Free Agent Faceoff: Marcell Ozuna vs. Nelson Cruz

Good write up, but I feel like signing Cruz is a no-brainer. The one position the Twins appear to be fully set at for years to come is DH, so there's no need to sign an expensive long term player there when worst case scenario the spot can serve as a mostly off day for a rotation of sluggers.

Where is the option for the case against both?

Rather than spending ten plus million on Cruz or much, much more for the other guy, how about spending $600K on one of the young kids in the system? That would also open up a spot to rotate several of their big bats in the regular lineup thru the DH spot.

Seeing that the Twins have pulled their offer to Cruz off the table, got a feeling looking internally is high on their list. 

Rotating internal options is a better option because it gives a chance to rest established players like Sano and Donaldson. It creates more opportunity for younger players who are ready to be called. I don’t want Rooker and Larnach to sit on the bench. It is also more cost effective. I loved the Nelson Cruz years but last year should be the last.

I've said it elsewhere on this site, but I think it's never a good idea to sign a DH to a long-term contract. A short-term deal locks down an effective bat for the roster but offers long-term flexibility with how you use the full 25+ roster over a few years.

There are always exceptions of course, but a David Ortiz only comes around so often (fortunately).

So, regarding Cruz and his natural and normal decline.

He had trouble last year especially late. The knee was part of it. The reason we don't see any hitter doing well near or in the 40's (with very rare exception) is usually vision. The eyes ability to change focus hits the wall around that time. I think he's hit that wall. Just won't be able to consistently focus well enough on pitches with movement and speed. I say use internal options and spend on a starter, a couple of relievers and the utility guy or a new shortstop.

Cruz. I don't like the idea of signing long term DH only contracts unless you're getting Edgar Martinez or David Ortiz. And I don't think Ozuna is either of those guys. And while he can technically play the OF, so can I. You can put me out there, but I wouldn't be helping the team. Ozuna is a DH only moving forward and I just don't think he can replicate his 2020 stats for full years moving forward.

 

Cruz is likely not a 162 game DH this year even. I think his end of the year slump was caused largely by his ailing knee, but as you get into your 40s you don't become less likely to have joint pain. I think he still has a good year in him and some classic Boom Stick stretches where he can carry the offense, but don't think I'd pencil him in for all 162. But he's still useful to have in the lineup and in the clubhouse on a 1 year deal. 

 

Part of his usefulness is that counting on the young guys to come up and replicate anywhere close to his numbers, or even provide above league average DH numbers, is not a smart plan going into a year you're looking to contend. Rooker has never put up Cruz like numbers in the minors so why would we think he'd suddenly do it in the majors? He looked really good for a week in the majors, but that literally means nothing. The league is going to have scouting reports on him now and he's going to have to adjust from the jump this year.

 

It's time for the young guys to start getting their chances, but don't do it without a safety net. Cruz provides a nice 1 year (throw in an option year again if he really wants it) safety net for the kids. He can get the majority of the DH ABs as long as he's proving to be useful while also helping mentor the young kids. Cruz and Donaldson are both professional hitters who have shown they're more than willing to work with the young guys and disseminate the wisdom that have helped them both produce at very high levels. Put Cruz in the DH spot for 2021, but give him some regular rest while cycling other guys through to keep him as healthy as he can at 41 years old and getting everyone who needs/disserves them regular ABs. Cruz is the perfect veteran safety net as the team works to contend while continuing to look to be competitive for the years to come.

In his age 24 season (2019), Rooker OPS'd .933 at AAA.  In his age 24 season (2004), Cruz OPS'd .989 in A+, and .919 at AA.  Based on this, Rooker would appear to be more advanced than Cruz at a similar point in their careers--why would we be so quick to assume Rooker can't possibly come close to Cruz' production?  This is not to say I think he well--I am reasonably certain Nelson Cruz will put up better numbers in 2021 than Rooker.  Will those numbers be far enough better to offset the extra millions Cruz will earn, and the decreased flexibility the Twins will have to endure?

