The Minnesota Twins' Front Office Played Themselves

[Deadfan]

2 hours ago, Thebigalguy said:

I like where the Twins are. They have what they need on the roster and in the minors. If they play up to their potentials, we're playoff bound. Forget free agents and trades. The team has what it needs if they get the job done and stay healthy.

Derek? Is that you? 

[awmonahan]

Perfect article. I was generally ok with the FO up until this off-season. Mistakes happen. But this was a bad, underfunded plan, based on a stupid premise, and somehow they didn't adjust. Heading into the last year with any sort of projected rotation, this is the worst time possible to completely butcher an off-season. And that's precisely what they've done.

[heresthething]

I don't think the Giants will regret the back end years of this contract because:

1) By the time this contract is over the AAV will look pretty typical.

2) Big payroll teams don't care about the dead money, it matters little to them.  And now we are watching a strategy play out with the extended years so it really makes it all the more a non-issue to those teams.

[DocBauer]

1 hour ago, mnfireman said:

After reading comments on this thread and others about the teams FO, I don't think I would let most of these posters (posers?) be the GM of my Fantasy baseball team, more less the GM of a MLB team. If you guys think that team was so focused on Correa that they let other players "slip" away you are very delusional. There are more than enough FO members, assistants and interns to keep in contact with all players and agents, all keeping  Falvey and/or Levine up-to-date on negotiations. 

Realistically, who does everyone think the team should have "tried harder" to sign? Judge? Wasn't going to happen, he turned down more $$$ and years to stay in NY. Turner? Turned down more $$$ to go back to the east coast. Bogaerts? Boras played that one correctly, getting every teams "back-up plan" SS to sign first, and at a very steep commitment to the Padres at that. Nimmo? Boy did the Mets get played on that contract, $62 MM more guaranteed money than Buxton. Haniger? Maybe, but he's 32, has a history of injuries and he's from the west coast, San Francisco is close to family. Verlander or deGrom? Not happening, too expensive. Bassitt, Walker, Taillon, Elflin? If you believe in your system and feel it is going to produce soon, you don't sign aging veterans to 3 and 4 year contracts, especially veterans with past injury issues. Clevinger or Syndergard? Veteran pitchers with injury history on 1 year make-good or build-value contracts, where have we heard this before? 

Rodon may be in play, but he is on record as saying he prefers NYY as his landing spot, why outbid them for a guy who doesn't want to be anywhere else. But if 5/$135 gets it done, do it.*

Swanson may also be in play, but he has sat back and watched Correa, Turner and Bogaerts get stupid $$$ for stupid years, he has got to be thinking "I can get some of that." But if 6/$141 gets it done, do it.*

* + FanGraphs/CrowdSource estimates.

I think we will some FA signings and some trades and we may be very surprised who is involved. Or maybe not. Either way, Falvey and Levine etc... are building this team around expectations of prospects future performance, just like every previous FO this team has had, good or bad.

I almost agree 100%...just not all the way there.

As I've stated in other posts, the 10yrs and $285M offer to Correa, if an INITIAL one, with all the opt out control, was a fine offer. If you look at total value and control and most of the signings the past few seasons, it was a logical beginning. HOWEVER, once it became clear that contracts were going to go on a sharp rise this year, the offer should have been a minimum $300M type of deal, probably $315-ish. THAT is what is disconcerting. Did the FO really believe nobody else was "in" on Correa with a better offer until it was too late? Now, I think the Giants just blew the Twins out of the water with their deal, and a deal I wouldn't do. But my issue with the FO is once it became clear we were going over $300M no matter what, time to boldly jump in and play the game, or walk away and look at other options.

