Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: Article: How MLB Teams Rebuild - Part 2

  1. #1
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Brad Swanson's Avatar
    Posts
    548
    Like
    35
    Liked 46 Times in 23 Posts
    Blog Entries
    143

    Article: How MLB Teams Rebuild - Part 2

    Works on contingency? No, money down!
    Kevin Slowey was Framed!

  2. #2
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Oldgoat_MN's Avatar
    Posts
    646
    Like
    130
    Liked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Letting Shin-Soo Choo go had to be very unpopular to the casual fans.
    The Indians look to be completely unpredictable for this year. That in itself will be entertaining.

  3. #3
    I have to think that Justin is gone at the trade deadline, providing, of course, the Twins are out of contention at that time...(fortunately, one can type such a thing and not worry about keeping a straight face.) Hopefully, Justin has a good year, increasing his trade value.

  4. #4
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,147
    Like
    62
    Liked 74 Times in 50 Posts
    Trades always sound like a swell idea--to the team that has an asset they perceive to be "fully valued". But we need to view from the perspective of "the other team". What value do they place on our asset? And is it possible that patience will permit them to acquire this player "for less"? We have read this about free-agents who have not signed as Spring training is about (or already has!) to begin--that the price will come down.

    Another example: during the Santana trade both Boston and New York were pointing-out that they believed they were "paying twice" for Santana. Once for acquiring him and second for paying him his salary. I'm confident that this reasoning would apply to any trade for Morneau or Willingham.
    The Twins must accept "diminished expectations" for said players. Other teams will see the same shortcomings in these two that the Twins see, and will adjust their "exchange" accordingly. The return on a trade will very likely be disappointing. I believe Willingham has significant value as a DH (more than what the Twins would recieve in return for a trade) and therefore should be retained. He won't be blocking anybody as a DH.

    AAA experience? The Twins Way includes extensive time in the minor leagues not just for the purpose of a man "proving himself" but also to become a Twins Player. But there comes a time when a guy has "to prove himself as a MLB player"--and that can't be done in the minor leagues. Consider Plouffe. There is still doubt in the Twins mind that he is the long-term solution at 3B--despite his 2012 season and all of the time he has spent in the franchise being evaluated. My point, if Plouffe's actual ML experience wasn't enough, then any more MiL experince for Dozier definately won't prove he belongs at the ML level. Dozier is 25 (soon 26), he has had plenty of years (from age 8) to "learn how to play", now it's time to actually play. The back-and-forth between AAA and ML may be fine for 22 yr-olds but not 26.

    The analogy of Carroll's career path and could that be Dozier in the future, sets the performance standard at "mediocre", not excellent. If these "good-guy, mediocre-type" players become the goal of the organization, they doom the franchise to continual disappointment. "Good-enough" is the enemy of "excellent".

  5. #5
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    493
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    The articles ought to be called how not to rebuild a team. Look at the number of years the Astro's have been down. Their good players aged, left as free agents, and they had not developed replacements. Chicago continues to buy talent, susstains nothing. Cleveland's talent played well for only one year since the 90's group got old.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    493
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    So when you look at the information provided what stands out is that there are by WAR not many high quality players on these teams. Chicago buys talent, but it is not upper echelon talent. Go to fangraphs and see what the top players on Detroit, Cinci and the Giants look like. Note how the aqquired most of their talent (draft, trade and develop). That should be your guide on how teams rebuild, not the bottom feeders.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator All-Star
    Posts
    3,415
    Like
    167
    Liked 309 Times in 184 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Chicago also just changed GMs, which kind of makes them hard to gage. They used to be a heavy player in the FA market. While Theo will go there, he believes in a farm system too and does some Beane style moves (like Scott Baker) to hopefully improve that.

