The Falvey Philosophies, Part 3: One-Year Wonders

[Greggory Masterson]

An examination of the Twins roster in Derek Falvey's seventh year reveals four fundamental philosophies the organization has embraced. Today we look at the organization's obsession with one-year contracts.

Image courtesy of © Michael McLoone-USA TODAY Sports

This is where the group leaves the biggest footprint. In the Falvey-Levine era, most of the veteran fill-ins discussed in Part 2 have come in the form of one-year contracts, or contracts with vesting, team, or mutual options for the second year. Based on my research, the breakdown in the length of free agent contracts can be seen below, prior to the second Correa signing, sorted from most recent to least recent, again color-coded by position.

One-year contracts are something of a default option for most clubs. No-harm-no-foul, small commitments have a short-term risk. However, this club has shown a special proclivity for the one-year deal.

This pattern emphasizes the importance of the farm system producing fruit in this organization. If the decision-makers refuse to find longer-term pieces in free agency, they need to be sure that their internal options are enough to win more games than they lose.

They have made a few longer-term commitments, but those situations were special exceptions, such as shoring up the catching position with Jason Castro in 2017 and Christian Vazquez in 2022. Carlos Correa's three-year deal was a one-year deal with insurance, should he suffer a significant injury or forget how to play baseball, a risk the club was willing to take given his talent and clubhouse presence. Although the Josh Donaldson contract does not reflect favorably on them in hindsight, like with Correa, they saw his off-field presence to be valuable (i.e., “He’ll bring intensity”) regardless of his performance, which was expected to be high as well.

As can be seen in the table, they do often try to get a bit of extra value out of these one-year deals—especially for bounceback candidates—in the form of options. Most recently, in 2022, they added team options for the Dylan Bundy and Chris Archer signings. If either of them had regained their past form, the team could have brought them back for about $10MM each, The options, though, however, have rarely been exercised, suggesting more duds than bouncebacks.

The only option exercised by the team was for the second year of Nelson Cruz ’s 2019 contract. The Cruz signing has been the best in the Falvey-Levine era, netting 6.3 fWAR for about $18.5 million over his first, two-year deal. Exercising that option was a no-brainer. The majority of those moves have not paid off anywhere close to as well as the Cruz signing.

A few times each offseason, they make attempts at players on multi-year deals. Before Donaldson and Correa twice, those attempts have not borne fruit. However, their steadfast adherence to their strategy generally prohibits them from the biggest move. 

As with many of the one-year deals, the Twins' signings of Donaldson and Correa were due in large part to other clubs' wariness over injury concerns. They instead made their interest known and provided a lower offer as a fallback. They attempted the same to no avail, for instance, with Carlos Rodon, Zack Wheeler , and Yu Darvish. Those types of moves, though, would largely prohibit future moves of a similar magnitude. 

Without the Donaldson trade, they likely would not have been able to sign Correa the first time around. It is possible that spending more money to land Wheeler would have precluded them from future flexibility, so they likely see value in never overextending themselves, especially on pitchers.

For this reason, it’s imperative that the Correa signing pays off, because they likely will not have the ability to sign even another Donaldson-like contract in the near future. Given that the chips have been pushed in on a player like Correa, I feel pretty good about the odds, but all that needs to happen is the spontaneous combustion of an ankle to sink the ship.

What are your thoughts on the one-year approach with specific exceptions?

 

View full article

[NotAboutWinning]

There's a lot of stink in that 1 Yr column 🤨

[tarheeltwinsfan]

You pay your money and you take your chances.

[Brandon]

He’s basically Terry Ryan with flair.

[sun]

C.J. Cron was left off the chart. Both Cron and Schoop were productive journeymen that helped the Twins set the new bomba record.

One year contracts are often prove it deals or to be a bridge until a prospect is ready to move up the ladder. The FO tries to build chemistry, sometimes it works and other times it simply serves its purpose to fill a need.

Look at SS Simmons, he was very entertaining and served as a bridge player. The MLB is like a traveling circus that provides live & exciting entertainment. Veteran players can all be very talented and should be appreciated for the millions that they're paid. If there were better players/ options that the Twins wanted to sign to a longer commitment then they would have. The front office needs to protect the future of the franchise which is why they dumped Donaldson. 

The Twins have a mission and having a solid defensive team seems to have been a constant goal. They can't rely on hitting bombas to win enough games every year. There have been injuries and failures over the years, just look at Sano's roller coaster of a career. 

One year contracts are completely understandable until they can bring up more exciting players from the minors or sign the FA's that they need. And Correa is compensating for some of the savings from the many short 1 year contracts. Any player can get injured at anytime so the Twins did need to trade for 1 year of CF Michael Taylor.  It's a necessity from the perspective of upper management. A proven vet is often better than having a rookie or Celestino fill the spot. 

