Mahle for Steer/Hajjar/Encarnacion-Strand - How did the Twins blow this one so badly??

[Aerodeliria]

13 hours ago, Game7-91 said:

 

The difference between trading for Castillo or Mahle was contract term and prospects. Seattle moved their #1, 3, 5 and low level pitcher for 2 months of Castillo, to chase a WC birth. Ballsy move, and paying off so far....so does Seattle have better medical risk assessment process, or just a bigger appetite for risk/reward? Maybe Seattle believed they were one piece away from being legit WS potential. Twins couldnt say thst, even privately. If Castillo goes down in the next 3 weeks does it would change nothing about how they assessed that risk at the time of trade.

Ditto for Twins, what matters is their risk assessment at time of trade.  If they missed something egregious on meds, then they need to fix their process. I've felt for years Twins have failed to properly identify and manage injuries. It needs to get fixed. But its too early to say if Mahle is a continuation of that or just bad luck.

Taking Mahle over Castillo was a hedged bet. The scope of Twins' acceptable risk was security/length, hedged by reasonable expectation of performance and lesser prospect capital.  It wasnt a bad bet, assuming there was no glaring red flag they chose to overlook. They rolled the dice, just like Seattle, and appear to have lost the short term. The longer term TBD. 

 

 

Well said!

[Riverbrian]

10 hours ago, h2oface said:

Let me try some subsitutions here.....

Is Mahle going to help us in the playoffs this year?  (no)

Is Mahle guaranteed to be a major league producer beyond this year?  (no)

Are Steer or Encarnacion-Strand guaranteed to never be a decent major league player in the future?  (no)

Hey..... it works both ways!

 

 

How about that... it does. Sounds like you agree with me that these things take time to determine. 

Yet... 3 seconds into something... we have a loud declarative topic title. 

[dxpavelka]

11 hours ago, h2oface said:

The sad thing is that something said with satire is actually true in many cases.

Satire?

[I wish the twins were good]

On 9/3/2022 at 7:49 PM, alexlegge said:

 

Thoughts?

https://tenor.com/view/theyre-******-ground-keepers-cleaning-major-league-gif-14460958

[MABB1959]

17 hours ago, bean5302 said:

You really feel Brusdar Graterol would have been more valuable to 2020's Cy Young runner up? Maeda having a solid (but unlucky) 2021 before going down with the UCL tear was unfortunate, but he's super cheap and has added more fWAR in just his down 2021 than Graterol has in his career so far. Graterol isn't a threat to be a starter, and that was really the big risk in dealing him. Maeda's still under contract for only $3MM next year. Meanwhile, Graterol appears to be a good middle reliever or maybe setup guy. I think Maeda was a very good trade, even considering the loss of 2022.

I never said anything about it being even but the point was more of the medical/training staff.   We should have traded or paid for a better starter.  Just my opinon!

[jctwins]

On 9/3/2022 at 10:15 PM, gunnarthor said:

I wasn't a big fan of the FO coming into the season so I'm ready to move on. I don't think they've done much to improve the Twins and, worse, have made baseball boring. Watching Gordon pitch tonight (to save the pitching staff?) was pathetic. I'll wait for the season to end but, right now, I don't see how we can keep supporting this crud.

It's too bad we're talking about the Twins, because they are only capable of a house cleaning once every 10-15 years or so. 

 

[SkyBlueWaters]

On 9/5/2022 at 5:35 PM, h2oface said:

Excellent lineup? The "excellent" lineup is pretty depleted.

Maybe you think of them with all the current injuries and travails? I spoke of finding pitchers for the front of the rotation. Obviously, I'm looking to the future. 

The outfield is Larnach, Buxton, Celestino, Kepler, backed by Cave and Garlick. 

The infield is Urshela, Miranda, perhaps Correa, Polanco, Kiriloff.

Both Gordon and Arraez move around the diamond. 

