Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Three Things to Like (and Hate) about the Nelson Cruz Trade


    John  Bonnes

    Do not go gentle into that good night. Trade, trade amidst the dying of the light.

    I won't apologize to Dylan because he would hate that, but the sentiment rings true in a crappy baseball season. It's tempting to hold on timidly, wishing against one's fate. But what good is that? Better to meet it head-on, even if it means trading away Nelson Cruz. There is plenty to like about the deal and plenty not to like, and we're going to unpack both. And because it was Martini Cart Night at my condo complex, and because the whole crummy season should have been Martini Cart Night across Twins Territory, we're not going to be sticklers about the ordering of this list.

    Image courtesy of © Jesse Johnson-USA TODAY Sports

    Twins Video

    #3 Reason to Like This Deal – The Timing
    Congrats, Minnesota. You're kind of a big deal. Your team just made the biggest trade of the trade deadline so far because Cruz was the best bat on the trade market. That market was a bit limited, given that he can't play in the National League, but he was still the big dog.

    And believe it or not, the question you should be asking was, "Why did they make the deal so early?" The Twins have been out of the postseason race for a month, but often a deal like this is not made until a day or two before the deadline. Sometimes it's not made until the afternoon of the trade deadline. Seeing a deal come together a week early suggests one of two things, both positive for the Twins:

    1. They got an offer they could not refuse. That's good news.
    2. They gave "buyers" a deadline for their best deal.

    I suspect the latter. The Twins looked at the market and decided to push the first domino. They still have at least Michael Pineda, Andrelton Simmons, and Hansel Robles to move, and they want to start fielding offers.

    It also might be that they saw teams waiting on making offers for someone like Cubs' third baseman Kris Bryant until Cruz had found a landing spot. That's important because the Twins are likely trying to move Josh Donaldson. That's more difficult until Bryant is traded, since Bryant doesn't have $50M attached to him as Donaldson does.

    So even if the Twins insisted on the timing, it's a ploy that suits their needs.

    #3 Reason to Hate This Deal - Beware the Rays
    The Rays have earned the title of the Smartest Team in Any Deal. It's happened over and over, even when the names involved were premier players like Blake Snell or Chris Archer. It's hard to win a trade with the Rays.

    That said, the last deal the Twins made with the Rays has turned out great. Before the 2018 season, the Rays traded Jake Odorizzi to the Twins for prospect Jermaine Palacio. Odorizzi only had one good year with the Twins – but it was a terrific year, posting a 3.51 ERA in 2019 and resurrecting his career.

    Meanwhile, Palacios is back in the Twins organization. He's playing at AA-Witchita this year. He's 24 years old and having a breakout season, posting a 782 OPS as a shortstop after leaving the Rays' farm system. So, at the very least, the Twins weren't fleeced in that deal.

    #2 – Reason to Like the Deal – The Twins NAILED a Need
    Was the Twins' starting pitching the biggest reason for this year's disappointing season? Maybe not. But it's within the top four for sure, and feel free to debate the order in the comments. (Your candidates: starting pitching, injuries, [insert your favorite rant here], Alex Colome).

    But if the Twins want to take advantage of the competitive window they have from 2022-2024, they need major-league ready (and preferably cost-controlled) pitching. That's precisely what they got in this trade.

    The Twins only have two starting pitchers returning next year – Kenta Maeda and Jose Berrios. This year's backup plans - Randy Dobnak, Devin Smeltzer, and Lewis Thorpe – have been injured. So have all three of the top pitching prospects in the organization: Jhoan Duran, Matt Canterino, and Jordan Balozovic. Plus, the Twins likely have only about $40M to spend on the free agent market next year.  

    Getting back cost-controlled but solid major league pitching is no easy task in Major League Baseball. Looking at the other players the Twins could trade, very few could field that return. Nelson Cruz was their best (and maybe last) chance to do so, and they pulled it off.

    #2 Reason to Hate It – Nelly's Gone
    Losing Nelson Cruz sucks. He was a perfect fit for this team, and the team ended up being a perfect fit for him. Even though he played for the Twins from when he was 38 to 41 years old, he posted the highest OPS (984) of his career for any team. Read that again. Texas (823 OPS) and Seattle (908 OPS) revere him. But Cruz never played better for any team – unless he does so for the Rays. And I hope he does. Kick some ass, Nelly.

