Leaderboard

I will stick my neck out as an oldtimer and ask what the heck do all those new 'stats' mean? I don't like that baseball has been reduced to all these metrics which make everything so mechanical. I can't remember the last time I attended a game where someone hit a big HR and the fans all got giddy and buzzed...wow, what launch angle...what exit velocity. Its a new world.... I also think voicing this on this site will make me very unpopular, but its an opinion and I have noticed that newcomers comments here are not embraced with much friendliness. Thats too bad too. As for Sano--he still needs to cut down on the k's. No question he did get several very big hits during the season and he was a much improved hitter. Still a work in progress. Is he ultimately going to be a 1Bman? Probably.

1) The Dyson trade didn't work out. That said, in scouting, can you "see" that a player is injured? Is that possible without X-ray vision? I'm not being snarky, I really don't know. 2) Odorizzi was a really good trade. Will the player they gave up ever make it to AA? 3) You didn't mention that they turned Garcia into Zack Littell. That turned out well, no?

Yeah, but this isn't trading for minor leaguers. It's trading for major leaguers. I'd give some cautionary notes there. Certainly that didn't work well in the Sam Dyson trade. Maybe the chaos and urgency of a trade deadline worked against them, but they clearly didn't see he was damaged good when they scouted him. Jake Odorizzi looked good last year, but he didn't look terribly good the year after they acquired him, though it looks like they got away without giving up too much.Love Sergio Romo. No arguments there. Finally, the only other time I remember them trading for a major leaguer was the 2017 trade deadline debacle. They traded for Jaime Garcia, but then panicked and reversed course a few days later, traded him away, traded away their closer Brandon Kintzler - and then won the Wild Card. That's a pretty mixed bag of major league trades. I'd perhaps conclude they did a decent job in some of their 2018 deadline trades that look like they're paying out. But I'll hold back on evaluating them until I see how this offseason works out.

Just adding plays to the 40 man roster and claiming a trade a win, seems to be a pretty low bar we've set for this front office. Maybe we should wait to see if they actually contribute anything at the major league before we call this a huge haul.

Done.

No one should be untouchable... Let's not get blinded by less than 400 MLB PAs like several did with the Turtle last winter. I'm intrigued trading with the Cubs...

I would take a couple of years of Bryant for the right price. As I said ... you listen to offers, and if the right one comes along ... Not sure what that would be with something involving Arraez, but, I'd listen.

It will weaken 2B....but they will have added Darvish or Bryant....not sure the team is weaker overall. I think Gordon will be ready this summer. If Lewis is the stud everyone believes, he might be ready to come up this year at some point. If they have to downgrade at 2B (offensively) to add Darvish, I'm all in.

Yeah, don't think you can say that, just because these minor leaguers the FO traded for are success stories just because they've been added to the 40-man. That's a real stretch, even for me, and I've watched enough of thise guys play to be appropriately impressed by them. But keep in mind, the FO that added them to their 40-man roster is the same FO that traded for them in the first place! It's not like their decisions were subsequently evaluated by a different panel, who then said, "Why, YES, these kids are good. Well done, Twins FO, go ahead and add them to your 40-man roster." It's not that surprising that the guys who made the deals to get them would now decide not to let them get away for nothing. As I said, I like the ones I've personally watched and I think it's perfectly reasonable to add them to the 40-man. But I'm not on board with claiming that's some kind of evidence of how brilliant the FO is. For that, I think we need to wait to see how these guys perform on the big stage, eventually.

A trade of Arraez for Yu Darvish take 21.5M off the books for the Cubs who seem very reluctant to exceed the Luxury tax.

But they will occasionally put out a quality product at whatever dumb name their stadium has this year. "Betty's Really Neat AirBNB Field at ReCyCl Aluminum Can Recycling, Inc Stadium" per source: http:www.bidhereforWSStadiumnamingrights,com Local fans already referring to it as BRN'd out ReCC.

Sano and Arraez for Bryant and Darvish????? Now that would be a blockbuster!

