Maybe the Twins Have a Spending Problem?

10 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Well the problem there is quite obvious once you notice it. You listed 10 players but only 1 is a pitcher.

Graterol was 20
Alcala - 23

Thorpe - 23

Smelzer - 23

Mejia - 23

Romero - 23

Gonsalves - 23

Stewart - 23

Duffey - 24

Dobnak - 24

Duran is 23, and probably would have been up.

Jordan Balazovic is 22,

Canterino - 23

Enlow  - 22

Winder, Sands, Colina, Vallimont, Burrows, Moran are all already 24, Barnes 25, Cano 27.

It isn't like they waited too long on calling some of them up, it is more like they just weren't that good, or maybe held onto them to long to get any value, the next wave are basically all 24 or older Berrios already had 400 innings by that time.

22 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

The Twins signed Donaldson. They tried to sign Wheeler and Darvish. 

Makes no sense that they can't pay Berrios and Buxton. I'm failing to understand why you can offer big money deals to players who didn't play for the Twins last year, but when it comes to your own players of the same caliber, you need to stick to your guns and insist on getting a still-in-arbitration discount.

If I didn't know any better, I might suspect they are dealing with these players in a way so as not to upset the rest of the league by letting the players set a precedent for how teams need to deal with arbitration-eligible star players. 

We have no idea if they are insisting on a club friendly deal.  You are insisting that Berrios will accept an offer that is reasonable at this point.  He may not be willing to accept an offer unless it is so outrageous that Berrios and his agent are confident no other team will match it.  If this is the case, why would they sign him now?  That would be the height of incompetence.  For one thing, he could blow out his arm next season.  It happens.  Why take the risk if you have to make an offer so high no other team would match?  Why not let the process playout and probably get him for less than would it would take today.  In the meanwhile, take the prospects?

It sounds like they are willing to pay Buxton as long as he actually plays.  This seems very prudent.  Do you really want them committing a huge guarantee to a guy that has a very consistent track record of playing in less than 100 games?  He is a great player but paying full market value for 80 games a year is a very bad investment and one that could really hurt this team for several years.

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

The Twins signed Donaldson. They tried to sign Wheeler and Darvish. 

Makes no sense that they can't pay Berrios and Buxton. I'm failing to understand why you can offer big money deals to players who didn't play for the Twins last year, but when it comes to your own players of the same caliber, you need to stick to your guns and insist on getting a still-in-arbitration discount.

If I didn't know any better, I might suspect they are dealing with these players in a way so as not to upset the rest of the league by letting the players set a precedent for how teams need to deal with arbitration-eligible star players. 

Because in order to sign players that didn't play for you last year, you have to (generally speaking), pay them more than 29 other teams are willing to.  For players you have control over, you simply have to abide by the pay structures set up.  It would be stupid for the team to give up the leverage of arbitration years, just like it would be stupid for the player to give up the leverage of free agency years.

I'm glad you do know better, and don't legitimately think the Twins are trying to hold the salary line for the organizations they're competing against.

I will also add to my previous post, of the top 25 ERA leaders this year, only Brandon Woodruff(24), Chris Bassitt(25), deGrom (26, mostly because of injury), Davish (25 -Japan), and Charlie Morton (24) weren't pitching in the majors by age 23.

So IMO if you minor league pitching prospects aren't ready for the majors by 23, you can assume you aren't getting a top of the rotation arm. Which means Jordan Balazovic needs to be up very, very soon.

Edit- you can actually go to the top 50 and only added the following who weren't pitching in the majors before age 24- Nick Pivetta(24), Sean Manaea(24), Lance Lynn(24), Yusei Kikuchi(28), Luis Castillo(24), Anthony DeSclafani(24), Merrill Kelly(30), Jordan Montgomery(24)

8 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

I will also add to my previous post, of the top 25 ERA leaders this year, only Brandon Woodruff(24), Chris Bassitt(25), deGrom (26, mostly because of injury), Davish (25 -Japan), and Charlie Morton (24) weren't pitching in the majors by age 23.

