Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Forums

A way, way too early look at the 2019 rotation. And yet...

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 03:12 PM
This is stupid! Its way, way too early! And we will have months ahead of us to discuss the 2019 season. And yet, between a disappointing...
Full topic ›

Dozier v Forsythe

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:54 PM
Never thought this would be necessary, but I'm going to post periodic updates comparing the two the rest of the year. Forsythe doesn't ha...
Full topic ›

Article: What To Do With Byron Buxton?

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:54 PM
On Tuesday, the Minnesota Twins activated Byron Buxton from his fourth separate stint on the disabled list this season. It's been a night...
Full topic ›

Game Thread (8/16): Twins vs. Detroit, 7:10 PM CT

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 03:12 PM
Twins | 56-63 overall, 35-24 at home, 5-5 last 10 Ervin Santana, RHP | 6.53 ERA, 1.45 WHIP, 2.33 K:BB in 20.2 IPTigers | 50-71 overall, 1...
Full topic ›

Article: Twins Daily Roundtable: Closing Time

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:37 PM
Twins Daily Roundtable is a weekly series. As part of this series, a question will be posed to the site’s writers and they will respond i...
Full topic ›

Recent Blogs


BREAKING: Twins Trade Rodney To A's

The Minnesota Twins have announced that they have traded RHP Fernando Rodney to the Oakland A's in exchange for RHP Dakota Chalmers.
The Twins have traded their closer, Fernando Rodney, to the A's. In return, the Twins receive 21-year-old RHP Dakota Chalmers.

Chalmers was the A's 3rd round pick in 2015 out of high school in Georgia. He received a seven-figure bonus, well over slot value, to keep him from a commitment to the University of Georgia.. He pitched a couple of games with Beloit this year, but according to Darren Wolfson, he had Tommy John surgery in April.

Here is another report on Chalmers from Jeff Johnson of The Gazette in Cedar Rapids:



Rodney was signed by the Twins before this season. He worked in 46 games for the Twins and went 3-2 with 25 saves and a 3.09 ERA.

According to Mike Berardino, the A's had claimed Rodney, which of course gave them less leverage in a trade.



The Twins will make a corresponding roster move tomorrow before their game.

  • nclahammer likes this

  • Share:
  • submit to reddit
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

126 Comments

Photo
ashburyjohn
Aug 10 2018 09:48 AM

otoh...Kimbrel's 4 blown saves came in 37 opportunities; Rodney's 6 in 31.So, that's actually pretty significant difference...and Kimbrel is no longer great.I know nobody wants to look at BS anymore...but the guys that blow them at a healthy clip never have the impressive underlying numbers either, as is/was the case with Rodney.  

I was responding to the notion that we'd have 5 more wins in the bag if not for Rodney. I'd rather have had a better closer too, but that overstates it.

 

Who did you want them to go get last winter? Who were the guys they should have been in on?

In my mind, the Twins made some strong moves in relief (and spycake is right that not trusting the young arms is the issue, not the free agents signed as aside from Belisle, the vets were as good as you could expect collectively) and decent moves for starting pitching (went for Darvish, didn’t go too far and then got a solid 1 year guy). After that, I can’t see where they should have been more active. The position players were set and you’d be upset to bring someone in to take a spot from a young guy. Sure Buxton, Sano and to a lesser extent Kepler have had bad seasons but you wanted to roll with those guys because they’re the future. I look at opening day and aside from Polanco being suspended, that’s who I wanted the Twins to have at that position.

 

I don’t see where the Twins should have been more active last offseason in Free Agency.

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

    • Dman, SF Twins Fan and KirbyDome89 like this

 

One problem is the surgery.He won't be back until when, mid season?Drafted in 2015, we will need to add him to the 40-man following next year.That doesn't give the Twins a lot of time to judge whether he is deserving.

 

The odds of somebody adding him via Rule 5 are pretty much zero.

    • Mike Sixel likes this

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s).

This is a fair point.

