Article: The Discard Pile

[yarnivek1972]

Since the Falvine era started the Twins have made only a handful of changes to the minor league coaching ranks and player development staff. I’m not sure that qualifies as “fixing” development. The proof is in the pudding. This third year is when the MLB team should start seeing Falvine development projects. Gordon doesn’t figure to help. He might get an obligatory cup of coffee in September. Of the Twins top 15 prospects via their own website that figure to be at the MLB level at all in 2019 are Gordon, Wade, Gonsalves and Thorpe. None of them likely to be impactful. None of them are under 23. NONE.

 

Nick Gordon is not young. He’s 23 and was completely overmatched at AAA last year. I saw a report that stated 27% of MLB PA were by hitters 25 or younger - the highest percentage in 40 years. I don’t put a lot of stock into the age of prospects relative to the league they are in. Prospects are ALWAYS the youngest players in a given league. A typical A ball team has maybe 5 legitimate MLB prospects and 20 or more organizational filler types. The org fillers are invariably older for two reasons. They get promoted more slowly. Being older is the only way the org fillers can compete at the level they are at. And even then most of them struggle.

 

AA teams have even fewer prospects and AAA teams are mostly guys that shuttle between AAA and MLB, with very few prospects without MLB experience.

[old nurse]

 

Maybe we should do this for the Yankees and Red Sox too! Because one data point isn't sufficient, probably.

 

Of course, not trading for players like Dozier in 2017 might be one reason they came up a game short......You also left off that they traded for Machado in 2018, so maybe they decided their plan of not trading for great players didn't work.

 

Now, if every team decides this....well, then there are probably market inefficiencies being created in terms of trade value.

boston  Sandy Leon was a purchase, Moreland and Nunez were bargain free agents . JD Martinez and Hanly Ramirez were not a bargain free agent.  They traded for Kinsler and Pearce, not giving up much. , The rest of their lineup was their own drafted, or international players. Their starting pitching pretty much traded for except for Price. 

 

In 2017 Logan Forsythe OPS .786 for the playoffs. Can't blame him.

Edited January 23, 2019 by old nurse

[Major League Ready]

 

I'll accept that the Twins cant win by acting like a mid market team when they've spent a decade or so acting like a mid market team.

To date, we only know their practice of acting like a bottom market team ain't getting the job done.

 

Timer after time, I ask for examples. What I am hearing is constant insistence that the front office is incompetent and that TD participants have a better understanding of how to build a team. If this is true, there would be numerous examples of teams applying the practices being insisted upon unless your point is that they are all tooo stupid to every apply these practices. Which is it. Are TDers just smarter than all the executives running mid tier teams or are there enough examples to substantiate the practices being promoted here?

 

Where are the examples. Is anyone here interested in taking an unbiased look at the success of various practices because based on the refusal of anyone to supply a direct answer most people just want to complain about something that they have not even evaluated fairly.  

[Major League Ready]

 

I've answered, I can show decades of your approach not working, across nearly every mid market team. Maybe the lesson is mid market teams are largely doomed no matter what they do.

 

No you have not even come close to answering the question. How does examples of what did not work answer the question of what does? Let's just start simple. Would you agree that there would be ample examples of successful mid tier teams building through specifically high end FAs and trading for establish players? It would be real nice if you started with an answer to this question.

 

The only other alternative is that all of the mid tier teams have incompetent executives that just don't understand how to build a team as well as the posters here. Is that your position? If not, show me actual proof. All you have provided is anecdotal come-backs.  I even provided you a simple model where the acquisition method for all of the 3 WAR position players and SPs is shown as well as the WAR for RPs over 1.5 WAR.  

 

if the practices you and others insist are critical the rosters for the majority of mid tier playoff teams over the past 10 years should have players of this type making major contributions. If not, there are a lot of TDers complaining that the Twins won't follow practices that have proven to be ineffective or at best, less effective. Do you want to take a look at numerous examples and come to an educated position or would you rather just insist the FO is incompetent. Ironically, the most incompetent thing we can do is not examine the evidence.

[Major League Ready]

 

Maybe we should do this for the Yankees and Red Sox too! Because one data point isn't sufficient, probably.

 

Aaron Judge - 5.5 WAR - Drafted
Aaron Hicks - 4.7 WAR - Traded for a BU Catcher (JR Murphy)
Didi Gregorius - 4.2 - Acquired before coming established
Giancarlo Stanton – 4 WAR - Prospect cost reduced significantly by taking on salary
Gleyber Torres - 2.9 WAR Traded for while in A+
Brett Gardner - 2.8 WAR - Drafted
Miguel Andujar - 2.2 WAR - Acquired for established player

 

Only one position player (Stanton) was a product of free agency or trade for an established player. The prospect cost was substantially lower than normal because of his large contract.

 

Luis Severino - 4.8 – WAR - Drafted
Masahiro Tanaka – 2.9 WAR - Int FA
Chad Green - 2.3 WAR - Traded for while in A+
Dellin Betances - 1.7 WAR - Drafted
Aroldis Chapman - 1.7 WAR - FA

 

The Yankees highest impact SP (Severino) was drafted. They had only one other SP over 2.5 WAR (Tanka) who of course was an International FA. Their 2 most impactful RPs (Green) was acquired wjhile in A+ and Betances was drafted. Chapman 1.7 WAR was a FA.  Free agency had a role but their greatest value by far was drafting and trading for players that were still prospects.

 

Summary – By far the most impact came from smart trades for players that had not yet produced at a high level at the ML level and drafting. Of course, the Yankees could easily spend $100M more on players than the Twins and you would expect to see evidence of that spending ability. They were able to get Stanton for a modest price in prospects because of his salary and they were able to attract Tanaka. His 2.9 WAR is not what we would call dominant but a reasonably important contributor. They also spent to get Chapman.

