact that it is faster would only be relevant if it had an equivalent or even close to equivalent chance of working. There is a reason the entire league is emphasizing drafting and development. There are reasons why you constantly hear team X is interested in player Y but won't part with top prospects. There are reasons why long-term contracts, especially for 30 or 30+ players are being avoided. To ignore all of the trends because we want gratification now is horribly ill-conceived strategy.

the beauty of free agency is you don't stop drafting and developing your minor league talent.

 

OK, so how long do you have until your fan base stops showing up? Do we need to go back to retraction?

 

It's a business that needs to sell tickets, shirseys, concessions and TV deals with a significant portion of the fans, even the most rabid and long term, are getting very close to giving up on them. Ask the Rays who won 90 dames and still no one shows up.

 

What do you do if Sano, Kepler, and Buxton take the strides forward that we all hope they do? The pitching is awful and was the issue last year. It's worse this year.

[Guest]

 

Now if they go out and overspend right now and that core doesn't produce, just like last year, they they overspent for nothing, the core has to produce before you go and add those 1 or 2 giant pieces.

No. They don't have to produce before you add 1 or 2 "giant" (or just "good") pieces. They just don't.

 

That is nothing more than FO/ownership BS! It's unfiltered crapola that the suits pedal to fans who are so programmed to accept whatever THIS year's excuse for pocketing a few extra million dollars of our money is.

 

Revenues for all MLB teams are growing like crazy, while payrolls have, generally, increased at a far lower rate (and, now, in Minnesota anyway, look to be dropping by over 20%.)

 

What's the WORST thing that happens if the Twins sign a guy or 2 to long term deals for a total $20-30 million or a year? They spend about the same as they did a year ago, but the team underperforms again. They "overspent"? So what? The Pohlads STILL turn millions in profits, just not as many millions. Why the HELL would any fan care about that? It's not like they have ever rolled savings from one season into spending extra money the next year. EVER. They don't work that way. They should, yes, but they never have!

 

They hand out a bad contract? So what? Five years from now, revenues will be so much higher across the league that a couple of years of throwing $20 million down a rathole won't even make a dent. They LITERALLY have no other money committed for even one year away in 2020, much less 2025.

 

But it MIGHT turn out to be a good deal, too. Of course, we'll never know because the Twins will never even try.

 

Back to this season, though, what happens if the core DOES come out of the gate playing well? Great, but you've waited until July-August to augment them.

 

How many games did that cost you in the standings by waiting? 4? 6? More? When they end up making a run with their augmented roster and still finish 2 games behind the White Sox, it's going to be a little late to say, "I wish they'd signed legit help in the offseason instead of waiting," isn't it?

 

By waiting until mid year to see how the "core" starts the year, you essentially are writing off the season unless ALL of your "core" not only demonstrates improvement but have 3 months of All-Star or better level of play, because anything short of that is still likely to leave you struggling to catch up in the second half.

 

Why are people still not only buying this line of crap from the FO, but proselytizing for them?

 

 

 

[Major League Ready]

 

I can show you decades of teams with 78 wins that didn't do those things, and then didn't win playoff games, ever. Cincy. Pittsburgh. Minnesota.

KC, who when they finally made trades of prospects did win it all. Decades of multiple teams who refused to trade prospects and sign any big free agents, who went on to not win.

The Twins signed Jack Morris to one of the biggest deals in MLB history, after a bad year, and won the world series.

Sitting around waiting for all the prospects to work.... How has that worked out for most of the mid market teams?

 

So, in other words, you can't provide any substantive proof so I will continue to offer anecdotal evidence. There are several examples of playoff teams with equivalent or less evidence over the past few years. The evidence is clear that big dollar free agents and trades have had a minor or in some case no impact. You sure do avoid the facts.

 

Are you also going to debate that all of the ML teams are placing far less importance on big $ free agents or that they are all very reluctant to trade top prospects?

 

BTW ... Morris was signed to a 1 year deal. You sure don't stick to a premise. After absolutely harping on the Twins won't sign multi year deals, you use a 1 year contract as an to support your point. I would add that examples of 25+ years ago is not the best evidence of how to succeed today.

 

The Kansas city example is not great either. They were a better team after shields left and the won the WS without him. Yes, they got Davis but nobody here would have thought that he was an important asset when the trade was made.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Major League Ready

[Mike Sixel]

So, in other words, I can't provide any substantive proof so I will continue to offer anecdotal evidence. There are several examples of playoff teams with equivalent or less evidence over the past few years. The evidence is clear that big dollar free agents and trades have had a minor or in some case no impact. You sure do avoid the facts.

I can show that your path doesn't work over decades, across multiple teams... perhaps a different, uncharted, path is needed.

 

I've posted this before.... I'm not asking for four big signings, or even three. I'm asking them to make one multi year commitment to a guy they think is an all star quality player, and one multi year commitment to a guy they think is just below that. If they can't afford that, they probably need to be in a different business. This year, they have the same exact holes as last year, plus second base. Why? No long term commitment. So, once again, they need to rely on free agency to fill those holes.

 

I'm not asking them to build their team around free agents or trades. I'm asking for less than that. I'm not asking them to spend above the median range, except in years they think they should go all in.

