Article: BREAKING: Twins to Sign Versatile Marwin Gonzalez

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

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.

I kinda get what you're saying but the Gonzalez move only makes me grumble more about the lack of an impact bullpen arm this offseason.

 

Add that and I think the Twins are pretty easily an 85 win team based on last season's performances, with an upside of 90+ wins without even squinting (95 if you squint a bit).

 

Young teams that underperform in a season often either fizzle out entirely or go bananas. My opinion is that you bank on the "go bananas" side of that equation and you buy a few players to hedge that bet. You don't need to go sign Keuchel and indebt yourself to a player for 4+ seasons but you should definitely sign guys like Gonzalez (and a reliever) to give the young players a framework in which to succeed.

[yarnivek1972]

Just thought I'd drop some notes on Gonzalez's fielding:

 

(all 2018 season) (I'm comparing Gonzalez to all other players who played 100+ innings at the position)

 

1B (176 innings)

UZR: 30th / 76

DRS: 23rd / 76

RNGR (range): 38th / 76

 

2B (183 innings)

UZR: 45th / 82

DRS: 32nd / 82

RNGR: 48th / 82

 

SS (269.2 innings)

UZR: 62nd / 68

DRS: 55th / 68

RNGR: 58th / 68

 

LF (533 innings)

UZR: 14th / 97

DRS: 9th / 97

RNGR: 25th / 97

 

Gonzalez barely played any 3B last year, so here's his 2017 numbers:

(138.2 innings)

UZR: 59th / 76

DRS: 40th / 76

RNGR: 53th / 76

 

 

So in summary, according to these stats, Gonzalez is a good defensively at LF & 1B, average at 2B, below average at 3B, and relatively bad at SS. I'm starting to think Adrianza might be safer than I originally thought, and I didn't realize he was graded so well in the outfield. Definitely bad news for Tyler Austin, though.

Gonzalez may be better than average at 1b and LF, but that really isn’t saying much. That’s where you typically put your weakest fielders. And his offense isn’t good enough to be anything than an occasional late inning fill in for those spots. If he gets 100 innings at 1b or lf this year, that will mean some bad things happened.

[Twodogs]

I think Marwin may just become the everyday firstbaseman??  Then Cron goes to the bench

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Why is a 104 wRC+ a point against him?  Among qualified players this is where that would rank in baseball:

 

1B: 17th Best

2B: 9th Best

3B: 16th Best

SS: 12th Best (Right behind Polanco if he had a full season)

LF: 18th Best (Right behind Rosario)

RF: 18th Best (Better than Kepler)

 

That's not garbage.  That's not a utility player.  That's a guy with a ton of versatility who slots in the middle to upper half of wRC+ for every position he can play last year. 

 

Context matters.  This reminds me of the "Adrianza sucks" thread where people didn't realize that a .750 OPS is a pretty good ballplayer in 2018.

 

I never remotely said or implied that a 104 wRC+ is "a point against him", much less that it was "garbage" or rendered him a utility player.

 

The context of my post was that I was specifically responding to another poster who claimed that Gonzalez offered significant *platoon* value to the Twins, *above* what his projection suggests he might otherwise contribute.

 

Plenty of valuable players have a 104 wRC+, but it's not easy to provide extra platoon value with a 104 wRC+ split, especially given the Twins current roster.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I never remotely said or implied that a 104 wRC+ is "a point against him", much less that it was "garbage" or rendered him a utility player.

 

The context of my post was that I was specifically responding to another poster who claimed that Gonzalez offered significant *platoon* value to the Twins, *above* what his projection suggests he might otherwise contribute.

 

Plenty of valuable players have a 104 wRC+, but it's not easy to provide extra platoon value with a 104 wRC+ split, especially given the Twins current roster.

 

Using projections is a big part of the problem.  It's a flimsy place to start.

 

Plus, you framed it as "not particularly strong".  No one was claiming Gonzalez was Bryce Harper, but a 104 wRC+ with that versatility is a strong asset.  Unless you are using strong in some outlandish sense no one was implying, an average to above average player with versatility is exactly the opposite of "not particularly strong"

 

And while no one has claimed he is Harper, there are people in this thread calling him a utility player and using your posts to justify that.  Perhaps you're arguing your point more forcefully than you should.

Edited February 23, 2019 by TheLeviathan

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

So in summary, according to these stats, Gonzalez is a good defensively at LF & 1B, average at 2B, below average at 3B, and relatively bad at SS. I'm starting to think Adrianza might be safer than I originally thought, and I didn't realize he was graded so well in the outfield. Definitely bad news for Tyler Austin, though.