Royce Lewis's injuries are a real concern. But I was impressed with the kid when he came up in May. Sure, only 40 big league at bats, but given his work in the minors, having a young shortstop who slashed .300/.317/.550 is sweet. No, I don't expect the slugging to stay that high--but it doesn't have to for him to be an excellent middle infielder, does it?

Right now, we gauge Sano by his troubles this year, and the K's are a big problem. But he's still a 29-year-old who's homered 169 times. (By which I mean that I'd fully expect, if the FO dealt him, he would homer about 300 more times over the rest of his career, and probably a disproportionate number of times against us.)

That's 15 players, aside from the catchers. I know the offense has been beat up this year, and it's been feast or famine in run scoring. But talent wise, I think that lineup is excellent.

[Blyleven2011]

On 9/4/2022 at 9:36 AM, RJA said:

I think the FO has messed up on a lot of things, but the deadline acquisitions this year are really questionable.   Mahle is an example.  He is a nice pitcher with good stuff, but the whole world knew he had some issues earlier this season.  How many times have we seen it play out that a pitcher has a shoulder or arm issue that is reported to be minor, only to turn out a few months later to require surgery?  If the main reason you acquire pitching at the deadline is to help the team make the playoffs, why risk trading for a player that has had an issue earlier in the season.  Even if it does not end up requiring surgery, the chance that the injury reoccurs is pretty high.  And, to give up what they did was unbelievable.  But, how about Lopez.  We gave up a lot for a reliever that has had a good partial season after years of failure.  Doesn't it sound a little bit like a Pagan situation, one good brief run early in his career followed by 4 years of failure?  What made them believe Lopez was a good long term bet?  Why trade for a reliever with multi years of control, giving up excellent prospects, when he has no long term history of success?  I could go on and on about Paddack, Dyson, Happ, Shoemaker, Colome, etc., but I fear this FO has a level of arrogance that makes them believe they are smarter than everyone else--smartest guys in the room syndrome.  Throw in Cavaco and Sabato as number one picks and their record is pretty grim.  When they do make good choices, they trade them away.  God help us all.

You nailed everything  ... I agree I would not go get someone to help for the playoffs push that has injury concerns  ....

You nailed it and I DITTO it ...

 

[saviking]

Players are bigger, faster and stronger through weight training and throw harder. All this puts more strain on soft tissue and ligaments. 

I've been watching the Twins since 1961. Until recently I can't remember baseball taking it's toll on athletes health the way it has. As long as we stay on this trajectory MLB might as well move the 40 man roster to a 50 man roster.

We gave up some of my favorite minor leaguers. Steer is going to be good for a long time and En-Strand hit everywhere he played although his defense was bad. I figured he would wind up a pure DH .. Still I was fine with the trade had Mahler not gotten injured, but then, injuries are the wild card now days ..

[purplesoldier4u]

On 9/4/2022 at 12:18 PM, Winston Smith said:

But but they got Pagan.

I may be an outlier. but I like Pagan. Why a guy with that good of stuff can pitch so poorly is beyond me. 

[USAFChief]

28 minutes ago, purplesoldier4u said:

I may be an outlier. but I like Pagan. Why a guy with that good of stuff can pitch so poorly is beyond me. 

The "stuff" is inconsistent, and he lacks command way too often.

He can throw a tremendous splitter, but the next one just meanders to middle middle. He'll dot the corner with a fastball, then let one sit right in the whomp'em zone.

And the slider is awful. The opposite of "good stuff."

[Teflon]

Is throwing all-out for 5 innings with a 1+ K to IP ratio more stressful on a starting pitcher than pitching a more-paced 7 innings at a 0.7 K to IP ratio? Is it really worth this to turn the 3rd time through the order over to a middle reliever?  It's like somebody gave baseball this monkey paw that granted three wishes and, well...  

