Front Page: Ryu To Sign with Toronto. Now What?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Sorry but the sample size of teams was every team in the league for the last 20 years. The result (not the sample size) was two teams.

Call it sample or result, but you are claiming there are only 2 single team seasons in 20 years that can serve as a blueprint for Twins success. If that was true, then there is no meaningful blueprint. Falvey and Levine aren't limited by the 2005 White Sox or 2015 Royals (minimizing Cueto), just as the Twins ownership wasn't limited in hiring its current FO from those two teams. It's just trivia/noise, with the effect of derailing 2019 Twins discussion rather than advancing it.

 

I don't find it "friendly" to insist the FO is either cheap or incompetent. If have no problem with the presentation of facts that support a mistake or bad practice. However, unsupported opinion should be tempered and not presented in the form of other people (the FO or ownership) must be cheap or incompetent.

You were not responding to a specific post, and you addressed your post to "many here". Remember this is a discussion forum, not a personal soapbox.

 

If you disagree with a specific post, and you feel you must reply, reply specifically to that post, and keep it focused and polite. Or you can choose to ignore it (an often under-rated option!). But please don't add more noise to the rest of the discussion.

 

And as always, if you feel a post violates the site comment policy, please report it rather than responding:

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/8228-twins-daily-comment-policy/

[nick_hansen]

 

I don't disagree. You (and others) are refusing to acknowledge what I am saying. Put another way, you are refusing to look at hard fact or history or whatever you want to call it. You can't say a big FA signing is essential when it has not been dome in the past 20 years and perhaps more. I didn't go back any further.. If this type of roster construction is necessary, there would be examples of teams with below average revenue winning via this practice. The opposite is true. The teams that have won or even made it to the WS improved from within. The CWS traded away their best position player it what ended up to be a bad trade for several years to come and the Royals lost the Elite SP to free agency the year before the won. Yes, the made it their the year before as a WC team but they obvious improved from within and their improvement came in a deadline deal.

 

Some of you are also missing the point that it does not make sense to freak out that the FO did not pull the trigger on Wheeler / Bumgarner or Ryu. FAs acquisitions with this profile have been very poor. I have put up that history previously. I am not going to bother again because it is obviously just ignored. Yes, my off-season plan included Wheeler at 5/100. The difference in my acceptance of not getting him is that I don't just ignore he wanted to go somewhere else. I have part of recruiting high-end talent. Sure I could have just offered them whatever it takes but those here who suggest that just cant accept is not a practice that facilitates success and I guarantee you they have never been responsible for the bottom line. I have also been recruited for very attractive positions and declined because I preferred to stay near family.

 

So, in case some of you still do not understand my point, its not that I would not have signed Wheeler at 5/100 as predicted or even 5/120. I just don't think it's worth freaking out over given the fact he just did not want to be here and it does not make sense to pay whatever it takes when you are already dealing with a practice that fails more than it succeeds. 

 

At this point I would maker a trade provided the cost is not absolutely nuts or I might even make two trades (if possible) for comeback candidates like Archer. A rental at the deadline is also a possibility.

To be fair, we never made a real offer to Wheeler. He eventually accepted 5/$118M from Philly, while Chicago offered 5/$125M (slightly more) and we offered 5/~$100M (considerably less). Unless Wheeler had a specific desire to play in the Midwest, I really do not see why he would even consider our notably lower offer. However, if we had put a Corbin-like offer of around 6/$140M on the table to top Philly, then I do believe that he would have actually given us some true consideration.