 

A lot of people said they had a good offseason, but honestly, if they had done any less, I think it would have been a disappointing offseason:

 

- We lost 2 relievers from an already suspect pen, so we signed 3 FA relievers (1 of whom was recently back from surgery)

- We lost approximately one SP to attrition (we'll call it the Garcia/Colon spot), so we traded for Odorizzi

- We had a pretty mediocre DH situation, so we signed Morrison

- We lost another SP (Ervin) to injury at the beginning of spring training, so we signed Lynn

 

If we had rolled into 2018 counting more on Duffey, Boshers, Hughes, or Vargas, I think that would have been bad. So really, these moves were kind of the minimum acceptable standard. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think it necessarily deserves any special credit either.

 

Whatever credit you want to give them for not making any really bad moves (like giving a 4/52 deal to Alex Cobb) could just as well be offset by a lack of credit for failing to make any great moves (like getting Gerrit Cole or Miles Mikolas).

    • Mike Sixel, Dman, KGB and 2 others like this

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

 

To finish my thoughts for 2018 free agents, the big contracts were Arrieta, Darvish, JD Martinez, Hosmer, Cain, and Upton. The Twins were in on Darvish and it never felt like Arrieta was a match so no issues on the pitching choices. The OF contracts to Cain and Upton look good through a year but I would have reacted negatively if the Twins were not going with Rosario, Kepler and Buxton in the OF this year. I was (and am) excited about all three. I think you can certainly say the Twins would look awesome with JD Martinez at DH (though that contract could be tough by the end) so that’s a place they could have been active. He’d have fit well with the Twins. It would’ve taken knowing the OF was going to suck or being very confident about JD Martinez. Not a lot to blame the FO for - not a ton of great fits and they were likely right to trust internal youth.

 

They should be in decent shape this offseason. 3B is relatively strong (Machado, Moose, Donaldson, Escobar) and that seems a place of need. Though Sano finishing strong might change that (and might move them back towards Escobar at 2B since he could move to 3B regularly once Gordon/Arraez is ready).

 

1B/DH is a lot harder. With Mauer, Austin and Sano they have some options but Sano off of 3B creates a hole there. The free agent market is pitiful. This is a place that the Twins could use trade pieces or perhaps take another shot on a Logan Morrison type. Might work better the second time?

 

I’m less inclined to move at catcher. Castro should be back and Garver is looking like a nice backup/1B/OF. Next year is a big year for Rortvedt – if he’s doing well in AA next year that may impact the Twins decision making. Same thing with Jeffers at the lower levels. Overall, catcher seems like a place for the Twins to wait another year for more information.

 

You can always use starting pitching. I expect the Twins will be in on that market. Kershaw seems likely to go back to the Dodgers but Dallas Keuchel, David Price, JA Happ, Garret Richards, Charlie Morton, Eovaldi, Ervin Santana, and of course, Bartolo Colon make for an interesting (if not exactly top-heavy) market.

 

I hope the Twins take a similar path to pitching this offseason as last. In on big starters but not getting desperate since they have nice young internal options (Berrios, Gibson, Romero, Pineda, Odorizzi, Mejia, Gonsalves, Thorpe is not a bad crew – though I wouldn’t mind one solid veteran signing). Making some smart free agent reliever moves.

 

And then I’d like to see them go get someone in the infield. Machado seems unlikely but they should be in on him to a point. As a fall back, getting an Escobar or a Donaldson on a shorter deal would be a nice bridge to the next generation.

 

    • Mike Sixel, wavedog, markos and 5 others like this

Can't work up much of an opinion.Other than count me as one that did NOT think Rodney would fetch anything even remotely approaching a "near major-league ready" player.And he did need to be traded.So....lottery ticket.  

    • Mike Sixel and SF Twins Fan like this
Photo
Hosken Bombo Disco
Aug 10 2018 10:26 AM

Who did you want them to go get last winter? Who were the guys they should have been in on?

In my mind, the Twins made some strong moves in relief (and spycake is right that not trusting the young arms is the issue, not the free agents signed as aside from Belisle, the vets were as good as you could expect collectively) and decent moves for starting pitching (went for Darvish, didn’t go too far and then got a solid 1 year guy). After that, I can’t see where they should have been more active. The position players were set and you’d be upset to bring someone in to take a spot from a young guy. Sure Buxton, Sano and to a lesser extent Kepler have had bad seasons but you wanted to roll with those guys because they’re the future. I look at opening day and aside from Polanco being suspended, that’s who I wanted the Twins to have at that position.