This seems like another pro-FO piece without a lot to back it up. The FO didn't trade Dozier when his value was at it's peak and threw in the towel at the trade deadline that year as well. Smeltzer is a bullpen and Raley might be a 4th OFer. Escobar is probably the best trade here in that Duran has some real potential as a #3 type (which is a good thing). I don't know how anyone can say the Pressly trade was good. Alaca is 25 years old now and put up nearly a 6.00 era in AA. Pressly is one of the best relievers in the game. Chalmers isn't anything to get excited about. He's 23 and thrown 20 innings above low A ball and has serious control problems. Not a lot of upside there. Last year the Twins had 10 players amass at least 2 WAR. This FO acquired only 3 of them (Cruz, Odorizzi and Pineda). I liked the Schoop and Gonzalez signings last year, Cron was a good pickup and I like that the FO hired Rocco and decided to go with Garver instead of signing someone else to play with Castro. Those were all good moves. But this FO also traded away Huascar Ynoa (who made the majors at 21 for Atlanta) and while they've made a number of trades, they have yet to trade for a top 100 prospect and Jake Cave is the only guy that's managed more than even a 1 WAR season in the majors. I'm not saying our FO is a failure but so far most of their moves haven't done much, although they've made a lot more moves than normal. They didn't understand when they had an opportunity in 2017, didn't do anything to reinforce this team at the deadline this year. There is value in letting guys like Polanco and Kepler play instead of replacing them and those moves look great now. But most of the success is because of the players, not the FO or ownership.

I would really, really, REALLY like to see him repeat his performance this year. That to me is the biggest question. We know he can overcome adversity. But can he overcome success?

Ha, yeah I like this one which comes from the land of "Wow, that's a hot take!":

For the Twins, though, it's not an "either-or", it's an "and". They probably need Pineda AND another good starter or two. I've got no qualms if you prefer Bumgarner at 4/72, etc., but for every pitcher you pass on, it increases the chance you'll wind up fishing in the Martín Pérez waters again. The Twins probably can't afford to be that choosy about FA SP this winter when we're talking about estimated market rate contracts.

I love Black Friday deals!

Unfortunately, Doogie didn't say you could do it yesterday. Only RIGHT NOW. (Which I guess has already passed too? )

Gunnarther's points are all well taken. I would just add a few additional points on the positive side. Regarding your conclusion, "most of the success is because of the players, not the FO or ownership," I think the front office deserves some credit for player development. The hitting and pitching coaches they hired appear to have contributed to significant improvements in velocity and pitch selection among the pitchers, and to improved pitch selection among the hitters. For instance, was Odorizzi undervalued when they traded for him, or appropriately value and he improved while here? Either way reflects well on management. Likewise you credit them for "letting guys like Polanco and Kepler play," which I agree was a bold and correct decision (not to mention correctly assessing their potential and locking them up long-term, which now looks brilliant!) But stating it that way implies that playing time alone was all they needed to become stars. That may be true, but the fact is they improved notably, as did several other hitters, and such is improvement is far from inevitable, suggesting they were also well coached. Perhaps most impressive is the dramatic improvement of relievers like Duffey, May, and Rogers. At the beginning of the year I thought the failure to upgrade the bullpen was egregious malpractice and would doom the season. By the end of the season their bullpen was above average, and those three guys look like core contributors. I'm very impressed by that. They also got contributions from Littell, Dobnak, and Smeltzer, while pulling the plug at appropriate times on Harper, Parker, Magill, and Hildenberger. I'd still like to see Hildy and Romero blossom, but I'm glad they weren't throw out there when we needed wins and weren't delivering. My main point is, while it's definitely significant that 7 of their top 10 WAR players were acquired by previous management, and I'm glad to have that pointed out, I don't think it's inevitable that those previously acquired players would have become so productive without the new coaches. I can't tell how much credit should go to the players and how much to the coaches, and I think you're right to give most to the players. But I do think the player-development staff made a contribution as well, and based on last year, they seem to be good at bringing out the best in their players. And that gives me a great deal of hope for the future.