Can I tell you exactly which other options? No, not without sitting down and taking the time to make a list. But maybe Contreras at catcher for a better bat...while still having a good glove...than Vazquez. Maybe the jump on Bassitt early and get him to help head the rotation. (Not a stud, but a good and proven arm). MAYBE, though I kinda doubt it, a sudden turn to Boegarts for similar $ AAV but not the extra years? I don't believe the FO just sits on their hands and does nothing while waiting for Correa, in this case, or in dealing with Buxton last year. But there is a real sense, IMO, that they are so locked in and focused on a "one big deal" that they do loose sight of the big picture. Last year was a perfect example where we ended up with Bundy, Archer, and Smith when there was a plethora of interesting and solid arms out there that came off the board one by one.

I don't hate our FO. I don't think lack of signing someone is necessarily a lack of interest or due diligence, sometimes the numbers are impossible or the player has an absolute preference, etc. But you are either in or not on your big move. And regardless, you should have an idea of needs, budget, and available options. And it just feels to me they wait around too long at times before getting "serious" about turning their attention elsewhere.

[Mike Sixel]

36 minutes ago, KBJ1 said:

The Giants will come to regret the last 5 years of that contract. How many 38 -42 year old SS of note have there been?

He will be an expensive DH without Nelson Cruz power at twice the price.

If Lewis can come back and continues on the path he was on, we will be just fine.

Get pitching, pitching and more pitching and sign Brad Fullmer for crying  out loud.

His slider is unhittable!

Well a power hitting corner OF wouldn't hurt either. We have the money, but there aren't many prospects in the OF or catcher department unfortunately.

And we desperately need Kiriloff to step up and play 1B.

Thoughts?

They don't care about the last 5 years.....they wanted to spread the money out. 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/why-are-teams-issuing-extremely-long-contracts/

I agree with the premise of the article here and the one I just linked.

There was ZERO chance he signs for less than Turner. Zero. Once he signed, the Twins should have pivoted to Bassit and, well, not sure who else. Xander is a much better deal, and I'd have been good with signing him for what he got.

The Twins did this with Darvish.....and passed on every great SP last year. They have one, one, long term FA deal to an elite player in the history of their club. I think we have to realize who they are, and they need to also. The team must be built mostly from within, but when they do sign FAs, they need to aim at the second tier and get the ones they want. 

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, DocBauer said:

I almost agree 100%...just not all the way there.

As I've stated in other posts, the 10yrs and $285M offer to Correa, if an INITIAL one, with all the opt out control, was a fine offer. If you look at total value and control and most of the signings the past few seasons, it was a logical beginning. HOWEVER, once it became clear that contracts were going to go on a sharp rise this year, the offer should have been a minimum $300M type of deal, probably $315-ish. THAT is what is disconcerting. Did the FO really believe nobody else was "in" on Correa with a better offer until it was too late? Now, I think the Giants just blew the Twins out of the water with their deal, and a deal I wouldn't do. But my issue with the FO is once it became clear we were going over $300M no matter what, time to boldly jump in and play the game, or walk away and look at other options.

Can I tell you exactly which other options? No, not without sitting down and taking the time to make a list. But maybe Contreras at catcher for a better bat...while still having a good glove...than Vazquez. Maybe the jump on Bassitt early and get him to help head the rotation. (Not a stud, but a good and proven arm). MAYBE, though I kinda doubt it, a sudden turn to Boegarts for similar $ AAV but not the extra years? I don't believe the FO just sits on their hands and does nothing while waiting for Correa, in this case, or in dealing with Buxton last year. But there is a real sense, IMO, that they are so locked in and focused on a "one big deal" that they do loose sight of the big picture. Last year was a perfect example where we ended up with Bundy, Archer, and Smith when there was a plethora of interesting and solid arms out there that came off the board one by one.

I don't hate our FO. I don't think lack of signing someone is necessarily a lack of interest or due diligence, sometimes the numbers are impossible or the player has an absolute preference, etc. But you are either in or not on your big move. And regardless, you should have an idea of needs, budget, and available options. And it just feels to me they wait around too long at times before getting "serious" about turning their attention elsewhere.

Not "sometimes". Always when it comes to the elite players. That's why they should stop looking at them.