I don’t see where the Twins should have been more active last offseason in Free Agency.

Since you are going down this road again (in a Rodney thread), I will say, again, that I disagree completely with just about everything above :)

The key with Darvish/Arrieta/Cobb/Lynn was signing them in the normal period. The front office used Twins Fest (mid-late-January) as a target for trading Dozier the year before, so that would have worked as a good deadline for signing a free agent starter. I would have signed Cobb but during the normal signing period.

And no, I would not have signed Rodney. What about closer, then? Dunno. These guys are supposed to have "the data." Maybe Reed or Pressley. Reed was a good signing. I would have hung on to Burdi and Chaggy, too.

 

I was responding to the notion that we'd have 5 more wins in the bag if not for Rodney. I'd rather have had a better closer too, but that overstates it.

Agreed.It doesn't work like that.

 

I will say the Rodney signing seems more and more strange in retrospect.If you liked him going into 2018, what don't you like about him going into 2019?Did they actually expect him to be better than he was?They shouldn't have.Seemed like a hedge signing at the time."We'll get someone better at the deadline if we look to be serious contenders."To me, this trade is changing their mind...admitting mistakes. It's not like anyone else in the bullpen has stepped up to make Rodney redundant (at least yet).Although...I agree with the changing of the mind.Never like the signing in the first place.

    • Mike Sixel, wavedog, Dman and 1 other like this

I'll summarize my thoughts on the FRE era.I was puzzled why we signed him in the first place along with some of our other Rule 5 bullpen moves- despite all the anxious moments he performed better than I thought he would so I would have to say I was a bit pleasantly surprised by his performance as a Twin.Figured he would be traded but thought we might get back a little more than we did- the front office must have decided they didn't want him around.Be real interesting what our bullpen looks like next year - hope these guys have a plan other than waiver wires and Rule 5 picks. Winning is the best entertainment but I will say FRE sure brought excitement to the 9th inning by how much trouble could he get into before either pulling it out of the fire or losing it - and since we are not playing for anythinganymore I am slightly going to miss that. 

    • Mike Sixel, ThejacKmp, LA VIkes Fan and 1 other like this

 

Since you are going down this road again (in a Rodney thread), I will say, again, that I disagree completely with just about everything above :)

The key with Darvish/Arrieta/Cobb/Lynn was signing them in the normal period. The front office used Twins Fest (mid-late-January) as a target for trading Dozier the year before, so that would have worked as a good deadline for signing a free agent starter. I would have signed Cobb but during the normal signing period.

And no, I would not have signed Rodney. What about closer, then? Dunno. These guys are supposed to have "the data." Maybe Reed or Pressley. Reed was a good signing. I would have hung on to Burdi and Chaggy, too.

 

It’s nice to have that arbitrary deadline but that wasn’t the way the market was working. Other teams were stalling and the market was very slow developing because the top players weren’t signing. Guys don’t just sign with someone during that period, they wait and see what the market will be. You’re not going to get movement unless someone thinks “Yeah, this is the best I’m going to get.” So you have to overpay (like the Rockies with Holland, a bad contract no matter what he did this year).

 

You would have paid exceptionally more for Cobb had you signed him early because you’d be paying against what people thought the market would be, not what it was. His contract looks rough now at four years and $57 million. Think what you would’ve had to pay if you’d moved quickly. Another year? Another $20 million?

    • Dman, howieramone2 and SF Twins Fan like this

 

Agreed.It doesn't work like that.

 

I will say the Rodney signing seems more and more strange in retrospect.If you liked him going into 2018, what don't you like about him going into 2019?Did they actually expect him to be better than he was?They shouldn't have.Seemed like a hedge signing at the time."We'll get someone better at the deadline if we look to be serious contenders."To me, this trade is changing their mind...admitting mistakes. It's not like anyone else in the bullpen has stepped up to make Rodney redundant (at least yet).Although...I agree with the changing of the mind.Never like the signing in the first place.