Those are too small of samples to conclude anything. Although his career UZR/150 numbers suggest somewhat similar conclusions -- below average at 2B, SS, and 3B, average at 1B, and above average in LF.

 

I likewise get the feeling that Marwin Gonzalez could start most days at a different corner spot for us, and Adrianza could still be on the team too.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I never remotely said or implied that a 104 wRC+ is "a point against him", much less that it was "garbage" or rendered him a utility player.

 

The context of my post was that I was specifically responding to another poster who claimed that Gonzalez offered significant *platoon* value to the Twins, *above* what his projection suggests he might otherwise contribute.

 

Plenty of valuable players have a 104 wRC+, but it's not easy to provide extra platoon value with a 104 wRC+ split, especially given the Twins current roster.

I think you're overlooking the fact that someone will go down in the first month of the season... and the second month of the season... and so on.

 

Adding a player like Gonzalez gives you flexibility when things are good and a quite good backup should things go bad.

 

I have a lot of faith that a manager like Baldelli will be able to use that kind of player in a way that add wins to the team over the course of a season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Using projections is a big part of the problem.  It's a flimsy place to start.

 

Plus, you framed it as "not particularly strong".  No one was claiming Gonzalez was Bryce Harper, but a 104 wRC+ with that versatility is a strong asset.  Unless you are using strong in some outlandish sense no one was implying, an average to above average player with versatility is exactly the opposite of "not particularly strong"

 

And while no one has claimed he is Harper, there are people in this thread calling him a utility player and using your posts to justify that.  Perhaps you're arguing your point more forcefully than you should.

 

I am really confused now. Did I not make clear that my post was specifically about extra platoon benefits? I don't know what anything I said has to do with Bryce Harper or utility players. A 104 wRC+ split isn't particularly strong if you're trying to argue it provides extra platoon value on this Twins roster. That was the context of my post. I said the word "platoon" repeatedly. The post I quoted said platoon repeatedly (specifically saying that I was "not accounting for the very real benefit in platoon splits that Gonzalez permits"). The 104 figure isn't even Gonzalez's overall batting line -- it is one of Gonzalez's platoon splits. (Overall, he's a much worse 103 )

 

If there are other posters generally complaining that he's not Harper, or that he's a utility player, please respond to them.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think you're overlooking the fact that someone will go down in the first month of the season... and the second month of the season... and so on.

 

Adding a player like Gonzalez gives you flexibility when things are good and a quite good backup should things go bad.

 

I have a lot of faith that a manager like Baldelli will be able to use that kind of player in a way that add wins to the team over the course of a season.

Am I going crazy? Is the site filtering the word "platoon" from my posts?

 

I was responding to another poster who said to me: "you simply are not accounting for the very real benefit in platoon splits that Gonzalez permits."

 

A 104 (or 103) wRC+ can be valuable. A guy who can fill in at a lot of positions can be valuable too. I wasn't saying anything to the contrary in that post.

 

I just can't give that guy *bonus credit* for a platoon benefit, beyond the value of his 103 (or 104) wRC+ and versatility, when I don't see a strong case for it.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I am really confused now. Did I not make clear that my post was specifically about extra platoon benefits? I don't know what anything I said has to do with Bryce Harper or utility players. A 104 wRC+ split isn't particularly strong if you're trying to argue it provides extra platoon value on this Twins roster. That was the context of my post. I said the word "platoon" repeatedly. The post I quoted said platoon repeatedly (specifically saying that I was "not accounting for the very real benefit in platoon splits that Gonzalez permits"). The 104 figure isn't even Gonzalez's overall batting line -- it is one of Gonzalez's platoon splits. (Overall, he's a much worse 103 )

 

If there are other posters generally complaining that he's not Harper, or that he's a utility player, please respond to them.

 

You are trying to make this about platoons but you've been making the argument about projections from the get go.  In fact, the platoon issue came up in response to you using projections about this year to argue he's worse than anyone in the starting nine.  

 

Your entire framing on this doesn't make much sense.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Levi: if you want to argue with me about projections, quote my post about projections and we'll go from there. Quit quoting my posts about the platoon issue unless you specifically want to discuss the platoon issue, thank you.

Edited February 23, 2019 by spycake

[rdehring]

Great move that makes the Twins a better team today than yesterday.