This, a hundred times this. We could write an equally unbalanced article making the FO look completely incompetent. I hope TD doesn’t lose its objectivity because there have been a couple of doozies lately

I don't understand how quantum physics works but it doesn't distract me from enjoying my toast in the morning.

Give me back Escobar and Presley and you can keep all of those prospects. Eduardo Escobar posted a 4.2 WAR in 2019. For reference, that tied Tatis Jr (who was phenomenal in him games played). Juan Soto posted a 4.7. Freddie Freeman and JT Realmuto 4.4s. Nelson Cruz a 4.3. He posted a higher WAR than Max Kepler and Mitch Garver. Higher than Jose Altuve, Austin Meadows, and JD Martinez. Crude measurement, I know, but that’s what I’m using for the sake of time. We all know about Pressley. He’s been, arguably, the best reliever in the MLB since he arrived in Houston until his injury issues late in the season. These guys are among the best in Major League Baseball at their positions (both positions we need). I don’t know how, with a straight face, you can list the likes of Devon Smeltzer, Luke Raley, a couple of hard throwers who will be a fraction of Presley if we’re lucky, and Celestino, who was awful save for a few months and is years away from the majors on a team with a loaded outfield, and say “See, these guys are killing it.” There are some things people seem to forget. This front office had a pretty good offseason last year....the year before that was an epic disaster. Also, many of the significant contributors on the team were holdovers from the previous regime. They brought in Cruz who was a resounding success....but he fell into their lap (nobody really wanted him that badly due to his age). Aside from that they’ve brought in guys like Morrison, Lynn, Zach Duke, CJ Cron, Jonathan Schoop, etc. Hardly a murderer’s row. Don’t get me wrong, I have faith in them. But way too many people in the media and fandom are anointing Falvine the Kings of Baseball. In reality l, that isn’t really based on a whole lot. They won the worst division in baseball and got utterly dismantled by the team that lost to the team that lost to the Nationals in the World Series. I still need to see some things play out. I don’t think they’ll be giving a long runway in terms of spending (not as much as people think), and a lot of players are due for regression. There is a good chance everyone will be writing articles expressing the opposite sentiment this time next year.

I have to say I don’t believe these rumors. Not sure why Chicago would target Arraez. I would only be interested in getting MLB pitching for him. I don’t see any reason to trade away one of our best cheap hitters unless I’m getting wowed by the return.

I'd do that yesterday.

Well, his team has the 2-time reigning Cy Young winner on the staff, so there's no shame being behind him. Not sure how you get "3rd at best" -- Wheeler had the 2nd best bWAR, 2nd best fWAR, 2nd best FIP, even including Stroman's numbers from Toronto. Admittedly he's closer to Stroman/Syndergaard in those categories than to deGrom, but again, no shame in that either -- the Twins could benefit from that level of pitcher too. (If Wheeler was closer to deGrom's numbers, he'd be in the Cole-Strasburg group for expected contract.) Edit: I guess I should ask, what do you think he will get paid? MLBTR predicted 5/100. Doogie Wolfson said it could get done for 5/89 (5 years at the current QO rate).

It is an unsafe world out there. All you can do is keep your head on a swivel, prepare them as best you can, and let them know that at least for now, Jose Abreu still only has a one-year deal.

More and more women are getting job opportunities in front offices in baseball. But today the Cubs announced that they have hired Rachel Folden as the 4th coach of their Rookie League affiliate. From the tweet, she's got an incredible playing and coaching background. I don't know if she's the first woman to coach in the minor leagues. It's something we can research if anyone wants. But it is a nice step.

I tell my son don't be an idiot signing free agents and spending money means nothing if your minor league system isn't stacked to produce in the future. Sure this type of thinking might get you to the world series or even win it but it can't be sustained over the long haul.

We have a lot of infield depth so it's much easier to cover the trade for Arraez than it is to come up with good SPs.

