Roster revamp?

[TheLeviathan]

 

I suspect the front office is moving in that direction, albeit not immediately.

In the case of catching, they shouldn’t make that kind of snap judgment. Astudillo is getting reps behind the dish every third day or so. When your backup catcher is Garver, I think that says a lot about how the org views Astudillo. Garver, while defensively sketchy (but also improving, at least visually), has a potentially elite bat for a catcher. If Willians is taking games away from him, that tells me the front office is intrigued by Astudillo.

Also, dropping Castro is pure madness when you have a defensively-challenged catcher and a curious enigma rostered behind him. You want Castro guiding those guys as much as possible for as long as possible.

Like I said last year, I think one of the worst things that happened to Mitch Garver is Castro going down for the entire season. Garver could have learned a lot about the finer points of modern catching by sitting next to Jason 162 times a year and implementing those lessons every third day.

 

I understand this position.  It's probably even correct.  Then I watch Casto take an at-bat and want to burn you at the stake.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I understand this position. It's probably even correct. Then I watch Casto take an at-bat and want to burn you at the stake.

IKR! Brock has a very logical point, but dang Castro has a terrible bat, that looks so much worse in this lineup than it did in 2017. Having Garver and Astudillo makes that difference so much more stark.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If they couldn't recall Littell, then why did they tell him to be ready to come up on Saturday?

If the FO didn't know the rules, that is very concerning.

If the game Friday had been postponed, Littell would have been eligible to come up Saturday as the 26th man.

[jorgenswest]

My biggest roster concern is Polanco and his shoulder.

 

Is there an underlying problem that has caused some poor throws and a change in his arm angle in the throws? Will it result in an IL stay?

[nicksaviking]

Unless one of your catchers gets hurt, now that awful bat is playing in 1/3 of the games, instead of just a slightly below average for a catcher bat.

The post I was responding to stated they would be fine dumping Castro, then bringing up Navarreto as the backup if Garver or Astudillo got hurt.

You can play that hypothetical off of any position though.

 

I wouldn’t want to sacrifice production we are getting now for insurance against something that hasn’t happened yet. And that insurance isn’t really guarding against much if one perceives Castro’s bat as poorly as I do. I might not go with Navarreto, but I don think the waiver wire vet du juor is going to be much of a step back.

[nicksaviking]

Also, dropping Castro is pure madness when you have a defensively-challenged catcher and a curious enigma rostered behind him. You want Castro guiding those guys as much as possible for as long as possible.

Like I said last year, I think one of the worst things that happened to Mitch Garver is Castro going down for the entire season. Garver could have learned a lot about the finer points of modern catching by sitting next to Jason 162 times a year and implementing those lessons every third day.

I thought Graver looked fine behind the plate by the end of the year; he really struggled early but I thought he was more than capable by September after getting consistent playing time. Certainly not so bad as to need to hamstring the roster with a third string catcher. They got that Tellis guy in Rochester if they need someone later.

[USAFChief]

I don't understand the  angst over Castro. He's a very good catcher, who will provide a 90-ish OPS+.

 

He's not an offensive force, but he's not a black hole either. And I bet if you asked the pitching staff which catcher they prefer to throw to, his name comes up often.

 

The Twins don't have the luxury of throwing Cleveland's staff out there every day. They need to squeeze everything they can out of the staff they have, and I think Castro is the best of the three in doing so. Garver and Astudillo will get their ABs, although I believe Astudillo will get most of his someplace other than catcher (and he'll cool down, too.) Garver is...pretty bad behind the plate, IMO. I think it'd be a mistake to hand over full time catching duties to him.

 

 

[nicksaviking]

I have no angst with keeping Castro; if they can swing three catchers it’s fine by me. I’d just hate to see them keep him at the expense of a roster spot or at bats for Garver or Astudillo.

 

I don’t think he’s a 90 OPS+ guy though. He’s done that once since 2013. I was always fine with the Castro signing but I always assumed he was just a place holder until they found a longer term answer, which I think they have.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I have no angst with keeping Castro; if they can swing three catchers it’s fine by me. I’d just hate to see them keep him at the expense of a roster spot or at bats for Garver or Astudillo.