Neither

In his age 24 season (2019), Rooker OPS'd .933 at AAA.  In his age 24 season (2004), Cruz OPS'd .989 in A+, and .919 at AA.  Based on this, Rooker would appear to be more advanced than Cruz at a similar point in their careers--why would we be so quick to assume Rooker can't possibly come close to Cruz' production?  This is not to say I think he well--I am reasonably certain Nelson Cruz will put up better numbers in 2021 than Rooker.  Will those numbers be far enough better to offset the extra millions Cruz will earn, and the decreased flexibility the Twins will have to endure?

It's really hard to compare anyone to Cruz in this context. Cruz was very good until he turned 35 when he became phenomenal. I doubt there has ever been a player that improved their career stats between the age 35-40. Trying to compare Rooker is hard to do. Does anyone remember the scene in Money Ball when Billy Beane explains to the staff they can't think in terms of replacing Giambi with one player. I think that applies here. It's not if we can replace him. Can we build a better team by investing elsewhere?

My preference in order would be:

1. Neither - rotate internal options

2. Ozuna

3. Cruz

I think we have more than enough hitters internally that can be (maybe even NEED to be) rotated through the lineup regularly to fill the DH spot. Ozuna isn't locked into DH only, he can also play outfield, I would guess could probably even play 1B. We've beaten the odds on Cruz's production falling off a cliff the past two years, let's be happy with that and move on instead of rolling the dice one more time against even steeper odds. Also, I keep seeing people excuse Cruz's declined performance at the end of last year with "he had a sore knee." Well, that's what happens when you're 40+ years old. You wake up in the morning with a sore knee for no apparent reason. Or a sore back, or neck, or shoulder, or wrist, or...

My choices -

• Rooker
• Larnach
• Whoever we are resting

Spend the money on a pitcher.  

The article limits the options to these two.  I would say Cruz.  That is because it is for 1 year.  We have options to fill similar rolls in our systems.  I would not want to clog that with a big deal for Ozuna, who may never live up to contract.  His up and down seasons scare me, and even more when his best season was on a short contract season.  He really only had 2 outlying seasons of high OPS.  You list he had three over .775, and one of those was only .800, not like the over .900 of the other two.  

The big question, do you think for 18 mil a year for three years worth his expected numbers over what Rooker or Larnach would be expected?  It is not always what the player can do for the price, but will the cost difference be worth what they would do compared to likely replacement.  Cost of Rooker or Larnach will be for 2 years min 17 mil less, and for third year most likely at least 15 mill less.  Can you spend that money each year on say a starting pitcher or another postion?  

To clarify why I said 3 years is with Cruz to 1 year the 3 years is the difference of the contracts. 

Cruz is a victim of his own magnificence. A normal 40 year old former MLB star plays amateur ball where reduced skills are the norm. Cruz has been terrific and if he was even 35 the discussions would be totally different. But he isn't and age happens.

All of the arguments are well put and it does seem like the internal options are great, but wouldn't it make some sense to see Nelson Cruz again this coming summer. I can even accept if he is injured or suddenly cannot Boom. I'm of the mind to offer $15-17 million for this year with some option that is at the team's discretion and might include a path into coaching.  

Nelson Cruz is not even the shadow of Harmon Killebrew but letting the Killer go to Kansas City was the single worst mistake in franchise history. The Twins can afford to take a swig of Cruz in '21. Who knows, he may once again forget how old he is and do his little tip-toe jog around the bases enough to keeping us all smiling at the absurdity of it all.

Absolute no to Ozuna. He's shown none of the consistency Cruz has shown. Further, we are talking about a long term commitment, which I am against. I support the DH, always have, for many reasons, but you just don't LOCK UP a DH unless he's a special bat.

I think Rooker is going to be an OK player. Maybe even a good one, I think Kirilloff is going to be great. I think Larnach is also going to be good to great, which is why I hope any trade the Twins MIGHT make doesn't include AK OR Larnach. Those two could be our corner OF for years to come, or a combination of 1B and OF.

Why, unless a trade opportunity came our way would we part with either?