The short 1 year contracts allow for roster flexibility which is good when there may be more free agents or AAA prospects available/ ready next year. Rome wasn't built in a day. It can take a lifetime and patience is a virtue.

[Greggory Masterson]

4 minutes ago, sun said:

C.J. Cron was left off the chart. Both Cron and Schoop were productive journeymen that helped the Twins set the new bomba record.

One year contracts are often prove it deals or to be a bridge until a prospect is ready to move up the ladder. The FO tries to build chemistry, sometimes it works and other times it simply serves its purpose to fill a need.

Look at SS Simmons, he was very entertaining and served as a bridge player. The MLB is like a traveling circus that provides live & exciting entertainment. Veteran players can all be very talented and should be appreciated for the millions that they're paid. If there were better players/ options that the Twins wanted to sign to a longer commitment then they would have. The front office needs to protect the future of the franchise which is why they dumped Donaldson. 

The Twins have a mission and having a solid defensive team seems to have been a constant goal. They can't rely on hitting bombas to win enough games every year. There have been injuries and failures over the years, just look at the Sano's roller coaster of a career. 

One year contracts are completely understandable until they can bring up more exciting players from the minors or sign the FA's that they need. And with Correa it's compensating for some of the savings from the many short 1 year contracts. Any player can get injured at anytime so the Twins to need to trade for 1 year of CF Michael Taylor.  It's necessary from the perspective of upper management. A proven vet is often better than having a rookie or Celestino fill the spot. What's there to complain about? 

Cron was actually a waiver-wire pickup. Going through all of the transactions makes you remember a lot of things that you forgot, like that Chris Giminez signed a MiLB contract before the 2017 season, never played a minor league game and caught 59 for the Twins, signed with the Cubs in the offseason, then was traded back to the Twins at the waiver trade deadline.

[Nine of twelve]

With the exception of Nelson Cruz I don't think there's anyone on this list who would have been worth signing for more than one year. Of course that begs the question: how many were worth signing for even one year?

[rv78]

4 hours ago, Nine of twelve said:

With the exception of Nelson Cruz I don't think there's anyone on this list who would have been worth signing for more than one year. Of course that begs the question: how many were worth signing for even one year?

Exactly. Can't say anyone outside of Cruz moved the needle for the team. Pathetic. It shows how good the FO has been at signing "good" players. Answer = not very. I guess if you are going to call them one year "wonders" you have to "wonder" why they signed them in the first place.

[sun]

Fans can have selective memories. If Cron, Schoop, Marwin Gonzalez & Sergio Romo weren't worth the short contracts, then how did the Twins win 101 games & the Central Division in 2019, with the 3rd best record in the AL.

One year contracts helped put the 2019 team together.

[Twins_Fan_For_Life]

Was Matt Wisler a one-year signing?  

[Greggory Masterson]

16 minutes ago, Twins_Fan_For_Life said:

Was Matt Wisler a one-year signing?  

Waiver claim from Seattle. I didn’t write much about waiver claims, but they have gotten a number of solid players that way, most predominantly Cron and Wisler, off the top of my head. 

[TwinsDr2021]

17 hours ago, sun said:

C.J. Cron was left off the chart. Both Cron and Schoop were productive journeymen that helped the Twins set the new bomba record.

One year contracts are often prove it deals or to be a bridge until a prospect is ready to move up the ladder. The FO tries to build chemistry, sometimes it works and other times it simply serves its purpose to fill a need.

Look at SS Simmons, he was very entertaining and served as a bridge player. The MLB is like a traveling circus that provides live & exciting entertainment. Veteran players can all be very talented and should be appreciated for the millions that they're paid. If there were better players/ options that the Twins wanted to sign to a longer commitment then they would have. The front office needs to protect the future of the franchise which is why they dumped Donaldson. 

The Twins have a mission and having a solid defensive team seems to have been a constant goal. They can't rely on hitting bombas to win enough games every year. There have been injuries and failures over the years, just look at Sano's roller coaster of a career. 

One year contracts are completely understandable until they can bring up more exciting players from the minors or sign the FA's that they need. And Correa is compensating for some of the savings from the many short 1 year contracts. Any player can get injured at anytime so the Twins did need to trade for 1 year of CF Michael Taylor.  It's a necessity from the perspective of upper management. A proven vet is often better than having a rookie or Celestino fill the spot. 

The short 1 year contracts allow for roster flexibility which is good when there may be more free agents or AAA prospects available/ ready next year. Rome wasn't built in a day. It can take a lifetime and patience is a virtue.

Cron and Schoop both had two of their worst years in 2019 based on WAR, also is the Twins mission having a solid defensive team, they seem to be failing on that one.

Is this front office trying to build a civilization or a baseball team to win a playoff game? You are correct there are a large chunk of fans that have waited their whole entire life time for a playoff win.

[Karbo]

This is another example of why it is so important to draft well and build from within, especially for a mid market team. So far. it seems to me that drafting players may be a short coming for this FO. On the same hand, they seem to do fairly well picking up other teams MiLB players to develop.

