jdgoin

We drafted Plouffe thinking he was going to be a SS who hit for some power. I don’t recall anyone trying to make him a slap hitter. Maybe use the opposite field (Parker wrote an article on that in 2015) but not a slap hitter.

Yes, I understand that and I agree with you. My point was Martin had not been able to establish his pro career and figure out who he was as a professional hitter yet before these changes came about. Maybe it was just too soon in his development process. My bet is eventually he figures out how to get to some power.

Dozier became one of the more productive hitters in the game from 2014 to 2017, posting ISOs well above league average and hitting 23, 28, 42, and 34 HRs in that time. Kubel posted ISOs well above league average from 2007 until 2010 (.177, .199, .239, .178 vs league avg of roughly .155) after returning from a knee injury when he shredded his knee the 2004 AFL. Plouffe posted ISOs of .154, .220, .165, .190, .160 while the league average was around .145.

Dozier’s power came in two waves. He started to show signs of power potential in 2011 when he played in High-A and AA. I’m not sure he completely changed who he was a hitter though. He was already hitting fly balls to the pull side. Dozier also showed good plate skills, making contact, & walking as much or more than he struck out. His next power wave showed up after we signed Josh Willingham. Willingham was an extreme pull hitter and Brian realized the pulling the ball was the easiest way to hit HRs. You can see in his bathed ball profile the jumps in fly ball and Pull% beginning in 2013. Dozier was a good hitter in college and the MiL who eventually sold out for power but was still productive. Martin hasn’t had the chance to find his power yet. He was traded in his first season of pro ball. His next season his swing/approach was altered greatly. He may or not find his power as he understands when and how to pull the ball better rather than trying to maximize his power through a different swing.

Sounds similar to a backup SL. Hitter thinks it’s a SL but it doesn’t do what it “should” do. Perkins always told me it was the most effective pitch he had, even if it was an accident.

What I find interesting is neither the Rays or Brewers are not on any of those lists on the more extreme ends. My guess here is the Rays try to maximize matchups and each of those clubs focus on squeezing every bit of what a pitcher is good at rather than remake them. In the Lopez and Pagan cases it doesn't seem like it was a pitch quality issue. The issues run deeper.

Thank you @SethStohs for taking the time to remember “Cliffy” on here. He was mentor of mine. He was a kind and generous person, with a mischievous grin and chuckle. Wicked smart. I mean REALLY smart. As we are fond of saying in the baseball world, Mike was a “good human”. He will be missed by many. But mostly by his wife, kids, and grandchildren.

It’s been that way for awhile now. There is SO much that goes into overhauling a player though. It really ends up being a quantity thing. You identify the qualities you want to target and try to fix all of them and hope one works out every once in awhile. The structure around the, pitchers is most important. You need a fixer or fixers. In the MiL and the ML. I think orgs overlook that. That was always my first question. Who is go8ng to fix them? Then the player has to have the aptitude for change. Not all of them do. These cases should be supplemental and right now it feels like MIN is almost trying to build a pen this way. Good guys can get better, but fringe guys aren’t usually becoming real guys.

These are the type of changes that makes scouting more difficult now. You think you have a guy pegged and he spends an off-season overhauling his mechanics or swing and comes back a totally different dude. Sometimes there are signs. Thielbar always had a high spin CB, but altering his release point to give it more vertical activity, coupled with throwing it firmer gives him a new weapon.

But also in this case Hef was in NY by now.

I would believe that. Hef is smart. He had an easy way about him. ML experience. You could tell from the first interview he had ceiling if he stayed with it. He had just retired a few months earlier. I wanted to hire him in Arizona when the Mets hired him.

I am trying to understand what you mean by stats don’t tell the whole story in this case?

Nice work @Parker Hageman. There is a lot to unpack here. I'll start with the changing of Lopez. The Lopez & Pressly situations while similar, seem to be very different as well. As I recall, HOU never asked Press to change the shape of either of his breaking pitches. They wanted him to throw his CB more often & with confidence. Your analysis of Lopez it seems like they tried to change his SI & CH to pair up "more efficiently" & alter his release point to do so. For a reliever in season, one of those is difficult, let alone all three. MIN has also lost their "Fixer" when Wes Johnson left. This has always been my biggest thing when someone wants to acquire a pitcher based on pitch data. Who do we/they have who can fix it? It's a hard mental adjustment for a guy.