[howeda7]

In general, the people who frequent this site are the hardcore of hardcore baseball fans. They know who the prospects are and value them. They know who wins trades based on trade value calculators and how bad a FA signing might look in 5 years. So I get how some might defend Falvey based on that.

To the other 95% of the fan base, you want an organization that tries to win when they have a chance. The Vikings try to win virtually every year. They might not always succeed, but it's not for lack of trying. OK, the NFL is the only league with a truly fair salary structure. But the Wild and the Wolves at least pick their spots. The contracts Parise and Suter signed with the Wild were every bit as insane at the time as Correa's and they signed them both on the same day! Did it work? No. Do I applaud them for going for it? Yes. The Wolves did the same with the Rudy Gobert trade. And so far, it looks like that might not work either. But they saw a window and they went for it.

The Twins, post 1991-92 have never gone all in. Not once. In 2001 they were good for the first time in 9 years. They desperately needed another starter. Who did they get? Rick Reed. And they traded their starting RF'er to get him. Can't part with prospects. Think of the future!

In 2006 they were the hottest team in baseball. They desperately needed a hitter at the deadline. They could have gotten Soriano for Kevin Slowey. They wouldn't do it. Think of the future!

In 2010 they were in first place in a brand new stadium. They no longer had to think small time. They did get Thome and a few others in FA and sign Mauer. Finally things were different! Still, at the trade deadline they could use an ace. They could get Cliff Lee for Aaron Hicks. Can't do it. Think of the future!

And then after years in the abyss, in 2019 they had the greatest HR hitting team in MLB history. But the rotation desperately needed another starter? Did they get one? No. Price to steep. Think of the future!

Minnesota sports fans are largely tuning out and done with this team. Why? This organization is forever more worried about a tomorrow that will never come than they are with winning today.

In a vacuum, I understand why they didn't sign Correa. But they also didn't push their chips all in on 2022 to try and win when they did have him. Trading your closer on Opening Day for a starter with "team control" is not going all in. And neither is trading for Mahle. 

When Falvey balked at the trade deadline in 2019, he showed he is no different than Terry Ryan or Bill Smith. The Pohlads are hands off owners. They will not push their GM to "go for it". If this team can't have new owners, which would be great, they need a GM who understands that they have to be the ones to push. I don't think the Pohlads say "no" nearly as much as they GM's never ask.

Falvey is clearly not the guy that will ever push this thing over the top, even if he stops making idiotic trades for injured pitchers. Nothing will change until he's gone, there are new owners or both.

This franchise is in a very precarious place with their fan base and I'm not sure they realize it or maybe they don't care. The average age of baseball fans keeps getting older. And once people tune and (and they are) what will bring them back? The charm of Target Field is largely worn off. It's not easy to find the games on TV. Their attendance this year will be brutal. The TV ratings even worse. And they have to negotiate a new long-term TV contract next off-season?

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, howeda7 said:

In general, the people who frequent this site are the hardcore of hardcore baseball fans. They know who the prospects are and value them. They know who wins trades based on trade value calculators and how bad a FA signing might look in 5 years. So I get how some might defend Falvey based on that.

To the other 95% of the fan base, you want an organization that tries to win when they have a chance. The Vikings try to win virtually every year. They might not always succeed, but it's not for lack of trying. OK, the NFL is the only league with a truly fair salary structure. But the Wild and the Wolves at least pick their spots. The contracts Parise and Suter signed with the Wild were every bit as insane at the time as Correa's and they signed them both on the same day! Did it work? No. Do I applaud them for going for it? Yes. The Wolves did the same with the Rudy Gobert trade. And so far, it looks like that might not work either. But they saw a window and they went for it.

The Twins, post 1991-92 have never gone all in. Not once. In 2001 they were good for the first time in 9 years. They desperately needed another starter. Who did they get? Rick Reed. And they traded their starting RF'er to get him. Can't part with prospects. Think of the future!

In 2006 they were the hottest team in baseball. They desperately needed a hitter at the deadline. They could have gotten Soriano for Kevin Slowey. They wouldn't do it. Think of the future!

