Twinkie Town: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Blogger Q&A - And The Valley Shook

Another Dead Offseason


I love our Twins, I love the TC logo, and TC Bear.  I will miss the dome, but embrace Target Field (Not to be mistaken for Target Center...Geniuses).  I long for many more seasons of the M n M boys, because frankly just M boy is kind of boring, but as a Twins fan, I am used to being let down, and I am afraid to say it, but this offseason is going to be no different.

If the Pohlad family are good for anything, it's proving that they can get by on the cheap with this organization.  They have won numerous Division titles on low budget teams.  Why should this offseason be any different?  They proved that with just a tweak in house and adding a low risk veteran they can make an improbable push and win yet another division pennant.  The problem is that many Minnesota fans are saying, "enough is enough."  Why should we settle for "One-and-Done's" when other teams are continuously getting better.  We need to go out and at least add a strong pitcher.  I hear Lackey is going to be available, and hell, I'd be satisfied with a Bedard or Harden.  We need to solidify the middle infield.  Valencia at Third sounds nice for next year, and lets pair him next to Tejada, and put Casilla back at second.  He may not be any better than Punto, but at least he has an upside.  I'm tired of giving Punto chance after chance to waiver around the Mendoza line, and never come up clutch.  Casilla didn't play well, but at least he could improve.  Punto is going nowhere fast, but yet Gardy's affection for mediocre utility players with below average bats (Which is what he was), continues to pencil him in somewhere.  Maybe after Mauer leaves, and trots off into the sunset to fade into the crowd in NY or LA we can try Punto behind the plate.  At least catchers aren't expected to produce with the bat.  Tejada may be a pipe dream, but it would be nice.  People continue to talk about trading for the likes of an Uggla, or a JJ Hardy, but we really don't have much to offer a team that we can afford to give up.  Sure we could dump off a starting pitcher, but look how well that worked for us in the Garza deal.  I'd rather get something for Gomez and potentially Crain or Liriano, but I don't see us snagging a starting second basemen or shortstop above what we have now.  Maybe JJ Hardy would come for that, but Uggla?  No way.  We need to shore up one of those spots; however, maybe putting some money into a free agent second basemen like Orlando Hudson isn't a bad idea.  We have a few SS's that could platoon with Harris and Punto at short, or maybe we resign Cabrera, making our infield look a little better at the plate, even if Cabrera is an adventure in the field.  I would like the looks of a Vilencia, Cabrera, Hudson, Morneau infield, or maybe a Vilencia, Tejada, Casilla/Cabrera, Morneau.  I don't care who or what as long as they are an upgrade, and can cause us to be rid of Punto. 

My other concern is our Outfield.  It's a good concern, but a concern nonetheless.  We have Cuddy, Span, Gomez, and Young all outfielders, as well as Kubel who will probably stay predominately DH again, as he should.  Cuddy is obvious at right field, that makes perfect sense, and if we keep Gomez, and he can be semi consistent, even if he's only hitting .230 or .240, he would be center field, and then we would have Span in left, leaving Delmon Young the odd man out.  Some people are ok with this, and think we should trade him, coming off a hot end of the season.  I couldn't deny that is an intriguing idea, but I don't think the market for a slow, limpy, clumsy left fielder is that high, especially one with mediocre hitting abilities.  I say we either A) Trade Morneau (OMG) and put Cuddy at first, leaving Young in his natural right field, or B) Trade Cuddy (Slight OMG) and put you guessed it, Young in his natural right field.  Young played right all through out his career in Tampa Bay, and then he gets here and we throw him in left.  Doesn't make sense to me.  Let me look back to my two aforementioned trade scenarios for a minute.  Trade one was getting rid of M n M number two Justin Morneau, which is a sickening thought, but he has a high value, which would bring us potentially a starting pitcher, or a good relief pitcher and some prospects, and would free up some money.  Cuddy showed that at least for a short time, he could play first more than serviceable.  I was impressed, and like I stated before we could get a decent amount for Morneau.  The other deal, which makes much more sense, is trade away Michael Cuddyer who still has some high value, which would net us either a solid position player and a prospect or two or a strong pitcher and a prospect or two, or a few prospects.  I would hate to see him go, but we need to cut something in order to position ourselves for a strong season next year.  Especially when you have Detroit, Chicago, and Kansas City all sporting solid to extremely good starting rotations. 