  8. #8
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,074
    Like
    97
    Liked 341 Times in 194 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wise One View Post
    Note how the aqquired most of their talent (draft, trade and develop). That should be your guide on how teams rebuild, not the bottom feeders.
    I don't see how this is a counter-point to anything being suggested. The Cubs, when buying FAs, were never "rebuilding". Likewise, I wouldn't call Cleveland "rebuilding", that happened years ago and as guys like Kipnis, Santana, Chisenhall are coming up now. Most any team rebuilds with drafting, trading, and developing.

    The question really is, how much of their current roster do they maintain while they are doing that. Personally, I think you move guys when you are offered value for them. What boggles my mind is that this team is so resistant to trade the "core" guys but then doesn't hesitate to let them walk. See: Hunter and Cuddyer.

  9. #9
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,147
    Like
    62
    Liked 74 Times in 50 Posts
    Hunter was most surprised his option was excercised (he had listed his MN residence). I think Hunter and Santana were kept for 2007 because the FO believed that the team could expand on its '06 success.

  10. #10
    I agree with Leviathan. The Twins allow guys to walk. What they did with Span is basically what you should be looking at for most any player. Another season or two out of Perkins, then move him on and replace him with another body, for example. I'm sure the Twins braintrust is trying to figure out how to get the msot out of their "prospects" now that so many are needed, sadly, but still not have them all hit arbitration or free agency at the same time, or the longterm prospects of signing the guys to team friendly contracts early like they did with Span, and Perkins, and Baker, and in some ways Blackburn.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    493
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    I don't see how this is a counter-point to anything being suggested. The Cubs, when buying FAs, were never "rebuilding". Likewise, I wouldn't call Cleveland "rebuilding", that happened years ago and as guys like Kipnis, Santana, Chisenhall are coming up now. Most any team rebuilds with drafting, trading, and developing.

    The question really is, how much of their current roster do they maintain while they are doing that. Personally, I think you move guys when you are offered value for them. What boggles my mind is that this team is so resistant to trade the "core" guys but then doesn't hesitate to let them walk. See: Hunter and Cuddyer.
    Bother Levi your memory is either short or other reasons. Cuddyer's last year was in the middle of a penant chase. I don't recall you people demanding he be traded before they couldn't get anything for him. If JO Berios is a real deal, then it will work out as a great trade. If Luke Bard workd out, then they did great with Kubel. By most accounts the Hunter contract with the Angels was an unforseable blow them out of the water offer. The Twins did try and were more than generous with their offer. Time will tell if Harrison and Boyd will be great compensation for Hunter. It is so easy to forget.

    My Brother Levi. I am sorry I did not post it clearly enough for all to understand between my two posts (pesky work gets in the way) that in no way did I consider Cleveland, Houston, or the Cubs to be rebuilding at this time. It would say that there was something there. I will try harder next time to be clearer for you

  12. #12
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,692
    Like
    32
    Liked 772 Times in 423 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wise One View Post
    By most accounts the Hunter contract with the Angels was an unforseable blow them out of the water offer. The Twins did try and were more than generous with their offer. Time will tell if Harrison and Boyd will be great compensation for Hunter. It is so easy to forget.
    The Angels offered way more money than was expected but the Twins were never competitive on their offers to retain Hunter, just as they weren't competitive on their offers to Johan.

    Letting someone walk without an offer and letting someone walk because your offer is 60% of market value is pretty much the same thing, one just looks better to a casual fan.

  13. #13
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,575
    Like
    7
    Liked 27 Times in 22 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    The Angels offered way more money than was expected but the Twins were never competitive on their offers to retain Hunter, just as they weren't competitive on their offers to Johan.