In 2010 they were in first place in a brand new stadium. They no longer had to think small time. They did get Thome and a few others in FA and sign Mauer. Finally things were different! Still, at the trade deadline they could use an ace. They could get Cliff Lee for Aaron Hicks. Can't do it. Think of the future!

And then after years in the abyss, in 2019 they had the greatest HR hitting team in MLB history. But the rotation desperately needed another starter? Did they get one? No. Price to steep. Think of the future!

Minnesota sports fans are largely tuning out and done with this team. Why? This organization is forever more worried about a tomorrow that will never come than they are with winning today.

In a vacuum, I understand why they didn't sign Correa. But they also didn't push their chips all in on 2022 to try and win when they did have him. Trading your closer on Opening Day for a starter with "team control" is not going all in. And neither is trading for Mahle. 

When Falvey balked at the trade deadline in 2019, he showed he is no different than Terry Ryan or Bill Smith. The Pohlads are hands off owners. They will not push their GM to "go for it". If this team can't have new owners, which would be great, they need a GM who understands that they have to be the ones to push. I don't think the Pohlads say "no" nearly as much as they GM's never ask. Falvey is clearly not the guy that will ever push this thing over the top, even if he stops making idiotic trades for injured pitchers. Nothing will change until he's gone, there are new owners or both.

I agree with nearly all of this, except the last part about owners. Every GM acting the same kind of means the boss has an agenda, IMO. Also, I think the Mahle deal was going for it.....but otherwise, yes. Agreed. 

[mnfireman]

43 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Contreras would've been a massive upgrade at C. Haniger would've solved the RH OFer hole or Abreu at DH if the Twins just wanted a RH bat. Throw the Vasquez money at David Robertson and maybe take a flier on Tommy Kahnle since this FO doesn't fear injury risk with pitchers. All of that was absolutely possible with the money MN has to spend. Of course the Twins did, or hopefully will find other players to fill those holes, but the guys that "slipped away," were the more desirable players. That's the criticism. 

As a hitter, yes, Contreras has the advantage. But 5/$87, no thank you, Vazquez will do just fine.

Haniger is a west coast native and seemed pretty intent on staying there, but yes, 3/$43.5 seems reasonable for him. But, like Buxton, he has a history of injuries and would do the team no good on the IL.

Robertson will be 38 shortly after opening day, he could fall of the proverbial cliff very quickly. At 1/$10 his role is already covered by younger players under longer team control.  

 

[heresthething]

17 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They don't care about the last 5 years.....they wanted to spread the money out. 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/why-are-teams-issuing-extremely-long-contracts/

I agree with the premise of the article here and the one I just linked.

There was ZERO chance he signs for less than Turner. Zero. Once he signed, the Twins should have pivoted to Bassit and, well, not sure who else. Xander is a much better deal, and I'd have been good with signing him for what he got.

The Twins did this with Darvish.....and passed on every great SP last year. They have one, one, long term FA deal to an elite player in the history of their club. I think we have to realize who they are, and they need to also. The team must be built mostly from within, but when they do sign FAs, they need to aim at the second tier and get the ones they want. 

Just read Gleeman's article in the Athletic and I'm even more disgruntled with this FO than I was before.  

...it’s noteworthy the Twins apparently offered a slightly higher average annual salary ($28.5 million) than the Giants ($27 million), but were willing to do so for 10 seasons and not 13. At some point there needs to be a line drawn, and doing so with an offer that goes through Correa’s age-37 season is logical. But is it really a big enough difference to lose him over?

What will the sport even look like in 13 years? How high will league revenues and payrolls have soared? And where will $28.5 million rank among the largest salaries? 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

Ask yourself this question: "Why did SF's offer to Correa exceed the Twins' offer by 65 million dollars?"  There must have been another (other) offer(s). over the $285 million, in order for the Giants to pay that much more than the Twins' offered. Therefore I bet $285 million was not the second highest offer which Correa received. But you live and learn (hopefully). Now about the Twins pitching....