As a Minnesotan, I'm tired of falling victim to the "Middling infielder at low cost,"  or "Veteran arm to add some leadership," scenario that this team is pulling.  It's a scam to say we brought in Ramon Ortiz, or Livan Hernandez for any other reason than to save some coins.  Come on Twins, open things up a bit.  Let's see a strong offseason, not a boring one.

Poll
Are the Twins going to be active this hot stove?
Yes, we will bring in a starter, and fill several holes as well as lock up Mauer
11 votes
Yes, we will lock up Mauer and potentially fill our Starting pitching need
25 votes
Yes, we will bring in several "Veteran Leadership" guys, but manage to lock up Mauer anyway
11 votes
Yes, we bring in some "Veteran Leadership" and make a large offer to Joe, which he ultimately turns down
6 votes
No, we will not do much this offseason, and will be lucky to resign Mauer
13 votes

66 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs  |  Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

A few points

1. Money. People are hopeful that the Pohlads will spend more on the Twins this offseason because of the move to Target Field. The Twins won’t have to share revenue with the Vikings any longer, which should increase payroll. I don’t think we should write off payroll increasing for this reason, though even then I don’t think we can guess how much it will increase.

2. Lackey. There aren’t a lot of ace SPs available this offseason. Lackey’s contract is going to be huge, and while he deserves a big contract, he might get one for more than he’s worth because there are so few other good options for teams looking to pick up starting pitching. Because of this, I would guess Lackey goes to one of the bigger market teams. I don’t think the Twins go after him even if they increase payroll.

3. Trade Morneau? I don’t like that idea for a few reasons. First, if we have to replace Morneau with Cuddy, we get a drop in production – effectively, we replace Morneau’s ABs with Young’s (yuck). Second, we have to worry about Cuddy declining, and I doubt we lock Cuddy up to a long term contract. Third, Morneau’s trade value will be lower coming off a bad injury, and trading Morneau would be a PR nightmare.

4. Trade Cuddyer? Here I agree with you – I don’t want to trade Cuddy, but given the right offer the Twins shouldn’t rule out a Cuddy trade. Cuddy probably had a career year that he’s unlikely to repeat, and we owe him a big contract. Even then, I don’t think it’s likely that the Twins actually do trade Cuddyer, since he seems like a big clubhouse presence.

5. Trade Young or Gomez? Assuming that Cuddyer is not traded, I still say the Twins get what we can from Gomez or Young. I think you’re right that neither gets us much in return, but I would say we trade one of them just so that the other has a chance to play full time and develop. Personally I would keep Gomez and trade Young – at least Gomez adds value in his defense if he never develops into a good hitter, while Young’s defense is bad enough that if he doesn’t turn into a good hitter he hurts us all around.

by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 25, 2009 2:44 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I'll respond too

1) Money—The Twins spend about half their revenue on major league salaries.. The Twins-Centric Off-Season handbook has most of the details. I do not blame the club for not going over their budget, but their budget should expand with far greater revenue. This is especially helpful when many of the teams are really strapped—the Twins should be one of a minority of teams with a decent amount ($10-15M) to spend.

2) Lackey will come very expensive. Just like Johan Santana, only the biggest budgets will have room to bid on him. Besides that, he is a Type A Free Agent. I would be stunned if the Twins seriously pursued him or any Type A Free Agent.

3) Trading Morneau is simply foolish. He is only 28, and is a monster offensive player. The Twins have been short on power for 30 years, why would they trade away a bona fide sluggers.