[alexlegge]

On 9/5/2022 at 8:56 AM, jorgenswest said:

One of the reason the Twins were able to acquire Mahle without giving up a global top 50 prospect was his health risk. The upside of a healthy Mahle is a vastly improved rotation for the playoffs. We didn’t get the upside. I prefer the risk of Mahle to trading for a starter to try to stabilize the back end but isn’t someone you want starting a playoff game. A healthy Mahle starts game 1 for the Twins.

There is reason to be concerned about the buyer side on any significant deadline deal. The solution is to not make deals or be a seller. 

All good points. And yet the outcomes for the players with injury risks have consistently been suboptimal over the past few years. That's why I think it's worth questioning however medical information and injury risk calculation is being funneled through the Twins baseball operations department. It's not just Mahle. What about the Paddock deal? Absolute nightmare scenario. And Aaron Gleeman's recent Athletic article does a nice job of assessing the Chris Archer signing, which hasn't been terrible but also has been far from spectacular.

Can anyone name one player with an above-average injury risk who, during his Twins tenure in the 2020s, has contributed more than OR equal to what we would've expected based on raw talent?? *Maybe* Buxton could count, but that would be a stretch, and only even in the discussion because of prior knowledge of just how susceptible he is. I still think the management strategy this year was a mistake. He may end up with more games played, but he's consistently been missing in key games due to injury and unnecessarily rested in other key games without significant injury. The result has been the same: less healthy Buxton than we could've had.

As others have mentioned, Falvey was brought in with a reputation of being particularly forward-thinking on pitching. The organizational results haven't been a total disaster, and some trades have worked better than others (the Maeda, Fulmer, and Lopez deals all seem to have arguably made a decent impact), but I don't think anyone would say confidently that the Twins pitching pipeline is in great shape, or even that their pitching at the major league level has improved drastically. I'm not ready to point the finger at Falvey directly though, because the suboptimal outcomes related to injury risk assessment/calculation seems to be a noticeable common thread. If that's on Falvey, then the organization has much bigger structural problems. I think right now we need to be concerned about their rehab/training and medical teams. Something in there just isn't clicking.

Another thought regarding the recent issues this season - Rocco has never been the most pristine manager when it comes to managing a pitching staff on the whole. He seems especially inept with getting the best bang for your buck out of a relief corps. Tbh, it raises the question of whether the Twins would still be in first place had Wes Johnson stayed???

[LA VIkes Fan]

On 9/7/2022 at 3:01 PM, Blyleven2011 said:

You nailed everything  ... I agree I would not go get someone to help for the playoffs push that has injury concerns  ....

You nailed it and I DITTO it ...

 

Help me understand. What would you have done differently? Would you have stood pat and not made the trade for Mahle at all? Would you have included Miranda and/or Larnach (nobody wants Kirilloff at this point with the uncertainty if he will ever come back) in a package to try to get Luis Castillo or Frankie Montas? They were not available for the package we traded for Mahle. Would you have kept Povich instead of trading for Jorge Lopez? Would you have kept Rogers and his present 4.69 ERA, over 5 since July 1, at the beginning of the season knowing he was likely gone as a FA after 2022? I agree Pagan stinks and have advocated for his DFA but he's frankly no worse than Rogers has been this year and we have Paddack next year after his TJ so at least we would up with the lottery ticket. And hey, maybe we sign Rogers back to MN for 2023. He's seen the big world out there and it hasn't treated him very kindly. 

I understand and respect the position that trading for a guy with injury concerns for a playoff push is a risky strategy. But I think you have to also include 2 other factors - Mahle is signed for next year and the likely alternative was getting nobody. Our high end prospects are on the Twins, not in the minors, or hurt. Mahle is a starter next year (we hope) and I think this team was being set up for next year all along.  It's perfectly legitimate to say that given the market it would have been better to simply not go get a starting pitcher at the deadline. That's the alternative. You gotta choose one. 