[bloggymcbloggerson]

i don't think they have as much of a singular focus as a lot of people believe. we don't know how much they were in contact with the other shortstops, and it appears turner wasn't coming here anyway.

[KirbyDome89]

45 minutes ago, mnfireman said:

As a hitter, yes, Contreras has the advantage. But 5/$87, no thank you, Vazquez will do just fine.

Haniger is a west coast native and seemed pretty intent on staying there, but yes, 3/$43.5 seems reasonable for him. But, like Buxton, he has a history of injuries and would do the team no good on the IL.

Robertson will be 38 shortly after opening day, he could fall of the proverbial cliff very quickly. At 1/$10 his role is already covered by younger players under longer team control.  

 

Would you rather the team give up established players and/or prospects instead of just $$ to acquire talent?

We can play the same game, and point out the warts on whoever ends up filling in at these positions, the point was that there was plenty of money to spend + opportunity to spend it, yet the Twins watched better options come off the board while sitting on a non serious offer to Correa.  

[mnfireman]

7 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Would you rather the team give up established players and/or prospects instead of just $$ to acquire talent?

We can play the same game, and point out the warts on whoever ends up filling in at these positions, the point was that there was plenty of money to spend + opportunity to spend it, yet the Twins watched better options come off the board while sitting on a non serious offer to Correa.  

I am all about adding the right players at the right cost, not spending $$$ just to spend $$$. Too many TD posters come on here to rant about their hatred for the FO and play fantasy GM for a day, but forget that they're not dealing with their drunk buddy in a fantasy league or have tweaked the settings on their MLB the Show video game so that teams and players accept their unrealistic offers. Social media fuels this by constantly updating bits and pieces of offers and the teams involved, getting fan bases to act like spoiled children who have had their favorite toy taken away when their favorite team loses out on a player.  

This year more than any other has showed that the players and agents are using teams to get their biggest offer, and the Twins have been one of those teams that has been used. 

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, mnfireman said:

I am all about adding the right players at the right cost, not spending $$$ just to spend $$$. Too many TD posters come on here to rant about their hatred for the FO and play fantasy GM for a day, but forget that they're not dealing with their drunk buddy in a fantasy league or have tweaked the settings on their MLB the Show video game so that teams and players accept their unrealistic offers. Social media fuels this by constantly updating bits and pieces of offers and the teams involved, getting fan bases to act like spoiled children who have had their favorite toy taken away when their favorite team loses out on a player.  

This year more than any other has showed that the players and agents are using teams to get their biggest offer, and the Twins have been one of those teams that has been used. 

Like what? What is the "right cost"? I assume you mean the second tier of players, in which case we agree......but most of those are gone now too. 

[baul0010]

When you sum up our off-season like that, we might as well sell of the usable veterans and start rebuilding for the future.  Only problem is, in not sure I want Falvey overseeing that task.

[mnfireman]

4 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Like what? What is the "right cost"? I assume you mean the second tier of players, in which case we agree......but most of those are gone now too. 

For starters, 13/$350 is not the right cost. It is what the market played out to be, which was too high, in my opinion.

I am all for trading Arraez in the right deal, very unpopular on here right now.

The team has 4 corner OF's that bat LH, include 1 in a deal that brings a good return. Do not trade just get rid of 1 because there are too many (no such thing).

I do not think that Farmer should be the opening day SS, but I also do not want the team to panic and overpay or rush a prospect because they didn't get Correa.

I don't think the team should sign Rodon as I don't think a 7 year contract ends well and I think the prospects (pipeline if you will) are coming. However, if they do sign him, one or two of these prospects brings back value in a trade.

I think Fulmer is better $$$ spent than Robertson if they decide to sign a FA RP. Also there are plenty of in-house options to build a BP.

Teams like the Twins are always going to have to develop most of their own players. The caveat to this is that players don't always develop as hoped and stop-gaps will need to be signed until the next prospect hopefully develops. This is what Falvey and Levine have done their whole careers, and how the Twins have run for generations. Expecting a change is unrealistic and, highly doubtful.

