Article: BREAKING: Twins to Sign Versatile Marwin Gonzalez

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I've been looking and it appears that Cave may have an option left. Does anyone know where that information can be found?

Cave actually has 2 option years left (2018 was the first of 3).

 

Roster Resource is pretty accurate for that information:

https://www.rosterresource.com/mlb-minnesota-twins/

[markos]

 

Why would you hope that? Does platoon advantage only count when the starting player is left-handed?

 

Gonzalez will play all over, so he's not really a platoon partner to anyone . . . but there's no doubt he's a major upgrade over Rosario/Kepler against LHP and Schoop/Cron against RHP. So the regular starters get days off they need anyway and the lineup is improved significantly at the same time. 

Cron has historically had zero platoon split - from both sides he is better than Gonzalez. Schoop has a mild reverse split, as he is slightly better against RHP than LHP, and his career OPS against RHP is better than Gonzalez. Rosario's career OPS against LHP is .711. Gonzalez's is .730. The only major upgrade is Kepler against LHP, and he is the one player they just made a long-term commitment to.

[Steve Lein]

I think this jeopardizes Jake Cave on the 25-man more than it does Astudillo, and I also think that's the right call.

 

Have to think it's Adrianza who ends up out.

[nicksaviking]

 

A lot of those guys have already been replaced (by Cruz, Cron, Schoop, a returning Castro and Polanco, an emerging Astudillo), or didn't play much until after we sold at the deadline.

 

If we sell at the deadline again in 2019, I don't care who plays the last two months of the season. I certainly wouldn't guarantee Gonzalez $21 mil now to take those PAs.

 

We must remember last year differently then because typically each game there were at least three guys in the lineup who I didn't even want on the team.

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The only major upgrade is Kepler against LHP, and he is the one player they just made a long-term commitment to.

And small sample caveat, but Kepler also seemed to show improvement vs. LHP last year (.745 OPS).

[nicksaviking]

If this team does find a way to have Astudillo and Gonzalez on the 25-man, it would also be pretty helpful when calling up prospects. If a starter gets injured, they could call up the best hitter period, not the best hitter who plays a particular position. Maybe now we get Kirilloff or Rooker instead of Tyler Motter or Gregorio Petit.

[mudcat14]

I agree.  Granite is the obvious 40-man casualty.  If we lose him, so what?

 

I do find it interesting that Gonzales' & Eduardo Escobar's career numbers are almost identical.  Marwin has an ever so slight edge across the board offensively, while Escobar seems more at home defensively (particularly on the left side of the infield.)  Both got $21mil deals, but Eduardo's is spread over three years.  I guess the Escobar trade did yield some intriguing prospects, so they need to be factored in to the equation at some level too.  

 

My initial reaction is that Torryes and Austin are most affected by this signing.  Adrianza is still the primary back-up on the left side of the infield, while Marwin will see most of his action at 1B, 2B & the OF particularly against RH pitching. I hope El Tortuga is still in play, but don't think this helps him much either.

[markos]

 

We must remember last year differently then because typically each game there were at least three guys in the lineup who I didn't even want on the team.

That was because there was typically four guys hurt/terrible/suspended, and Escobar could admirably fill the shoes of one of them. Gonzalez is likely going to play the same role as Escobar the past few seasons. Nice player to have, but he doesn't raise their ceiling very much, if at all, and frankly I don't think he is worth the money/commitment.

[chpettit19]

 

All winter long, we've been hearing that the Twins shouldn't be aggressive while Buxton and Sano are such big question marks.

 

Now, we make our biggest cash guarantee to lock in a guy to provide average-ish corner play in the case that Buxton and Sano don't make it.

 

Something about those two positions doesn't add up to me. There will be Marwin Gonzalez types available for reasonable cost at the deadline if we need it.

Why wait til the deadline and then have to trade assets?

[BJames]

Could we not sign a Starting Pitcher for 2 year 20 mill???  Pitching is still needed. Not a insurance policy for Sano.  Not a waste, but I'd rather see a pitcher. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

We must remember last year differently then because typically each game there were at least three guys in the lineup who I didn't even want on the team.

I'm not trying to be argumentative or anything. But do you remember the following about the 2018 season?

 

- Polanco was suspended for the first half of the season (presumably that won't happen again)

 

- Dozier and Escobar were traded at the deadline, thus missing a third of the season

 

- Castro was injured after the first month (and he and other catchers are pretty much irrelevant to Gonzalez's playing time anyway)

 

Those are all things that contributed a lot to who played in 2018, and that we shouldn't expect to repeat in 2019.

