Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Does Phil Miller know something here?

  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#31 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 04:34 PM

Sizemore sounds like a nice idea (back in 2010, you could have made a good case for him to be set up to be one of the best players for the next decade), but realistically, I don't see that happening at all. We should want Hicks to get another shot at CF, and with the way Buxton is coming, it has to be sooner rather than later for Hicks to get another shot. If you sign Sizemore, then you likely have a muddled situation no matter how you work it.

To answer the question at hand, it does seem quite plausible to me that Bartlett could, if healthy, be the Twins starting SS on Opening Day. That doesn't mean he would be much of upgrade, but that speaks more of their current options rather than his level of play.


Signing Sizemore would merely be a stopgap and insurance policy- and would sign very cheaply. No need for it to ever become a muddled situation, the day they are convinced that first Hicks, or then Buxton are ready, Sizemore is gone.

#32 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 04:48 PM

I was never particularly high on Bartlett's defense when he was with the Twins. I know that others were, and his defense seemed to improve a bit with Tampa. I always did like his offense, considering that there was no power. Still he seems a long shot to me. I would think that the chances of him being more than a backup at this stage of his career are very high against, and I am not sure that he is likely to be any clear upgrade to Escobar. Whether there will be a need for a 2nd backup infielder kind of depends on how the roster plays out.

I can't get much excited about the speculation concerning Sizemore, but clearly the interest in Rajah Davis shows that Ryan might be interested in adding some sort of outfielder who can play defense and has a little pop. Talk about Wieters is kind of silly, why would you want to block Pinto and I really can't see Ryan doing anything at catcher after he added Suzuki.

The whole DH corner outfield thing is still pretty messy and unclear. The outfield would be a lot clearer if Hicks and Arcia prove they are ready.


You would want to consider Wieters because he's:

a proven major leaguer catcher,
who is young (only 3 years older than Pinto),
big and strong (6'5"/240#),
stays healthy and durable,
switch hits,
doesn't wilt as the season progresses (career .766 OPS 2nd half vs. .715 OPS 1st half),
hits for power,
above-average pitch framer,
plus arm,
plus pitch blocker,
who the Orioles are actively shopping who still has 2 years of arb left before FA.

#33 The Wise One

The Wise One

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 819 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 04:57 PM

You would want to consider Wieters because he's:

a proven major leaguer catcher,
who is young (only 3 years older than Pinto),
big and strong (6'5"/240#),
stays healthy and durable,
switch hits,
doesn't wilt as the season progresses (career .766 OPS 2nd half vs. .715 OPS 1st half),
hits for power,
above-average pitch framer,
plus arm,
plus pitch blocker,
who the Orioles are actively shopping who still has 2 years of arb left before FA.


Not a bad idea to get Weiters. What is the realistic cost to get such a player?

#34 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,647 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 10 January 2014 - 04:58 PM

You would want to consider Wieters because he's:

big and strong (6'5"/240#),


6'5" catchers do not last long catching... Pinto has the perfect physique for a catcher (think Pudge Rodriguez instead of Joe Mauer)
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#35 The Wise One

The Wise One

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 819 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:04 PM

Signing Sizemore would merely be a stopgap and insurance policy- and would sign very cheaply. No need for it to ever become a muddled situation, the day they are convinced that first Hicks, or then Buxton are ready, Sizemore is gone.


Seizemore has an OPS+ of 84 since 2010 and has been almost ready to come back since June of last year. Good for him if he makes it back, but it will not be a vintage Sizemore. It would be the shell of Sizemore.

#36 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:14 PM

6'5" catchers do not last long catching... Pinto has the perfect physique for a catcher (think Pudge Rodriguez instead of Joe Mauer)


I just want him to last long enough with the Twins before his next big FA contract with the Dodgers.

Edited by jokin, 10 January 2014 - 05:45 PM.


#37 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:15 PM

Seizemore has an OPS+ of 84 since 2010 and has been almost ready to come back since June of last year. Good for him if he makes it back, but it will not be a vintage Sizemore. It would be the shell of Sizemore.


Yep, that's why I said if the Twins think that Sizemore has a shot at 75% of his old self, it's well worth the gamble of a minor league contract to find out.

#38 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:23 PM

Not a bad idea to get Weiters. What is the realistic cost to get such a player?


2 years before FA and a motivated seller with strong payroll considerations in keeping other prized players on their roster which diminishes his value.... so.....oh, and the O's still have current MLB needs....but no question, the trade would cost a good prospect. But no one in all of MLB would expect a trade of Buxton or Sano for anything less than an Ace Starter (near the end of his contract) plus much more in return. The Orioles might bark up that tree to start negotiations, but would quickly find out that it's the wrong one.