    Plus, of course, the whole leadership thing. Cruz was the MVP for both full seasons he played for the Twins, and while his performance certainly justified it, it was his teammates' testimonials that made that choice a no-doubter. He doesn't call attention to himself with histrionics or conspicuous public displays. He just led. The media didn't hear that from Cruz. They learned about it from his teammates. That's how you know it was real. Which brings us to the best reason to dislike this trade...

    #1 Reason to Hate It – And He Ain't Coming Back
    Sometimes you have to leave the past behind, and I suspect the Twins recognize that. Cruz will turn 42 years old next year, and that presents a significant risk. They also have younger bats, like Brent Rooker and maybe even Mitch Garver or Luis Arraez, that they would like to try as a designated hitter. Plus, he will likely cost any team over $10M to sign, and we've already covered the potential payroll squeeze that awaits this team.

    It's not impossible. The Twins love him, clearly. Cruz loves them right back. So never say never. But this season revealed so many leaks in the Twins' ship that I'll be surprised if they expend resources to bring Nellie back for one more year. It would have been nice to have him around a few more months, given that reality. 

    #1 Reason to Like The Trade – They Did Pretty Good
    If you screw up the players you get back, none of it means a damn thing. We won't know for sure about these guys until their Twins' careers are over, but there are some things to be excited about with the players the Twins got in return.

    The lesser (right now) of the two prospects is Drew Strotman. It's worth noting that he's the higher draft pick of the two, so he was not always second fiddle. He's also on the Rays' 40-man roster, which is a negative to his value in terms of roster management, but shows just how impressed the Rays were with him just last year. He has a mid-90s fastball, a plus slider, and added an impressive cutter last year to complete the package.

    That potential hasn't been displayed yet this year in AAA. He's had decent results (3.39 ERA) but is walking way too many batters. But he's also just 24 years old, and this is his first taste of AAA after skipping AA altogether.

    The more intriguing prospect is Joe Ryan. He wasn't particularly near a top 100 prospect in preseason rankings, but it'll be interesting to see if that has changed given his performance this year in AAA. Tallying 75K in 57 IP, with just ten walks and a 0.789(!) WHIP, can change expectations.

    His profile is funky enough to either cast doubt or raise eyebrows. He has a mid-90s fastball that batters have trouble picking up due to his delivery. The COVID year allowed him to work with the Rays coaching staff on his secondary offerings, which seem to have improved. Plus, he is a bit of a free spirit, based on this profile of his development in Sports Illustrated.

    If Twins fans want a preview of him, check out the US Olympic Baseball team. He's on it. Or make your way to CHS Field in St. Paul in August. Or maybe you won't need to cross the river. He might be ready for a trial at Target Field before the year is over.

    The Twins did reasonably well in their first move of the trade deadline season. They made a solid and aggressive move at a good time, getting quality players and filling a need. It also sets them up nicely for more moves before the July 30th deadline.

    But yeah, it's a shame it had to come to this. And the team will need to wait and see if their move turns out as well as they hope.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    23 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

    So the players are just required to work for one team forever? You realize they are people, right? Like teams would every pay fair value in that system. 

    We have seen that system, so we don't have to speculate.  They wouldn't.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, gil4 said:

    I think your figure shows how much the salaries of the players were artificially suppressed 50 years ago, rather than an indicator that we should go back to the previous system. 

    Not to argue too much with you, but 56 years ago my father bought a 3 bedroom house with a basement and garage in a very nice neighborhood for 19,500 dollars.  So when we look at the salaries of the era 50 years ago, remember what it bought compared to today (that same house today is over 300,000).  They made a comfortable living playing a game they would have killed to play at that level.  If we are going to feel bad for players, feel bad for the minor leaguers who never see any real money; yet they keep playing the game they love to play.  You can't suppress a salary that was never supposed to be that high to begin with.  Just my two cents worth.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    22 minutes ago, gil4 said:

    We have seen that system, so we don't have to speculate.  They wouldn't.