 

To put it in prospective, The Yankees incremental income over the Twins covers Tanaka, Stanton, and Chapman with enough left over to sign 2 more players for another $25M AAV each. Therefore, they can spend the Twins entire budget on 20 players instead of 25 players. Therefore, after signing all of those players, the Yankees could still spend 20% more AAV than the twins on their remaining roster.

Perhaps the real problem is that fans just don’t understand that this difference in spending ability absolutely dictates that mid tier teams need to take a different approach if they are to have any chance of success.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Major League Ready

[ashbury]

Nick Gordon is not young. He’s 23 and was completely overmatched at AAA last year.

It was his age-22 season. That's young for AAA, even accounting for roster filler. BB-REF.com will show me the top 100 batters in games played, and there were 4 guys age 22 and one at 21.

 

Mind you, I was seriously unimpressed with what I saw from him in SSS in person. But he's young enough that we probably haven't seen the best from him yet.

[Major League Ready]

Anyone interested in another objective view. Let’s look at all of the mid-tier teams that made the playoffs in 2017. I already covered 2018 which very clearly showed the vast majority of the most productive players were acquired as prospects or unproven ML players or drafted. I also covered one of the big market teams (Dodgers). They have shown a strong preference to build through prospects. None of their impact players were high end free agents despite their financial capacity. Now let’s look at the mid-market teams that made the playoffs. This includes, Arizona, Colorado and arguably Houston who has enough significant incremental revenue but certainly not in the same category of the Dodger/Yankees.  Of course, the Twins and Indians were the other two mid-tier teams but we already know how they were built.

 

Let’s start with the Diamondbacks.

 

Position Players

Paul Goldschmidt - 5.1 WAR - Drafted
David Peralta – 3.8 WAR – 1 year deal for $7M
A.J. Pollock - 2.5 WAR - Drafted
Ketel Marte - 2.5 WAR – acquired after having .4 negative WAR the previous year.

Starting Rotation

Zack Greinke - 5.1 - FA
Zack Godley - 3.5 WAR – Acquired while still in A+.
Robbie Ray - 3.2 WAR – Acquired with 28 IP at the MLB level and negative WAR
Patrick Corbin – 3 WAR – Acquired while in A+

They only had 1 RP (Bradley) over 1.5 WAR.  He was drafted.

 

Summary – It would be accurate to say this team built on trading for prospects and drafting. No doubt Greinke was a big part of the team and if the Twins are one player away I doubt anyone here would object to the Twins signing a “Greinke”. However, let’s keep in mind that the acquisition of all the other cheap talent made it possible to sign Greinke just like Riverbrian points out a flexible roster allows for the signing of Cruz. Of course, it does not hurt the Diamondbacks had just signed a billion dollar TV contract. 

 

Let’s finish up the National league with a look at Colorado.

 

Position Players – I included LeMahieu because the Rockies only had 2 players above 3 WAR and he is fairly highly regarded. Ignore him if you wish.

 

Charlie Blackmon - 6.5 WAR - Drafted
Nolan Arenado - 5.6 WAR - Drafted
DJ LeMahieu - 1.9 WAR – Acquired after his 1t season with the cubs where he had.1 negative WAR.

Starting Pitchers – The Rockies only had 1 SP (Gray) with 3+ WAR so I included the others who provided innings.

Jon Gray - 3.2 WAR drafted. Only had 110 innings but was effective.
German Marquez - 2.4 WAR – Acquired when still at A+.
Kyle Freeland  - 2.0 WAR – Drafted

 

Relief Pitchers – The Rockies only had 1 RP above 1.5. That was Jake McGee – 2.1 WAR cquired from the Rays in his 2nd year of Arbitration. He received 4.8M which the Rays are highly unlikely to pay for a RP. Another words, his acquisition was very similar to the twins acquiring Morrison or Cron.

They did sign Greg Holland on a 1 year $6M deal (bounce back deal) He produced 1.1 WAR.  They also got 1.1 WAR from Chris Rusin who was acquired before becoming an established MLB player. He produced the same WAR as Holland for $545K.

 

Summary – Zero trades for established players and no high end free agents.

Anyone see some very strong tendencies in how successful mid-tier acquire talent?

[Mike Sixel]

Add I've said, I want one established player acquired they think is great, and one below that. That seems in line with your findings. Greinke, for example. Or what the Brewers did. Or something like Stanton, but not that much money. Or, the Cardinals when they paid big dollars for an OF and pitcher, which I believe they traded for those two, and then signed them to large extensions, last time they were really good. Or what KC did in trading the number for prospect in the game.

 

Your findings seem to see these teams have several players, not a lot, but one to four, acquired by trade or larger FA deals than MN does. That's consistent with what I'm asking for. One or two bigger investments for more than one or two year deals.

[yarnivek1972]

I don’t think it’s a surprise to anyone that most winning teams are built from within. The key is and always has been drafting and developing well. It’s an area the Twins have been lagging behind the rest of the league for at least a decade. I have yet to be convinced that enough has changed in player development techniques and methods under the new regime. We’ll start to see soon enough I suppose.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Extensions do nothing for me.  By and large, I'm not a fan.  Maybe they'll shock me with one, but I doubt it.  Long term retention does nothing for me if the team isn't willing to buy-in.

And that's fair. I still want a reliever either way but would feel better with extensions to various players, primarily if the team front-loads those contracts and spends the money TODAY so they have more money TOMORROW.