4) Cuddyer—He is perhaps my all-time favorite player. He also is the only RH hitter that the Twins have that hits home runs. That makes his value to his present club far greater than it might be to any club looking to add a RH corner OF or 1B.

5) Young or Gomez? I would trade Young. They both take bad at-bats, but in different ways. Young hurts the team greatly in the field, especially when compared to Span , who would figure to replace him in left.

by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Oct 25, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not...

saying that I want or even condone the trade of Morneau or think it would be a good idea, however I am saying it as an option that one would have to explore if the right offer were made…As for Lackey, I tend to agree that he probably wouldn’t be even chased by the Twins, but I read in one of the fishwraps that the Twins would likely pursue Lackey…IDK how legit the source was or if it was speculation but I figured it was worth a look…

by SouthSotaPop on Oct 27, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dude, the Series isn't even over yet

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 25, 2009 4:11 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm sick and tired.....

Of this Twins spend 52% of revenue on the team. They spend 52% of revenue once it reaches a certain level, period.

I have never seen the need for the Twins to create front office/system expenditures any more than they currently are. Bam. True. It costs x-amount of dollars to run the team. It costs x-amount of dollars to run the minor leagues. If you wish to increase expenditures on draftees, then this is an added expense. But saying payroll is $52 million if you take in $100 million, and $77 million if you take in $150 million, I’m sorry…you don’t spend $20+ million more running the organization — unless it is off-the-books bonus money or draftee money.

Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!

by rosterman on Oct 25, 2009 7:12 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

That's a league standard

Part of the owners’ agreement enacted after some owners pocketed luxury tax money instead of spending it on their teams. So, yeah. If they don’t spend 52% of revenue on players or player development, they get in trouble with the Commissioner’s Office. I don’t see them planning to spend more than that. But they can’t plan to spend less, either.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 25, 2009 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, it's called profit

The Pohlads like baseball but they like profit at least as much

by DJL44 on Oct 26, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's why I said they wouldn't spend more than 52% of revenue

They have to spend just enough to keep the Commissioner off their backs. But they don’t want to cut into profits to make that one deal that will make them not just a division contender, but a league contender.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 26, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think that's possible

I think it’s 2 deals minimum to make the jump from division contender to league contender. They’ll spend just enough extra to ensure they get the postseason bump but not more than that because in order to bump the odds in your favor v. the Yankees, Angels and Red Sox you have to spend as much as them. Is it worth spending $10M a year to bump your World Series odds from 10% to 20%? No, but it’s worth spending the $6M to bump your divison odds above 50%. Part of the equation is you have to go through 2 of those teams, not just one.

0.1 × 0.1 × 0.4 = 0.004
0.2 × 0.2 × 0.5 = 0.02

That’s double the chance to win a postseason series but only a 2% shot at a world series title versus an 0.5% chance.

I’m sure they were hoping to win a game and get 2 postseason home games. Either way they got the attendence bump going into the new stadium which boosted demand for season ticket packages. The Twins want to win because they earn more $$ from winning. It’s backwards to think they want to earn more $$ to help the team win. They earn the most profit by just barely winning their division. The best way to maximize your shot at a title is to get into the playoffs regularly, not to spend everything on one season. Unless you think you can sell all your assets and put together a team with a 75% shot at beating the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels. Even then there’s a good chance you lose.

by DJL44 on Oct 26, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you

Now I’m thoroughly depressed. I preferred ignorance.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 26, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Always the underdog

Suppose they sell everything and create a juggernaut with a 70% chance at beating the Yankees:

0.7 × 0.7 × 0.9 (NL stinks) = .44 – a 44% chance to win the World Series. That probably would take an additional $40M in payroll to achieve along with gutting the minor leagues. That still doesn’t assure a title. Better to roll dice every year than to go all-in.

by DJL44 on Oct 27, 2009 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Rolling the dice doesn't cut it in the playoffs

You need at least one ace. You need offensive fire power that can hit good pitches. You need air-tight defense. You don’t win in the playoffs with luck.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 27, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They can't afford an ace

Unless they develop one internally. This is why Terry Ryan’s strategy of drafting pitcher after pitcher made sense.

by DJL44 on Oct 27, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Develop internally

Gibson.

