The Ryan Pressly trade is starting to look pretty good

[Otto von Ballpark]

19 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

He has 1.05 years service time.  Does that give us 5 more years of control?

That was Alcala's service time entering the 2021 season. He collected another full season this year, so he's up to 2 years and 5 days now. That means 4 more seasons of control (2022-2025).

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 minutes ago, Linus said:

Anybody besides me wonder how Houston magically unlocked Presslys spin potential?  Possibly spidertac?

Possibly, but Houston is just good at developing pitchers. The Twins certainly weren't at their level in 2018, though I don't really know how the two organizations compare today.

Unlike others, I think the Twins knew what they had in Pressly, they simply chose the prospects over 1.5 years of control. And that was a defensible position at the time given how 2018 was going.

[Mike Sixel]

12 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Possibly, but Houston is just good at developing pitchers. The Twins certainly weren't at their level in 2018, though I don't really know how the two organizations compare today.

Unlike others, I think the Twins knew what they had in Pressly, they simply chose the prospects over 1.5 years of control. And that was a defensible position at the time given how 2018 was going.

Agreed. Teams do trade good players sometimes. Lamenting giving up talent to get talent seems odd, given what I read here all the time....

[Otto von Ballpark]

19 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

and has presence in the BP would not have changed what happened in the 2019 playoffs

Any kind of hindsight exercise like this is challenging, especially in the face of our long postseason losing streak, which invites a sort of "transactional nihilism" where nothing we do ultimately seems to matter.

But having Pressly in 2019 may have changed our trade deadline strategy (from Romo/Dyson), which could have had some October implications.

Reminds me of 2010 -- putting a healthy Joe Nathan on our playoff roster wouldn't have changed the outcome of the series by itself, but if we then used Ramos to acquire someone other than Capps, it gets a little more complicated.

[MN_ExPat]

18 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

But I think this is part of the pattern. Ynoa for Garcia? Gil for Cave? Baddoo, Wells, Goodman, Chargois (and others) for nothing? The Escobar and Dozier trades don't look great. 3 lottery tickets for Dyson? Kintzler for Watson? Dumping Hughes and a comp pick to save payroll? Harper for McMahon? Even the Graterol and the comp for Maeda is looking bad. Each of these moves are, individually, defensible. But, man, they aren't great moves.

For me, it's a sign that the Twins FO doesn't evaluate talent correctly and, worse, fails to understand the talent it has. 

This sounds like your trying to evaluate a trade from the perspective of who “won” the trade.

I guarantee you, the FO knew exactly what they “had” in Pressly.  Just because you don’t like a trade, doesn’t make it bad or mean that the FO are clueless, drooling Neanderthals.

Baseball trades almost always revolve around need and how desperate a team is for that need. I was sorry to see Pressly go, I liked him, but the Astro’s had a need, the Twins had a need. I will say that the trade has appeared to be good for both teams. 

[Mike Sixel]

BTW....Kevin Goldstein said on the Fangraphs' chat last night (he was in a FO for a bit) that teams don't look at who "won" a trade. They are trying to make their team better (or whatever their goal is) and don't worry about beating the other team in a trade.

[gunnarthor]

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

BTW....Kevin Goldstein said on the Fangraphs' chat last night (he was in a FO for a bit) that teams don't look at who "won" a trade. They are trying to make their team better (or whatever their goal is) and don't worry about beating the other team in a trade.

That would make sense. I'm not sure that doesn't mean they don't try to "win" a trade. The Padres, Giants and Pirates(?) I think all got accused of hiding injury reports about players they traded, IIRC. 

[bighat]

4 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

First, Celestino had no business being in the majors.

Exactly. So the Saints got a good player and the Twins gave up Pressley. But what did the Minnesota Twins, based in Minneapolis MN get for Ryan Pressley again? A guy who isn't ready for the majors and a pitcher who was a slightly below-average reliever.

When Celestino starts 162 games for the Twins and hits 25 HR and drives in 89 runs while stealing 20 bases and posts a nice WAR and a gnarly OPS, then we can talk about the Twins winning this trade. Until either he or Alcala go out and become major keys to our major league ballclub, we ain't got diddly squat.

That's just from my perspective. I appreciate the article, discussion, and also hearing your perspective as well.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 minute ago, bighat said:

Exactly. So what did the Minnesota Twins, based in Minneapolis MN get for Ryan Pressley again? A guy who isn't ready for the majors and a pitcher who was a slightly below-average reliever.