The reason that falling short on this particular player (in this manner) was so frustrating is because unlike a number of the other FA pitchers in his tier, the future potential was still there and the possibility that his best years may just be ahead of him. Metrics wise, he looks like a solid bet with a top-rated FB and a good arsenal of secondary pitches. Plus he's one of the younger FAs in his class so the odds that his arm will hold up through a greater proportion of the contract is better. He's one of those players that I think with the right coaching staff could take his play to the next level. Financially, we were set up to finally be able to make an aggressive & potentially high ceiling move like this and not let it severely hurt our long term plans should it not fully pan out. I can accept us not getting the player in the end (if Philly outbid us because they felt they HAD to have him), but still it's just so disappointing that we would put up such a lackluster effort like this for a player that could've greatly helped our pitching staff for years to come.

[FormerMinnasotan]

I can understand waiting till Spring Training to be critical if the Twins FO in their pursuit (or lack thereof) of top end starting pitching but I still remain skeptical anything will be done to improve our rotation and yes, our rotation needs improvement. Jose Berrios might not ever ascend to even being a #2 starter and Odorizzi is more like a solid #3, and when back from suspension Pineda is more or less a #3/4. That’s decent in the regular season, but in post season that’s not a rotation that can stack up with the Yankees or Astros. So now what should happen between now and Spring Training is the Twins need to trade away both solid contributors (like Rosario), near MLB talent (Thorpe, Smeltzer, Dobnak, Nick Gordon, Brent Rooker), and possibly our higher valued prospects (Lewis, Kiroloff/Larnach, Balazovic/Graterol, Wandar Javier) to acquire a pitching arm like Snell, Archer, Ray, Morton. My problem is I don’t think this FO has the guts to take any risk like making a trade that includes our higher touted prospects despite the fact our farm system has decent talent and decent trade able talent. The thing for even a guy like let’s say Brusdar Graterol is right now his trade value is as high as it will ever be given his potential, however he’s one that might not even pan out as a quality starting pitcher meaning unless he’s a lights out reliever his trade value will never be worth anything.

[kdag23]

I agree with you on needing to make a trade for a top level SP. Let's say Rosario is included, how many of the others you mentioned do you think it would take?

[Major League Ready]

 

To be fair, we never made a real offer to Wheeler. He eventually accepted 5/$118M from Philly, while Chicago offered 5/$125M (slightly more) and we offered 5/~$100M (considerably less). Unless Wheeler had a specific desire to play in the Midwest, I really do not see why he would even consider our notably lower offer. However, if we had put a Corbin-like offer of around 6/$140M on the table to top Philly, then I do believe that he would have actually given us some true consideration.

The reason that falling short on this particular player (in this manner) was so frustrating is because unlike a number of the other FA pitchers in his tier, the future potential was still there and the possibility that his best years may just be ahead of him. Metrics wise, he looks like a solid bet with a top-rated FB and a good arsenal of secondary pitches. Plus he's one of the younger FAs in his class so the odds that his arm will hold up through a greater proportion of the contract is better. He's one of those players that I think with the right coaching staff could take his play to the next level. Financially, we were set up to finally be able to make an aggressive & potentially high ceiling move like this and not let it severely hurt our long term plans should it not fully pan out. I can accept us not getting the player in the end (if Philly outbid us because they felt they HAD to have him), but still it's just so disappointing that we would put up such a lackluster effort like this for a player that could've greatly helped our pitching staff for years to come.

 

I have said over and over that I would have liked to get Wheeler. My logic was the same. Part of our difference in opinion is that I don't assume to know what happened. Somewhere I read a story the Twins were told not to bother because he was not coming here. IDK and neither does anyone else here. I can tell you that corporate America has the same kind of assumptive conclusions throughout the ranks and I have heard more assumptions than I can count. The vast majority were wrong. It's so prolific that at one point I traveled to all of the larger regional offices once a quarter and held a town meeting. Conference call for the smaller offices. Staff could ask questions and very little was out of bounds. There was still plenty of wild assumptions but it did promote a good work climate.