[KirbyDome89]

1 hour ago, mnfireman said:

I am all about adding the right players at the right cost, not spending $$$ just to spend $$$. Too many TD posters come on here to rant about their hatred for the FO and play fantasy GM for a day, but forget that they're not dealing with their drunk buddy in a fantasy league or have tweaked the settings on their MLB the Show video game so that teams and players accept their unrealistic offers. Social media fuels this by constantly updating bits and pieces of offers and the teams involved, getting fan bases to act like spoiled children who have had their favorite toy taken away when their favorite team loses out on a player.  

This year more than any other has showed that the players and agents are using teams to get their biggest offer, and the Twins have been one of those teams that has been used. 

So now it's an issue of cost and not availability? 

No, the Twins weren't "used." They didn't want to pay market rates. It baffles me, that with their underwhelming offer made public (by the Twins themselves no less!) fans would still rather believe in some Boras/Correa conspiracy theory.

[PopRiveter]

I think the big loser is the franchise stuck with ANY player with a 13yr, $350m commitment.

At 10yr, $285m I would have felt mixed emotions with at least some buyer’s remorse, but I won’t for one minute feel jealous of SF fans today.

I hope the team can redirect some resources to improve their pitching situation.

 

[Mike Sixel]

11 minutes ago, PopRiveter said:

I think the big loser is the franchise stuck with ANY player with a 13yr, $350m commitment.

At 10yr, $285m I would have felt mixed emotions with at least some buyer’s remorse, but I won’t for one minute feel jealous of SF fans today.

I hope the team can redirect some resources to improve their pitching situation.

 

You are trading the certainty of the present, to give up one average FA in years 11-13......because that's what an average FA will cost then. What's more likely, that CC is great for 5-7 years with some value in the next three, or that one average FA will matter to the Twins in years 11, 12, and 13?

[Battle ur tail off]

2 hours ago, howeda7 said:

In general, the people who frequent this site are the hardcore of hardcore baseball fans. They know who the prospects are and value them. They know who wins trades based on trade value calculators and how bad a FA signing might look in 5 years. So I get how some might defend Falvey based on that.

To the other 95% of the fan base, you want an organization that tries to win when they have a chance. The Vikings try to win virtually every year. They might not always succeed, but it's not for lack of trying. OK, the NFL is the only league with a truly fair salary structure. But the Wild and the Wolves at least pick their spots. The contracts Parise and Suter signed with the Wild were every bit as insane at the time as Correa's and they signed them both on the same day! Did it work? No. Do I applaud them for going for it? Yes. The Wolves did the same with the Rudy Gobert trade. And so far, it looks like that might not work either. But they saw a window and they went for it.

The Twins, post 1991-92 have never gone all in. Not once. In 2001 they were good for the first time in 9 years. They desperately needed another starter. Who did they get? Rick Reed. And they traded their starting RF'er to get him. Can't part with prospects. Think of the future!

In 2006 they were the hottest team in baseball. They desperately needed a hitter at the deadline. They could have gotten Soriano for Kevin Slowey. They wouldn't do it. Think of the future!

In 2010 they were in first place in a brand new stadium. They no longer had to think small time. They did get Thome and a few others in FA and sign Mauer. Finally things were different! Still, at the trade deadline they could use an ace. They could get Cliff Lee for Aaron Hicks. Can't do it. Think of the future!

And then after years in the abyss, in 2019 they had the greatest HR hitting team in MLB history. But the rotation desperately needed another starter? Did they get one? No. Price to steep. Think of the future!

Minnesota sports fans are largely tuning out and done with this team. Why? This organization is forever more worried about a tomorrow that will never come than they are with winning today.

In a vacuum, I understand why they didn't sign Correa. But they also didn't push their chips all in on 2022 to try and win when they did have him. Trading your closer on Opening Day for a starter with "team control" is not going all in. And neither is trading for Mahle. 