 

The only move/decision that needs to be made before the end of spring training is with the 40-man roster.  Don't think they will DFA a pitcher as they only have 20.  So to me, its gotta be an outfielder.  They will have been in camp for a week, which I suspect gives them time to decide between Granite and Reed.  Granite has the edge that he has options and the likelihood that Reed makes the final 25 is slim and getting slimmer.  So I suspect they will DFA Reed and try to swing a deal for some kid playing in the rookie league somewhere.

[Jham]

Pretty sure this makes us a better team, just not sure how or why. He's an upgrade over somebody...

[mikelink45]

 

Except that Adrianza is far better with the glove at SS.

According to BR he is better at 3b/2B and is a minus 9 in his SS appearances.  I do not think Adrianza is as good as advertised. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/a/adriaeh01.shtml

[TheMatt]

"We spend money see. Just not on the bullpen"

[AlwaysinModeration]

It’s a bit hard to get super-excited about this move after they have added Cruz, Cron, and Schoop, not to mention having Cave, Austin, Duda and Astudillo to sort through / possibly lose. But he’s clearly an upgrade to the overall roster (have to figure he takes Adrianza’s spot), he’s a switch-hitter, and he can play / platoon pretty much anywhere. I like seeing the FO actively trying to improve every spot on the roster. I just hope that they are right that the marginal dollars spent on him are more valuable than anything else they could have done, especially if these are the last FA dollars they spend this year.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It’s a bit hard to get super-excited about this move after they have added Cruz, Cron, and Schoop, not to mention having Cave, Austin, Duda and Astudillo to sort through / possibly lose. But he’s clearly an upgrade to the overall roster (have to figure he takes Adrianza’s spot), he’s a switch-hitter, and he can play / platoon pretty much anywhere. I like seeing the FO actively trying to improve every spot on the roster. I just hope that they are right that the marginal dollars spent on him are more valuable than anything else they could have done, especially if these are the last FA dollars they spend this year.

 

I still prefer to use Cave's options and go with Austidillo, Gonzalez, Adrianza, and Garver as the bench from the start.  I know it probably won't happen, but I guess I can dream.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I'm trying to figure out how these guys fit, and I think there's a chance Garver starts in AAA, Astudillo being the better receiver. Also I think the Twins carry only 12 pitchers for the season's start. Maybe even 11 with the off days they have. They will also need cut at least one of the guys they just signed this offseason. Not a bad thing, necessarily. All seems a little weird to me. We'll see.

[LylesCrocodiles]

Spycake I understand your points on Marwin. You feel like spending money on pitching rather than the luxury of having a good utility man. I think a lot of us agree.

 

But you did write this... “Why? Gonzalez's projected WAR per PA is worse than each one of our current starting 9.”

 

If the Twins have 9 hitters with a WAR higher than Marwin this will be a hell of a season for the Twins. Marwin is a proven commodity with upside of a 4+ WAR season. Something he did just two seasons ago.

 

Baseball is being played differently now. More matchups. More using the DH to give guys a day off. I think Marwin is a perfect fit for the Twins and I would be shocked if he is not a top 5 WAR player for the Twins in 2019.

[LylesCrocodiles]

Top 5 WAR position player

[RaoulDuke]

 

I don't think anyone here is saying it's not a fair market deal. (Or at least, very few are saying it -- there's always that "one guy" and I should know because sometimes it's me )

 

But you don't think this team might hesitate about adding a player this summer, with $10-20 mil less room to spend? You don't think they might put themselves in a position where they have to choose between needed reinforcements at 2-3 spots, when they could have potentially added them all with $10-20 mil extra to spend? With $3-4 mil like Perez is guaranteed, yeah it's not a likely concern -- but there seems to be ample evidence that $10-20 mil can have an effect on how this franchise operates.

 

And you have to weigh that against whether the Twins necessarily needed to add a likely average corner player right now, even on a fair market deal.

 

I think this team is still well below what they could be comfortably spending.  I don't necessarily agree with, but I understand, the lack of big spending this off season.  I think they will spend when the team shows they are ready to contend. 

 

This roster is a lot of gamble, this year is about seeing what they really have in Buxton/ Sano and seeing if they can hit on some guys like Schoop.  Honestly this insurance/ super utility signing for good money gives me hope on the payroll front, they could have just gambled on things working out.  If they are willing to do this deal logically/ probably/ hopefully there should be another addition to the pitching staff. 

 

Buxton - Can he stay healthy/ Hit above the mendoza line?