I'm not a huge fan of this FO or Baldelli. You still have to give them their due for the stark improvement in the team since they got here. The Twins were going nowhere and getting there fast under the old regime. I think its a real question whether this FO/manager combination can get us over the hump of being a slightly above average 82-85 win team who would just be "happy to be there" in the playoffs to a 90+ plus win team that could actually compete for a deep playoff run. We've seen some improvement and some development, but I really wonder if Baldelli is the right guy if we actually can keep the deep team we should have next year healthy.  I would love to see us somehow win this lousy division and win a playoff  series and compete in the next, Regardless, I think next year tells the tale.   

[LA VIkes Fan]

11 hours ago, alexlegge said:

All good points. And yet the outcomes for the players with injury risks have consistently been suboptimal over the past few years. That's why I think it's worth questioning however medical information and injury risk calculation is being funneled through the Twins baseball operations department. It's not just Mahle. What about the Paddock deal? Absolute nightmare scenario. And Aaron Gleeman's recent Athletic article does a nice job of assessing the Chris Archer signing, which hasn't been terrible but also has been far from spectacular.

Can anyone name one player with an above-average injury risk who, during his Twins tenure in the 2020s, has contributed more than OR equal to what we would've expected based on raw talent?? *Maybe* Buxton could count, but that would be a stretch, and only even in the discussion because of prior knowledge of just how susceptible he is. I still think the management strategy this year was a mistake. He may end up with more games played, but he's consistently been missing in key games due to injury and unnecessarily rested in other key games without significant injury. The result has been the same: less healthy Buxton than we could've had.

As others have mentioned, Falvey was brought in with a reputation of being particularly forward-thinking on pitching. The organizational results haven't been a total disaster, and some trades have worked better than others (the Maeda, Fulmer, and Lopez deals all seem to have arguably made a decent impact), but I don't think anyone would say confidently that the Twins pitching pipeline is in great shape, or even that their pitching at the major league level has improved drastically. I'm not ready to point the finger at Falvey directly though, because the suboptimal outcomes related to injury risk assessment/calculation seems to be a noticeable common thread. If that's on Falvey, then the organization has much bigger structural problems. I think right now we need to be concerned about their rehab/training and medical teams. Something in there just isn't clicking.

Another thought regarding the recent issues this season - Rocco has never been the most pristine manager when it comes to managing a pitching staff on the whole. He seems especially inept with getting the best bang for your buck out of a relief corps. Tbh, it raises the question of whether the Twins would still be in first place had Wes Johnson stayed???

All good points, but I have 2 questions/possible disagreements. You call the Paddack deal a night mare. Not sure I agree. Rogers is a FA after his year and he has not been good since May.  Pagan actually has very similar stats other than saves. Paddack could be a strong starter after he returns from TJ and we have him through 2024 via arbitration. It actually looks like a short term loss through May, pretty even almost a win thereafter, and a possible long term win for us. We have to evaluate Rogers on what he is in 2022, our last year of control, not what he was in 2019-21. Besides, nothing stops the Twins from re-signing him after this season. His price should have come down after this year.   

I agree with you on Rocco - he is not strong when it comes to handling a pitching staff. Yet I believe the starters ERA/FIP for the Twins has actually improved since Wes Johnson left and he was the guy who changed some guys' mechanics to get more velocity. Are those changed mechanics directly related to the injuries? Perhaps. I also have read that it was Johnson was insisted that Pagan should be a closer and made the in-game pitching changes before he left. Not sure his leaving explains the current issues. I think it's an overall talent deficit and lack of organizational depth resulting from poor drafting in the 200-2008 time frame.  Is this FO any better? We won't know that until 5-6 years after the drafts.  