 

I don’t think he’s a 90 OPS+ guy though. He’s done that once since 2013. I was always fine with the Castro signing but I always assumed he was just a place holder until they found a longer term answer, which I think they have.

just picking nits, but stats disagree with you. I do agree with the latter parts of your post. He’s had some down years with the stick for the Twins. They have better hitting options, who don’t seem to be drastic drop offs fielding wise.

[Doomtints]

 

You want Castro guiding those guys as much as possible for as long as possible.

 

He can do that while catching 1 game a week. Pair Castro up with the #5 pitcher.

 

In any case, the other two guys are doing fine. It's a big assumption that the other guys are not already better than Castro.

[Brock Beauchamp]

He can do that while catching 1 game a week. Pair Castro up with the #5 pitcher.

 

In any case, the other two guys are doing fine. It's a big assumption that the other guys are not already better than Castro.

It’s a bigger assumption to assume two guys with a combined total of 98 games started at the MLB level are better than an established, respected defensive catcher.

[nicksaviking]

6263D144-436B-41E2-B5C7-4908142F1D85.jpeg just picking nits, but stats disagree with you. I do agree with the latter parts of your post. He’s had some down years with the stick for the Twins. They have better hitting options, who don’t seem to be drastic drop offs fielding wise.

Those stats seem to agree with me. Still looks like one 90 OPS+ Season since 2013.

[ahart10]

Catchers don’t have to put up great numbers to be considered a star these days, no Mauers out there. JTR is an 820ops hitter and is considered far an away the best catcher in the game right now. If Gary Sanchez could catch he’d be an actual superstar. Th point is Astudillo/Garner put up good numbers and are capable backstops. If I had to choose two of the three I’d rather trade/release Castro than send the one of the other two down.

[DiscGolfer]

Management has paired up  Castro with Berrios as his catcher, I wouldn't expect any Castro moves unless you see someone else catch for Jose.

[Mike Sixel]

 

It’s a bigger assumption to assume two guys with a combined total of 98 games started at the MLB level are better than an established, respected defensive catcher.

 

If only they had an opening last year, where they could have used the young players more......oh, wait....

[Otto von Ballpark]

Management has paired up Castro with Berrios as his catcher, I wouldn't expect any Castro moves unless you see someone else catch for Jose.

Someone else caught Jose pretty much all of last season...

[stringer bell]

Here’s my four-man bench when Sanò returns—Garver, Astudillo, Gonzalez and Adrianza. About as versatile as any bench contingent the Twins have ever had.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Management has paired up  Castro with Berrios as his catcher, I wouldn't expect any Castro moves unless you see someone else catch for Jose.

I thought so too, but then heard Baldelli on the radio state emphatically that No, there are no intentional pairings happening. Could have fooled me. Astudillo has caught Pineda both times, too.

 

I’d actually like to see Astudillo catch Berrios more, considering Castro is a free agent after 2019 and Astudillo is still a rookie.

[Nine of twelve]

 

Here’s my four-man bench when Sanò returns—Garver, Astudillo, Gonzalez and Adrianza. About as versatile as any bench contingent the Twins have ever had.

The Twins will probably go to a 13-man pitching staff at some point, although I hope they don't have to. If and when that happens, we're down to a 3-man bench. Of those four I believe it would be Adrianza who would be jettisoned.

[jorgenswest]

Someone else caught Jose pretty much all of last season...

Mostly Wilson.

[Riverbrian]

 

I thought so too, but then heard Baldelli on the radio state emphatically that No, there are no intentional pairings happening. Could have fooled me. Astudillo has caught Pineda both times, too.

I’d actually like to see Astudillo catch Berrios more, considering Castro is a free agent after 2019 and Astudillo is still a rookie.

 

Oldest trick in the book... He says "There are no intentional pairings happening" but he fails to mention if there are "unintentional pairings happening". 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Mostly Wilson.

Sure, Wilson caught him 14 times. But Garver and Astudillo caught him 13 times last year too.

 

And in 2017, when I believe Castro was healthy the whole season, he only caught him 15 out of 26 times, a lower rate than he caught the rest of the staff.