 

Granted, Dozier and Escobar are gone, but we already signed one replacement -- Schoop -- plus the aforementioned return of Polanco should count as half a replacement too. And presumably we're not planning to option Sano to the minors again.

 

Yes, Morrison bombed and was hurt in 2018. And Grossman kinda sucks. But we already signed Cron and Cruz, and I hope the front office has more confidence in them than Morrison and Grossman.

 

Yes, Buxton had a wasted year, and he's back for 2019 -- but it would be hard for him to play *less* in 2019. And in any case, if we just use Kepler or Rosario to cover CF in Buxton's absence, I don't see who plays the corner OF as any kind of preseason priority for this club.

[blindeke]

 

I think this is a decent, but not great, addition. Lots of short term, win now, moves on offense, and very little pitching, which seems odd to me.

 

Yean, I'm kind of assuming the front office has some sort of hopefully genius master plan to hack MLB pitching. I'm also hoping that the plan works, but guessing that it won't...

[USAFChief]

Meh.

 

Once again, minor improvement to the margin, but nothing that really moves the needle much.

 

We're talking about a guy with a career .737 OPS. A nice utility player, to be sure.

 

But ... a utility player.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Why wait til the deadline and then have to trade assets?

I don't think Marwin Gonzalez alone makes much of a difference in our odds of selling vs buying at the deadline.

[chpettit19]

I don't get why anyone would be down on this signing. The biggest weakness of this roster before today was flexibility. We brought in one of the most positionally flexible players in MLB for a price that isn't going to hurt the payroll in any meaningful way. Oh, and he's a switch hitter so can give anyone on the field a day off anytime they need. It's a new era in baseball. Most guys aren't playing 160 games anymore. And at this point the Twins don't have anyone who's earned the right to demand they're out there every day (other than Cruz at DH). It's a long summer and there will be injuries and there will be guys who have bad years, or bad stretches. More depth is not a bad thing, ever. We are more talented now than when we woke up this morning. That's a good thing.

 

Do we need more pitching? Yes. Does making our position players better hurt our pitching? No. I don't get the posts after every signing complaining that "now we won't sign so and so." People were mad when we claimed Cron because then we couldn't sign a "proven MLB" player, but now we sign a proven MLB player who has a ring and can help show our young guys what it takes to be a champion and we're mad that we didn't sign him earlier? Just don't get the complaints about this signing at all. The day we bring in a Marwin type guy to replace a Trout type guy we can complain. He's not replacing anyone at this point. And anybody getting sent down because of this signing wasn't that great of a player to start with.

[chpettit19]

 

I don't think Marwin Gonzalez alone makes much of a difference in our odds of selling vs buying at the deadline.

Me neither, but your post was asking why we would sign him now when we could just wait until the deadline and get a similar player then. And I'm asking why you would want to wait and see when his signing only costs money as opposed to trading assets for a similar player who will still cost money. I don't follow the logic of ever wanting to trade for a similar player to one you can just sign and save your prospects.

[The Mask of Zoilo]

Yean, I'm kind of assuming the front office has some sort of hopefully genius master plan to hack MLB pitching. I'm also hoping that the plan works, but guessing that it won't...

 

Wouldn't surprise me if the front office swoops in on a last minute, discount one or two year contract with a reliever or two now that camp has started. It appears to be a Falvine strategy.

[Rosterman]

Good signing in some ways. He can backup third or first well, depending on Sano. 

 

Where the question comes is the need for Adrianza. And, also, that bench bat that could play 1B/OF (Austin) or just 1B (Dudas). Looks like Austin will be out for sure now. But see the 40-man spot opening up with the waiver of Torreyes, who could stay with the Twins as more insurance.

 

But the guy is a solid bench bat and can rotate thru the infield, maybe getting equal at bats to everyone else in the line-up one way or another.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

That was because there was typically four guys hurt/terrible/suspended, and Escobar could admirably fill the shoes of one of them. Gonzalez is likely going to play the same role as Escobar the past few seasons. Nice player to have, but he doesn't raise their ceiling very much, if at all, and frankly I don't think he is worth the money/commitment.

Agreed.

 

I think people see Gonzalez as Escobar's replacement, which is natural. But I think a lot of Escobar's value was the fact he was cheap, we had a bit of a hole at shortstop for much of his tenure, and we felt no great pressure to make sure Escobar was an everyday player. He was the utility infielder (albeit one we weren't afraid to start when necessary).