When Falvey balked at the trade deadline in 2019, he showed he is no different than Terry Ryan or Bill Smith. The Pohlads are hands off owners. They will not push their GM to "go for it". If this team can't have new owners, which would be great, they need a GM who understands that they have to be the ones to push. I don't think the Pohlads say "no" nearly as much as they GM's never ask.

Falvey is clearly not the guy that will ever push this thing over the top, even if he stops making idiotic trades for injured pitchers. Nothing will change until he's gone, there are new owners or both.

This franchise is in a very precarious place with their fan base and I'm not sure they realize it or maybe they don't care. The average age of baseball fans keeps getting older. And once people tune and (and they are) what will bring them back? The charm of Target Field is largely worn off. It's not easy to find the games on TV. Their attendance this year will be brutal. The TV ratings even worse. And they have to negotiate a new long-term TV contract next off-season?

This post sums up perfectly how I feel about the Twins. 

They had so many chances over the years to go for it and they never have, instead preferring to hold onto what amounted to B level prospects and players. Hicks, Slowey, 

Soriano, Lee, 2019, again this year(Mahle is no stud) Trading away Santana, not extending Hunter, trading Berrios. 

Instead coming up with guys like Rick Reed, Matt Capps, etc etc. These are not "going for it" players. And those are not "winning moves" Even this year Castillo was the guy, not Mahle.

They just cannot get over their fear that they may mess up "contending in the future". Well the fact of the matter is, they haven't "contended" since probably 1992.

 

I get why they do what they do. And I am not sure right now is even a time they should go all in. (It would if Buxton could ever stay on the field). But it is just the a perpetual feeling of hopelessness that they will ever do anything to make themselves into a true contender that is hard to swallow.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

Signing CC isn't about going all in for this year....he is likely to be elite for 5-7 years......

[h2oface]

29 minutes ago, mnfireman said:

......I think Fulmer is better $$$ spent than Robertson if they decide to sign a FA RP. Also there are plenty of in-house options to build a BP......

Robertson signed with the Mets a couple of days ago..... itroduced officially today.

[howeda7]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I agree with nearly all of this, except the last part about owners. Every GM acting the same kind of means the boss has an agenda, IMO. Also, I think the Mahle deal was going for it.....but otherwise, yes. Agreed. 

Or it means they keep hiring cautious GM's who will value the 5 year plan over today. That doesn't mean they won't listen if the GM tells them it's a time to go for it. The failures at the trade deadlines are 100% on Terry Ryan/Bill Smith/Falvey. I guarantee Jim Pohlad didn't tell them not to make those trades.

On something like the Correa contract, sure they have buy in. But if you have a plan for how you will manage the payroll in the back-half of the contract, I'm sure they can be convinced. I seriously doubt it was Joe Pohlad who drew a red line at 10 years. Falvey did. And maybe in this one case, that's the correct decision. But folding and leaving the table isn't ALWAYS the right call. But it's the only one they ever make.

I was fine with the Mahle trade, because by that point, it was pretty obvious we weren't WS contenders, we were just trying to win a play-off game and end the 0-18 and I'm OK with that. But all in is Luis Castillo or Frankie Montas.

[mnfireman]

33 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

So now it's an issue of cost and not availability? 

No, the Twins weren't "used." They didn't want to pay market rates. It baffles me, that with their underwhelming offer made public (by the Twins themselves no less!) that fans still would still rather believe in some Boras/Correa conspiracy theory.

Underwhelming offer??' $28.5 MM/yr would be second highest AAV among this years FA, 17th overall among MLB players. $285 MM would have been the 3rd highest overall value among this years FA, but only 13th overall among MLB players. You're right, I can see where that was an underwhelming offer.

The Twins offered more in AAV over 10 years (insane amount of years by the way) but are still being dogged by the fanbase for an "underwhelming offer." They were used to get more years and money.