 

I think Castro's spot is safe for now, but it's not because he's inextricably tied to Berrios.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Oldest trick in the book... He says "There are no intentional pairings happening" but he fails to mention if there are "unintentional pairing happening".

 

That’s probably more like the 18th oldest trick, but yeah, I agree

[Brock Beauchamp]

If only they had an opening last year, where they could have used the young players more......oh, wait....

I don’t get the Astudillo decision last year but Garver was truly awful the first half of the season when the Twins were still fringe contenders. I don’t fault them in the slightest for not throwing away the most important defensive position on the field in May.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don’t get the Astudillo decision last year but Garver was truly awful the first half of the season when the Twins were still fringe contenders. I don’t fault them in the slightest for not throwing away the most important defensive position on the field in May.

Garver could have been optioned, or we could have carried Astudillo as one of 3 catchers instead of locking in a roster spot for mop-up men in Kinley/Hughes/Belisle.

[Mike Sixel]

I don’t get the Astudillo decision last year but Garver was truly awful the first half of the season when the Twins were still fringe contenders. I don’t fault them in the slightest for not throwing away the most important defensive position on the field in May.

Not sure where you get May.... But by mid June it was obvious.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not sure where you get May.... But by mid June it was obvious.

Well, on June 15, the Twins were still only 5.0 games out of the division. On June 1st, they were 5.5 games out of the division so everyone was keeping basically the same pace for a few weeks in June. It wasn't cut and dry by any means.

 

Also, around the middle of June, Garver began starting roughly half the team's games behind the dish so the front office was clearly moving in that direction as the season progressed.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Garver could have been optioned, or we could have carried Astudillo as one of 3 catchers instead of locking in a roster spot for mop-up men in Kinley/Hughes/Belisle.

Like I said, I don't really get the Astudillo decision but I suspect it was done because he was an unknown to the organization. Still, it doesn't make sense to acquire that player and never put him behind the dish in a game during his first stint with the team. You'd think they would have worked him in a few times just to see what they have. Anyway, once they got a look at him in Rochester for ~5 weeks, he came back up and started almost all of his games behind the plate.

 

But also, let's remember that the front office and manager weren't exactly on the same page in 2018. Hard to say who made what decision and why.

[Jim Hahn]

Like I said, I don't really get the Astudillo decision but I suspect it was done because he was an unknown to the organization. Still, it doesn't make sense to acquire that player and never put him behind the dish in a game during his first stint with the team. You'd think they would have worked him in a few times just to see what they have. Anyway, once they got a look at him in Rochester for ~5 weeks, he came back up and started almost all of his games behind the plate.

 

But also, let's remember that the front office and manager weren't exactly on the same page in 2018. Hard to say who made what decision and why.

It's hard to know what pages the front offices and managers are on anywhere in major league baseball, right now. With liaison men on the staff, with people in the front writing out lineups, with managers carrying scripts in their pockets; lines are getting pretty blurred. It looks with catchers constantly looking into the dugout, somebody is trying to call the games too.

 

It used to be front offices largely concerned themselves with assembling the roster, making changes to the roster, etc. Managers managed. Now it is harder to tell who is making what decision. With analytics, concencious building, and thinking outside the box; decisions could be coming from anywhere.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

It's hard to know what pages the front offices and managers are on anywhere in major league baseball, right now. With liaison men on the staff, with people in the front writing out lineups, with managers carrying scripts in their pockets; lines are getting pretty blurred. It looks with catchers constantly looking into the dugout, somebody is trying to call the games too.

It used to be front offices largely concerned themselves with assembling the roster, making changes to the roster, etc. Managers managed. Now it is harder to tell who is making what decision. With analytics, concencious building, and thinking outside the box; decisions could be coming from anywhere.

I absolutely agree with this in 2019 and believe that concept was a driving force behind the Baldelli hire.

 

But in 2018 and under Molitor, I don't think things were quite that fluid. There seemed to be something of a wall between the concepts the front office were pushing and what Molitor was doing on the field. Not an enormous rift or anything, just a little more resistance than should probably exist in a modern baseball organization.