Where Is the Farm System Help for the Twins?

by Jesse on Nov 9, 2011 10:52 AM EST in News

The Twins need impact players if they plan on competing in 2012. Can Trevor Plouffe be one of the players to provide some unexpected value?

Major League Baseball teams need to draft well and develop that talent to remain competitive. Even the Yankees focus on player development these days, and nobody will ever have a higher payroll than that organization. For a few years, the Twins were baseball's darlings for player development.

Who could blame them? They won division titles with, largely, talent they cultivated, so who could blame baseball for falling all over themselves for a team who not only fought off contraction but was able to win, year after year, on a smaller budget with mostly home-grown talent? Between 1999 and 2004, the Twins introduced (more than a cup of coffee) an impressive list of impact players (products who would eventually post at least one 3+ WAR season with the Twins, per BaseballReference.com):

That's a pretty good list, even if a few of them (Ford, Redman, Mays) had most of their value tied up in one season. But over the next seven years, from 2005 through 2011, the Twins introduced a much smaller list of impact players. Check it out after the jump.

Minnesota hasn't produced an impact player since Duensing in 2009, and it's dubious as to whether he'd be able to post another 3-win season. Span was the last position player introduced (2008), and the first since '04 (Mauer, Kubel) who is still with the team.

The Twins have players who could be stars in their system. I believe that Liam Hendriks, Chris Parmelee, and Joe Benson all have the ability to post a three-win season or two, although perhaps not in the next couple of years. Does Ben Revere have that kind of ceiling? He was just 0.8 wins above replacement in 2011, in spite of his stellar defense. Everyone else, from Kyle Gibson to Aaron Hicks to Miguel Sano, is at least two years away.

Competitive teams stay competitive because they find ways to bring fresh blood into the mix. For the Twins this has always been through the draft, because they couldn't be big bidders in free agency. But now, with the lack of impact player development, they're in a position where they don't just need their established players to perform as expected, they need to hope for a diamond in the rough (or three) to help them bridge the gap of the next two years or so.

Once again I'll say the Twins are at a crossroads. How they move this winter will tell us everything we need to know about their future plans. They'll attempt to patch together a roster that they hope will compete, or they're going to put together a plan that sets them up to re-take the AL Central circa 2014. Either way, the front office has their work cut out for them, because piecing together a good roster which has introduced one impact bat through the system since 2004 is not an easy thing to do.

Tweet Comment 48 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Danny Valencia will make that list

So will Joe Benson.

by DJL44 on Nov 9, 2011 11:13 AM EST reply actions

"wins-above-replacement level"

Is Danny Valencia 3 wins above a replacement level 3B ?

I’ve never really thought he was, maybe 1 or 2 but 3 + is an impact player and Valencia may not be that.

Yoenis Cespedes
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15469
^ the bottom video ^

by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Nov 9, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions

DJL44 said

Danny “will” make that list. I take him to be projecting improvement, and I hope he’s right.

I could definitely see Danny matching Koskie’s peak, and Koskie is on the list of guys with a 3+ WAR season. Danny will probably need to do it with a little more offense because he’ll probably never match Koskie’s defense, but it’s still possible.

by amiller92 on Nov 9, 2011 11:49 AM EST up reply actions

You're greatly underrating Koskie

Koskie didn’t peak as a 3-win player – he peaked at almost 6 WAR. He was a legitimately excellent player for a few years, getting on base at a .370-ish clip, hitting with power, and even stealing bases (he had 27 SB in 2001), all while playing good defense. If Valencia reaches Koskie’s level, that would make him one of the two or three most valuable players on the team.

"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 Nov 9, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions

Yes, Koskie had five consecutive years with an OPS+ of 110 or better

And he had a plus glove. If Valencia even comes close to that, we would all be amazed. I don’t think he is the player he was last year. I don’t think he is the player he was his first year. Somewhere in between—a 2WAR player— is reasonable. Solid, but not worthy of this list.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 9, 2011 12:31 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

I expect to see (and would be very happy with) Valencia settling in as a league average third baseman. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him have one year that gets him on this list, but I wouldn’t expect it perennially, either.

