Pagan Tendered

[chpettit19]

13 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I guess if you believe his issues with HRs and baserunners are going to evaporate then sure, it's the engine. Shiny was in reference to the K rate and "stuff," that's constantly touted despite the poor results. I think there's something that doesn't click internally but the real point was that interest outside of MN doesn't validate the decision to sign or keep Pagan anymore than guys signing or being claimed elsewhere invalidates the Twins decision to let them go.

Do I think they were "dumb," for rolling the dice on him last year? Not necessarily, but it wasn't exactly a great gamble. Do I think they're "dumb," for tendering him a deal? If he's on the team opening day, yes. It's such a high risk/low reward move. Even if it works out for this season, the process (acquire a guy who finds a way to go from bad to worse, feed him the ball until your season is cooked, tender him a cheap deal and stick him in lower leverage situations) is awful and non-repeatable. 

I understood the analogy, I'm saying it's wrong. The K rate and "stuff" is what makes the engine go, it's not the wheels. A pitcher can't be good without those "shiny things." So the Twins, and other teams apparently, see Pagan as a car with an engine that needs a little tuning up, and they hope they're the mechanics to make it run like "name your favorite fancy car here." 

I hope he's not on the opening day roster, but their process is still sound, and is the same process every well run team follows. Liam Hendriks was a "lemon" until he was tweaked and became the best closer in baseball. Matt Wisler was a "lemon" until the Twins tuned his engine and he's been a bullpen weapon for them and Tampa now. Max Muncy was a "lemon" until the Dodgers got him in the hands of their mechanics. Shoot, Gio Urshela was a "lemon" until the Yanks got their hands on him. Jorge Lopez was a "lemon" until the O's moved him to the pen. My point isn't that the Twins should rely on Pagan, or even should've tendered him, it's that this is something every team in baseball does. And they're clearly not the only team that sees something in the "shiny stuff" that they think they can turn into something useful.

Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. Maybe they're right that he's got more in him, but they aren't the ones to bring it out. But guys like Pagan get deals every year from every team because they all think they can take the raw talent and produce something out of it. I don't like that the Twins are continuing to employee Emilio Pagan, even for just right now, but the process isn't dumb in anyway. It's what teams do. They scout and then try to teach. I don't want him, but this is how baseball works. Literally every team does this.

[rv78]

16 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Again, I don't want Pagan back and wish they would've traded or non-tendered him. But the idea that the Twins are dumb for wanting a player that other teams want doesn't make sense.

There is a lot of irony in this. I've always complained about the Twins getting players that other teams DON'T want. Isn't that why they end up taking the leftovers? Anywho, this is a bad decision and we can only hope they see some trade value in Pagan and he's packaged with Kepler for a better than average player in return.

[KirbyDome89]

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I understood the analogy, I'm saying it's wrong. The K rate and "stuff" is what makes the engine go, it's not the wheels. A pitcher can't be good without those "shiny things." So the Twins, and other teams apparently, see Pagan as a car with an engine that needs a little tuning up, and they hope they're the mechanics to make it run like "name your favorite fancy car here." 

I hope he's not on the opening day roster, but their process is still sound, and is the same process every well run team follows. Liam Hendriks was a "lemon" until he was tweaked and became the best closer in baseball. Matt Wisler was a "lemon" until the Twins tuned his engine and he's been a bullpen weapon for them and Tampa now. Max Muncy was a "lemon" until the Dodgers got him in the hands of their mechanics. Shoot, Gio Urshela was a "lemon" until the Yanks got their hands on him. Jorge Lopez was a "lemon" until the O's moved him to the pen. My point isn't that the Twins should rely on Pagan, or even should've tendered him, it's that this is something every team in baseball does. And they're clearly not the only team that sees something in the "shiny stuff" that they think they can turn into something useful.

Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. Maybe they're right that he's got more in him, but they aren't the ones to bring it out. But guys like Pagan get deals every year from every team because they all think they can take the raw talent and produce something out of it. I don't like that the Twins are continuing to employee Emilio Pagan, even for just right now, but the process isn't dumb in anyway. It's what teams do. They scout and then try to teach. I don't want him, but this is how baseball works. Literally every team does this.

Yeah I disagree with your interpretation. Those things (physical or mental capability) are a product of the engine, not the the force that's driving it, but that's not really the point. 

Sure, every team thinks they can fix somebody else's broken pieces, but not every team watches that signing blow up in spectacular fashion and then thinks they'll re-up and run back the same experiment with different results. That's where this argument starts to fall apart for me. If Muncy posts an OPS barely over .600 in 2018 does LA continue feeding him ABs? Ditto for Urshela, and really all the others listed as well, Lopez being the lone exception, and he was a Baltimore draftee and pre arb so it's not really all that comparable. I don't doubt someone else would've given Pagan a shot, but I do have serious doubts about how many other teams would've been eager to hand him a contract if he was blowing games for them last season, or the previous two.  