Yes, I'm guessing the Twins were hoping if they could come close enough in money that the sales pitch they gave during the 2022 season would mean something even if the money was a little less. I don't know if they could have gone higher or not. But I'm pretty sure Boras either told all teams involved or a select few what offers he had in hand and gave them a certain amount of time to beat them. The Giants chose to do that and make sure nobody else was close. The Giants had to make a decision as well. They could have increased their offer slightly and risk not signing Correa. Or do nothing and call Boras' bluff. None of us know what the offers were as of say, Sunday night. For all we know the Giants offered 10 years and $295 million at first and came back with the winning offer.

@Parker Hageman Nice question! Do teams "miss" players when they are targeting one or do they conduct due diligence and make an informed decision on who to target, keep multiple conversations going, etc? Of course they miss out on players by targeting someone. Just by definition they missed out on Turner, Bogaerts, etc. because their main SS priority was Correa. They were willing/wanted to get Correa and would let the others sign first if they didn't have an answer. I guess a team could make the same or similar offer to those 3 players and give the agents 48 hours to respond and whomever responds first gets the deal. Not sure that would be received to well by the agents. If you're asking did they miss out on an impact starter by waiting on Correa, then they chose to miss out on the starter. But the reverse would have been true as well. If they would have targeted a SP at the top end and had to wait they would have missed on Correa as well. There is always a tradeoff. Even the Yankees missed out on a starter because they went after Judge. So maybe they missed on DeGrom and settled for Rodon. Just like if you were thinking of doing a marathon you might need to think about giving up Coors Light during training. There is a tradeoff. Teams have their pref lists for FA and potential FA ongoing. That helps make decisions in future seasons as well by studying the quality/depth of positions available this offseason, next offseason, and going forward. The real work on the current FA class probably started right after the Trade Deadline. Personnel departments will begin to rank them by position, then maybe by all position players, pitchers (SP & RP separate), and then combine everyone together. Using this offseason as an example, let's say the Twins had no clear SS frontrunner. They would take Correa, Turner, or Bogaerts. But they really wanted Rodon and their second SP candidate fell behind all the SS in their rankings. They may go after Rodon while keeping dialogue going with the SS class and be happy with whichever SS they signed. Does that make sense? You use your projections and internal rankings on all ML players so you can quickly see how each player affects your roster, your payroll, etc. Doesn't matter if they're FA or currently in an organization. I would say most teams do not have the payroll availability to sign two guys like Correa and DeGrom, so you have to make decisions. Adding $60+ million in salary probably strains most teams. In today's game, teams are talking with each other all the time. You're keeping track of who might be available via trade. During FA you have all sorts of conversations going on with multiple agents or agencies. I would say every teams at least checks in on just about every free agent to get a lay of the land. Maybe something pops up that wasn't on their radar. Teams do a lot of due diligence nowadays.

The cynicism is extra thick today. ??

As usual, you make a very articulate and valid point.

I’m not debating the approach. That’s a separate discussion. I just was trying to give some potential insight on how it went down based off experience and possibly what their thought process may have been. I don’t have any info other than what I’ve observed and been through.