 

If you can lock down a couple of players cheaply through 2022-23, that possibly extends the bridge of legitimate contention for another few years as those extended players are joined by the next wave of Kirilloff, Lewis, Thorpe, etc.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Let's see the examples of 90+ win teams with equivalent or less revenue built on the practices being promoted here.

One problem with this restriction: most teams with equivalent or less revenue than the Twins haven't done well, overall. Most WS are won by higher-revenue teams, and most WS appearances are by higher revenue teams too. A few similar-revenue teams have had a stretch of competitive regular seasons (including the 2000s Twins), but very little postseason success. Many more have achieved less. It's not necessarily a strategy that the Twins should be locked into following, if they don't want to.

 

A few of those teams would have probably been better served to be more aggressive at times. In fact, the most recent smaller-revenue team to win the WS (Royals) were rather aggressive, in the Wil Myers trade. Yes, they won the WS after Shields left, but they still had Davis (whose 5 years of control was an underrated asset after his initial bullpen success with Tampa), and the Royals did reach game 7 of the WS with Shields which likely helped them win it all the next year. (A key to that deal was that Myers was projected as a corner player, which likely capped his future value, so this doesn't necessarily mean the Twins should flip Lewis -- but it's still a general example of aggressiveness.)

 

The Brewers are another club that's shown some aggressiveness, with some results -- in 2011, they made it deep into the NLCS after acquiring Greinke, and then again last year with Cain and Yelich. Obviously no one would say the Twins should aim to compete with Chacin and Miley as our top starters, but again the general idea is there are potential benefits to aggressive moves (including helping to cover areas of the roster which turn out weaker than expected, like the Brewers SP after the Jimmy Nelson injury).

 

Aggressiveness won't always work that well, but even then, it doesn't always hurt either. The 2008 Brewers made the playoffs but failed to advance after acquiring Sabathia, but they ultimately didn't pay too much of a price (Brantley eventually became pretty good, but the Brewers built their own pretty good OF by that time too). The recent Diamondbacks haven't advanced past the first round with Greinke, but his contract isn't really inhibiting greater success.

 

It's not necessarily a bad idea to try to follow the less aggressive path of the 2000s Twins again, or the more recent Pirates and Reds teams. You could build a team approaching 90 wins and hope for some luck -- the Indians certainly came close in 2016. But it's not the only way for markets like ours, and after the experiencing this path in the 2000s, recognizing that competitive windows can still be limited no matter how "sustainably" you try to build in a smaller market, and needing a jump-start out of the 2010s doldrums, I think a lot of Twins fans might welcome taking a more aggressive chance today, and they wouldn't necessarily be wrong.

 

Mind you, that aggressive chance has to be smart -- not just signing any 30+ year old FA to a long-term deal, or dealing valuable up-the-middle prospects for strictly short-term returns. But targeting younger guys like Yelich in trade, or FA like Machado, could absolutely qualify. At this point, so could a successful extension bet, like the Indians did with Kluber, Carrasco, and Ramirez. But I'd hope that our front office has enough skill to do something more than biding our time with modest 1 year deals.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Extensions do nothing for me.  By and large, I'm not a fan.  Maybe they'll shock me with one, but I doubt it.  Long term retention does nothing for me if the team isn't willing to buy-in.

Obviously extensions don't add talent to the current club, but they can help retain it for longer and at lower rates, making it easier to add talent later. Like the Indians with the Kluber, Carrasco, and Ramirez deals -- if not for those, their window might be over by now. And perhaps it would have been harder for recent Cleveland clubs to supplement with Miller, Encarnacion, Hand, etc.

 

I'm not sure if the Twins have talent worth extending -- Berrios seems the most intriguing -- so I wouldn't necessarily demand the Twins sign an extension. But it's a little disappointing to see no progress in that regard, alongside the absence of aggressive moves otherwise.

[Mike Sixel]

How sad is it that this far into the rebuild, most fans here are unsure anyone other than Berrios and maybe Rosario should be extended? That level of production is disappointing.

[Doomtints]

Note that the "discard pile" in question consists of discarded players from teams who want to contend. The Twins are not picking up cast-offs from bad teams cutting salary.

 

The Twins won't catch up to the contenders by taking their castoffs. The Twins were already in the middle tier but I suppose these moves can push them over 80 wins again (in theory).

Edited January 23, 2019 by Doomtints

[Mike Sixel]

 

Note that the "discard pile" in question consists of discarded players from teams who want to contend. The Twins are not picking up cast-offs from bad teams cutting salary.

 

The Twins won't catch up to the contenders by taking their castoffs. The Twins were already in the middle tier but I suppose these moves can push them over 80 wins again (in theory).

 

TX is trying to win? Wow, they need help.

[markos]

 

No you have not even come close to answering the question. How does examples of what did not work answer the question of what does? Let's just start simple. Would you agree that there would be ample examples of successful mid tier teams building through specifically high end FAs and trading for establish players? It would be real nice if you started with an answer to this question.

 

The only other alternative is that all of the mid tier teams have incompetent executives that just don't understand how to build a team as well as the posters here. Is that your position? If not, show me actual proof. All you have provided is anecdotal come-backs.  I even provided you a simple model where the acquisition method for all of the 3 WAR position players and SPs is shown as well as the WAR for RPs over 1.5 WAR.  

 

if the practices you and others insist are critical the rosters for the majority of mid tier playoff teams over the past 10 years should have players of this type making major contributions. If not, there are a lot of TDers complaining that the Twins won't follow practices that have proven to be ineffective or at best, less effective. Do you want to take a look at numerous examples and come to an educated position or would you rather just insist the FO is incompetent. Ironically, the most incompetent thing we can do is not examine the evidence.