[weitz41]

 

[chpettit19]

6 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Yeah I disagree with your interpretation. Those things (physical or mental capability) are a product of the engine, not the the force that's driving it, but that's not really the point. 

Sure, every team thinks they can fix somebody else's broken pieces, but not every team watches that signing blow up in spectacular fashion and then thinks they'll re-up and run back the same experiment with different results. That's where this argument starts to fall apart for me. If Muncy posts an OPS barely over .600 in 2018 does LA continue feeding him ABs? Ditto for Urshela, and really all the others listed as well, Lopez being the lone exception, and he was a Baltimore draftee and pre arb so it's not really all that comparable. I don't doubt someone else would've given Pagan a shot, but I do have serious doubts about how many other teams would've been eager to hand him a contract if he was blowing games for them last season, or the previous two.  

I don't buy the argument that teams should be less likely to sign a guy because he was bad for them if multiple other teams think he's a useful player. The only argument against it would be if the Twins simply don't have the ability to get the most out of the player. If they think that (not fans, but the team themselves) they should be making changes to get people in there that they feel can improve players. It doesn't make sense to me to say "we were the team he was bad for so we shouldn't give him a shot and instead let another team fix him" if they think he's fixable.

If he's fixable, and I don't think he is thus I don't want him on the Twins, it shouldn't matter that he was with the Twins or the Royals or the Dodgers or the Diamondbacks or what team he was on. That shouldn't play any role beyond they have more knowledge of him than the other teams so should actually have an advantage in fixing him. I hope he's not on the roster come spring training time, and wish he wasn't on the roster now. I would've DFA'ed him in July. But if multiple teams around the league think he's fixable, and the Twins are one of them, then it makes sense to keep him to be the one to reap the possible benefits of fixing him. He was bad for the Padres the last 2 years, but they still tendered him and had him all the way up to opening day. Guess that's a dumb front office, too.

[farmerguychris]

Don't want anything to do with him.  Sure, his metrics say he should be better than he is.  But for 3 years - his inconsistency in putting a few pitches every outing in the middle of the plate gets him rocked.  

If its true that 'multiple' teams were interested in trading for him, perhaps the Twins f.o. is just trying to sort out the best deal for him in a trade.  Worst case however is that we stall too long trying to get too much and then end up keeping him because his metrics say he should be better than he is.

Move on from the guy - don't care if we get nothing from him.

[Cris E]

You can't trade, fix or pitch him if you let him walk, so step one was getting a contract on him.  Opening day is months away, the 2023 roster is far from set at this point and the Falvine like to make moves. Just relax and let them work. The hubris they were being accused of in this thread is in every front office in the league and makes Pagan valuable. People will come asking for him: he's got a 96mph fastball with life, a 20 save season under his belt, he'll take the ball 60 times a season and he's a good guy in clubhouse and is good with the media. Teams value that.

[KirbyDome89]

On 11/19/2022 at 7:29 PM, chpettit19 said:

I don't buy the argument that teams should be less likely to sign a guy because he was bad for them if multiple other teams think he's a useful player. The only argument against it would be if the Twins simply don't have the ability to get the most out of the player. If they think that (not fans, but the team themselves) they should be making changes to get people in there that they feel can improve players. It doesn't make sense to me to say "we were the team he was bad for so we shouldn't give him a shot and instead let another team fix him" if they think he's fixable.

If he's fixable, and I don't think he is thus I don't want him on the Twins, it shouldn't matter that he was with the Twins or the Royals or the Dodgers or the Diamondbacks or what team he was on. That shouldn't play any role beyond they have more knowledge of him than the other teams so should actually have an advantage in fixing him. I hope he's not on the roster come spring training time, and wish he wasn't on the roster now. I would've DFA'ed him in July. But if multiple teams around the league think he's fixable, and the Twins are one of them, then it makes sense to keep him to be the one to reap the possible benefits of fixing him. He was bad for the Padres the last 2 years, but they still tendered him and had him all the way up to opening day. Guess that's a dumb front office, too.

....or if the player isn't fixable. It makes plenty of sense to say "he was terrible for us, what we thought we could fix only got worse, let's not pay him again; he can be another team's problem." 

Neither do I, but I absolutely believe it matters where he was. If having him in house was such an advantage, and the results somehow managed to top his last two s*** seasons, that's a strong indicator that either your ability to "fix," him is non-existent, or there's no fixing to be done. This isn't a card game where the deck just reshuffles; the Twins organization isn't going to radically change between now and opening day, yet we should expect that from Pagan. 

I forget, was Pagan on that Padres roster Opening Day?....