 

I'm asking them to make a long term commitment to two players they did not draft, who are already major league players. None of that stops them from doing what you want.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Mike Sixel

[ewen21]

 

Here's my problem with the "Wait until the right moment and push your chips in" stance: Nobody knows when that right moment will be. 

 

The Twins won 71 games in 1986. They won 74 in 1990. 

Those events have notthing to do with my thought process and I do not support signing big free agents right now.  You are doing what Mackey did, trying to me in a box

 

Watch it brother :shoot:  :shoot:  :shoot:

[bobs]

  The motive behind these moves is obvious to me.  They are trying to give the young guys "one more year" to develop.  Nick Gordon isn't ready yet...give him another year at AAA and sign Schoop.  If Gordon is ready next year, he'll be here.  If not, they can try to keep Schoop or look for a long-term solution.  

  Is Sano gonna step up or bust?  Is he a 3B or 1B?  Sign Cron and give Sano a year to figure it out or the FO has to find a long-term solution.  

  It's basically a wait-and-see approach that tries to allow your young players every  opportunity to develop, to show they belong....or show they do NOT belong.  

[Squirrel]

To me the Twins are between a rock and a hard place with their roster. What happens if Buxton, Sano, Berrios, or even Kepler lives up to their potential. Buxton hits for a 290 average with his usual defense, Sano hits over 40 bombs and has a 270 batting average, Berrios wins 20 games with over 200 strike outs and Kepler hits 30 bombs with at 270 batting average. You spend 20 plus million dollars over 7 years on someone like Manny Machado and what do you do with our own if the switch flips and they produce like everyone thinks they should. Unfortunately the Twins are not able to have the payroll of the the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers have and would have to get rid of a couple of them. What happens if Gibson all of a sudden figures it out and wins 20 games. its all possible and it could all happen next year if the stars align. The problem is the Twins have too many young players with high ceilings, and high ceilings means big payroll in the near future and Falvey and Levine have to keep that in mind when they put this years roster together.

If they all click then you have a winning team for a few years and then you make some trades. We can’t keep playing the ‘what if’ game. Prospects are prospects until they prove otherwise and that core hasn’t proved anything. And what if they don’t? Then you have Machado to anchor the next wave.

 

If you do nothing but plan for the future you will continually lose in the present. And I’m not suggesting we trade everyone and mortgage the future. I’m just looking for a little more present that isn’t an unwise penny-pinching budget.

[Platoon]

Here's my problem with the "Wait until the right moment and push your chips in" stance: Nobody knows when that right moment will be. 

 

The Twins won 71 games in 1986. They won 74 in 1990.

 

You may not know when it will be, but you will know when you see it. But the core has to be in place and therein lies the problem. We have never built the core. As CB above points out we still do not know what we have with our core of Buxton, Sano, and Kepler. We should, but we don't. Adding a Machado to the level that group played at last year won't make us a winner. Adding a Machado to the level that group is capable of quite likely would. Now al I need to figure out is which Sano and Buxton, et al, will show up this year. And if I am wrong in my analysis, the Mauer Contract Haters can easily morph into the Machado Contract Haters. They won't even have to change the initials on their caps!

[Adam Krueger]

I guess what bothers me the most is that for the past 2-3 seasons, the front-office has taken this 'value approach' and almost none of their 'savvy' acquisitions have worked out. The jury is still out on the Michael Pineda deal, but Morrison was a bust, Addison Reed has been meh, Fernando Rodney was meh, Zach Duke..., Lance Lynn (we barely knew thee), and on and on. It is a series of uninspiring moves and the fact that none of them have really worked out all that favorably makes me question the ability of the front-office to judge potential and talent. Yes they were cheap deals, team-friendly and what not, but in order to make that strategy work for you, some of these value picks have to work out much better than expected.

 

This approach, compounded with some player development question marks makes me wonder, "when are Falvey and Levine going to realize the potential that we thought was there when they were brought on to lead this organizations personnel decisions?" If not soon, why keep them around?

 

I'm not in the camp that says that the Twins need to spend big money and go after the front-line free agents every off-season, but dumpster diving every year isn't the way to go either.

[drivlikejehu]

I can't fault Falvey or Levine for taking a job that was conditional on maintaining a low payroll. There just aren't very many baseball exec jobs to go around, and a decent chunk of those are with cheap owners. 

 

Is it kind of irritating that they also have to cover for ownership, and deflect criticism over the payroll? Sure. But I seriously doubt that they enjoy that aspect of the job. 

[jkcarew]

This is pretty much how this organization has always been run, right? You do the best you can with talent evaluation/acquisition (given significant payroll constraints)...but mostly, you just sit back and wait for stars to appear. If some Pucketts, Hrbeks, Gaettis, Mauers, Morneaus, Radkes, Santanas, etc. come along, you have a shot. If they don't come along, you patch stuff together so that it looks like you care, and fans can look forward to the random (and unsustainable) 85-win season when everything falls into place.

 

That's what's happening here. Buying (at a very low cost) another year to see if stars appear. I don't defend it, but I don't look for the Twins under this ownership to become something they've never been. In the meantime, I my only hope is that Falvey and Levine have what it takes to make the stars appear more frequently, more consistently...and soon.