Would you agree that there would be ample examples of successful mid tier teams building through specifically high end FAs and trading for establish players?

 

I feel like there is quite a bit of "No true Scotsman" going on in your arguments on this thread, so I'm not sure any kind of evidence will change your mind. But here are some examples that I think are pertinent.

The Brewers were already brought up, but you said don't count because you can't understand how they won 96 games with such bad pitching.
The Royals were brought up with the Shields trade, but you said they don't count because the Royals were better after Shields left (as if they would have been better without him while he was there?), ignoring that the whole point of the trade was to bridge the gap between their position players (who were in the big leagues) and their pitching prospects (who were a few years away).
You just brought up the Diamondbacks, who signed Greinke. But you said that doesn't count because it was only one piece.
The Reds had a nice little run at the beginning of the decade, and they spent a fair amount of prospect assets to acquire Rolen, Choo and Latos. But I'm sure the Reds don't count because they didn't sign any high end FAs. Or they weren't successful enough. Or they didn't "build through" these players. You can take your pick.
The Blue Jays signed Russell Martin and traded for Josh Donaldson, and they had a few years where they were pretty successful. But maybe they weren't successful enough for your threshold. Or they don't qualify as a mid tier team.
The Cardinals won a World Series in 2011 with Matt Holliday and Lance Berkman as their 2nd and 3rd best position players - both fairly high priced free agents. But I'm not sure if they cross your threshold of being "high end FAs", so maybe they don't count. And of course, the Cardinals punch above their market size when it comes to payroll, so their long stretch of competitiveness probably doesn't count - despite their trades (like for Ozuna and Goldschmidt) and signings (like Fowler).
The Mariners just had a quasi-successful run (despite being run by some extremely mediocre GMs) in large part because of Cano and Cruz - both FAs. But they probably weren't good enough overall to count. And Seattle is probably too big of market.
The Tigers traded for prime Miguel Cabrera, signed a bunch of high end FAs, traded for other established players. They were one of the best teams in baseball between 2011-2014, and had a nice 8 year run of competitive baseball. But they probably don't count because their owner allowed them to run high payrolls.
The Indians signed Edwin Encarnacion, traded for Andrew Miller. But this is probably supplementing an existing core, rather than building through those moves. So they don't count.
The Nationals have signed Werth, Scherzer and now Corbin. They made a big trade to get Adam Eaton. Does this example count?
The Rangers nearly one back to back World Series at the beginning of this decade, and arguably their best player was Adrian Beltre, who they signed as a free agent. They also paid big bucks to get Darvish and Joe Nathan.

 

While not a mid-tier team, the Astros have gone out and acquired one or more established veterans with multiple years of team control via the trade market every year since 2015: Gattis, McCann, Giles, Fiers, Verlander, Cole.

 

So there are 10 examples from the past eight years who I think answer your question. But I'm sure you can lawyer your way out of accepting any of them as valid evidence, because your question is super subjection to what is or isn't "mid tier", "successful", "building through", "high end", "establish players". But only 14 or the bottom 20 teams in revenue have made the playoffs since 2011, and 9 of them show up on my list.

[Major League Ready]

 

Would you agree that there would be ample examples of successful mid tier teams building through specifically high end FAs and trading for establish players?

 

I feel like there is quite a bit of "No true Scotsman" going on in your arguments on this thread, so I'm not sure any kind of evidence will change your mind. But here are some examples that I think are pertinent.

The Brewers were already brought up, but you said don't count because you can't understand how they won 96 games with such bad pitching.
The Royals were brought up with the Shields trade, but you said they don't count because the Royals were better after Shields left (as if they would have been better without him while he was there?), ignoring that the whole point of the trade was to bridge the gap between their position players (who were in the big leagues) and their pitching prospects (who were a few years away).
You just brought up the Diamondbacks, who signed Greinke. But you said that doesn't count because it was only one piece.
The Reds had a nice little run at the beginning of the decade, and they spent a fair amount of prospect assets to acquire Rolen, Choo and Latos. But I'm sure the Reds don't count because they didn't sign any high end FAs. Or they weren't successful enough. Or they didn't "build through" these players. You can take your pick.
The Blue Jays signed Russell Martin and traded for Josh Donaldson, and they had a few years where they were pretty successful. But maybe they weren't successful enough for your threshold. Or they don't qualify as a mid tier team.
The Cardinals won a World Series in 2011 with Matt Holliday and Lance Berkman as their 2nd and 3rd best position players - both fairly high priced free agents. But I'm not sure if they cross your threshold of being "high end FAs", so maybe they don't count. And of course, the Cardinals punch above their market size when it comes to payroll, so their long stretch of competitiveness probably doesn't count - despite their trades (like for Ozuna and Goldschmidt) and signings (like Fowler).
The Mariners just had a quasi-successful run (despite being run by some extremely mediocre GMs) in large part because of Cano and Cruz - both FAs. But they probably weren't good enough overall to count. And Seattle is probably too big of market.
The Tigers traded for prime Miguel Cabrera, signed a bunch of high end FAs, traded for other established players. They were one of the best teams in baseball between 2011-2014, and had a nice 8 year run of competitive baseball. But they probably don't count because their owner allowed them to run high payrolls.
The Indians signed Edwin Encarnacion, traded for Andrew Miller. But this is probably supplementing an existing core, rather than building through those moves. So they don't count.
The Nationals have signed Werth, Scherzer and now Corbin. They made a big trade to get Adam Eaton. Does this example count?
The Rangers nearly one back to back World Series at the beginning of this decade, and arguably their best player was Adrian Beltre, who they signed as a free agent. They also paid big bucks to get Darvish and Joe Nathan.