Until then, Baker will have to function as an ace.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 27, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

You can throw the John Lackey dream out the window
if we’re going to add to the rotation this off-season (doubtfully but hopefully)
its going to have to be a #3 or maaaybe #2 type of guy

i.e.

Ben Sheets, Tim Hudson, Find an Edwin Jackson type on the cheap like the Tigers did last year……. -easier said than done

AND YOU KNOW WHAT ?

the answer to that may be Carl Pavano -the way he pitched against AL central foes and the Yanks in the post-season was an awesome memory!!!

Deolis Guerra = Daniel Cabrera ?
I tend to think so

by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Nov 2, 2009 2:47 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Disagreement
You don’t win in the playoffs with luck.

The 1987 Twins (won largely because of home-field advantage, plus opposing team’s leadoff man missed the Series after getting rolled up in a tarp), 2006 Cardinals (worst record of any champion), 1997 Marlins (legitimately a good team but got into the playoffs as a Wild Card and scored the championship-winning run thanks to an error), 1985 Royals (Denkinger!), 1975 Reds (benefited from a semi-ridiculous interference non-call), and basically every other champion to some extent, disagree with you. Luck plays a HUGE part in winning in the playoffs.

I also don’t completely buy the “you need an ace to win in the playoffs” argument, although there’s certainly some truth to it. You know why teams that win in the playoffs have aces? Because they’re the best teams, and great pitching is part of what makes a great team. The Yankees’ ace this year is a guy who was awful in multiple attempts to be a team’s playoff ace prior to this year. I’ll agree that the playoffs magnify the impact of an ace (since he’s pitching every three games instead of every five), but no ace is completely impenetrable.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Oct 27, 2009 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

All those teams had at least one ace.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 27, 2009 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Top-end pitching talent helps more in the playoffs, to be sure...

while pitching depth isn’t as necessary as in the regular season. But an “ace” certainly isn’t a prerequisite for playoff success. It’s more important to simply have as much talent as possible.

The Twins chances of getting an “ace” this year are slim to none. People keep on throwing out names like Brandon Webb, Roy Halladay, John Lackey, but it’s just not gonna happen for the Twins. Maybe Rich Harden or Erik Bedard, but they’ll probably only go 150 innings.

by Mike I on Oct 27, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you really think that has anything to do with it?

The Pohlads haven’t wanted to spend any money no matter who is in power. I don’t think this is a politics thing at all.

by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 28, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Pohlads give millions to charity every year

So they pay fewer taxes on a percentage basis than the rest of us.

Also, welfare accounts for less than .001 of the federal budget. The two largest line items are defense and medicare/medicade.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 28, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, I forgot service on debt

That’s second. Then the health care industry.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Oct 28, 2009 11:05 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

TT is an SB Nation blog of, by and for the fans. We strive to be the best Minnesota Twins blog by providing quality content and analysis, as well as daily news and notes on the team. We hope you'll make Twinkie Town your home for all things Twins!
Start posting about the Twins »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Organization Review (Relief Pitchers)
Small
On Roy, Ramos, and RISK

Recent FanPosts

Small
Anybody want to talk revenues?
Joel87bw5_small
Signing up for the Minors
Small
Roy, Ramos, and RISK, Part II
Small
30 Cents on the Dollar = 2B Indifference
P1060527_small
New Uni Thoughts
Small
Minor League Report...November 14, 2009
Pose_small
Prediction Time (My Guess at 2010 Organizational teams)
Minnesota_twins_vinyl_baseball_small
New Uniforms on Monday

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Twinkie Town On Twitter

SPONSORS


Editor-In-Chief

Twinkietown_small Jesse

Senior Writer

Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler

The_jet_small cmathewson

Gladdentwins_small Adam Peterson

Hosken_powell_autograph_small RandBall's Stu