This explains the fresh dog poop in my driveway every morning... my neighbor is a White Sox fan. At least I think it's dog poop...

THE FEAR IS REAL!!!!!!!!!

Parents, give your kids an extra hug today, when you send them off to school. You can't know whether this will be the day we see the news bulletin that Chicago has signed both Cole and Strasburg. Kids, give your parents that hug, too.

I totally share the kids feelings and fears. And I am over 60.

Great article. My sister has been in the Marlins front office for almost 20 years now. She has some great stories about being a women in MLB.

Similar to scott's study is http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2013/12/death-to-tinstaapp-updating-mckinneys.html Perhaps bust for a player who did not accumulate 9 WAR in 6 years is a little harsh. Ben Revere had a car war less than 9 bwar but has career earnings of 17 million. I would happily be a bust for that. Nick Blackburn, a top 56 rank player, made it 3 years. Success or bust? If one would turn the language around to there is a 22% chance of sustained success from a prospect I think people would have better understood the concept rather than bust.

The range is 500 miles on the premium vehicle. This isn't a vehicle that will need to charge on job sites very often, and could often be a power generator itself. I don't think people really realize what it doesn't cost to run an electric vehicle. No oil changes. Brakes last twice as long. The motors last twice as long. There is no transmission. Fueling the vehicle is pennies compared to gasoline (seriously, this truck probably costs $25 to go 500 miles if charged on the overnight grid). I'm not talking about this being useful on a job site 150 miles from bum**** nowhere, but that's not where most job sites exist. And the savings are enormous when applied over the life of a vehicle. This is why I never understood why electric/hybrid has been pushed at economical consumers in small hatches; that's not where you can actually save real money. The real money is saved in vehicles that are driven 100+ miles a day, where electric and their 25-40% operating cost really starts to add up. For example, you can buy a sedan that gets 40mpg on the freeway. That's really good. Move that same vehicle to electric and the savings are pretty minimal because the cost of operation is already so low. The savings are there, but they're not enormous. But take a fleet vehicle that mainly operates in an urban environment, rarely drives over 200 miles a day, and gets pounded into the ground five days a week, 52 weeks a year, while getting just 12-15mpg... Now that's where you actually see savings and where businesses can start being convinced to move to electric, which will drag the rest of us along with them. And that's why Amazon dropped $700 million on Rivian: to build them fleet vehicles. UPS should have done it five years ago, maybe even longer, but traditional business is far stupider than free marketers want us to believe. It's just one more reason why companies like Amazon are lapping the field on traditional businesses in pretty much every way; they don't have their heads up their asses.

Incidentally, the baseball trade simulator https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trade-simulator/ , which evaluates "surplus value", has Price and Eovaldi both so deeply negative in value, that if paired up for trade the Sox would also have to give up both Mookie Betts and Andrew Benintendi (as one way to do it), just to get to break-even for nothing of significant value in return. Surplus value isn't the whole story - if you like a player's contribution enough, and if you are not budget-constrained, then maybe you consider it a privilege to overpay for their services. But, the above site does provide some enlightenment.

Read the article and found it...interesting. I guess on paper it makes some sense. Some. But why not keep our prospects and use our payroll for different guys, including Hamels or Pineda for that #4 spot? I'd like that much more than Price at this point. And we wonder why the FA market hasn't been so crazy about high $ and long term.

Doubt. If it's true, I hope they get it done.

Painful as it sounds, selling Arraez now is selling high. This is how you do it. Think of all the can't miss guys we held on to, that ended up missing? That being said, I see Arraez as a future batting champion and an excellent lead off table setter, and I like his chances to be an all-star. If it isn't a haul (Contreras or Baez or Darvish) then move on. I could see the Cubs partnering with us on a blockbuster.

Dangling suggests he is an attractive addition. He had negative WAR last year and costs $16M/year. Not so attractive.