"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 Nov 9, 2011 2:07 PM EST up reply actions

Defensive improvement mainly

I think he’s a 2.5 win bat and a 0.5 win glove in at least 1 season

by DJL44 on Nov 9, 2011 12:03 PM EST up reply actions

As long as he doesn't go all Lew Ford on us.

by markos on Nov 9, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions

Don't know about Joe Benson

But Danny Valencia should already be on that list. The only problem is that the Minnesota Twins have had a horrible, at times, infield and that led to 99 losses. The truth is that Danny is about as good as the night he managed the walk-off run against the Cleveland Indians in the moment he had to do it against his college roommate in Chris Perez. In short, he sent all the fangirls into fangirl heaven for the rest of the night. If he keeps performing like that in the future, we are looking at a hall of famer at third.

I'm a proud fan of the Minnesota Twins and Dallas Cowboys!
"Life is precious and time is a key element. Let’s make every moment count and help those who have a greater need than our own." – Harmon Killebrew
Champagne SuperTolbert Saves the day!!!

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 12:16 PM EST up reply actions

No. We are not.

by Brady Eyestone on Nov 9, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Anybody can have good or bad years

Part of Danny Valencia’s problems stems in coaching and the other part is the bad middle infield.

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions

That's a good point

His UZR was like 15 when he had Hardy next to him. With Nishioka or Plouffe next to him, it was under water. Why? Because Hardy got to balls in his zone and turned them into outs. If they bleed into left, it counts against Valencia’s UZR. If Hardy got them, it didn’t.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 9, 2011 2:01 PM EST up reply actions

Very interesting

I knew that UZR was slightly affected by adjacent players, but it never dawned on me that it would affect a players WAR. I suppose it does for Fangraphs. Does anyone know if the same issue applies with Baseball Reference? Kind of defeats the purpose of creating a independent value metric like WAR, though I guess it is better than not incorporating defensive value at all. Just another reason why defensive metrics are shaky at best.

by markos on Nov 9, 2011 3:20 PM EST up reply actions

UZR = WAR

FanGraphs uses UZR for their defensive WAR value – it’s just UZR/10. Baseball-Reference uses some other metric for their defense, although I’m not positive which one. I’d assume, though, that it would have similar limitations.

"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 Nov 9, 2011 3:50 PM EST up reply actions

BBRef WAR is typically > Fangraphs WAR

BBRef doesn’t penalize as much for defense.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 9, 2011 5:05 PM EST up reply actions

Drugs are bad, Mm-kay

by That'sWhatSheSaid on Nov 9, 2011 1:10 PM EST up reply actions

We'll know whether anything has changed

If they spend real money at short stop and backup catcher.

If they go the bargain route, I guess we just have to wait until we develop some talent again.

by amiller92 on Nov 9, 2011 11:13 AM EST reply actions

I think the bullpen is a big problem

The Twins did very well with homegrown bullpens in the past. Recently they have had expensive or ineffective bullpens.

by DJL44 on Nov 9, 2011 11:14 AM EST reply actions

They have some arms, there's just a gap

Gut, Jacobson, Watts

It ebbs and flows.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 9, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions

Drafting and development failures

I can’t blame Bill Smith for the player development failures from 2003 to 2007. I don’t know if was a failure of identifying big-league players in the draft, or an issue with minor-league player development. Regardless, the Twins will have a good opportunity to restock the farm system this draft, with high first and second round picks, and potentially several compensation picks. Hopefully they don’t botch it like 2004.

by markos on Nov 9, 2011 11:19 AM EST reply actions

Basically

The development of players rests in the hand that the team is dealt. Overall, I am going to say that the draft classes from those seasons were weak.

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 12:20 PM EST up reply actions

This list isn't terribly fair

Part of the reason the Twins didn’t debut as many 3+ WAR players in the last few years was because the previous guys were already there. Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, Kubel, Santana, Romero, and Ford were all in spots preventing new guys from getting there. Also, Cuddyer and Kubel didn’t have their big seasons until after 2005. Prior to 1999, the Twins were so bad that they didn’t have to worry about replacing a superior player, so many more players made their debuts. It would be more interesting, I think, to see what percentage of new full-time players met that threshold – I’d guess that it’s not quite as big a difference, because fewer players were brought up and given regular playing time while the Twins were in their run of division titles.

To look at it another way, setting aside one-year wonders like Redman and Ford, the Twins actually did a good job of replacing guys. Hunter left but was replaced by Span. Jones left but was replaced by Cuddyer (who debuted earlier but never had a great season until 2006). Guzman left but was replaced by Bartlett (insert Bill Smith insult here). Morneau, Mauer, and Kubel didn’t need to be replaced.

"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 Nov 9, 2011 12:05 PM EST reply actions

Every player needs to be replaced at one time or another.

Morneau, Mauer, and Kubel didn’t need to be replaced.