From inside an MLB organization, deep sea fishing looks a bit different. Image courtesy of © Matt Krohn-USA TODAY Sports I've been listening and reading reactions from media, fans, this blog, etc. since FA opened. I'm pretty sure the front office went home pissed, bummed out, confused, and with all sorts of mixed emotions when Carlos Correa signed with the San Francisco Giants. It's deflating when an agent calls to say their client is going to go in another direction. I know this is the job we/they have signed up for, so it comes with criticism. You put a lot of time, effort, and emotions into something and must have it play out the way you want. It's even more exhausting when your job is evaluated every which way by outsiders, and you truly are doing what you think is best. You're not trying to be cheap or make it look like you're just putting in effort for show. You honestly are trying the best you can, given your circumstances. For fans and media, the armchair quarterback stuff is fun. I get it. Did the Twins get played in this Correa saga? Were they played? A little by Correa's actions throughout 2022, but Derek and Thad are smart. They have dealt with Boras plenty. They know his playbook. They took a shot with the initial contract and tried to make the best of it. They knew it was a one-year deal unless Correa had a TERRIBLE year in 2022. They wanted to sell him and his family on the area, the culture, and the ballpark and show him what he could have. A season-long recruiting visit, so to speak. Before NIL, that stuff used to work in college. It can work in capped leagues where you must find advantages outside player salaries. You take care of the players' families. You upgrade the travel accommodations, nutrition, etc. -- things that don't count against a salary cap. It's a little more challenging in baseball. Those two knew the risks they assumed when entering this contract. Plenty of comments claim the Twins should have known that 10 years for $285 would not get it done. A couple of points here: Minnesota knew they would not be the highest bidder in the end. They were hoping to keep it close enough to stay in the race. Like many businesses, they hoped the relationship between the manager, club, ownership, and player meant something. Also, having been involved in player negotiations for many years, Boras took his best offers to San Francisco Giants and whoever else and told them you had 24 to 72 hours to match or beat it. San Francisco chose to be the highest bidder, for better or worse. Only time will tell. The Twins didn't get beat because ownership is cheap. They aren't cheap - they are disciplined. And I realize that makes fans upset. Some fans want the emotional owner who will do "whatever it takes." Were they aggressive enough while having Correa? Phil Mackey had a little rant on YouTube yesterday saying the Twins should have been more aggressive in other areas, particularly pitching, for the one season they knew they had Correa. At first, I thought Phil was correct. But I thought about it more. You can argue with the results, but they were aggressive in acquiring starting pitching. They traded for the three of them for the 2022 season. If you want to debate the individual pitchers, I can understand that. Or, if you're going to argue trading for injured pitchers because they cost less, you can do that, too. The results were mixed from poor, to below average, to solid. But they were aggressive. We have yet to learn who else they tried to acquire via trade. We know the end results. When players hire Boras in a situation as Correa did, they hire him to be a fixer. Here's how: In that first contract, he works on finding the best fit so the player can reestablish his value. Boras calls it a "pillow contract." Then he usually searches for the most significant deal he can find, either by Average Annual Value (AAV) or by total guaranteed money. Sometimes a big-time Boras free agent takes a little less to go where they want to go, but not often. That's the inherent risk of chasing "big fish," particularly chasing Boras clients. If you plan contingencies, you can avoid getting stuck holding the bag at the end. The Twins planned contingencies. It does not mean they will work out, but it's been reported they've met with Swanson and Rodon already. We don't know what options C, D, and E are. The focus on Correa Aaron Gleeman wrote a fantastic article on The Athletic, laying it all out there. You should read it if you still need to. There are a lot of areas to fix on the Major League roster for 2023. They still need a shortstop. They need pitching. They need offense. They need pitching. (Yes, I know I listed it already). There are ways to work the roster without Correa and still improve it. It's still only December. Jack Goin served in various roles in Baseball Operations with the Minnesota Twins from 2003-2017, including Director of Baseball Research and Director of Pro Scouting. He most recently served as a Pro Scout and Player Personnel Analyst with the Arizona Diamondbacks from 2018-2021 View full article

Ownership deserves a little bit of credit here as well.

You’re not giving Boras enough credit.

As the former director of this non-existent analytics department, I take offense to this comment. ??

They had a tough culture to work in under the previous GM. They have now run off a good GM after 2 years and winning a World Series. External candidates for that job (if there are any) are definitely going to pause before entering that atmosphere. Having a good working environment and winning aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s tough to retain talent in a poor environment. You can only overcome dysfunction for so long.

You're probably correct Nick. There hasn't been a front-loaded $300M contract, especially with opt outs that I remember. My point was there are front-loaded contracts with opt outs at lesser dollar amounts and fewer years that would provide a framework, no matter the total dollar figure. Nolan Arenado, Eric Hosmer, J.D. Martinez, Chris Sale all have front-loaded contract with opt outs. Player opt outs are also used liberally in the NBA. By "structured this way" I meant a long-term contract where the money is front-loaded and includes opt out clause or two. I wasn't trying to be vague or generalize.