When Celestino starts 162 games for the Twins and hits 25 HR and drives in 89 runs while stealing 20 bases and posts a nice WAR and a gnarly OPS, then we can talk about the Twins winning this trade. Until either he or Alcala go out and become major keys to our major league ballclub, we ain't got diddly squat.

That's just from my perspective. I appreciate the article, discussion, and also hearing your perspective as well.

As I mentioned later, I'm generally not a fan of declaring "winners/losers" of trades unless it's embarrassingly lop-sided like the Pierzynski or Johan trades.

You're reading more into what I wrote than what I actually wrote. 

[ashbury]

7 hours ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

"transactional nihilism"

I think that was the title of the doctoral dissertation by my Philosophy 101 professor.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Yes. In what world would it not be in their best interest to have Celestino develop into a starting center fielder?

So what is your timeline for this desired outcome? To begin the 2023 season? Please tell  

Anyone who smashed LOVE on your comment is welcome to respond as well. 

One of the points I am trying to make is that light-hitting backup centerfielders can be found, I assume, for a lot less than an established All Star relief pitcher. 

[chpettit19]

18 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

So what is your timeline for this desired outcome? To begin the 2023 season? Please tell  

Anyone who smashed LOVE on your comment is welcome to respond as well. 

One of the points I am trying to make is that light-hitting backup centerfielders can be found, I assume, for a lot less than an established All Star relief pitcher. 

Sure, by 2023 if Celestino is a starting quality major league center fielder that'd be good. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. There is no situation that ever equals the trade having been Pressly for Alcala (like your previous post stated). It was Pressly for Celestino and Alcala. It was also never Pressly for Celestino (as this post would suggest with the statement about backup CFers being available for less than an All Star reliever). It was Pressly for Alcala and Celestino. That was the trade. You don't get to separate Alcala and Celestino. They were both part of the trade. Whatever they turn into (even if it's other players in a future trade) can be compared to the 1.5 years of Pressly the Twins traded away. That's how this works. You don't get to separate the return or add in the extension years for Pressly as those years weren't guaranteed when the deal was made. 

I'm thoroughly confused as to what your 2 posts are trying to get at.

[Brock Beauchamp]

42 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

So what is your timeline for this desired outcome? To begin the 2023 season? Please tell  

Anyone who smashed LOVE on your comment is welcome to respond as well. 

One of the points I am trying to make is that light-hitting backup centerfielders can be found, I assume, for a lot less than an established All Star relief pitcher. 

Define "backup" centerfielder. If Celestino plays behind a healthy Buxton and OPSes at an .800 clip but Buxton OPSes at .950, Celestino is still technically a "backup centerfielder" but that has no bearing on his talent level or value.

[KirbyDome89]

22 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

but if you can get a good RP and good OF for 1.5 years of a good RP, why not? Why not do that? 

Because you're trading a known commodity from a position of relative scarcity for hope? Unquestionably Pressly would've been more valuable to a team that saw itself as a contender the last three years. We're using some narrow samples to project "good," onto these guys. 

[KirbyDome89]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Define "backup" centerfielder. If Celestino plays behind a healthy Buxton and OPSes at an .800 clip but Buxton OPSes at .950, Celestino is still technically a "backup centerfielder" but that has no bearing on his talent level or value.

Agreed, but do you expect him to consistently OPS .800 against major league pitching?

[Brock Beauchamp]

8 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Agreed, but do you expect him to consistently OPS .800 against major league pitching?

Absolutely not. I only used that number as an example of how Celestino’s potential value has little correlation to whether he starts 130 games or 40 games. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Sure, by 2023 if Celestino is a starting quality major league center fielder that'd be good. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. There is no situation that ever equals the trade having been Pressly for Alcala (like your previous post stated). It was Pressly for Celestino and Alcala. It was also never Pressly for Celestino (as this post would suggest with the statement about backup CFers being available for less than an All Star reliever). It was Pressly for Alcala and Celestino. That was the trade. You don't get to separate Alcala and Celestino. They were both part of the trade. Whatever they turn into (even if it's other players in a future trade) can be compared to the 1.5 years of Pressly the Twins traded away. That's how this works. You don't get to separate the return or add in the extension years for Pressly as those years weren't guaranteed when the deal was made. 

I'm thoroughly confused as to what your 2 posts are trying to get at.

If Celestino becomes the starting center fielder, in say 2023, then that means Buxton is gone. If I’m reading the room correctly, people won’t be too thrilled if that’s the case. 