Until now

First, Justin Morneau needs to be replaced and that will be Chris Parmelee. Then Jason Kubel will either be replaced with a free agent or Joe Benson, and Joe Mauer will eventually be replaced as well.

Jesse mentioned the Yankees and how they are working their own farm system despite their high payroll. It is high because of Rivera, Jeter, and A-Rod among others. They would want to get rid of those three and Mark Textera as well as Nick Swisher. If the Yankees do that, the payroll is in the $170 million range, and the Red Sox payroll will be in the $190’s and maybe up to $210 million after this offseason is complete.

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 12:38 PM EST up reply actions

The Yankees don't want to get rid of Rivera, Jeter, and A-Rod

That’s crazier than Manny Ramirez at shortstop.

by ColossusOfRhode on Nov 9, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions

Do you know something we don't?

Maybe saying that the Yankees have de-aged those players?

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions

The burden of proof is not on me

Those three players are all under large contracts. They also bring in large amounts of revenue. They also continue to be effective players. The Yankees historically don’t mind having the largest payroll in baseball.

What do you know that suggests otherwise?

by ColossusOfRhode on Nov 9, 2011 3:00 PM EST up reply actions

Yes.

The Yankees continue to re-sign those players, inspite of their age and contract demands. If they didn’t want them, they wouldn’t sign them.

by Jesse on Nov 9, 2011 3:12 PM EST up reply actions

It's sorta not fair,

inasmuch as some of these players could potentially reach a 3+ WAR season at some juncture with the Twins. Blackburn and Slowey could, maybe Revere.

But I think the point stands that the Twins have not developed impact talent over the last five years or so, like they did in the first half of the last decade.

by Jesse on Nov 9, 2011 1:07 PM EST up reply actions

Some of that talent was traded away

Wilson Ramos and Matt Garza were dealt

The drafting has been poor/unlucky since 2003. Rainville, Waldrop, Hunt and Gutierrez all look unworthy of a 1st round draft pick. Gibson and Bashore have been injured and Wimmers had a major setback.

For position players Hicks and Plouffe have a chance but those chances are fading.

by DJL44 on Nov 9, 2011 1:23 PM EST reply actions

And it all goes back to coaching.

Maybe it is time to get Gardy out of there as Manager of the Minnesota Twins. If he has the attitude that a player has to be major league ready when they come to the Twins, then we are going to need a payroll in the $300 Million range and the bleachers at Target Field will be costing $50.

by Jessy S on Nov 9, 2011 1:56 PM EST up reply actions

Interesting breakdown. An initial response I had was the pre-2004 group “benefitted” compared to the latter from some bad previous Twins teams (e.g., up until 2001, the Twins often picked in the first half of round one), meaning they simply had more higher-upside prospects to develop. Mauer was #1 overall and Cuddyer #9; the only other first rounder in that group is Hunter, who went 20th. Conversely, the only first round pick in that latter group is Span, who like Hunter went 20th.

But that’s merely part of the picture, I think. And anyway, both lists show it’s about depth, not top picks. They’ve certainly seemed to hit a dry spell in terms of development, compared to a few years ago at least. Here’s hoping the current next generation, with maybe the addition of a fairly fast-track/high-upside prospect such as Appel with the #2 pick next year, help usher a renaissance.

by jianfu on Nov 9, 2011 2:07 PM EST reply actions

Wait, what?

Duensing is an impact player, but Blackburn wasn’t?

by funnytrain on Nov 9, 2011 7:43 PM EST reply actions

If the standard is 3 WAR, yes.

Duensing was 3.1 in 2010, Blackburn has never been over 2.8. Blackburn has also had two negative WAR seasons.

by spanspanspan on Nov 9, 2011 8:19 PM EST up reply actions

Fangraphs agrees with you

Blackburn

2008: 2.5 fWAR
2009: 3.0 fWAR
2010: 0.3 fWAR
2011: 0.7 fWAR

Duensing

2009: 1.1 fWAR
2010: 1.6 fWAR
2011: 1.7 fWAR

The difference comes from how they measure pitcher WAR. BBRef uses Runs Scored, adjusted for defense, while Fangraphs uses FIP (walks, strikeouts, home runs). Not that it really matters, but I thought it was an interesting side note.

"Nobody wants to hear me rap." - Joe Mauer
"METEOR" - JIM THOME

by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Nov 9, 2011 8:30 PM EST up reply actions

Exactly.