#39 Thegrin

Thegrin

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 675 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:31 PM

Players that have been away from the game as long as Bartlett usually have a hard time hitting Major League hitting. I'm not sure he would be a hitting improvement over Florimon and he would definitely NOT be a fielding upgrade. I'd be shocked if he made the Twins Roster out of Spring Training.

#40 Jim H

Jim H

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 06:00 PM

I just want him to last long enough with the Twins before his next big FA contract with the Dodgers.


So what we are getting is a 2 year rental, effectively preventing the Twins from finding out what they really have in Pinto. After Weiters leaves you are back to finding a catcher for what could be a developing team with hopefully a number of young pitchers forcing their way onto the roster. I have no idea what it would cost in terms of prospects to get Weiters for 2 years but unless you could extend him when you traded for him, it would likely be too much for a rental that wouldn't be around when the team is actually getting good.

#41 oldguy10

oldguy10

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 06:42 PM

I cannot imagine any scenario where Colabello is on a MLB roster, he is 30 years old and to me just about the same as a retread talent-wise or perhaps even worse. He will assuredly look nice on the Rochester roster.

#42 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 06:48 PM

I cannot imagine any scenario where Colabello is on a MLB roster, he is 30 years old and to me just about the same as a retread talent-wise or perhaps even worse. He will assuredly look nice on the Rochester roster.



Not that he should ever be on the Twins 25-man, but I can imagine many scenarios where Colabello will spend time with the Twins this year.

#43 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,668 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:10 PM

Florimon and Colabello shouldn't get any bonus points over older veterans because the Twins are rebuilding. They are younger but they shouldn't be considered long term pieces either.

I could easily see Bartlett winning a spot on the roster over Escobar (or they carry two backup infielders) and splitting time at SS with Florimon.

#44 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:27 PM

Florimon and Colabello shouldn't get any bonus points over older veterans because the Twins are rebuilding. They are younger but they shouldn't be considered long term pieces either.

I could easily see Bartlett winning a spot on the roster over Escobar (or they carry two backup infielders) and splitting time at SS with Florimon.


Escobar is out of options, Florimon is not. Esco fits the UTIL IF role much better than the other two, who have virtually only ever played SS. Would they really carry 4 MI?

#45 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,668 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 01:11 PM

Escobar kind of sucks. Losing him because he's out of options isn't a concern.

Almost every season this team frustratingly carries 2 futility infielders. Last year it was Carroll and Escobar.

#46 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 04:48 PM

Escobar kind of sucks. Losing him because he's out of options isn't a concern.

Almost every season this team frustratingly carries 2 futility infielders. Last year it was Carroll and Escobar.


So Bartlett comes in in the Carroll role? Even though he doesn't have the bona fides at either 2nd or 3rd base? Ugh.

#47 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,668 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 07:55 PM

So Bartlett comes in in the Carroll role? Even though he doesn't have the bona fides at either 2nd or 3rd base? Ugh.


The only problem is that you are implying that Escobar is a bonafide MLB'er. He kind of sucks regardless of how many positions he has played before. If Bartlett beats out Escobar and they only carry one backup MI'er then he will obviously have to show that he can handle 2B/3B.

But in the end they are going to carry two futility infielders like they do pretty much every year. It's better than carrying two backup catchers but not much.

#48 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 January 2014 - 08:54 PM

It's better than carrying two backup catchers but not much.

It's also better than two backup catchers AND two futility infielders. Plus a 13 man staff. Which if memory serves isn't unprecedented.

#49 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,339 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 11 January 2014 - 08:57 PM

It's also better than two backup catchers AND two futility infielders. Plus a 13 man staff. Which if memory serves isn't unprecedented.


It sure does make man'gin' easier though.

#50 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 January 2014 - 09:00 PM

It sure does make man'gin' easier though.

One would think, but that still leaves room to get your best hitter out of the game for defense, and then there's the problem of trying to get 7 relievers into the game by the end of the 8th.

#51 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 09:48 PM

It's also better than two backup catchers AND two futility infielders. Plus a 13 man staff. Which if memory serves isn't unprecedented.


No it isn't. It happened at times, as recently as last year. Why change up when things are going so swimmingly? :whacky028:

But seriously, if they somehow sign Garza and, since they signed a legitimate defensive veteran ML catcher, Gardy should be read the riot act that it's a new day coming here...... the Twins payroll money has been shifted to focus on the Starting pitching woes, 7 or 8 pen arms are now hereby (at least to open the season) superfluous and that he only gets 2 catchers and 11 pitchers to start out, with always at least one, if not 2, legitimate hitting options from either side of the plate available off the bench.