So IMO if you minor league pitching prospects aren't ready for the majors by 23, you can assume you aren't getting a top of the rotation arm. Which means Jordan Balazovic needs to be up very, very soon.

This is a little bit different when the vast majority of prospects lost an entire year of development time, and then had a delay to the start of this season as well.  I would guess that if COVID didn't happen one of Duran or Balazovic (perhaps both) might already be in the majors.

1 minute ago, nicksaviking said:

Sure, but the leverage means nothing if the player calls your bluff. There's no rule that the Twins have to follow the arbitrary pay structures.

What Buxton and Berrios are asking for pretty much sounds exactly what the players unions has been calling out the owners for for decades. Young players are NOT getting their fair share. The new CBA is coming up, I absolutely could easily see the union pressuring B&B to take a hard stance while the owners are pushing the Twins to keep the status quo. I mean, other clubs with young stars soon to find themselves in the same spot want more Ronald Acuna action, not precedent breaking moves in the players favor.

The Twins should absolutely not be beholden to the other organizations since they will be the one's benefiting while the Twins are left (once again) holding the bag. But covert collusion is nothing new to MLB baseball owners.

That's exactly why I said the teams would be stupid to ignore that leverage--it will lead to them making bad deals.  Take Berrios--he has clearly decided he wants to test the FA market; nor is that a decision he has come to recently.  Thus, if the Twins wanted to sign Berrios 1-2 years ago, they would have had to outbid not the actual market, but Berrios' conception  of the market.  Specifically after Wheeler signed his deal; Berrios I'm sure looked at it as a guy who was older, more injury-prone, and not necessarily better (Berrios 2017-2019 WAR--10.1.  Wheeler 2017-2019 WAR--9.1).  Therefore, is there any reason to think Berrios would be satisfied with the same deal a lesser player got 3 years before?  If you wanted to sign Berrios at any point after that Wheeler deal, I'm assuming a minimum contract is 5/$140M, and if he's expecting that to replace at least 2 if not all 3 arb years, it would be a horrible deal for the Twins (getting only 2-3 more years of control, while spending vastly more at the beginning of the contract--maybe $18M-$20M under arb salaries, against $75M-$80M under the extension).  If you want more extra control, you'd need to go probably 7/$175, which is a huge bet to place on a guy who could quite easily blow out his arm, and never be the same.

1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

This is not even close to true.  It has been reliably reported that Wheeler's agent wouldn't even listen to offers from the Twins--the Twins were expressly told not to waste their time.  As for Yu Darvish, he has posted 8.2 WAR (all in the NL as well) since 2018, which ranks him 32nd in all of baseball.  Do you think the Twins can realistically compete while paying 2nd/3rd starters $20M+ a year?

Please provide any legitimate source for Wheeler's agent telling the Twins to stop wasting their time unless it was in regard to an offer Wheeler's camp already rejected, but the Twins kept floating. If the Twins had made a 5 year / 125MM offer, Wheeler would be wearing a Twins uniform. Instead, they low-balled Wheeler relative to other offers.

Darvish is a legitimate ace, but he came with (and still comes with) injury risk. He's a pitcher who can completely shut down an opposing playoff lineup. Calling him a #2 or #3 based on WAR which includes his injury lost 2018 isn't an argument made in good faith. Darvish is arguably as good as any pitcher not named deGrom from 2019-2021, you know, when he was actually pitching.

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Makes me wonder what the players are asking for. If Berrios is asking for Wheeler's contract and the Twins won't do it I don't get that at all. If he's asking for significantly more than that I can understand the Twins hesitation. Without any real knowledge of what the Twins are offering, or have offered in the past, or what the players are "demanding" it's really hard to say what is going on. Pohlad making comments about the Twins being able to afford both doesn't help anything. Of course they could pay them both, but what does that mean for the rest of the roster?