I don’t like BBRef WAR as much for pitchers.

by funnytrain on Nov 9, 2011 8:48 PM EST up reply actions

Ahh, ok, I didn't check both sites

by spanspanspan on Nov 9, 2011 10:30 PM EST up reply actions

or, from a less stats-based standpoint

Would you rather have 130 innings at 2.6 ERA (2010 Duensing), or 200 innings at 4.0 ERA (2008 and 2009 Blackburn)?

"Nobody wants to hear me rap." - Joe Mauer
"METEOR" - JIM THOME

by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Nov 9, 2011 8:32 PM EST up reply actions

It depends on what you get from the 70 innings that Duensing doesn't throw.

by Jesse on Nov 9, 2011 9:02 PM EST up reply actions

You can flip them around if that makes you happier.

But it doesn’t change the point. It doesn’t matter whose WAR we use, they’ll tell the same story.

by Jesse on Nov 9, 2011 9:02 PM EST up reply actions

Not always

I wish we had one WAR standard. The gap is less for pitchers than position players. The main difference is how defense is weighted.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 10, 2011 9:08 AM EST up reply actions

The difference for pitchers is quite large

Skipping relief pitchers, rWAR’s main ingredient is RA and has a team-fielding correction while fWAR uses FIP. So, they evaluate pitchers from completely opposite directions.

I always thought of FIP as more of a “projection” tool, so I don’t like it showing up in a value metric, but bb-ref’s fielding correction can produce some funny results when a pitcher has a UER% which is out of line with how its defense usually performs (which can happen if there are a couple of high UER innings).

by DavidRF on Nov 10, 2011 10:17 AM EST up reply actions

Good points

Especially the thing about FIP. Too many analysts use FIP as an absolute value stat. It’s more of a “all things being equal” type of stat.

FWIW, I think the bbref is more accurate. It doesn’t relay on UZR or FIP as much, which are best used in context.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 10, 2011 1:02 PM EST up reply actions

It looks like Blackburn consistently outperformed his FIP in 2008 and 2009.

I don’t know how much knowledge about his true talent we can get from his last two seasons, because it looks like he’s just been pitching hurt for most of that.

by funnytrain on Nov 10, 2011 8:51 PM EST up reply actions

GB pitchers tend to outperform their FIPs

FB pitchers tend to underperform relative to their FIPs.

Sinkerball pitchers are notorious for having short careers. See also, Erickson, Scott and Silva, Carlos. I just think the league has figured out how his ball moves and has adjusted to it. Unless he makes adjustments himself, it doesn’t look good. I won’t say he can’t make adjustments. But I don’t think it’s particularly likely.

He did add a change-up last year, and that didn’t seem to help much. His curve ball is just too rolly-polly. His slider is more of a cutter. And he throws his sinker too much. Last year, he lost the feel for the sinker, so he was throwing 88 MPH four seamers. That’s not going to work very well.

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

by cmathewson on Nov 10, 2011 9:58 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, that makes sense.

I would definitely defer to your knowledge, I didn’t really get into baseball until only a couple years ago.

by funnytrain on Nov 10, 2011 10:32 PM EST up reply actions

Blackburn with a 4.00 ERA???

That’s generous. I understand that was his ERA in 2008-2009, but take a look at his ERA the last two seasons – 4.98.

I really don’t understand what the obsession is with Blackburn. People talk about him as if he is a key player on the Twins while in reality, he could easily be replaced. I don’t care about WAR or anything like that, the fact of the matter is he has a BAA around .320 and an ERA around 5. That’s great pitching…if you’re in a slowpitch softball league.

by pwilliestyle on Nov 10, 2011 10:12 AM EST reply actions

Yeah?

Blackburn had significant elbow problems in 2010 that weren’t treated until the offseason, leading to an inability to throw his slider. Basically, he Cuddyer’d out the injury and both he and the team suffered for it.

In 2011, his elbow problems flared up again, and his control and command totally disappeared. Let’s not claim that Blackburn is completely worthless, because he’s shown in 2008 and 2009 that, when healthy, he can be a good back-of-the-rotation starting pitcher. His value is contingent on whether he can stay healthy.

by funnytrain on Nov 10, 2011 8:36 PM EST up reply actions

Value contingent on whether he can stay healthy...

You can make that claim with a lot of players, that’s a bit of a cop out if you ask me. Plus, I am not saying that I wouldn’t want him as a #5 starter, but that is his ceiling. My point was most Twins fans seem to think he is a #3 or even a #2. This notion is nothing short of delusional.

by pwilliestyle on Nov 18, 2011 2:58 PM EST up reply actions