 

Sano - Can he stay healthy? Not strike out half the time? Stick at 3rd for abit?

 

Schoop - Is he the player from 17 or 18?

 

Cron - Can he produce and not Lomo it up after a good year?

 

Rosario - Can he find consistency and keep it up?

 

Kepler - Can he breakout?

 

Polanco - Can he lock down shortstop?

 

Gonzalez provides a reliable answer to those questions when some inevitably fail.

 

 

 

 

[Channing1964]

I am so ECSTATIC I dont know where to start!!! First lets all recognize it as a double edge sword...Not only did we get him...we kept him away from the team that needed him the most...The Indians. IMO we just became the obvious favorites to win the AL Central. As sad as i was to see Escobar get traded I am equally elated to welcome Marwin. It is the absolute best move made by this regime and I have to go on record as saying Thank you Mr Falvey and Mr Levine. I am an Old School fan(since 1970) and what excites me more than the versatility, attitude and offensive skills is the presence in the Clubhouse of a World Series Champion. When these young guys learn how Champions conduct their daily business the results could be AMAZING. I get the focus on Analytics is merited. Team Chemistry still cannot be overlooked. (see 2018 Red Sox) Marwin didn't come join us to watch the World Series, He came to show us how to win another one!

[Nine of twelve]

I'm posting just after Channing1964, and I'll echo those sentiments but I'm not quite so over-the-top. I think advanced statisical analysis is valid and worthwhile, but I think some of us get a bit too involved with that. On a 25-player roster a player like this is invaluable. He is able to play many positions satisfactorily and his batting skills are above average. And a switch-hitter no less. I think there's no doubt that our team has significantly improved with this signing.

[Otto von Ballpark]

But you did write this... “Why? Gonzalez's projected WAR per PA is worse than each one of our current starting 9.”

 

If the Twins have 9 hitters with a WAR higher than Marwin this will be a hell of a season for the Twins.

Remember, WAR is a counting stat / an opportunity stat. I just posted that to illustrate, in numerical form, that in order for Gonzalez to contribute, he will have to take some opportunity from others who are already considered capable of similar contributions at their respective positions.

 

Now, due to injury and under-performance, there will definitely be some opportunity available for Gonzalez. Although it's not always so easy to know when and where it should be -- for example, last April, Rosario was one of our worst hitters. If he does that again, and the rest of the lineup is healthy, should he start to lose more playing time to Gonzalez? (Rosario turned out to be our best hitter in May and June.) Sano and Buxton look like easy candidates to cede playing time -- but at the same time, we still want to give them some leash to hopefully improve themselves as assets. Perhaps even Kepler deserves some leash vs LHP? If most of our starting 9 deserves a leash of a few months, would we be better off forgoing Gonzalez for now, save the money, use the roster spot for someone else (Astudillo? or a pitcher?) and re-evauating in June?

 

It's also worth remembering that while Gonzalez provides nice insurance, the unpredictable nature of injuries and underperformance caps that benefit somewhat. If any combination of injuries or underperformance happens to overlap, while we're still better off with Gonzalez than without him in that scenario, he's not necessarily able to insure against all cases, perhaps not even most. (Gonzalez himself is not immune to injury or streaks either.)

 

Also, how will the presence of Gonzalez affect our decision-making? Could the presence of Gonzalez, and the desire to play him everyday, make us less likely to give appropriate leashes to players, or less likely to look at, say, Rooker or Gordon in a timely fashion? Or delay us from better addressing an issue quickly? Again, it's easy to say we're simply better off with Gonzalez as an option than without him, but in practice it's not always that simple to actually view him and use him optimally among all of your resources. If Cron struggles or gets hurt, it could be awfully tempting to plug in Gonzalez at 1B rather than perhaps adding an intriguing Rooker to the 40-man roster for a look before the trade deadline. Or if Polanco hits the DL and Gonzalez cover SS for a week -- but then Polanco's absence drags on, and after awhile, we realize that we'd probably have been no worse off (offense plus defense) if we would have simply replaced Polanco with a more traditional SS option right away.

 

Again, this is not to deny Gonzalez his value. These are just factors that illustrate how this is more complicated than simply adding a comparable value player to fill an open spot. Of course, you are right that Gonzalez has some upside himself -- if he posts another 4 WAR season, we probably won't worry too much about who is replacing along the way!

[Otto von Ballpark]

Buxton - Can he stay healthy/ Hit above the mendoza line?