 

While not a mid-tier team, the Astros have gone out and acquired one or more established veterans with multiple years of team control via the trade market every year since 2015: Gattis, McCann, Giles, Fiers, Verlander, Cole.

 

So there are 10 examples from the past eight years who I think answer your question. But I'm sure you can lawyer your way out of accepting any of them as valid evidence, because your question is super subjection to what is or isn't "mid tier", "successful", "building through", "high end", "establish players". But only 14 or the bottom 20 teams in revenue have made the playoffs since 2011, and 9 of them show up on my list.

 

I knew when I started it was a fool's errand. As I have said repeatedly anyone can give anecdotal evidence. I listed ALL of the contributing players so that the relative importance of each kind of acquisition can be measured. If my point was trying to say the Twins should never sign a big name free agent or trade for established players you would have a point.

 

I posted more than once at the end of the season that I though Machado was the kind of big name free agent that makes sense for the Twins. What you and others simply do not understand is that mid-market teams can only afford a Machado if the are effective in DRafting/development and trading for prospects. When you look at all of the examples this is abundantly clear. 

 

I listed several example of playoff teams that little or no contribution from high end free agents or players acquired by trade after becoming established. Of course, there have been contributors acquired via FA or after becoming established but the teams generally speaking got to the point of contention via cost effective players and the players you mentioned were a small portion of the WAR.  Were they still important? Of course they were but posters here are way to worried about the finishing strategy than actually building the foundation necessary for a lower revenue team to build a contender.

 

You use Greinke as an example. That entire team was drafted or traded for as prospects. Was Greinke important? Absolutely! What so few here seem to understand is that the Twins revenue necessitates a very cost efficient structure for the rest of the team to make such an acquisition feasible.

[Major League Ready]

 

I knew when I started it was a fool's errand. As I have said repeatedly anyone can give anecdotal evidence. I listed ALL of the contributing players so that the relative importance of each kind of acquisition can be measured. If my point was trying to say the Twins should never sign a big name free agent or trade for established players you would have a point.

 

I posted more than once at the end of the season that I though Machado was the kind of big name free agent that makes sense for the Twins. What you and others simply do not understand is that mid-market teams can only afford a Machado if the are effective in DRafting/development and trading for prospects. When you look at all of the examples this is abundantly clear. 

 

I listed several example of playoff teams that little or no contribution from high end free agents or players acquired by trade after becoming established. Of course, there have been contributors acquired via FA or after becoming established but the teams generally speaking got to the point of contention via cost effective players and the players you mentioned were a small portion of the WAR.  Were they still important? Of course they were but posters here are way to worried about the finishing strategy than actually building the foundation necessary for a lower revenue team to build a contender.

 

You use Greinke as an example. That entire team was drafted or traded for as prospects. Was Greinke important? Absolutely! What so few here seem to understand is that the Twins revenue necessitates a very cost efficient structure for the rest of the team to make such an acquisition feasible.

 

[ewen21]

 

I wasn't trying to argue, calm down. I was even more or less agreeing with you. It's reasonable to interpret that statement the way I did. This is a baseball forum, not a courtroom.  That may be what you were trying to say, but that's not how I interpreted this:  "Aside from Sano where is are players who came through our system since 2006 ended who has been in an ASG?It's abysmal.It is embarrassing."  

 

That said, the answer to your rhetorical question is Dozier and Berrios, but Perkins was a rookie in 2006. It's still an issue, but not nearly as dire as you're making it to out be.

I am not looking to argue either.  I am simply wondering, after distinctly I spoke about a certain time period and of those only coming through our system, why you'd create a new list that included free agents and guys brought up way before '06?

 

We are an organization that HAS TO do better bringing young players along and we have done an absolutely horrendous job of it for years.  One needs only to look back on the pitching we have raised over the last 13 seasons before Berrios arrived.  Did we produce anything worthy of note?  Gibson had one foot in the grave toward the end of 2017 and he finally turned a corner.  Other than him, where were the pitchers we have raised since Garza was called up in 2006 (until Berrios)???  That is an awful long drought and dare I say a serious problem.

 

I think the "piranha mentality" destroyed this franchise.  All this pride in the "little things" when we don't have any real starting pitching or a strong lineup that can slug the baseball.  Can't do the real important things but......Oh boy we do the little things!   Good for us.  Do we get cookie?

That mentality needs to be annihilated.  I don't ever want to hear about the "little things" because those things are fundamental.  Running out pop outs and the like is really cute and all, but that isn't to be bragged about or cited as "hustling"

Hustle to me is smart baseball. Any braindead player can run the bases hard.  Run them smart

[ewen21]

 

If you don’t learn from the past, you are condemmed to repeat it.

Also, you ignored a key part of my post. I said the Twins need to draft AND DEVELOP well.

I won’t get into whether or not Buxton and Sano were good signings. But it is undeniable that neither has developed well.

As for the current regime’s impact on development, how does that explain Nick Gordon, who was easily the top position prospect they inherited? How does it explain them simply walking away from a half dozen fairly highly regarded pitching prospects over the past couple years?

Not sure how we can boast about draft signings TODAY.  We have had great draft positions for years now.  Where is the beef?  Maybe it emerges this year, but we have not developed well by any stretch of the imagination.  If we had we would be better

[wsnydes]

 

I am not looking to argue either.  I am simply wondering, after distinctly I spoke about a certain time period and of those only coming through our system, why you'd create a new list that included free agents and guys brought up way before '06?

 

Because what you meant to say and what I interpreted what you typed are very different things. But I was agreeing with your greater point.