[USAFChief]

51 minutes ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

All good points, but I have 2 questions/possible disagreements. You call the Paddack deal a night mare. Not sure I agree. Rogers is a FA after his year and he has not been good since May.  Pagan actually has very similar stats other than saves. Paddack could be a strong starter after he returns from TJ and we have him through 2024 via arbitration. It actually looks like a short term loss through May, pretty even almost a win thereafter, and a possible long term win for us. We have to evaluate Rogers on what he is in 2022, our last year of control, not what he was in 2019-21. Besides, nothing stops the Twins from re-signing him after this season. His price should have come down after this year.   

I agree with you on Rocco - he is not strong when it comes to handling a pitching staff. Yet I believe the starters ERA/FIP for the Twins has actually improved since Wes Johnson left and he was the guy who changed some guys' mechanics to get more velocity. Are those changed mechanics directly related to the injuries? Perhaps. I also have read that it was Johnson was insisted that Pagan should be a closer and made the in-game pitching changes before he left. Not sure his leaving explains the current issues. I think it's an overall talent deficit and lack of organizational depth resulting from poor drafting in the 200-2008 time frame.  Is this FO any better? We won't know that until 5-6 years after the drafts.  

I'd have gladly kept Rogers. ERA for relievers isn't particularly useful in evaluating performance or projecting the future. 

2022, He's got a

1.15 WHIP,

11.5 K/9,

K/BB over 5.

0.8 HR/9

I think he'd have a spot in this bullpen. 

 

[Danchat]

1 hour ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

Yet I believe the starters ERA/FIP for the Twins has actually improved since Wes Johnson left and he was the guy who changed some guys' mechanics to get more velocity.

Didn't our bullpen numbers plummet right when Johnson left? I'm not sure we should look into these things with small sample sizes, but I can't believe that Wes leaving helped things. But there could be truth to the MPH+ training leading to more injuries.

25 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I'd have gladly kept Rogers. ERA for relievers isn't particularly useful in evaluating performance or projecting the future. 

Well, the stats don't really show the whole story since he was the best reliever in baseball the first two months, then became completely unusable until the Padres traded him, and now he's been mediocre for the Brewers. I'd still take him, but we'd be disappointed with him if he were not traded - he hasn't been his old self for a good 3 months now.

[KirbyDome89]

3 hours ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

Help me understand. What would you have done differently? Would you have stood pat and not made the trade for Mahle at all? Would you have included Miranda and/or Larnach (nobody wants Kirilloff at this point with the uncertainty if he will ever come back) in a package to try to get Luis Castillo or Frankie Montas? They were not available for the package we traded for Mahle. Would you have kept Povich instead of trading for Jorge Lopez? Would you have kept Rogers and his present 4.69 ERA, over 5 since July 1, at the beginning of the season knowing he was likely gone as a FA after 2022? I agree Pagan stinks and have advocated for his DFA but he's frankly no worse than Rogers has been this year and we have Paddack next year after his TJ so at least we would up with the lottery ticket. And hey, maybe we sign Rogers back to MN for 2023. He's seen the big world out there and it hasn't treated him very kindly. 

I understand and respect the position that trading for a guy with injury concerns for a playoff push is a risky strategy. But I think you have to also include 2 other factors - Mahle is signed for next year and the likely alternative was getting nobody. Our high end prospects are on the Twins, not in the minors, or hurt. Mahle is a starter next year (we hope) and I think this team was being set up for next year all along.  It's perfectly legitimate to say that given the market it would have been better to simply not go get a starting pitcher at the deadline. That's the alternative. You gotta choose one. 

I'm not a huge fan of this FO or Baldelli. You still have to give them their due for the stark improvement in the team since they got here. The Twins were going nowhere and getting there fast under the old regime. I think its a real question whether this FO/manager combination can get us over the hump of being a slightly above average 82-85 win team who would just be "happy to be there" in the playoffs to a 90+ plus win team that could actually compete for a deep playoff run. We've seen some improvement and some development, but I really wonder if Baldelli is the right guy if we actually can keep the deep team we should have next year healthy.  I would love to see us somehow win this lousy division and win a playoff  series and compete in the next, Regardless, I think next year tells the tale.   