 

I have also said the same for our financial position. However, that does not just spend the money regardless of the expected production. The Twins have to yield double the production per dollar spent as compared to the Yankees and of course this is true to varying degrees (ratios) with all of the teams with above average revenue. This is not an opinion it's an absolute certainty. I often hear it's not my money. No, it's not but if your goal is to build the best team possible, we should still want the money spent in a manner that produces the most wins per dollar spent. Morton and Cruz instead or Arrieta or any number of FAs instead of David Price, etc.

[SwainZag]

 

I agree with you on needing to make a trade for a top level SP. Let's say Rosario is included, how many of the others you mentioned do you think it would take?

 

The problem here is finding a team who is trading a top level SP.....and needs a piece like Rosario.  What team is trading an ace...and needs a 28 year old OF in his prime, who is getting expensive with a year of control after this year and is not a star level player?  Any team coveting Rosario is likely trying to win now.  There's also only probably 15-18 top level SP in the game right now.  You just can't say....who will give them up for what prospects.  Most top level SP are not going to be moved regardless.

[Major League Ready]

 

Call it sample or result, but you are claiming there are only 2 single team seasons in 20 years that can serve as a blueprint for Twins success. If that was true, then there is no meaningful blueprint. Falvey and Levine aren't limited by the 2005 White Sox or 2015 Royals (minimizing Cueto), just as the Twins ownership wasn't limited in hiring its current FO from those two teams. It's just trivia/noise, with the effect of derailing 2019 Twins discussion rather than advancing it.

 

You have jumped to a conclusion that suits your agenda. I did not even hint these two teams were the only examples the Twins should follow. This particular example was the result of me asking over and over with no success for someone to provide an example of success derived from the practices posters have insisted are essential to success. No such examples were given. I don’t think it’s at all a stretch to say that many posts were adamant that getting to the WS required specific types of aggression. When not a single poster was willing to provide an example, I answered my own question by listing the only two below average revenue teams that have won the WS in the past 15 years. The point was not these were the only examples. The point was that there were no examples of success being achieved via the practices claimed to requisite to winning the WS.

 

Anyone willing to be objective could learn something from these FACTS. Being below average in revenue obviously has a correlation to playoff success and it’s getting worse. Substantiated (not necessarily proven) by the FACT below average revenue teams won 9 WS in the previous 30 years and only 2 in the past 15. So, maybe it’s NOT just the Twins FO that is the problem. Two, the lack of success following the practices suggested here would suggest these practices are not the most effective strategy.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

You have jumped to a conclusion that suits your agenda. I did not even hint these two teams were the only examples the Twins should follow. This particular example was the result of me asking over and over with no success for someone to provide an example of success derived from the practices posters have insisted are essential to success. No such examples were given. I don’t think it’s at all a stretch to say that many posts were adamant that getting to the WS required specific types of aggression. When not a single poster was willing to provide an example, I answered my own question by listing the only two below average revenue teams that have won the WS in the past 15 years. The point was not these were the only examples. The point was that there were no examples of success being achieved via the practices claimed to requisite to winning the WS.

As a poster, I want to say you proved no such thing. You've been given many examples of successful aggressive moves by comparable revenue teams and you've simply created new criteria to dismiss them all, to the point where your criteria is trivial more than meaningful. Even by your own self-selected criteria in this thread, you can't reasonably dismiss Cueto (and Zobrist) simply because "the World Series only lasted 5 games."

 

And as a mod, I note that by your own description, you are not addressing specific posts or posters in this thread, but rather general arguments you perceive across the site. You have repeated these same general arguments in many threads previously -- see the comment policy example of "inserting a pet idea into thread after thread":

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/8228-twins-daily-comment-policy/?p=164092

 

You are welcome to create a blog post if you want to write about this general topic further. Otherwise, when participating in the discussion forum, I ask all TD members to stick closer to the actual discussion thread topics -- and if you feel others are causing the discussion to drift, try to reel them back in. A good way to do that is ask for clarification on a point they are making, tying it back to the thread topic, rather than going further off on a tangent.

 

I'm locking this thread, as it has outlived its usefulness.