How does adding Kris Bryant weaken any team? The Cubs are going to want multiple players who are young and cost controlled in return - perhaps some already with a bit of service time and perhaps some prospects. Keep in mind that Bryant is very capable OF and can play 1B too. And he's good on the bases too. The Cubs biggest issue is that Bryant, Rizzo, Baez, Schwarber, Almora (no biggie) and Contreras all become UFAs in 2021 and 2022. No way they can extend them all. So they have choices to make. I would not expect them to deal a frontline starter as they still have a team they think can contend. This is all about retooling the core so it isn't all coming due at once for them. And the Twins are definitely the type of team that could get over the top with a few added pieces. Also could see the Cubs dangling Kimbrel perhaps.

Schoop did his job as a placeholder until Arraez got red hot. What's wrong with doing the same thing in 2020? If Arraez was traded...

The question I always ask for these types of things is who do we have to replace Arraez... That would be Nick Gordon or Adrianza... I'm not ready to crown either as the 2020 starting 2B... and I'm guessing most wouldn't be too excited about bringing back Schoop on a 1 year make good deal. Now that said, Arraez should be a pretty vaulable asset, and if he brought back high end pitching, I'd certainly listen.

I'll just say this. Watching Sano home run highlights is a delight.

"Sell more than pink and sequined women’s apparel." My wife (Ashley) gets no annoyed with this. She sees a shirt that looks nice, then takes a closer look and 90% of the time its bedazzled (the other 10% of the time is way too expensive). Ashley is as big of a Twins/baseball fan as I am. she knows the game, the players, the rules. We've been at a games where someone does something bone headed (eg forgetting to tag up) and she will yell (very sarcastically) "what are you doing?!", and more than once she has had a dudebro (thank you for using this term Mary), try to mansplain the rules. She just looks them straight in the eye and says "it was rhetorical" Other Ashley story. She loves Marney, like we all do. Marney's job is Ashley's dream job. Once in KC, we were by the camera well before the game, where Marney sits. Ashley wanted to tell Marney how much she admires her, the job that she does, and just that she thinks she's great. It came out as "Marney, you're my hero". Marney took is in stride, but Ashley felt so dumb so saying that. Thanks for this series Mary.

I don't personally care how they improve pitching so long as it's improved. I'll simply say that I'd rather keep the prospects and spend the cash, but if they say get Jon Gray for a reasonable price and can fix him quickly, I'd be quite happy with that too. I think the problem though is that teams are in general wising up about these types of things. Gray will be a hot commodity on the trade front, and I suspect we won't get as lucky as we did with Odorizzi.

Okay, so I looked at the 1990 list. There are 40 pitchers on the list, and I count 16, I think, that indisputably (I hope) qualify as successful, accumulating WAR exceeding 5. now, that study says that if this year was representative among the 13 years included in their study, it would contain only about 9 successful pitchers, or just above 20%. Not the 35-40% number I'm looking at. I can get to the 20% success rate real fast with this list: Appier, Alvarez, Tapani, Nagy, McDonald, Kile, Avery, Stanton. Mercker... So, I'm skeptical about the study cited, but mostly, I think today's success rates are so much better that clinging to these old perceptions puts us out of touch with what our FO knows to be the reality. I mean, if we think about the fact that a half dozen players from our own Top 30 debuted last year and not one of them ever came close to being on BA's Top 100 list? There's just no way I can buy into a belief that those top 100 prospects aren't succeeding at better than a 50-60% clip these days, maybe better for position players.

Better call Mama! Time for more Gellner in the booth! I am with you on the Morneau/Gellner combo on the TV broadcast. Her calls on those games we’re great! I have two follow ups that weren’t exactly approached, but I think are relevant. 1) In a sport that is dropping in viewership and ticket sales, how can the MLB not prioritize the market opportunity to capture a larger portion of 50% of the human race? Tapping into women as a market segment has massive dollars out there just waiting to be taken advantage of. 2) reading this series of articles and internalizing the message, I come to my own role. Men as advocates. Of course women don’t “need” our voice, but when we raise our voices together we can bring a spot light to injustice. Thank you TCAnelle for your excellent works!