Cruz for 1yr makes so much sense for both sides it's almost ridiculous it hasn t happened yet. But I get it.

But as great as Cruz has been, If you want to buy into MLB TRADERUMORS, Brantley could be had for the same projected salary or less and could actually play the OF giving the roster flexibility.

OR, you could sign one of the top 3 SS options, move Polanco to super utility, STILL sign an 11th man amongst the many options available, and still sign Bradley or Pillar for OF depth and versatility to go along with a SP and possible RP move and forgo a direct DH signing.

Of course, IF you buy in to a $135-140M payroll, all bets are off. You can STILL sign or trade for a SP, potentially bring in an 11th man AND another solid BP arm and STILL bring in Cruz or Brantley.

I believe the Dirty Sox are about $120M right now. They MIGHT make a move or two to augment their roster and push it it $130M. Do the Twins actually do less than that?

No to Ozuna long term because there is so much talent on hand. Yes to Cruz on the short hand to let the roster and prospects come up and play.

YES to a signin of Bradley or Pillar on the cheap to fill out the OF and DH spot with Kirilloff and Rooker and everyone else on hand.

Taking things as face value, there's no doubt we shouldn't invest in a FA DH, including Cruz. We can spend more wisely elsewhere & IMO that  rotating at DH is more advantageous  & frees up an extra roster spot. But w/ Cruz there is a magical chemistry, a mutual bond that goes beyond stats. I believe Cruz still has     at least one more good year in him. In 2019 Cruz ruptured his wrist & we thought he was finished but he came back, he has always came back. He knows his body & what needs to be done to maintain it's maximum level.

In this late time IMO they won't bring in the universal DH. It`s time for FO to offer a more reasonable offer. 

It's really hard to compare anyone to Cruz in this context. Cruz was very good until he turned 35 when he became phenomenal. I doubt there has ever been a player that improved their career stats between the age 35-40. Trying to compare Rooker is hard to do. Does anyone remember the scene in Money Ball when Billy Beane explains to the staff they can't think in terms of replacing Giambi with one player. I think that applies here. It's not if we can replace him. Can we build a better team by investing elsewhere?

I pretty much agree with this--as I stated, I doubt Rooker will be as good as Cruz in 2021.  I very much doubt that Rooker will have anywhere near the career Cruz has; I would be beyond shocked to be talking about Brent Rooker, Borderline Hall of Famer in 2035.

That said, I tend to agree with the philosophy behind your Giambi reference.  While Cruz would probably be somewhere around .290/.370/.550 in 2021, and Rooker more like .250/.310/.475, I wonder if the $14M you save by not having Cruz, in addition to the ability to give other players "half-days" by playing them at DH are more valuable than the 100 or so points of OPS you give up with Rooker.  Particularly when taking into consideration that Rooker has very little downside, while Cruz has massive downside.

To be perfectly honest, I think my ideal scenario is to sign Brantley, and go Arraez Brantley 1-2 in the lineup.  You can give each of your outfielders one day completely off every week, and one day at DH every other week, thereby keeping all of them fresh through the season.  Your OBP at the top of the lineup becomes great, especially if you put Donaldson third, and you can then tap into power with Sano, Kepler, and Rooker in the 4-6 spots.  That puts Buxton, Polanco (or a new SS), and Garver/Jeffers at the bottom of your lineup--that's a pretty dang good bottom three, particularly if Garver is closer to his 2019 form.

The dollars direct the team. The Twins can add Kluber and Adrianza to sit around $110 million.

They can add Cruz if they are somewhere near $120+ million for the roster.

Where life gets interesting is if the Twins are open to a payroll between $130-155 million.

I cannot fathom a scenario where the Twins sign Ozuna because they are loaded with corner bats and players to rotate through the DH position. Nelson Cruz is a short term cost and his past production warrants another look, not because the team owes him but because he has been consistently good. While there is some evidence of decline, it is scant and Cruz still compares more than favorably with all other options. A roster of 26 also affords a team to carry a player like Cruz who only carries a bat.

At this time, with this team - no to Ozuna.