06-19-2014, 08:28 PM #121"He is young, he came up the minor leagues fast"Fact: Pinto came up as a 24 year old last season, after 8 minor league seasons
Fact: Perkins himself came up as a 23 year old, after 3 minor league seasons (and we all remember that he sucked pretty much for 2-3 season)
Another fact checking that should had happened before opening mouth and throwing a teammate under the bus, but did not happen.
What I'm most curious about is why you're trying to hard to go after Perkins. He's one of the most stat-savvy players I know of, yet you accuse him of "not understanding" the metrics when, in fact, his statements about Pinto were accurate. Pinto is an awful pitch framer. He's second to last in the league but you don't even have to use a metric to know that... he looks bad. This shouldn't even be an argument.
Should Glen have said that about Josmil? Dunno. I find it odd, for sure... But I'm not going to bash him for it, either.
06-19-2014, 08:36 PM #122
- Liked 174 Times in 108 Posts
- Blog Entries
With Pinto catching, Perkins has struck out 11 and walked 3 guys in 10.1 innings this year. I guess those strikes must have all been swinging strikes.
06-19-2014, 08:37 PM #123
So if you go back to the original point.....a mid 30s, injury prone guy, in the middle of a career year? If all those reports are accurate (and typically they are, or very close) - it was the wrong approach. And it was the wrong approach for the same reasons then as they are in hindsight now.
06-19-2014, 08:43 PM #124
06-19-2014, 08:45 PM #125
1. He wasn't an individual cowboy. He worked within a system and had many of the same advisors, including the present GM, who are running the team today.
2. Under his direction, the team went out and got Miguel Sano. It may have been less money than the free agent contracts for Willingham and Nolasco, but it was still the biggest signing in Twins history.
3. People I know who got to know Bill Smith while he was GM say that he is one of the most decent people they know. Other stories suggest that he is and was very hard working.
4. It's hard to say that he is the only "GM who hands away talent like it's not big deal." Kyle Lohse was a good starting pitcher on playoff teams when he was here, then ran into social issues with management (there's another theme) before being given away for an old-for-his-league A-ball pitcher with low strike-out rates. Last year's opening game starter was given away for a small stipend. David Ortiz was handed away for . . . nothing.
Besides, if you truly believe Bill Smith was a terrible GM, comparing TR to him and considering TR a success for exceeding the low grade you give to Bill Smith still does not mean that TR is any great shakes as a GM. How about instead comparing him to other good GM's around the league? Off the top of my head, I consider Ryan to be a worse GM than Mozeliak, Beane, Sabean, Jocketty, Friedman, Cherington, Epstein (although let's see what he does with the Cubs), Rizzo, Wren, Dombrowski and Daniels (can't tell with Luhnow or Cashman; the only ones I consider clearly worse are Moore and Towers). Perhaps we can do a more statistical analysis of success in bringing up young players, picking up free talent off the waiver wire, attracting free agents, and upgrading the team through trades, but it does seem that these GM's and possibly others produce better results in many of these areas than TR. We can't blame Bill Smith for that."Where's the Crede?"
06-19-2014, 09:23 PM #126
I actually think Smith did some very smart things as GM. You probably shouldn't assume you know my opinion of the man and how he did his job. He made what were possibly the two worst trades in Twins history. That doesn't mean he was awful at everything or that you need to defend him for his obvious mistakes.
06-19-2014, 09:28 PM #127
06-19-2014, 09:48 PM #128
You don't have names of players offered. You don't have details on what was offered or even how much interest the team really had in Willingham. You don't even have the names of teams potentially involved in a potential Willingham trade or a single substantial quote from an MLB GM about the situation.
Yet you call Ryan's approach wrong. You realize how obviously biased that sounds, right?
At the time, I was 50/50 on the Willingham trade situation. I thought that it'd be tough to get good value for him. I still don't know if Ryan did the right thing, nor do I claim to know.
06-19-2014, 09:53 PM #129
I don't think it's at all realistic to think the Twins, or any team, would sign a player for 3 years to fill a need, have the player succeed for half a season, and then trade him. No matter the W/L record.
They signed him because they needed RH power. They were getting it. It would be a breach of good faith to operate that way, and other players/agents would notice.
I don't think it was ever seriously contemplated, nor do I think it should have been.
2014 is a different story of course.Every post is not every other post. - a wise man
This user likes USAFChief's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:
06-19-2014, 10:09 PM #130
Color me dubious of such moral high ground.
06-19-2014, 10:13 PM #131
I just don't agree with it for precisely the reasons I laid on in 2012. That was his peak value.
This user likes TheLeviathan's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:
06-19-2014, 10:27 PM #132
- Liked 37 Times in 31 Posts
Name me one similar situation in baseball where the union rep said the guy should not have been demoted? Quibling on age now on what is young and what is not? Pinto's rise from being promoted AA to the majors took less than 2 years. I guess in your idea that is not fast.
More axe grinding on Perkins?
06-19-2014, 10:56 PM #133
- Liked 177 Times in 100 Posts
- Blog Entries
I bow my head in apology for my comments about Willingham after 2012, trade options, 20-20 hindsight, etc. I guess from reading here there were those of you asking for a trade at the time. I guess I don't recall. I guess at least one of us has a failing memory. Lol
You know, if he remains healthy the rest of the season, and can simply maintain his normal career numbers per AB, he will not only be a huge asset for us, but in retrospect, his deal would once again be considered a good value.