It just feels like there’s a failure to think more than one move ahead sometimes before clicking the REPLY button. I apologize for not being more clear and if that sounds too harsh.

As far as Alcala, yeah I like him. Said it during the season even when he was struggling with all the other relievers. Still would rather have had Pressly for 2019.

[Brock Beauchamp]

38 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

If Celestino becomes the starting center fielder, in say 2023, then that means Buxton is gone. If I’m reading the room correctly, people won’t be too thrilled if that’s the case. 

It just feels like there’s a failure to think more than one move ahead sometimes before clicking the REPLY button. I apologize for not being more clear and if that sounds too harsh.

As far as Alcala, yeah I like him. Said it during the season even when he was struggling with all the other relievers. Still would rather have had Pressly for 2019.

Hosken, you need to read what chpettit is actually writing, especially if you're talking down to other users as you were in your middle paragraph. This is what he said, bolded emphasis mine:

Quote

if Celestino is a starting quality major league center fielder

He also said this:

Quote

Having 2 starting CFers is better than having 1. Having 3 is better than having 2.

It's rather apparent he (and I) are speaking of performance level, not games started.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

If Celestino becomes the starting center fielder, in say 2023, then that means Buxton is gone. If I’m reading the room correctly, people won’t be too thrilled if that’s the case. 

It just feels like there’s a failure to think more than one move ahead sometimes before clicking the REPLY button. I apologize for not being more clear and if that sounds too harsh.

As far as Alcala, yeah I like him. Said it during the season even when he was struggling with all the other relievers. Still would rather have had Pressly for 2019.

What moves ahead am I supposed to be thinking about? What moves am I supposed to be thinking about? Is this a chess game? Am I supposed to be thinking about how to checkmate you? I am so thoroughly confused right now. Is your point now that the Twins traded Pressly in 2018 so that they didn't have to re-sign Buxton in 2022?

Yes, if Celestino is starting in 2023 (as the plan, not because of injury) then Buxton wasn't re-signed and I'll be pissed. That has literally nothing to do with judging the Pressly trade, though. Nothing at all. They traded current talent for the hope of future talent. They felt their window was closed in 2018 and they could win without Pressly in 2019, but would like more talent for 2020 and beyond. I'd argue they were pretty accurate with that assessment. Not mad at anyone, and don't think it's crazy, that would have preferred to have Pressly in 2019 to having Alacala and Celestino now. To each their own. But Buxton not being re-signed has nothing to do with the Pressly deal. Sorry for not being able to "think more than one move ahead" of your points that have nothing to do with the forum. I'll try to be better next time.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

@Brock Beauchamp This is the exchange I was referring to:

8 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

10 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

I think this is an underrated comment. Is it really in the best interest of Twins fans for Celestino to develop into a starting center fielder? If not, then you are left to evaluate the trade as Pressly for Alcala. 

Yes. In what world would it not be in their best interest to have Celestino develop into a starting center fielder? Having 2 starting CFers is better than having 1. Having 3 is better than having 2. It is always in a team, and their fan's, best interest to have more talent than less.

Expand to see full exchange. An honest mistake, some might say.

[Brock Beauchamp]

4 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

@Brock Beauchamp This is the exchange I was referring to:

Expand to see full exchange. An honest mistake, some might say.

Fair ‘nuff. 

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

This is the exchange I was referring to:

 

Jo Adel is a center field prospect just getting his first taste of the bigs for the Angels. Is it against their interest to have him develop into a starting center fielder? Does him becoming good enough to start in center field mean they are going to move on from Trout? Or does it mean they now have 2 CF quality defenders in their outfield and when Trout goes down (like he did this year) they have someone who can replace him? 

I think our disconnect is what is meant by "develop into a starting center fielder." I see a difference between being good enough to start in center field (what I would say "develop into a starting center fielder" means) and being the starting center fielder. The comment you originally responded to suggested trading Celestino for more pitching. You read that as they should get rid of Celestino and keep Buxton. I'd argue they should keep both. With Buxton's injury history having a 2nd starting quality center fielder is huge. I'd say they've failed mightily by having Jake Cave as that guy the last few years. It's never bad to have multiple players who can start up the middle. In fact it's how Tampa builds their entire system.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

@chpettit19it was honest mistake. Please don’t go away. 

The “one move ahead” was actually directed more towards the front office. 