    They would with binding arbitration.  That was the whole premise from the beginning.  I guess the whole debate boils down to each ones definition of "fair" when we talk about a fair wage.  Maybe that is what makes it fun to debate.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Mark G said:

    They would with binding arbitration.  That was the whole premise from the beginning.  I guess the whole debate boils down to each ones definition of "fair" when we talk about a fair wage.  Maybe that is what makes it fun to debate.

    I'd rather see free than have someone's definition of fair imposed.

    I do understand that some degree of competitive balance is in everyone's best interest (and most other sports do it better because of the way they divide the TV money), but the money also has to be divided between the risk-takers/investors and the earners.

    I agree to an extent about the minor-leaguers.  The biggest offense I see there is they don't get to collectively bargain.  The MLBPA negotiates "on their behalf", but they can't actually be members of the union until they are in the majors.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 hours ago, gil4 said:

    The problem is you are comparing their income to the average income.  They aren't average.  Of the millions of people who play baseball, they are the top 800 or so.  In 1970, movie stars got paid big bucks. Top musicians got paid big bucks. Why? Because if the actors didn't like their pay, they could go to a different studio.  The musicians could sign with another label. But baseball players couldn't do that - they could either re-sign for what they were offered or hold out, which except for a few stars would have resulted in them being blacklisted by the sport.

    Now, they can eventually earn a certain level of freedom, after 4-5 years of team control as minor leaguers and then another 5-6 years in the majors (3 years of arbitration?) 

     

    What is stopping you? Are you not in the top .0001% in your field?  (Or does the market not widely differentiate between the to .0001 percent and the top 1% in your field as it does in theirs.)  Are you free to go to another employer?  

    Maybe the market just won't pay that kind of money for the goods and/or services that you help deliver, or the part you play isn't as difficult to replace as the part they play in their business.

    I was not talking about myself.  You twisted the point which was they were not considered under paid in 1970 so one would think public perception is they were well compensated when their salary had grown 10X.  If they did not think so at 10X, I am sure public and player perception was they were paid well when it reached 20X what it was in 1970.  Then, after it reached this level of 20X what they were paid in 1970, their salaries grew another 5X and therefore more than 100X what it was in 1970.  

    There are many holes in your position in terms of economic theory.  Every profession has people that are the very top of their profession.  Their salary is not determined by the ability of the company to pay.  Compensation for people living in a free market society are determined by one of two things.  Some get paid a minimum wage determined by law.  Employers pay the rest an amount sufficient to retain their services.  Some industries don’t pay as well as others so they probably don’t get the most skilled people.  However, employees in the most lucrative industries don’t pay employees based on ability to pay.  They pay an amount sufficient to attract these people from other industries.  

    So. Let me ask you this  … If MLB paid every player on the 26 man roster $1M/year?  That would still be twice as much as the next highest professional BB league.  What percentage of their employees would they lose?  Maybe 2 to 3 tenths of one percent could play in a higher paying sport, right.  How many could make more in a different profession?   Perhaps more importantly, how many people here would stay in their position at ¼ the pay for the average and less than 5% of their current comp for top players?  The answer is none.  Of course, some industries pay more or less because of the relative conditions of employment.  You have to pay a laborer more to do certain dangerous / dirty jobs.  It's hard for me to conclude that MLB as an industry pays more generously than other industries even though their employees play a game for a living.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The salaries of MLB will continue to rise and rise. The difference though is that the teams can charge more for tickets, etc to help make up for some of the rise. Some would argue that players are overpaid and many are- especially after a free agent to be career year and those who bat .220 or win 8 games and make 10+ million or more the next year after earning next to nothing by baseball standards. But there are some free agents who do not sign to the highest bidder. Comparing baseball salaries to private industry is ludacris IMHO. This is free enterprise and not like the days when Babe Ruth who once asked for more money than the current President. When asked why, he said "because I had a better year". Or when Mickey Mantle had a great year and the Yankees wanted to cut his salary or maybe give him a puny raise. If you want to be angry about salaries and benefits, be upset that congressmen receive full pensions after just 1 term in office- and guess who pays for that?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...