Pagan has been worse than Rogers by a decent margin, his struggles are on another level, and Paddack is now a guy they're hoping turns things around after 2 uninspiring seasons in SD + TJ surgery. 

This is a false dichotomy. Even if we ignore all the decisions along the way that landed the Twins in the pitching situation at the deadline, it wasn't Mahle or bust. They wanted him, they got him; to date it's been a poor decision.

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Pagan has been worse than Rogers by a decent margin, his struggles are on another level, and Paddack is now a guy they're hoping turns things around after 2 uninspiring seasons in SD + TJ surgery. 

This is a false dichotomy. Even if we ignore all the decisions along the way that landed the Twins in the pitching situation at the deadline, it wasn't Mahle or bust. They wanted him, they got him; to date it's been a poor decision.

Three pitchers were traded. They couldn't get Castillo at that price. Montas was hurt for a few weeks. So, Mahle or Montas? Those were your choices. Or, do nothing. 

[alexlegge]

8 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

This is a false dichotomy. Even if we ignore all the decisions along the way that landed the Twins in the pitching situation at the deadline, it wasn't Mahle or bust. They wanted him, they got him; to date it's been a poor decision.

Great point here. Indeed, if the Twins didn't trade for Mahle, I think almost anyone in this forum would probably agree that they would've at least wanted to try to add someone else as a starting pitcher. They needed a starter and would've gotten a starter almost inevitably. They chose poorly.

---

One more related thought, but does it seem like Falvey is irrationally opposed to two-month rentals at the trade deadline?? Not that this is necessarily the right year to put all of one's eggs in the metaphorical basket, but theoretically the right piece for a championship might *only* be available as a rental deal when the deadline comes. One example that comes to mind would be the 2009 Phillies trading for Cliff Lee (they even had the added bonus of warming Lee up to Philly so much that he accepted less cash to sign with them for a multi-year deal in 2011). I supposed the argument against this would be like the 2008 Brewers' trade for CC Sabathia. But even that deal probably opened their championship window far wider...IMHO we'll need to take accept risk like that and pull off a similar deal somewhere en route to propping open our championship window enough. Any Twins road to a trophy this decade will go through Yankee Stadium and/or Minute Maid Park. But even beyond this decade, we'll always be up against one or two superteams in the AL. Treading water and hoping for the best in a playoff "crapshoot," which seems to be the happy medium for this front office as well as both the front offices led by Terry Ryan and Bill Smith, is flawed logic; not to take things overly literally, but that strategy basically just guarantees we'll be firing bullets made of crap on the rare occasion when our championship window is opening...and you can be sure as s**t we'll be up against a team firing steel.

Perhaps a more philosophical way of thinking about it is the following: I'd personally opt for the same number and types of flags that the Royals have had since the year 2000 compared to the Twins - basically trading all the division championships in exchange for one championship and one additional pennant. Maybe we lose out on some good regular season memories, but now we're seeing a well-oiled playoff melancholic memory machine.

[KirbyDome89]

33 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Three pitchers were traded. They couldn't get Castillo at that price. Montas was hurt for a few weeks. So, Mahle or Montas? Those were your choices. Or, do nothing. 

Which means little as far as availability was concerned. Removing an option isn't the same thing as never having it in the first place. 

I asked before, but would the Twins have "done nothing," if they nixed the deal due to the medicals and subsequently ended up without a SP at the deadline? Would you, or anybody else defending the move as a situational necessity have been upset and claimed the Twins did nothing? 

[purplesoldier4u]

On 9/8/2022 at 4:57 PM, USAFChief said:

The "stuff" is inconsistent, and he lacks command way too often.

He can throw a tremendous splitter, but the next one just meanders to middle middle. He'll dot the corner with a fastball, then let one sit right in the whomp'em zone.

And the slider is awful. The opposite of "good stuff."

I didn't say "great stuff."