 

[Major League Ready]

19 hours ago, bighat said:

Exactly. So the Saints got a good player and the Twins gave up Pressley. But what did the Minnesota Twins, based in Minneapolis MN get for Ryan Pressley again? A guy who isn't ready for the majors and a pitcher who was a slightly below-average reliever.

When Celestino starts 162 games for the Twins and hits 25 HR and drives in 89 runs while stealing 20 bases and posts a nice WAR and a gnarly OPS, then we can talk about the Twins winning this trade. Until either he or Alcala go out and become major keys to our major league ballclub, we ain't got diddly squat.

That's just from my perspective. I appreciate the article, discussion, and also hearing your perspective as well.

 

By your logic, if we were having this same discussion about the trade of James Shields for Fernando Tatis Jr, your position would be that acquiring Tatis is meaningless until he actually proves his worth at the ML level.  In other words, we can’t put any value in the return if the player has yet to be proven.  

If this were true, Tatis Jr would have had no trade value at that time.  Sorry, value is projected for prospects and established player.  It would not make sense to project Josh Donaldson to play the way he did in his prime.  If we are to evaluate this trade today, we should use all of what we know to project future performance for Alacala and Pressly.  Do we know that players often struggle at first?  Do we project based on a pitchers velocity / command and movement?  Alcala does not project as a below average RP.

The only logical conclusion of your position is that we should not even attempt to evaluate a trade until the period of control has expired for all the players involved.  There is a whole lot of baseball media that seriously disagrees with you.
 

[Whitey333]

Hard to grade this trade.  Like most Twins trades this one involved future "prospects ". Most prospects never make it to the bigs.  It's too early to say this was a win or a loss because basically the Twins sell hype and hope.  Hopefully it will work out.  Usually it doesn't.  Here's one thought.  The twins finished last in the division.  Astros are in playoffs with a chance to win world series.  The twins have finished last 5 of the past 12 seasons.  That's almost half.  Hype and hope is all, hype and hope.

[saviking]

Let's face it. The only reason the trade might look good is because we didn't want to pay Pressley what he would command. Alcala has a chance to settle the score but keeping and signing Pressley would have been far superior. Look at all the troubles we have had with closers since the trade. 

As for Celestino I can't get excited about him with Buxton, Kirilloff, Larnach and Kepler. One or both of Lewis and Martin are going to wind up in the outfield and Gordon has much more versatility if you want someone without a lot of power.. And what about Wallner who is only a couple of years away from the majors. 

This has become a homerun league and I prefer home run hitting outfielders unless they can carry a high batting average and can cover a lot of ground. To me, Celestino is nothing more than trade bait. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 hours ago, saviking said:

Look at all the troubles we have had with closers since the trade. 

Was I watching a different team? In 2019, the Twins had Rogers as closer for most of the season and he was fantastic. In 2020, there was more of a time-share but Rogers/Romo/May were also very good.

Closer hasn't been a problem until this season and literally everything was a problem this season.

[MGM4706]

Lance Lynn is starting today in the Playoffs. We never see anyone fixed here for pitching. Our college pitching coach should have been reassigned with the other 2 coaches this week. Celestino not only couldn't hit but he had no clue as to how to play the outfield wall just like Larnach and Rooker don't. Kiriloff couldn't play the side walls either. That's on minor league coaches. But none of this matters unless we get an Ace. No team that has went deep in the playoffs without an Ace. So if the FO and Rocco are saying "We know we won't go deep in the playoffs because we wont address starting pitching then fine. We get what we have.

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, MGM4706 said:

Lance Lynn is starting today in the Playoffs. We never see anyone fixed here for pitching. Our college pitching coach should have been reassigned with the other 2 coaches this week. Celestino not only couldn't hit but he had no clue as to how to play the outfield wall just like Larnach and Rooker don't. Kiriloff couldn't play the side walls either. That's on minor league coaches. But none of this matters unless we get an Ace. No team that has went deep in the playoffs without an Ace. So if the FO and Rocco are saying "We know we won't go deep in the playoffs because we wont address starting pitching then fine. We get what we have.

Kansas City won the WS in 2015 without an Ace.  Their top SP in terms of WAR was Yordano Ventura who had the 44th highest WAR.  Their 2nd highest by WAR was Edinson Volquez who also had 2.7 WAR.  He was signed on a 2 year deal as a free agent and had averaged .6 WAR over the previous 6 seasons.  Their next 3 SPs combined for a total of 3.4 WAR