 

Maybe they're looking at internal development and the free agent pool this year and think that Rodney isn't going to be a great value? They also might realy like Chalmers/

    • jkcarew likes this

No more FRE®.

 

Sad.  

 

I guess closer tryouts for May (my choice), Moya, Busenitz, Mcgill, Duffey, Rogers.....

    • LA VIkes Fan likes this

Kind of a nothing deal. Rodney didn't figure in their future plans so get whatever you can get. On the plus side we don't have to watch his torturous outings anymore.

 

Maybe they're looking at internal development and the free agent pool this year and think that Rodney isn't going to be a great value? They also might realy like Chalmers/

But most of those reasons (to go somewhere other than Rodney) all existed when they originally signed him, IMO.Doesn't matter.We agree that there are many legitimate reasons to trade Rodney at this point.

 

But most of those reasons (to go somewhere other than Rodney) all existed when they originally signed him, IMO.Doesn't matter.We agree that there are many legitimate reasons to trade Rodney at this point.

 

Not really. They didn't know the 2019 reliever FA market (especially since reliever performance is so variable). They also don't know that internal guys will develop (though they certainly haven't rewarded any of those guys with MLB time so hard to see how they're so sure there).

 

Maybe they just didn't like Rodney as much once they had him for a year. He is 40+. It'll be fascinating to see what happens with Rodney this offseason. Is his option picked up by the A's? If he hits the FA market, what does he get? it will tell a lot about this decision I imagine.

Photo
KirbyDome89
Aug 10 2018 12:29 PM

 

If there were no other options, was it really brilliant strategy, or just what was available? I think they did a lot right last off season, it just didn't work. But I also think they did little to nothing to fix the medium term, either by signing longer term FAs or trading for player(s). 

 

But, if there are no real options for long term deals, is it really genius to not do what you can't do? That was the point of the post.......maybe they signed a bunch of ST deals because there wasn't another option, not because that's what they wanted to do.

 

I hope they are dealing from this super deep farm system for 1 MLB player with 3+ years of control this off season. No idea who, but a C, 3B, OF, 1B or SP would be nice. If not, it looks like another year of 1 year deals and hoping someone from the farm steps up.

Exactly, I haven't seen anybody say they expected the additions to make the team worse. They all came with concerns though, which IMO played a huge role in why they were available. Those question marks are often ignored when the moves are praised but then they resurface and they're used to laude the short term aspect of the deals. It's hard for me to applaud the Twins for scooping up players destined for short term deals in what was left of a down FA market, and then, after a bulk of the concerns over the signings come to fruition, commend them for only making short term commitments.

 

tl;dr The Twins should've been better this season. Regression by the core played the largest role, but the FO gambled on low risk/low reward FAs and they were burned. That isn't praise worthy IMO. 

 

As a side note, it worries me that they're in a position where they have more holes to fill via FA, trade, or internal options this coming offseason than the last. I know we each voiced concern about the success rate of reshuffling the deck season after season following short term commitments. Here's hoping round 2 goes a little more smoothly. 

    • USAFChief, Mike Sixel and Rigby like this
Photo
diehardtwinsfan
Aug 10 2018 01:06 PM

The picked up a high risk/high reward kid. Not sure what else we expected. I think this return is fine. 

    • howieramone2 likes this

 

I was surprised there wasn't a better bidder for Rodney before the deadline. Did Oakland pick up the remaining salary? The Twins need to recoup as much of this years' payroll excess as possible to sign "a big quantity of players next year..." (Although I prefer quality over quantity)

 

I agree with being surprised. The only assumption that I can make was they were not planning on trading Rodney or didn't get an offer they liked before the deadline. 

 

The other assumption is that they ran him through waivers like they do with most everyone. The A's put in a claim and they liked this kid they got back. They had to like the kid because they could have simply pulled Rodney back if they didn't. 

 

However... mainly my surprise is rooted in the fact that after he didn't go before the trade deadline... I assumed he would be in uniform for us on opening day 2019. 