Not sure what to think about the "still-in-arbitration discount" thought. I mean it's not Falvine's fault the system is what it is. It's unfortunate that teams have as much control as they do over the prime years of player's careers (changing that system is my number 1 hope for the CBA negotiations this winter), but it'd be poor team management to pay players huge contracts that ignore the arbitration system (which is supposed to allow lower payroll teams to compete since they can keep players like Berrios around longer at more affordable rates). 

I know this is a pipe dream, and I also know that only my generation might remember the days, but I would do away with the entire process and go back to the days where the teams could control their rosters indefinitely.  I can understand arbitration, but free agency, in my extremely humble opinion, has harmed the sport significantly.  What casual fan can keep track of a team from year to year without a scorecard?  The players stopped being just that, players, when they found out they could hire their gun (bat? Arm?) to the highest bidder and retire from life before 40.  And the people who pay to see them play have no connection to most of them, as they turn over year to year throughout our lifetimes.  Remember the 60's Twins?  Darn right.  Remember the 2000's Twins?  Yea, neither do I.  When you look at a team and see 20 different players than you did even 5 years ago, the fans lose their attachment and, at least a lot of them, lose the desire to come watch.  Unless they are winning 101 games, then it is the chic place to be; otherwise, you see crowds like you have this year.  Anyway, the game was better from the fans point of view when they knew their team, and the fans pay the bills; it is all about the fans.  The day the game became all about the players it stopped being a game, which is what the fans want to see.  My sermon for the day. 

11 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Please provide any legitimate source for Wheeler's agent telling the Twins to stop wasting their time unless it was in regard to an offer Wheeler's camp already rejected, but the Twins kept floating. If the Twins had made a 5 year / 125MM offer, Wheeler would be wearing a Twins uniform. Instead, they low-balled Wheeler relative to other offers.

Darvish is a legitimate ace, but he came with (and still comes with) injury risk. He's a pitcher who can completely shut down an opposing playoff lineup. Calling him a #2 or #3 based on WAR which includes his injury lost 2018 isn't an argument made in good faith. Darvish is arguably as good as any pitcher not named deGrom from 2019-2021, you know, when he was actually pitching.

 

Aaron Gleeman has said it multiple times on the Gleeman and the Geek podcast.

From 2019-2021, Darvish is 13th in WAR, so it's not really "arguable" he's as good as anyone not named de Grom.  He was going to turn 32 in the first year of his contract, and had only made 30 starts in a season twice (one season he made 29).  There was massive injury and aging risk, and acting like the Twins should have just ignored that isn't a position based in reality.

31 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

 

Aaron Gleeman has said it multiple times on the Gleeman and the Geek podcast.

 

From 2019-2021, Darvish is 13th in WAR, so it's not really "arguable" he's as good as anyone not named de Grom.  He was going to turn 32 in the first year of his contract, and had only made 30 starts in a season twice (one season he made 29).  There was massive injury and aging risk, and acting like the Twins should have just ignored that isn't a position based in reality.

Sorry, without a link, your comment is not credible in light of the dozens of printed articles I found stating the Twins were in the bidding and had made offers, were meeting with Wheeler's agents and talking directly to Wheeler himself. In regard to the podcast... I guess I could struggle to wade through the hour long rambling babble to find the quote. Just point me to the podcast in a link.

Actually, I think it's fair to concede there weren't a few more starters who were objectively better than Darvish. deGrom, Cole, Greinke, Wheeler, Lynn, Bieber, Ryu and Scherzer were all better. How much? Not a ton for most of them, but they were better. When I say "better" I'm talking about in terms of rotational position. Ace, #2, #3 #4 #5 type of style as defined by the pitcher you would most want on the mound in a 1 game playoff. Darvish's injury history is irrelevant to how good he is. It was already factored in as the only reason he didn't get $200MM+ instead of $126MM.

In any case, unless you find a link to your source for Wheeler outright telling the Twins not to make any offers, this will be my last post on it. If you do find the link, I'll be happy to listen and eat crow if what you're saying is true.