And going back to the infield, if Bartlett is really capable of a "Lazarus rising from the ashes routine", isn't it Florimon who is out of a job? Or are the Twins convinced that either "Barty" or PFlo Jr can fill the UTIL duties? It made no sense to carry both Caroll and Escobar last year as 2 true UTIL/no bat guys, it also makes no sense to not carry 1 true utility guy this year. If they are going with the 2 bench IFers SOP, it is incumbent on management to find a decent hitting platoon partner for Plouffe, or....

how about this to throw against the wall and see if it sticks?......

get Drew and employ a platoon split with Lazarus, er, I mean Bartlett (.795 career split against LHP). If Florimon is as valuable as many on this thread think he is/can become, he should bring back a pretty decent prospect in return or he can be stashed in AAA with his remaining option.

Edited by jokin, 11 January 2014 - 09:54 PM.


#52 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 09:58 PM

The only problem is that you are implying that Escobar is a bonafide MLB'er. He kind of sucks regardless of how many positions he has played before. If Bartlett beats out Escobar and they only carry one backup MI'er then he will obviously have to show that he can handle 2B/3B.

But in the end they are going to carry two futility infielders like they do pretty much every year. It's better than carrying two backup catchers but not much.


No implications on my part about Esco- they can always find another like him on the waiver wire. But the fact remains, you do need a guy who can somewhat competently and reliably handle multiple infield positions- I think he proved that last year.

#53 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,668 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 10:40 PM

Why are you convinced that Bartlett can't handle 3B/2B if he is still a competent player at SS? Before last season Escobar had something like 50 games played (each) at 3B and 2B. If Bartlett showed that he could handle the position and won the job then why can't he be a futility infielder?

Carrying two futility infielders is more common than you think. I gave the example last year but almost every year the Twins have two backup MI'ers. Almost the only way the Twins don't carry two backup MI'ers is if they sign an actual backup 3Bman or if Plouffe is relegated to the bench by Sano. Being the better player is why Escobar or Bartlett should make the team.

#54 SweetOne69

SweetOne69

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 496 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 08:17 AM

Then why not just give him a MLB contract? Making sure they get more for Dumit? I guess that makes sense.


Because the 40 man roster is/was full. By agreeing to a minor league contract, and a gentlman's agreement, it allows the team time to make room for him.

#55 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 08:52 AM

I think the gentleman's agreement is in place for both Bartlett ans Kubel. They still have to prove it in Spring Training. But if healthy, they are odds-on favorites to make the team. Bartlett was pretty good until he got hurt. Can he come back? Sure. Can he beat out Pedro? Not likely. But it will be fun to see him beat the odds on that one.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#56 stringer bell

stringer bell

    Front office apologist

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,673 posts
  • LocationZumbrota MN

Posted 12 January 2014 - 11:55 AM

What I can see (and grudgingly accept) is two utility infielders--Bartlett and Escobar--with Bartlett seeing quite a bit of duty as a quasi-platoon partner for Florimon. This would hinge on Bartlett hitting well enough against left handers to be considered an alternative as a pinch hitter against a left hander late in a game. Bartlett isn't a second or third baseman, but a shortstop can adapt at least marginally to the other infield positions as a second backup at both second and third. A left handed hitter to get at-bats at third and second would be optimal, but maybe there will be some improvement from Escobar. He at least has some youth on his side.

#57 SweetOne69

SweetOne69

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 496 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 12:08 PM

Isn't it common to keep 2 bench infielders? A typical 25 man roster is made up of 12 pitchers, 8 starting position players, 1 DH and 4 reserves.

The reserves are usually 1 catcher, 1 OF, and 2 IF

#58 IdahoPilgrim

IdahoPilgrim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,424 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 02:41 PM

One would think, but that still leaves room to get your best hitter out of the game for defense, and then there's the problem of trying to get 7 relievers into the game by the end of the 8th.


Given the rotation the past couple of years, that hasn't been as difficult as you might think.

#59 oldguy10

oldguy10

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 03:42 PM

USAFChief - great lines about getting your best hitter out of the lineup for defense and trying to get 7 relievers into the game by the end of the 8th. Are we sure you are not using USAFChief as a disguise for "The Common Man" or is it indeed you, Dan Cole?

#60 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 8,047 posts

Posted 12 January 2014 - 03:58 PM

Why are you convinced that Bartlett can't handle 3B/2B if he is still a competent player at SS? Before last season Escobar had something like 50 games played (each) at 3B and 2B. If Bartlett showed that he could handle the position and won the job then why can't he be a futility infielder?

Carrying two futility infielders is more common than you think. I gave the example last year but almost every year the Twins have two backup MI'ers. Almost the only way the Twins don't carry two backup MI'ers is if they sign an actual backup 3Bman or if Plouffe is relegated to the bench by Sano. Being the better player is why Escobar or Bartlett should make the team.


I'm not convinced of anything. I would prefer that the Twins find a better way to upgrade an already-anemic offense that on paper is going to be worse in 2014, particularly if you get the combined offensive production reminiscent of Carroll/Escobar circa 2013.

Being the better player (especially at the plate) is why they should still seek to sign someone better than either Esco or Bartlett, or both.