I want your number so I can sell you my house instead of taking an "underwhelming offer." I'll sell it to you for more money, but I'll give you more years to pay it off.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, mnfireman said:

Underwhelming offer??' $28.5 MM/yr would be second highest AAV among this years FA, 17th overall among MLB players. $285 MM would have been the 3rd highest overall value among this years FA, but only 13th overall among MLB players. You're right, I can see where that was an underwhelming offer.

The Twins offered more in AAV over 10 years (insane amount of years by the way) but are still being dogged by the fanbase for an "underwhelming offer." They were used to get more years and money.

I want your number so I can sell you my house instead of taking an "underwhelming offer." I'll sell it to you for more money, but also more years.

Less than Turner got. That wasn't realistic at all. Just like Darvish a few years ago wasn't realistic. 

[rv78]

In my book it all boils down to 1 thing.... $285M wasn't going to get it done and they probably knew that. That being said, maybe they weren't all that serious about breaking the bank for him. The first half of the 2022 season Correa was probably one of the worst clutch hitters on the team. And the Twins were in first place. What department was he the best hitter of? Arraez was better at BA, OBP and runs scored. Buxton led the team in HR and SLG. Miranda had more RBI's. Polanco had more walks. If it weren't for Gary Sanchez, Correa would have led the team in strikeouts. Sure he has a good glove at the most demanding position in baseball and he was a clubhouse leader, but he wasn't anything spectacular with the bat and the numbers prove it. Had he not had a good finish to the season his numbers would have been much worse and he'd still be using the Twins in 2023. I say ... Good riddance!

[Mike Sixel]

7 minutes ago, rv78 said:

In my book it all boils down to 1 thing.... $285M wasn't going to get it done and they probably knew that. That being said, maybe they weren't all that serious about breaking the bank for him. The first half of the 2022 season Correa was probably one of the worst clutch hitters on the team. And the Twins were in first place. What department was he the best hitter of? Arraez was better at BA, OBP and runs scored. Buxton led the team in HR and SLG. Miranda had more RBI's. Polanco had more walks. If it weren't for Gary Sanchez, Correa would have led the team in strikeouts. Sure he has a good glove at the most demanding position in baseball and he was a clubhouse leader, but he wasn't anything spectacular with the bat and the numbers prove it. Had he not had a good finish to the season his numbers would have been much worse and he'd still be using the Twins in 2023. I say ... Good riddance!

Arraez was at his worst in September when the Twins lost the division.....but you love him and hate CC due to when they hit?

[KirbyDome89]

13 minutes ago, mnfireman said:

Underwhelming offer??' $28.5 MM/yr would be second highest AAV among this years FA, 17th overall among MLB players. $285 MM would have been the 3rd highest overall value among this years FA, but only 13th overall among MLB players. You're right, I can see where that was an underwhelming offer.

The Twins offered more in AAV over 10 years (insane amount of years by the way) but are still being dogged by the fanbase for an "underwhelming offer." They were used to get more years and money.

I want your number so I can sell you my house instead of taking an "underwhelming offer." I'll sell it to you for more money, but I'll give you more years to pay it off.

They were $65M short....

Yes, they should be dogged for talking up Correa as a priority and then making an offer that had absolutely no chance of being accepted.

Counter offer; I'll give you 20% under market value, a la our beloved Twins. How could you say no? Have your people contact mine. 

[mikelink45]

I know I have been criticized for not supporting the huge contracts, but ESPN's article on aging really hits the points I believe.  I know this is subscription based, but this short statement "But at age 35, the group averaged 3.4 WAR, and at age 36, it was down to 2.2 WAR"  captures the essence of what I see.  

As a person who has spent his life guiding people I can tell you the body just does not hold up no matter our attitudes.  I do not mind short term big payments, but the league has gone nuts.  If this is to avoid the luxury tax this year, it just adds to it in future years.  

When I look at the chart that ESPN put together the only players worth some value after age 36 are DHs.  "Among all shortstops since 1969, only 10 produced at least 20 career WAR from age 30 on."