 

While I agree that they need to do a better job of developing young players, it most definitely is a problem, it's not true that they haven't developed impact players. That is what I was trying to show you. I included the FAs for comparisons sake. It's not like every ASG rep was brought in from outside the organization. Perkins was a 3-time all-star (and a really good closer) in that period. Dozier was most certainly an impact player. Berrios is most certainly a impact player. You asked what players developed in the Twins system had been to the ASG since 2006 aside from Sano, and I answered your question. Could and should there be more? Absolutely. The fact that there's not is why the team has been treading water for a decade. But to say that Sano is the only one to come up and make and impact or represent the team in the ASG is false. They do, however, need to do better and that's really the only way that this team is going to get better. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Anyone interested in another objective view. Let’s look at all of the mid-tier teams that made the playoffs in 2017. I already covered 2018 which very clearly showed the vast majority of the most productive players were acquired as prospects or unproven ML players or drafted. I also covered one of the big market teams (Dodgers). They have shown a strong preference to build through prospects. None of their impact players were high end free agents despite their financial capacity. Now let’s look at the mid-market teams that made the playoffs. This includes, Arizona, Colorado and arguably Houston who has enough significant incremental revenue but certainly not in the same category of the Dodger/Yankees. Of course, the Twins and Indians were the other two mid-tier teams but we already know how they were built.

 

Let’s start with the Diamondbacks.

 

Position Players

Paul Goldschmidt - 5.1 WAR - Drafted

David Peralta – 3.8 WAR – 1 year deal for $7M

A.J. Pollock - 2.5 WAR - Drafted

Ketel Marte - 2.5 WAR – acquired after having .4 negative WAR the previous year.

Starting Rotation

Zack Greinke - 5.1 - FA

Zack Godley - 3.5 WAR – Acquired while still in A+.

Robbie Ray - 3.2 WAR – Acquired with 28 IP at the MLB level and negative WAR

Patrick Corbin – 3 WAR – Acquired while in A+

They only had 1 RP (Bradley) over 1.5 WAR. He was drafted.

 

Summary – It would be accurate to say this team built on trading for prospects and drafting. No doubt Greinke was a big part of the team and if the Twins are one player away I doubt anyone here would object to the Twins signing a “Greinke”. However, let’s keep in mind that the acquisition of all the other cheap talent made it possible to sign Greinke just like Riverbrian points out a flexible roster allows for the signing of Cruz. Of course, it does not hurt the Diamondbacks had just signed a billion dollar TV contract.

 

Let’s finish up the National league with a look at Colorado.

 

Position Players – I included LeMahieu because the Rockies only had 2 players above 3 WAR and he is fairly highly regarded. Ignore him if you wish.

 

Charlie Blackmon - 6.5 WAR - Drafted

Nolan Arenado - 5.6 WAR - Drafted

DJ LeMahieu - 1.9 WAR – Acquired after his 1t season with the cubs where he had.1 negative WAR.

Starting Pitchers – The Rockies only had 1 SP (Gray) with 3+ WAR so I included the others who provided innings.

Jon Gray - 3.2 WAR drafted. Only had 110 innings but was effective.

German Marquez - 2.4 WAR – Acquired when still at A+.

Kyle Freeland - 2.0 WAR – Drafted

 

Relief Pitchers – The Rockies only had 1 RP above 1.5. That was Jake McGee – 2.1 WAR cquired from the Rays in his 2nd year of Arbitration. He received 4.8M which the Rays are highly unlikely to pay for a RP. Another words, his acquisition was very similar to the twins acquiring Morrison or Cron.

They did sign Greg Holland on a 1 year $6M deal (bounce back deal) He produced 1.1 WAR. They also got 1.1 WAR from Chris Rusin who was acquired before becoming an established MLB player. He produced the same WAR as Holland for $545K.

 

Summary – Zero trades for established players and no high end free agents.

Anyone see some very strong tendencies in how successful mid-tier acquire talent?

agreed, all major league teams depend almost exclusively on home grown talent.

 

The Twins have been unsuccessful at developing homegrown talent. They’ve sucked for 8 years with high draft picks and nothing to show for it.

 

What do you do about, just accept it and wallow in self pity and wait for JP to can you?

 

Do you acquire better players to fill gaps while your pipeline continues to develop?

 

I don’t have a problem with Schoop/Cron/Cruz. All reasonable improvements to the hitters.

 

The pitching side is apathetic, especially with the contracts and talent available this offseason. Parker is fine as ancillary, but he’s looking like the best pitcher acquired this offseason. Perez is a joke. If he had one good pitch you could maybe make a case. Maybe.... sad part is, if 5th starter were an open competition with in house options I would have been much happier. At least then it’s development for its own sake.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Sconnie

[Major League Ready]

 

Add I've said, I want one established player acquired they think is great, and one below that. That seems in line with your findings. Greinke, for example. Or what the Brewers did. Or something like Stanton, but not that much money. Or, the Cardinals when they paid big dollars for an OF and pitcher, which I believe they traded for those two, and then signed them to large extensions, last time they were really good. Or what KC did in trading the number for prospect in the game.

Your findings seem to see these teams have several players, not a lot, but one to four, acquired by trade or larger FA deals than MN does. That's consistent with what I'm asking for. One or two bigger investments for more than one or two year deals.

 

Mike,

 

Our differences are not so much as what but when. The duration of futility is absolutely meaningless in terms defining best practices. This team is chock-full of possibilities. Berrios is the only guy I would say is proven and perhaps rogers. Even Rosario is not reliable in my opinion. He was absolutely horrid the 2nd half last year because he just can't help himself, he has no patients at the plate.