[Trov]

I think fans need to remember that very few FA actually live up to their multi year deals.  First, most do not become FA until the tail end of their careers, and some big name players never make it to FA because their team retains them, or they are traded to a team that extends them.  Yes, there is normally 1 bigger name each year that does reach FA, and some more than that.  However, it is not common place.  There are about 6 teams that can take on bad long term contracts and write it off, outside of them, just about every team needs to be very risk adverse as to who they spend on.  

Every team needs young guys to come up to make their team work.  I cannot think of 1 team that is mainly built from big FA signings.  Even guys that have big long term deals, quite a few were traded first.  The main teams I can think that has built a large amount of team from FA signings are Mets and Padres, but even them it is not as much as you may think.  

Angels would continue to try, but have failed, and really they should be the model to not follow.  They routinely make the wrong long term signings of big name FA.  It started with Albert, and went on from there.  Not that he was bad the whole time, but he never moved the needle enough.  They have brought in big name after big name for a long stretch, only to now waste the best player of our generation in non-playoff games. 

Any time I read comments, or articles about needing to make bigger long term deals, I point out how bad the Angels have done it.  People forget that baseball cannot be changed by 1 single player.  It is not like football where a top QB can make huge difference, or even more so in NBA where 1 guy can fully change a bad team to a good team.  No one signing will ever swing a team from bad to good, it takes several players and depth.  

[sun]

1 hour ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Cron and Schoop both had two of their worst years in 2019 based on WAR, also is the Twins mission having a solid defensive team, they seem to be failing on that one.

Is this front office trying to build a civilization or a baseball team to win a playoff game? You are correct there are a large chunk of fans that have waited their whole entire life time for a playoff win.

Target Field opened in 2010. I'd guess that can be counted as part of building a civilization. Build it and they will come and now we have Buck & Correa. It's a start. 😄

[Rosterman]

Well, I liked the one year addition of Taylor (via trade) to allow the Twins to keep Celestino down on the farm for another season, as well as figure out what to do with guys like Martin and Ldwis, who probably won't be playing shortstop.

Most of the guys on the 1-year-list would've loved to get a multi-year contract, but failed. The next step is to get a contract (and maybe a team option - not a player option) for significantly more...if they produce. Or the hope that they do produce and egt traded to a real contender, or will be in-line for a multi-year deal.

And then, you ask, would a team be better spent to spend the money they paid for a Happ/Shoemaker and Bundy/Archer and get a better option in the off-season (assuming a player wants to come and play for your team in a multi-year deal). 

That's a heavy hunk of change that the Twins invested in single year additions to the roster that added little or nothing. Except for the fact that the Twins have x-amount of money to spend and that the front office can throw back into our faces that "they tried" in nthe free agent marketplace, rather than just rely on waiver claims and the signing of minor league free agents, most of whom would contribute accordingly.

Which brings the point, do you invest earlier in your own prospects. Do you go out-of-your-way to keep, say, Berrios, as an example...rather than search out free agents.

Quote

 

 

[ashbury]

17 hours ago, Greggory Masterson said:

Waiver claim from Seattle. I didn’t write much about waiver claims

Please do. Piecemeal memory is no substitute for someone taking a careful pass through the record.  Many teams play the waiver-wire game, and our Twin are part of it, so it's worth evaluating whether it's been worth the effort and roster churn.

[Twins_Fan_For_Life]

23 hours ago, Greggory Masterson said:

Waiver claim from Seattle. I didn’t write much about waiver claims, but they have gotten a number of solid players that way, most predominantly Cron and Wisler, off the top of my head. 

Re: Wisler

Thank you for clarifying.   I couldn't remember the particulars.  I do remember they declined to offer him arbitration the second year, which was kind of surprising. 

[Minny505]

Disregarding bullpen pickups, only 5 of these 1 year contract players were expected to be decent when signed: Lynn, Schoop. Cruz, Hill, Simmons. While Cruz makes up the majority of the value, those players collectively lived up to the contracts they received.

The rest were questionable signings before they even passed their physicals, and the collective results are so awful that it's time to admit that this FO doesn't know how to identify bounce-back talent. Bundy was probably the best signing of those question marks, which shows how much this strategy has backfired.

And that's fine. A front office does not need to be good at everything. They just need to understand their strengths and weaknesses and lean into those strengths while avoiding their weaknesses. 

And THAT has been the problem. They just haven't been able to stop themselves from leaning into their weakness.

But maybe that has now changed. Gallo is the only bounce-back, 1 year contract, and he is a very different type of bounce-back candidate. Every name on that questionable 1 year list had a bounce back upside of "He was fine". Gallo has All-star, Gold Glover upside.

Still not of a Cruz or Simmons level of average expected. Gallo is still a bounce-back signing. 

But at least this one has real upside.