Front Page: A Bigger Twins Problem Than Pitching

[ewen21]

Math:

 

The infield defense was -14 runs from the average MLB team in 2019.

 

The Twins rotation gave up 455 runs and the pitching overall 754 runs. Astros were at 640 btw.

 

14 runs is exactly 1.85% of the total runs the Twins gave up.

 

Not that big of a deal.

100% agree.

[darin617]

 

If Arraez has a solid first half this year he could become a key piece to getting a top of the rotation pitcher at the trade deadline.  That could open up 2nd for Polanco allowing them to trade for a good glove shortstop or sign one next off season.

 

I would trade Polanco before I would think about trading Arraez if he continues to play well.

 

I know everyone will say Polanco is/was an all star last year. Just go look at his stats after the all star break.  Poor defense and we can't hope JD can get to all the balls on the left side of the infield.

 

Sell high on Polanco if teams believe he has a high trade value.

[RaoulDuke]

 

Good MLB players traded for good MLB players approaches unicorn status because it just doesn’t happen.

Ya i guess I am banking on him still being very early on in his mlb career.  5 years of control on him holds value.  Ramos for Capps maybe?  Although I think Ramos had just had a little bit of exposure at the time.

[Platoon]

 

I think being able to score only 7 runs in 3 games was a back breaker. Our strength let us down. That and the first two starts we’re absolutely horrendous. “Our strength let us down"? Or is it possible that the long held, and repeatable fact that good pitching (and defense) beats good hitting reared it’s ugly head yet again?   Offense in any sport remains the most inconsistent talent to repeat. 

 

[Blake]

I think the Twins can afford one of either Arraez or Polanco.

 

Having two average gloves and great bats, up the middle, is asking for trouble.

 

Donaldson addresses the 3B issue but the middle is still weak.

 

I think Polanco should be on the trading block.

[Blake]

 

Math:

 

The infield defense was -14 runs from the average MLB team in 2019.

 

The Twins rotation gave up 455 runs and the pitching overall 754 runs.  Astros were at 640 btw.

 

14 runs is exactly 1.85% of the total runs the Twins gave up.

 

Not that big of a deal.

Overall, not a big deal.

 

However, if the Twins MI is giving up runs at critical junctures of the game, then, yes, it is a big deal.

[puckstopper1]

 

We don't yet know what Miguel Sano looks like as a full time third basemen. 

 

 

Thanks for the thoughts, Ted! 

 

I believe you meant FIRST basemen in the line above.

 

Very hopeful that Polanco and Arraez will work hard on improving their defense, but having Sano as the full-time first basemen is what makes me most nervous - especially his ability to pick throws in the dirt.  

 

It sounds like he is already working on - and looking forward to - the transition, which is great.

[Thrylos]

 

Overall, not a big deal.

 

However, if the Twins MI is giving up runs at critical junctures of the game, then, yes, it is a big deal.

 

The facts indicate the the Twins' pitching is much more likely to give up runs at critical junctures of the game than the middle infield, so the pitching is a bigger problem, which is the opposite of the title of this article. 

 

Makes no sense to save pennies, if you are losing dollars.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think the Twins can afford one of either Arraez or Polanco.

 

Having two average gloves and great bats, up the middle, is asking for trouble.

 

Donaldson addresses the 3B issue but the middle is still weak.

 

I think Polanco should be on the trading block.

Signing a player to an extension and then trading them 12 months later is a good way to ensure no player ever signs an extension with you again.

[Blake]

 

Signing a player to an extension and then trading them 12 months later is a good way to ensure no player ever signs an extension with you again.

Crud, I forgot about that.

 

 

[darin617]

 

Signing a player to an extension and then trading them 12 months later is a good way to ensure no player ever signs an extension with you again.

So then is it ok if we wait 2 years and hope Polanco still has some value?

[Mr. Brooks]

So then is it ok if we wait 2 years and hope Polanco still has some value?

Still has some value?

Where is this coming from?

 

Polanco is 26, and just put up a 6 WAR season with MVP votes.

[Thrylos]

 

Still has some value?
Where is this coming from?

Polanco is 26, and just put up a 6 WAR season with MVP votes.

And not to mention that he led the Twins' position players in WAR last season...

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

So then is it ok if we wait 2 years and hope Polanco still has some value?

Do you want to sign good players in the future?

 

This isn't the stock market, human beings are involved and risk is taken by both sides.

[Mr. Brooks]

Do you want to sign good players in the future?

 

This isn't the stock market, human beings are involved and risk is taken by both sides.

Not only that, but a player of Polanco's performance, at his age and contract is every team's dream.

I don't understand how this is even a discussion, barring a complete rebuild.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not only that, but a player of Polanco's performance, at his age and contract is every team's dream.
I don't understand how this is even a discussion, barring a complete rebuild.

That's why I said it's not the stock market.

 

Some fans view a player contract that's a net positive right now as something that should be traded so that the team can attain... another... net positive asset... in the... future...

 

Sorry, that's where I always get lost in this conversation.

[Mr. Brooks]

That's why I said it's not the stock market.

 

Some fans view a player contract that's a net positive right now as something that should be traded so that the team can attain... another... net positive asset... in the... future...

 

Sorry, that's where I always get lost in this conversation.

Ok, that at least makes some sense, though I still disagree with that poster.

I read it as him saying that Polanco isn't very good and we should trade him before everyone else realizes it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Ok, that at least makes some sense, though I still disagree with that poster.

I read it as him saying that Polanco isn't very good and we should trade him before everyone else realizes it.

It’s possible I misunderstood as well. I guess it never occurred to me that people believe Polanco isn’t good.