 

Sano - Can he stay healthy? Not strike out half the time? Stick at 3rd for abit?

 

Schoop - Is he the player from 17 or 18?

 

Cron - Can he produce and not Lomo it up after a good year?

 

Rosario - Can he find consistency and keep it up?

 

Kepler - Can he breakout?

 

Polanco - Can he lock down shortstop?

 

Gonzalez provides a reliable answer to those questions when some inevitably fail.

But, even "failure" for many of these questions is not necessarily worse than Gonzalez's own performance expectations.

 

Buxton -- he could hit at the mendoza line, but still be worth roughly 1.5-2 WAR just like Gonzalez usually has been, and perhaps warrant continued playing time.

 

Sano -- even if he fails at 3B, we may still want to give his bat more time

 

Schoop -- even in 2018, he was worth 1.4 bWAR, not appreciably worse than Gonzalez has been outside of 2017

 

Cron -- again, Gonzalez has not been an appreciably better hitter than Cron outside of 2017

 

Rosario -- inconsistency wouldn't necessarily make him a worse option than Gonzalez

 

Kepler -- doesn't need a breakout to be better than Gonzalez, and his contract gives him plenty of tine

 

Polanco -- likewise his contract should afford him plenty of time to lock down SS, especially compared to Gonzalez's likely limitations at the position

 

I know Gonzalez's expected performance still has value, and somewhere in here, there will likely be an opportunity for Gonzalez to contribute. But it's not necessarily simple to decide where, or when -- for example, pull the plug on Schoop or Cron in favor of Gonzalez too early, and Gonzalez is no longer a spare resource who can cover for an injured Sano or Buxton at any time.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Again, standard disclaimer: Gonzalez is a player of value, and this isn't a bad deal. I'm just skeptical that we can net good value from it here, given the circumstances.

[dougd]

For some reason the manager of Houston said in an interview prior to one of the playoff games last year that Gonzalez was their team's best defensive player at all four infield positions.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The elephant in the room is probably Sano (no size joke intended ).

 

Sano's grasp on 3B has always been fairly tenuous, and after last year, I think they would have been justified moving him to 1B/DH.

 

But, if they want to give him another shot at 3B in 2019, they need a better backup plan than Adrianza, and they probably need it available well before trading season heats up in July.

 

And once you've got Schoop installed at second base, getting Gonzalez is really your best option for a Plan B third baseman right now. Yeah, there are some other potential benefits with Gonzalez's versatility -- but the one that really stands out on this roster is taking over 3B from Sano. Dude was a big negative both defensively AND offensively last year. Can't risk that again this year, without an Escobar or a prospect ready to take over.

 

Like I said, I don't mind Gonzalez on this contract, and given Sano's situation, I understand it -- although that comes from a place of frustration about Sano, as much as any appreciation for Gonzalez. (It also calls into question how long Sano's leash will be, and if he's going to wind up redundant with Cron rather quickly.)

[scottz]

This board is great. I really enjoy reading 10 pages of opinions every time we sign somebody. That's not sarcasm. I love it.

 

However, I find it very funny that we (myself included) get caught up in a bunch of what if performance scenarios, or player value scenarios, or roster management scenarios and then use those scenarios to defend or attack the front office decision. Like I said, I do it too, but it's hilarious. Do we think the front office didn't think of any of these things? That they don't question whether or not this signing makes them better or has ripple effects down to, say, Gordon or Rooker or Astudillo or the 41st guy that they'll have to DFA or the 26th guy who will instead go to Rochester? It's hilarious.

 

This is a great board. Keep the opinions coming. I love it. (But we're hilarious with our special insights that the front office hasn't considered yet.)

 

This is my favorite site on the internet. Go Twins. Go Twins Daily.

[jorgenswest]

For some reason the manager of Houston said in an interview prior to one of the playoff games last year that Gonzalez was their team's best defensive player at all four infield positions.

Did the reporters follow up asking why he significantly reduced playing Gonzalez at SS after July 25 and used Bregman to replace Correia instead?

 

There was a game in August where he started Guriel at 2B, Bregman at SS and Davis at 3B while starting Gonzalez in LF. Davis played OF last year in both the minors and Houston. He could have easily played his defensive infielder at SS, kept Bregman at 3B and played Davis in LF. No manager plays their best defensive infielder in LF when he is so desperately needed in the infield with both Altuve and Correia out.

 

I think the manager’s action weigh heavier than his words here.