3 hours ago, Dman said:

Well like you said you would have Berrios for 10 more years.  A top of the rotation arm that you don't have to worry about.  You could have put Arraez or any number of players at 3rd and gotten decent production. Who is replacing Berrios anytime soon?  Berrios seems a much more important building block to me than Donaldson.  We do get Donaldson for 2 or 3 more years but with Berrios gone do you feel the team is going to get better or worse?

That depends on what the Twins get back when they trade him in the next couple of days.  If, instead, they extend him, no harm no foul.  The only way they are truly worse off is if they allow him to walk after 2022.

3 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Please provide any legitimate source for Wheeler's agent telling the Twins to stop wasting their time unless it was in regard to an offer Wheeler's camp already rejected, but the Twins kept floating. If the Twins had made a 5 year / 125MM offer, Wheeler would be wearing a Twins uniform. Instead, they low-balled Wheeler relative to other offers.

Darvish is a legitimate ace, but he came with (and still comes with) injury risk. He's a pitcher who can completely shut down an opposing playoff lineup. Calling him a #2 or #3 based on WAR which includes his injury lost 2018 isn't an argument made in good faith. Darvish is arguably as good as any pitcher not named deGrom from 2019-2021, you know, when he was actually pitching.

 

There is no such quote but there are many articles and I will post just one that let's us read between the lines  about his thinking.  The White Sox actually offered him more money than the Phillies but he wanted to play closer to his wifes family so money wasn't the only factor in his decision.

Sure maybe the Twins could have blown him away with an offer even higher and maybe he would have taken it or maybe the Phillies would have just come close to matching and he still would have stayed with them, it is hard to say.  His family though was a higher priority according to league sources and it was widely reported at the time.  He had a better offer on the table and he didn't take it.  If he didn't want to go to Chicago what are the odds he wanted to come to Minnesota?

6 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Buxton debuted in his age 21 season, and had 500 PA's in the majors in his age 23 season (i.e. he was a starter).

Sano debuted in his age 22 season, and had 495 PA's in the majors in his age 23 season

Arraez debuted in his age 22 season, and has been a starter ever since

Other examples

Polanco debuted in his age 20 season, and had 500 PA's in the majors in his age 23 season

Kepler debuted in his age 22 season, and had 447 PA's in the majors in his age 23 season

Kiriloff debuted this year, in his age 23 season, and would have gotten 500 PA's if not for injury (might have debuted last year, if not for COVID

Rosario debuted in his age 23 season, and got 474 PA's in the majors that year

Larnach debuted this year, in his age 24 season, and will probably get 500 PA's (also might have debuted last year if not for COVID)

Berrios debuted in his age 22 season, and was a full time starter in his age 23 season (25 starts in the majors)

Jeffers debuted in his age 23 season, and has been a full time starter this year in his age 24 season

 

The old stereotype that the Twins don't promote young players is just that--old.  It's not fact-based at all any more.

Correct on all points. As I said in my post I listed the 3 exceptions (Sano, Buxton, Arraez). The others you listed are correct too. However, Kiriloff, Larnach and Jeffers are all apart of another age group. My point is timing. Take the 87 Twins as a simple example. Puckett, Hrbek, Gaetti, Brunansky, Viola, et al came up together. That was a strong core to grow and gel together.

I thought the Twins had this going with Polanco, Kepler, Rosario, Buxton, Kyle Gibson, Sano but it seemed to die somewhere. Just an observation...

11 hours ago, KBJ1 said:

Build up a core of talented players, but never complete the puzzle with the right trade or signing. Who care about minor league "potential talent" when the time to WIN is now! Trade for the pieces you need when you have a core than can win!

I do think the Twins refusal to "go for it" has been a big problem over the years. 2019 was a prime opportunity to make a splash, and they traded for a couple of setup relievers and that was it... and the one time in the last 20 years they got risky with a deadline trade, they bet on Matt freaking Capps. 

Quote

Giving away Presley who went on to see the major league record with 30 straight appearances and zero runs (Alcala aside) was a disaster. A closer has been the #1 need on this team ever since Joe Nathan.