 

Quantity over Quality... I'd be happy with either. We may have enough holes to fill that quantity may be the only possibility though. 

 

Between you and I and everybody else who reads this... I'm looking at baby steps... I'll just be happy if we are not forced to play players who are hitting less than .230 every single damn day.

 

So bring me quantity, flexibility and honest to god competition for playing time and a manager who knows what to do with it.  

Whose closing?Who cares?We're all used to late inning heartbreak at this point.

Photo
Brock Beauchamp
Aug 10 2018 04:16 PM

 

I get your thinking -- I generally liked the moves last winter, and the trade returns at the deadline -- but I think that glosses over the intervening 4 months. Would have liked to see more of an attempt to shake up the 2018 team, maybe in May/June, before resigning themselves to seller status. Belisle was an underwhelming attempt, to say the least.

To be fair, Belisle came so late that he barely moved the needle in either direction. I'm not saying I liked the signing or want him anywhere near Minnesota, just that it probably didn't make much difference. The hand was pretty much dealt by the time he came aboard.

 

The front office was a mix of conservative and aggressive early in the season. After all, they promoted Romero pretty aggressively and let him pitch... and then demoted him.

 

A weird season.

    • Danchat and howieramone2 like this

To be fair, Belisle came so late that he barely moved the needle in either direction. I'm not saying I liked the signing or want him anywhere near Minnesota, just that it probably didn't make much difference. The hand was pretty much dealt by the time he came aboard.

The front office was a mix of conservative and aggressive early in the season. After all, they promoted Romero pretty aggressively and let him pitch... and then demoted him.

A weird season.


Well, the lateness is part of the problem with the Belisle move. (Not Belisle specifically, but the late effort trying to shake up the season a bit.) Too little, and too late?

Actually I think adding Belisle may have just been an early sign we were preparing to punt, and adding another cheap vet reliever so we could deal others. In which case... that was too early to give up.

I liked the Romero promotion, but that plus cutting Hughes was kind of the plan since spring training. Or at least, Romero took it because Mejia was hurt at the time. It wasn't really a proactive effort to shake things up.

And as you mention, as our season was moving toward irrelevance, we demoted Romero... then we demoted Mejia... and then we had Aaron Slegers starting for some reason... weird season.
    • Brock Beauchamp likes this
Photo
Hosken Bombo Disco
Aug 10 2018 08:49 PM

 

It’s nice to have that arbitrary deadline but that wasn’t the way the market was working. Other teams were stalling and the market was very slow developing because the top players weren’t signing. Guys don’t just sign with someone during that period, they wait and see what the market will be. You’re not going to get movement unless someone thinks “Yeah, this is the best I’m going to get.” So you have to overpay (like the Rockies with Holland, a bad contract no matter what he did this year).

 

You would have paid exceptionally more for Cobb had you signed him early because you’d be paying against what people thought the market would be, not what it was. His contract looks rough now at four years and $57 million. Think what you would’ve had to pay if you’d moved quickly. Another year? Another $20 million?

Twins Fest is not an arbitrary deadline, in my opinion. Also, that was roughly the deadline the front office set during the Dozier talks the prior offseason. In Cobb's case (or Darvish), he could be introduced at Twins Fest and ready for camp in Feb, and it's a different story, whatever he signs at, 4/60 or whatever.

 

The silver lining is the Twins have that additional free agent money to spend this offseason. 

 

That's a ridiculous suggestion.

 

Garver should be the "opener".

Hmm, not a bad idea. Let's emulate Tampa Bay's strategy!

 

Sources say: the leading Dark Horse candidate is Belisle... :talk028:

 

Sadly... This can't be simply dismissed. 

Photo
howieramone2
Aug 11 2018 09:57 AM

 

Reed, Morrison, and Odorizzi better be next.

Reed and Odorizzi aren't going anywhere. 


Similar Articles


by Cody Christie , Yesterday, 01:45 PM
Photo


by John Bonnes , 12 Aug 2018
Photo


by Tom Froemming , 30 Jul 2018
Photo


by Tom Froemming , 27 Jul 2018
Photo


by Tom Froemming , 26 Jul 2018
Photo