If MN can unload him, great; good riddance. I don't think whatever paltry return they'd get will be worth tendering him the deal and flirting with having him in the bullpen to start the year, but at that point I won't care. 

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

....or if the player isn't fixable. It makes plenty of sense to say "he was terrible for us, what we thought we could fix only got worse, let's not pay him again; he can be another team's problem." 

Neither do I, but I absolutely believe it matters where he was. If having him in house was such an advantage, and the results somehow managed to top his last two s*** seasons, that's a strong indicator that either your ability to "fix," him is non-existent, or there's no fixing to be done. This isn't a card game where the deck just reshuffles; the Twins organization isn't going to radically change between now and opening day, yet we should expect that from Pagan. 

I forget, was Pagan on that Padres roster Opening Day?....

If MN can unload him, great; good riddance. I don't think whatever paltry return they'd get will be worth tendering him the deal and flirting with having him in the bullpen to start the year, but at that point I won't care. 

I don't think he's fixable. I said that. I don't want him on the team. But that doesn't change the logic of letting him go if he's fixable simply because he was on your team. If he's fixable (and I don't think he is!) then you need to be able to fix him. That goes for any player. You can't have a successful team if you can't get the most out of players.

No, he wasn't on the Padres roster opening day in 2022, and it's not opening day 2023 yet, is it? But he was on their roster opening day 2021 after having been brutally bad in 2020 as well. That was the point. They kept him for a 2nd year. The entire 2nd year and then tendered him. You seem to have completely missed the point there. It isn't opening day 2023 yet, actually, it isn't even 2023 yet, actually it's not even December 2022 yet. The Padres had Pagan for a shortened 2020 and he was bad. They brought him back for 2021 and he was bad again. Then they tendered him a deal and carried him all the way up to opening day. I forget, is that more or less time than he's been on the Twins roster?

Again, I don't know how many times I have to say I'm not arguing for them to keep Pagan, but I'm not suggesting they keep him because I don't think he's fixable. All I'm saying is that the FO isn't doing anything (yet) that the Padres didn't do, and the reports are that multiple teams were/are interested in him so I'm saying that it's not logical to think the Twins are dumb for doing what they're doing when multiple teams are trying to do it as well with him now, and the Padres already did it with him.

[KirbyDome89]

On 11/22/2022 at 3:56 PM, chpettit19 said:

I don't think he's fixable. I said that. I don't want him on the team. But that doesn't change the logic of letting him go if he's fixable simply because he was on your team. If he's fixable (and I don't think he is!) then you need to be able to fix him. That goes for any player. You can't have a successful team if you can't get the most out of players.

No, he wasn't on the Padres roster opening day in 2022, and it's not opening day 2023 yet, is it? But he was on their roster opening day 2021 after having been brutally bad in 2020 as well. That was the point. They kept him for a 2nd year. The entire 2nd year and then tendered him. You seem to have completely missed the point there. It isn't opening day 2023 yet, actually, it isn't even 2023 yet, actually it's not even December 2022 yet. The Padres had Pagan for a shortened 2020 and he was bad. They brought him back for 2021 and he was bad again. Then they tendered him a deal and carried him all the way up to opening day. I forget, is that more or less time than he's been on the Twins roster?

Again, I don't know how many times I have to say I'm not arguing for them to keep Pagan, but I'm not suggesting they keep him because I don't think he's fixable. All I'm saying is that the FO isn't doing anything (yet) that the Padres didn't do, and the reports are that multiple teams were/are interested in him so I'm saying that it's not logical to think the Twins are dumb for doing what they're doing when multiple teams are trying to do it as well with him now, and the Padres already did it with him.

The Padres tendering him a deal last year doesn't make the Twins decision any less perplexing/stupid. So the strategy is to "stash," him on a crowded 40 man and make acquisitions/cuts around him until they get an offer that's acceptable? I mean c'mon....Do you honestly expect teams to start making significantly better offers, ones that would justify Pagan occupying a roster spot, later in the offseason or ST?

I understand you aren't beating the drum for Pagan to return, but the logic you're using to rationalize the move is shallow at best. There will almost always be some other team(s) sniffing around. Organizations kicking the tires isn't relevant when we're talking about how a guy like Pagan fits for the Twins. We just watched this play out with Sano, he'll certainly draw interest elsewhere, but I doubt we hear much moaning about the Twins being wrong to move on because somebody else decided to hand him a big league deal.  

[Nine of twelve]

I'm not saying I am in favor of this move. In fact, I'm probably not. But here's my analogy: tendering him is kind of like attempting a steal of third base when your team is one run down with two out in the bottom of the ninth. If you make a questionable move you damn well better succeed. If you don't you'll incur the wrath of even more people than you did by just attempting it. If Pagan turns into a reliable bullpen guy I'll congratulate the front office, the on-field staff, and Pagan himself. But they damn well better succeed.