 

Another part of our disagreement is that most posters here insist on counting any trade as an example of that we should trade for established players. The numbers clearly show that trades for prospects or ML players acquired before becoming established. These trades represent the exact opposite strategy. Generally speaking these players were acquired by trading away established players.

 

Where free agents are concerned our difference is that you see no risk if its only money. While I partially agree, available payroll is an acquisition asset just as are prospects or our International bonus pool.  Free agents often fail completely or produce very low WAR per # spent. That's the same as a bad trade in terms of losing productivity. Your insistence we should trade for a free agent SP even if we were not yet ready because we would have said SP when we did get good. I thought you might have a point but instead of assuming this is a good idea as you have, I actually took an unbiased look at the data which revealed free agent SPs on 4+ year contracts have been extremely ineffective.

 

Where FAs are concerned there is also the reality of this market and right now this market plus a team that has a very uncertain future. I have always been in on Machado because he is a good fit, stays healthy, and has been a consistent performer. Harper has had one great year and the incremental WAR would not be as high given our depth on the OF. Machaso also improves our defense. Back to the point. Machado and Harper type players are an extreme long-shot in this market. What other position players have any more likelihood of really moving the needle more than Schoop and Cron. The actually got the one offensive player that made sense.

 

The SP market sucked. If the best we can do is Corbin for 6/140 I say pass. Can we trade for a SP? Sure, but you better be willing to give up the farm. This is where we disagree. You would. I would not and the tendency of the league has  shifted to a strong inclination to keep elite prospects, even for the large market teams. It's extremely rare. almost unheard of for a mid-market team to give up top 10 types like Lewis / Kirilloff.

 

If we are so fortunate as to have all of the unknowns click, we can make adjustments during the year and we can make adjustments with much better information. Nobody would argue pushing all-in with a low probability hand is a poor strategy in Texas Holdem. It's just flat incompetent when running a MLB franchise. You can't bluff in baseball.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Major League Ready

[bird]

There's an overwhelming consensus here that the FO's failure to add one (or more) of the big name FA RP's is inexplicable and dispiriting. There's still time, but if they do nothing more to add another RP who tiers in there with or better than May/Rogers? Then they better be a lot smarter than we're crediting them. Perez, Parker, and Addison Reed better be more than we think they are.

 

Bottom line for me, and probably for most of us, is that the opportunity was so incredibly ripe, and anything less than an improvement to about, say, 85 wins or so would be a serious indictment against Falvey. I don't care how he gets there, and I go all "la la la la la" about all the 50% of payroll and cheap owner stuff. Derek, just contend in 2019, you have the ammo to do it. No one is stopping you.

 

It still boils down in large part to a huge but understandable bet that Buxton and Sano both become reliable members of a future core, 4-5 WAR guys at least. If the core in fact DOES produce, maybe allowing for one <2WAR season from one of Berrios, Gibson (they're signing him, I just know it), Polanco, Rosario, and Kepler, the bet will have turned out well. If two or more of Schoop, Pineda, Cruz, Cron, Parker, and Perez give us + 2WAR years, and if only one or two roster spots are occupied by negative WAR players? Then I think this team might be in the hunt, and with that one last RP addition, I'll sing Falvey's praises. Lastly, if four or more of Gonsalves, Romero, Hildenberger, Mejia, Astudillo, Garver, Austin, De Jong, Littell, Thorpe, Moya, Cave, and Vasquez step up and become productive regulars or really solid role players in 2019, I'll sing the praises of our (perennially good IMO) scouting organization too. I might even be impressed with Falvey's horse-swapping process and see signs that development and coaching are better.

 

I'm a lousy judge of these things, but I just don't see the pitching staff as being as bad as so many people describe it to be. It's not an exciting bunch, but they could be slightly better than adequate to win the division if the cards fall right.

 

I'm not sure what, specifically, some people want this FO to do. I feel like I often am dealing with a cacophony of complaints about the distant past and generalizations about it all: "spend for high-end FA, if only they drafted better, bad owner, Sano is proof of..." Exceptions to this are welcome things for me. Cogent arguments to sign Machado, trade for Greinke, bid on McCutheon? Good stuff.

[Mike Sixel]

No risk? I've never once said there is no risk. Of course there is risk in any decision. There is risk in relying on five one year deals, year after year. There is risk in relying on your farm almost exclusively. I've said that if you trust the front office to have their jobs, you have to trust them to spend well, even when they spend big. But I've never said no risk.

 

Given that they have one "proven" starter under control past this year, I would have signed Corbin, but I understand why some would not. I would have have extended Gibson, I don't understand the inactivity there. And yes, if they could trade for a good pitcher with three or more years of control, I'd give up prospects. I understand the arguments against that, I don't agree with them. Not for a team with deep position players, and almost no pitching under control. That's about the context of this team, but a general principle.

[bird]

 

Not sure how we can boast about draft signings TODAY.  We have had great draft positions for years now.  Where is the beef?  Maybe it emerges this year, but we have not developed well by any stretch of the imagination.  If we had we would be better

 

 

Do me a favor. Grab a dart and throw it at a list of MLB teams three times. Then compare the results of those teams over a full decade if you like. Pay close attention to the 1st round, since 70% of your success stories will be those guys. For recent drafts, use the prospect rankings. They are a very reliable take on things. Be fair. For example, adjust for the fact that Royce Lewis, #8 on BA's list, was unavailable to these other teams. First round draft order is immensely important in this comparative analysis. For later round picks, just add up the number of players who've made it and produced, say 1 WAR or more, and add up cumulative WAR for each team from these later round selections. You won't be doing much arithmetic. Throw out that 30 WAR outlier though, the lucky pick is not telling us anything. You learn more from the Rosario and the Rogers type about talent evaluation skill. 