    Letting someone walk without an offer and letting someone walk because your offer is 60% of market value is pretty much the same thing, one just looks better to a casual fan.
    The market value as you call it is set after the contract is signed. It was pretty much a universal wow when the Angels went that high. Doesn't excuse the Twins from not increasing their offer when the first was rejected. Hunter's agent never gave the Twins a counter offer either. The dollars per year was more than competitive with what other players received the same year or previous years. The other offers Hunter had were never made public that I know of. I recall that the White Sox made a 4 year offer. It would be reasonable to think that the dollar amount wasn't high enough. The Twins probably were more money per year, The Sox more years. The Angels came out of nowhere and made an offer Hunter couldn't refuse nor bother to give the Twins notice. I do remember later reports on Hunter not liking the interaction he had with Smith and felt the outcome might have been different with Ryan as GM
    Santana made it clear he wanted to play elsewhere irrespective of offer.
    Last edited by old nurse; 02-26-2013 at 09:12 AM.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer FrodaddyG's Avatar
    Posts
    536
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    The Twins probably were more money per year, The Sox more years.
    As memory serves, the Twins offer was for both less money and years.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer FrodaddyG's Avatar
    Posts
    536
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    I do remember later reports on Hunter not liking the interaction he had with Smith and felt the outcome might have been different with Ryan as GM.
    Which is strange, since Ryan was the one who offered him the lowball offer during the 2007 season.

  16. #16
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,575
    Like
    7
    Liked 27 Times in 22 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FrodaddyG View Post
    As memory serves, the Twins offer was for both less money and years.
    The Twins offer was less years and money than the Angels, I was pointing out the report that the White Sox were a team that made an offer. Do you have what the White Sox offered?
    The year before JD Drew signed 5/60. A 3 year contract would be far too short, but averaging 15 mil per year is not in terms of the Drew contract lowball in terms of dollars per year.
    Last edited by old nurse; 02-26-2013 at 11:05 AM.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer FrodaddyG's Avatar
    Posts
    536
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    The year before JD Drew signed 5/60. A 3 year contract would be far too short, but averaging 15 mil per year is not in terms of the Drew contract lowball in terms of dollars per year.
    And why would Hunter's target be anywhere near the same level as JD Drew? Hunter was a Gold Glove defender at an up the middle position who could actually hit. Drew was a corner outfielder. If he told his agent "go get me the same deal as JD Drew", he'd be an idiot, as evidenced by the fact that he got significantly more.

  18. #18
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,575
    Like
    7
    Liked 27 Times in 22 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FrodaddyG View Post
    And why would Hunter's target be anywhere near the same level as JD Drew? Hunter was a Gold Glove defender at an up the middle position who could actually hit. Drew was a corner outfielder. If he told his agent "go get me the same deal as JD Drew", he'd be an idiot, as evidenced by the fact that he got significantly more.
    15 million a year wasn't significantly higher than 12?

  19. #19
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer FrodaddyG's Avatar
    Posts
    536
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    15 million a year wasn't significantly higher than 12?
    25% higher. How much higher is $18M?

  20. #20
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,074
    Like
    97
    Liked 341 Times in 194 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wise One View Post
    Time will tell if Harrison and Boyd will be great compensation for Hunter. It is so easy to forget.
    The point was not one about return, it was one of philosophy. The Twins bristle at the suggestion that they should trade people, whether they are in contention or not. They also appear to have little qualms with letting guys walk no matter how vital to the clubhouse or how good they are at playing the Twins Way. (Cuddyer alone proves this) So it always bothers me when I hear Ryan or others suggest the reasons not to deal a guy like Willingham is because he is their kind of guy. We've let our kind of guy walk more than a few times - the reason to move or not move a player should have nothing to do with that. And they should understand when fans get irritated by this organization's bluster about trading (See: "Getting X player back from injury is just like making a trade!" or the annual stand-pat at the deadline approach) when they so flippantly seem to release guys that are heart and soul members of the team.

    It's hard to assess whether a team should or shouldn't sell the whole lot to rebuild, I think that depends on offers being received we know nothing about. But that was the general point being made here: do you sell off completely or half-ass it? What I don't want to see is a half-ass approach because Willingham is a "Twin's Guy" rather than the team being low-balled.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.