But the thing is, he wasn't given away. He was a fine reliever who got traded for two quality prospects, but the real issue was that he immediately became one of the league's best relievers simply by making a few tweaks thanks to Houston's pitching gurus. Pressly never reached that level of play with the Twins... nor did Gibson, nor Lynn, nor Hendriks, and so on. We've had some success with pitchers in 2019-20, but outside of that stretch we haven't been able to develop pitchers consistently, and when many of our arms leave, they improve elsewhere. To me, this is way more important than any "spending issue". 

5 hours ago, Danchat said:

But the thing is, he wasn't given away. He was a fine reliever who got traded for two quality prospects, but the real issue was that he immediately became one of the league's best relievers simply by making a few tweaks thanks to Houston's pitching gurus. Pressly never reached that level of play with the Twins... nor did Gibson, nor Lynn, nor Hendriks, and so on. We've had some success with pitchers in 2019-20, but outside of that stretch we haven't been able to develop pitchers consistently, and when many of our arms leave, they improve elsewhere. To me, this is way more important than any "spending issue". 

The fact that this seems to be happen quite frequently leaves me to believe we need to fire a few people and hire a few more

9 hours ago, Dman said:

There is no such quote but there are many articles and I will post just one that let's us read between the lines  about his thinking.  The White Sox actually offered him more money than the Phillies but he wanted to play closer to his wifes family so money wasn't the only factor in his decision.

Sure maybe the Twins could have blown him away with an offer even higher and maybe he would have taken it or maybe the Phillies would have just come close to matching and he still would have stayed with them, it is hard to say.  His family though was a higher priority according to league sources and it was widely reported at the time.  He had a better offer on the table and he didn't take it.  If he didn't want to go to Chicago what are the odds he wanted to come to Minnesota?

There is no denying you are correct that this information was widely reported.  However, those who want to insist the Twins could have signed player XYZ absolutely and completely ignore this type of information.  Here is another fact, there has been exactly two instances in the past 25 years a top free agent SP signed a 5 plus year deal with a team producing equal or less revenue than the Twins. 

Mike Hampton with Colorado was the first.  Of course, that deal was one of the biggest busts in the history of free agents.  The other was Grienke to Arizona which requires two asterisks.  Arizona had just signed a billion dollar TV deal and they did not win with Grienke.  The closest example of a success story was Scherzer to Washington.  The Nationals generate enough incremental over the Twins to pay for Scherzer but they are close enough to at least make it plausible. 

The point here is when someone insists with such reverence we should have signed Wheeler / Darvish or any other top free agent SP they MUST ignore a great deal of fact, history, and common sense to insist with such conviction that we just needed to make a competitive offer.  The common sense being history and the fact that their are numerous teams with significant revenue advantage over the Twins.  Who should we expect to win a bid when one of the people (teams) have significantly more money?  Does a person of average income drive the same car or live in the same house as someone making 50% more?

I think the Donaldson move was a 'go for it' signing, perfect after 2019.  I think they could've done more in 2020 and been in better position for 2021 with some creative acquisition of power arms for the pen.  Maybe that's the convenient answer for everything, but maybe capitalizing on a Kepler trade market for example, which is an option we're considering now for conversation at least.

7 minutes ago, lukeduke1980 said:

I think the Donaldson move was a 'go for it' signing, perfect after 2019.  I think they could've done more in 2020 and been in better position for 2021 with some creative acquisition of power arms for the pen.  Maybe that's the convenient answer for everything, but maybe capitalizing on a Kepler trade market for example, which is an option we're considering now for conversation at least.

In hindsight it would have been a great move to capitalize on Kepler's value after what looked like a breakout season.  However, it's very difficult to trade a high quality / established MLB position player for established MLB pitching.  Not impossible but very difficult especially for a corner outfielder.  They probably could have gotten pitching that would be ready in 2022 but that would not have gone over well with the fan base.  

On 7/22/2021 at 10:34 AM, Mike Sixel said:

I'm not sure what you are arguing they should do differently......

Pay market value to retain home grown talent at premier positions which lack internal options?