 

The point I'm making is that drafting has not been a bugaboo for a long time. Development? Yes, and this is an area that Falvey has aggressively prioritized in the past year. It may be fixed already. It's futile to ignore what's happening presently.

Edited January 24, 2019 by birdwatcher

[sweetmusicviola16]

 

No risk? I've never once said there is no risk. Of course there is risk in any decision. There is risk in relying on five one year deals, year after year. There is risk in relying on your farm almost exclusively. I've said that if you trust the front office to have their jobs, you have to trust them to spend well, even when they spend big. But I've never said no risk.

Given that they have one "proven" starter under control past this year, I would have signed Corbin, but I understand why some would not. I would have have extended Gibson, I don't understand the inactivity there. And yes, if they could trade for a good pitcher with three or more years of control, I'd give up prospects. I understand the arguments against that, I don't agree with them. Not for a team with deep position players, and almost no pitching under control. That's about the context of this team, but a general principle.

What about Keuchel? I actually liked him more than Corbin coming into the off season myself.

 

I agree with extending Gibson. Perhaps they have had talks, I'd assume they have since they did avoid arb with him. So they can't agree on dollars and length likely. If I were Kyle I'd likely be rolling the dice on a bigger FA deal myself. But yeah, with one SP signed up for 2020 that is a huge issue in my books. That does not bode well with 2020 being competitive. 

 

Frankly I'd do everything to extend Gibson and sign Keuchel. With Berrios that would at least make the front of our rotation a strong point heading into next season. I'd also trash the budget and woo Kimbrel here. Forget about Machado, not that they already haven't.

[Battle ur tail off]

 

I knew when I started it was a fool's errand. As I have said repeatedly anyone can give anecdotal evidence. I listed ALL of the contributing players so that the relative importance of each kind of acquisition can be measured. If my point was trying to say the Twins should never sign a big name free agent or trade for established players you would have a point.

 

I posted more than once at the end of the season that I though Machado was the kind of big name free agent that makes sense for the Twins. What you and others simply do not understand is that mid-market teams can only afford a Machado if the are effective in DRafting/development and trading for prospects. When you look at all of the examples this is abundantly clear. 

 

I listed several example of playoff teams that little or no contribution from high end free agents or players acquired by trade after becoming established. Of course, there have been contributors acquired via FA or after becoming established but the teams generally speaking got to the point of contention via cost effective players and the players you mentioned were a small portion of the WAR.  Were they still important? Of course they were but posters here are way to worried about the finishing strategy than actually building the foundation necessary for a lower revenue team to build a contender.

 

You use Greinke as an example. That entire team was drafted or traded for as prospects. Was Greinke important? Absolutely! What so few here seem to understand is that the Twins revenue necessitates a very cost efficient structure for the rest of the team to make such an acquisition feasible.

 

I understand where you are coming from. Of course you need a core of guys that are cheap and effective ballplayers before you go out and spend big. 

 

The thing is, your strategy requires another 5 years. And I have news for you. The 3 studs we are counting on, Lewis, Kiriloff and Graterol. Pick one, because one is all that will pan out. Low minors domination means jack squat in the grand scheme of things. 

 

Also, if your course is the way you see the Twins going, then why do they keep bringing in bargain basement guys? Low end free agents, etc? Why are they not trying to build this core further, give guys chances to step in a be a piece of the major league team?

 

They are still thumbing through the index of castoffs and signing guys that barely move the needle, yet take up roster spots and then they end up losing pieces to 40 man roster decisions rather than seeing what they have. 

 

What I and other posters see is the halfway approach and how it both does nothing to contend in the present, and also nothing to see what you have for the future and it's frustrating.

 

 

[Major League Ready]

 

I understand where you are coming from. Of course you need a core of guys that are cheap and effective ballplayers before you go out and spend big. 

 

The thing is, your strategy requires another 5 years. And I have news for you. The 3 studs we are counting on, Lewis, Kiriloff and Graterol. Pick one, because one is all that will pan out. Low minors domination means jack squat in the grand scheme of things. 

 

Also, if your course is the way you see the Twins going, then why do they keep bringing in bargain basement guys? Low end free agents, etc? Why are they not trying to build this core further, give guys chances to step in a be a piece of the major league team?

 

They are still thumbing through the index of castoffs and signing guys that barely move the needle, yet take up roster spots and then they end up losing pieces to 40 man roster decisions rather than seeing what they have. 

 

What I and other posters see is the halfway approach and how it both does nothing to contend in the present, and also nothing to see what you have for the future and it's frustrating.

 

I am going to say just two things. The path I am suggesting could and should be altered whenever the team becomes reasonably proven. That could be in June in next year. There is no changing the fact that several players have potential but have not realized it. We can react whenever that happens but pushing all-in on a desperate hope it all comes together is a good way to continue to suck for a very long time.

 

Two, you completely ignored several posts in which I outlined how the successful mid-tier teams have been constructed. There are several examples in just the past two years. Atlanta / Colorado / Arizona / Cleveland / Oakland have all constructed playoff teams by trading for prospects as opposed to trading for established players and drafting of course.  There is one high end FA (Greinke) among all of them and two if you want to count Encarnacion.  3 years 55M is not something the Twins would not do and he only contributed 3.3 WAR in his 2 years with Cleveland.  We could add the Rays even though they did not make the playoffs but had 90 wins in a tough division. Again no big FAs, no trades for big names and a propensity to cut anyone who's salary increases.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Major League Ready

[sweetmusicviola16]

The Cubs just sign Brad Brach for 3mil. I guess we don't have that kind of payroll flexibility.