FYI, when I have mentioned re-signing Willingham to a one year deal, IF healthy and productive the rest of the year, it's not because that is my preference. Merely an option to consider. It is very possible that next ST will see Hicks, Rosario, some decent but not overly expensive veteran FA acquisition, (even Fuld possibly) to compete for the CF position in 2015. And we can't discount Santana as well, even though his future is probably as a SS. (Possibly interesting utility reserve).
So who is in LF next season? That is my consideration for a 1 year deal on Hammer. Though ultimately I believe a younger FA is probably the best option on a 1 or 2 year deal. (Yes, FA, don't trade young talent to fill that spot unless a steal)
I have to wonder if the Twins are sellers, even if they would slide.
I say again, is Willingham's trade value, if he maintains, worth an A level prospect? Or are the Twins ultimately better having his veteran and RBI presence for the balance of the year?
Morales? As has been pointed out, I wonder at negotiations behind the scenes before his signing. As I understand it, he can not be rendered any deal that would restrict him after this season. So he might be playing out the season to improve his contract status for next season. I don't know that that would preclude re-signing with the Twins. There may indeed be an agreement that he is open to a trade at some point to a contending team. He might bring a decent return considering his past history. Again, I'm highly in favor of re-signing him if possible. He would bring a big, steady bat to the team next season while we await the likes of Vargas.
Correia? IF he continues his current trend, he might have some value to a team needing to flush out its rotation. I don't believe the return would be great. But his trade might be more about just creating a spot on the roster and in the rotation.
Dozier? No way!
Plouffe? Again no way. Injury aside, he's just coming in to his own. Sano isn't ready, of course. When he is, maybe then. But he might, as has been pointed out, be Cuddyer part 2 or close.
Suzuki? Again, I say no. I so want Pinto to be the guy. And hopefully he will be. But whether he catches 50-60-70% of the games next season, there has to be a backup you can count on. He continues to be an integral part of this year's team. I think his presence is important. And while the Twins have Pinto, backup options are limited unless someone has a good idea who might be available elsewhere. I'm a Herrman fan, but he needs consistent playing time, which he hasn't had lately. And while I believe the Twins have some really solid C prospects in the minors, they are just too far away.
Again, other than maybe Morales who I'd love to re-sign, I just don't know that we are sellers.
06-20-2014, 04:57 AM #134
- Liked 37 Times in 31 Posts
06-20-2014, 05:38 AM #135
- Liked 15 Times in 11 Posts
- Blog Entries
Suzuki may be tradeable but he seems to be responsible for the great pitching performances of Twins pitchers.
" No No. Please not Suzuki. Anybody but Suzuki."
"NO No. Please don't trade Hughes either. Anybody but Hughes and Suzuki."
"No no. Please don't trade Hammer. Anybody else but Hammer and Hughes and Suzuki."
and so on and so forth thru the lineup ...
06-20-2014, 07:54 AM #136
As for Berrios, I'm also hesitant to bash the Twins for call-ups because I don't get to see the player. Can I be disappointed that someone isn't called up? Absolutely. I was disappointed when May didn't get the call earlier this week. But at least with prospects, we have extensive stat sheets that give us a good indication of how that player is performing in the minor leagues. While not all the information possible, it's often enough to form a somewhat informed opinion on the matter.
Take last July, for example. I remember saying something along the lines of "while I can't complain that Ryan didn't trade any individual player, I'm really disappointed that essentially nobody was traded". I haven't been a big fan of Ryan's recent deadlines. He's definitely not above criticism in my mind, I simply don't believe that we can declare any move that didn't happen a mistake without more information.
06-20-2014, 08:20 AM #137
- Liked 55 Times in 35 Posts
However, we have limited information and much of the conversation is speculation. We know relatively little about the decision process. We also don’t have the experience and perspective of people who have been in MLB for 20-30 years. Therefore, while volume of content is great, we are not in a position to judge with the degree of certainty that is often demonstrated here. If someone were to judge any of us, who had far less professional experience in whatever it is we do, especially with partial information, I think we would tell that person to take a leap. I can say with certainty that is what would happen in a professional environment.
06-20-2014, 08:43 AM #138
And while you can argue about minor league stat sheets, we also know how completely misleading those can be. The minors are a different animal and most organizations (including the Twins) seem to rely more on what their coaching staffs are seeing for readiness than what their stat lines are telling them for readiness.
You can pretend this is some higher level of information, but it's not. It's one piece of a puzzle you're trying to put together in the dark. I think you can draw reasonable conclusions and opinions from this sort of information...but I'm not so foolish as to demand certainty or transparency as you're doing. It's not possible. What I provided was a variety of sources identifying the same thing: Willingham was not being entertained. Not in any kind of serious way. (More in the: sure, I'll take your Carl Yzstremski card for this Omar Vizquel card!)
That's the mistake and there is ample evidence to know it happened. The why it happened is what people like Chief are speculating on. There may have been a good reason why they didn't want to pull the trigger on a deal. However, there is no good reason to put up a front that scares away suitors.
06-20-2014, 08:58 AM #139
06-20-2014, 09:13 AM #140
- Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
- Blog Entries
I defended Pinto's defense earlier. But after his stint up here, it is pretty clear he is not ready defensively. Not only was he awful at pitch framing, he had tons of passed balls, errors and wild pitches. And he failed to throw out a single runner. He seemed to get worse as his playing time at catcher decreased. Hopefully, he can iron out those things in AAA. But he has a lot of work to do."If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."