 

But now, we already have a shortstop locked up (Polanco). We just guaranteed Gonzalez more money in one year than Escobar made in his entire Twins career, I think. And I think Gonzalez's role will pretty clearly spill over from utility infielder, to the point where he affects our playing time and roster decisions in the corner outfield and perhaps even 1B and DH (while we likely still keep another "true" utility infielder like Adrianza on the roster).

 

Gonzalez 2019-2020 and Escobar 2015-2018 may be similar players when they're on the field, but the resources they require, and the context of their roles, appear to be notably different.

[drivlikejehu]

 

Meh.

 

Once again, minor improvement to the margin, but nothing that really moves the needle much.

 

We're talking about a guy with a career .737 OPS. A nice utility player, to be sure.

 

But ... a utility player.

 

It adds something like 1.5 - 2 wins. That's really not "minor," particularly when you consider where the Twins sit from a projection standpoint. 

[HrbekRules]

 

I mean, would we lose any sleep if he doesn't make it through?

 

Nope

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Me neither, but your post was asking why we would sign him now when we could just wait until the deadline and get a similar player then.

Because we don't need Gonzalez to start anywhere right now. We already have 9 starters, and they'll get a good portion of the playing time in season's first half, regardless of whether we have Gonzalez or not. Which gives us time to kick this decision down the road a bit.

 

I know that "kicking a decision down the road" gets a bad conservative connotation, but this precisely the kind of decision and situation where you can safely kick it down the road -- 2/21 for a ~2 WAR "10th man", with our roster, isn't such a great deal that you can't pass it up. I think signing that deal now could actually be the more "conservative" route than simply waiting or looking for upgrades elsewhere.

[caninatl04]

Some numbers:

 

Marwin:

 

                                    GP  AB  R    H  2B 3B  HR  RBI  BB  SO  SB  CS  AVG  OBP  SLG  OPS

2018 Regular Season 145 489 61 121 25  3    16    68   53  126   2     3   .247 .324    .409   .733

Career                        795                                                                           .264 .318    .419   .737

 

Ehire:

 

2018 Regular Season 114 335 42  84 23 1      6      39 24   82      5     1   .251 .301    .379    .680
Career                         338                                                                          .242 .303    .355    .658

 

So, yes, its an upgrade over Ehire.  500 AB x (.264 - .242) = 11 hits / year.  But, 500 AB x (.419-.355) = 32 bases a year.

 

This difference in bases is explained by HR:

 

Marwin: 

 

Hits a homer in 3.1% of his AB or once every 32.45 AB

 

Ehire:

 

1.4%  so every 71.64 AB

 

That difference over 500 AB is 8.4 dingers

 

But is it worth $10 million / yr?

[Richie the Rally Goat]

 

I don't mind the signing. Versatile guy that can hit. He's good insurance for when Sano get hurt walking his dog or going out to get the mail. 

 

I still would rather have had the Twins spend real money on a difference maker, rather than bring in him, the pitcher from Texas, and the Angels pitcher. Use that money on one good guy instead of 3 marginal ones is my line of thinking. 

why not both?

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It adds something like 1.5 - 2 wins. That's really not "minor," particularly when you consider where the Twins sit from a projection standpoint. 

Does it really add 1.5-2 wins? Each one of our starting position players projects to more WAR (or WAR per PA) than Gonzalez at Fangraphs right now. The only way to fit in Gonzalez's projected 1.8 is to reduce playing time for everybody else, and I'm not seeing a particularly compelling platoon benefit either.

 

It *could* wind up adding 1.5-2 wins through some combination of injury or underperformance, but I don't see a way to *project* 1.5-2 additional wins right now.

 

Edit to add: as I stated elsewhere, I see this a move that further solidifies our 82 win projection, but doesn't really add much to it.

Edited February 22, 2019 by spycake

[caninatl04]

I'm afraid I don't like the signing. 

 

Two days ago, we the Twins had a crowded bench (maybe 5 or 6 players for 3 spots) and a weak bullpen.  So, whom do they sign?

 

Yes, the "bench" / handedness flexibility is improved, but wouldn't the money be better spent on the bullpen?

[chpettit19]

 

Because we don't need Gonzalez to start anywhere right now. We already have 9 starters, and they'll get a good portion of the playing time in season's first half, regardless of whether we have Gonzalez or not. Which gives us time to kick this decision down the road a bit.

 

I know that "kicking a decision down the road" gets a bad conservative connotation, but this precisely the kind of decision and situation where you can safely kick it down the road -- 2/21 for a ~2 WAR "10th man", with our roster, isn't such a great deal that you can't pass it up. I think signing that deal now could actually be the more "conservative" route than simply waiting or looking for upgrades elsewhere.

The Astros had Bregman-Correa-Altuve-Gurriel across their infield to start last year. They had Marisnik-Springer-Reddick across their outfield to start last year. Marwin still got 489 ABs for them last year. Which Twins starter are you plugging in for 1 of those guys? Rosario for Marisnik? Sure I can see that. There is literally no other Twins starter I would plug into that lineup. Maybe you see our players differently than I do, but I think it's safe to say the Astros had a better lineup last year than the Twins do this year and they were able to creep into the playoffs even with the weight of Marwin getting 489 ABs dragging them down. He's not a world beater but neither is anyone else in our lineup. Who are you concerned this established, quality big leaguer is taking ABs from? 

 

2/21 is nothing. That is not hampering our team in any way, shape, or form. We could cut him tomorrow and be just fine eating that money. My point is that "kicking it down the road" means you're giving up more in the transaction. We got him for a reasonable contract that doesn't hurt us. If we are competing and hit the trade deadline and decide we need a guy like Marwin to get us to the postseason then we're bringing this sort of contract in while also sending out prospects. So now we're paying the money anyways and we also lost prospect talent. And if he makes us better at the deadline he makes us better now. Why would you want half the season of better? To save $5 mil? Signing him doesn't hurt us, but might make us better. I don't see the downside. No 2 year deal is ever going to cripple a team. Ever.

[nicksaviking]

 

That was because there was typically four guys hurt/terrible/suspended, and Escobar could admirably fill the shoes of one of them. Gonzalez is likely going to play the same role as Escobar the past few seasons. Nice player to have, but he doesn't raise their ceiling very much, if at all, and frankly I don't think he is worth the money/commitment.

 

I agree, Marwin doesn't raise the ceiling much, but he raises the floor tremendously. This signing is taking away at bats from Adrianza, Field, Grossman, Petit and Motter.

 

I'd think it would go without saying that this team is going to have guys hurt/terrible/suspended again in 2019. Who those players are is unpredictable, but now there's a league average hitter on the roster who can cover near any spot saving us from watching a 29-year-old batless journeyman who's been DFA'd three times in the last two months and has spent most of his last five season in AAA.

 

This isn't a blockbuster deal, it's not putting anyone over the top, but everyone and their mother complained about the Twins lack of offensive depth last year, and justifiably so. This should shine as evidence that this team finally cares about establishing a MLB quality bench. It cost them 10M per this year and next? So what, good for them.

[chpettit19]

 

Does it really add 1.5-2 wins? Each one of our starting position players projects to more WAR (or WAR per PA) than Gonzalez at Fangraphs right now. The only way to fit in Gonzalez's projected 1.8 is to reduce playing time for everybody else, and I'm not seeing a particularly compelling platoon benefit either.

 

It *could* wind up adding 1.5-2 wins through some combination of injury or underperformance, but I don't see a way to *project* 1.5-2 additional wins right now.

 

Edit to add: as I stated elsewhere, I see this a move that further solidifies our 82 win projection, but doesn't really add much to it.

Doesn't it make immense sense to sign a guy to provide insurance for injuries and underperformance? Every team, every year suffers from these things. Going into a season with 9 guys and saying "they're all starting 162 and hitting in this exact order and providing these exact stats" is a recipe for disaster. 

 

Marwin Gonzalez is a proven MLB player on a contract that doesn't hurt anything. I can't comprehend how adding a proven MLB player is a bad thing. It just doesn't make sense.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Good signing in some ways. He can backup third or first well, depending on Sano. 

 

This is a common sentiment, that Gonzalez is Sano insurance.

 

But it's worth noting that Gonzalez hasn't played much third base at all. Only 2 starts there last year. Only 62 starts total in his 7 year MLB career, never even reaching 20 in a single season. Even in the minors, he never played much 3B -- only 70 career starts there, mostly in rookie leagues as a teenager.

 

Some of that is obviously because he was playing shortstop in his earlier career, and I don't have any particular reason to doubt his ability to play third. But I'm not sure how much they expect him to play 3B (or if they do, that could call into question their signings at 1B or even 2B too -- we could have signed more flexible options at those spots, or simply planned on moving Sano to 1B).