Opening Day lineup?

[Oxtung]

For those that think Mastroianni will start the season in CF do you think the Twins sign a 4th OF type last minute or bring up one of the AAAA guys? Who is available to be the back up CF that is currently in the Twins minor leagues?

[jokin]

The Lawton-for-Reed trade was not a "sell." The Twins were half a game out of first place and trying to shore up their rotation. What selling team trades for a 36-year-old pitcher?

 

I agree with with the premise of your question and you are correct. My mistaken memory was that the Twins were out if it by then, what with them having a horrid run to the trading deadline and finishing the month of July going into August losing 15 out of 19 games. And it didn't get much better after the trade, from August 1 to September 1 the Twins record was 11-19. So, they traded one of their key catalysts on July 31, Matt Lawton, who led the team in OBP at nearly .400 and OPS+ (at the time) @ 120. A curious "buying mode" trade, as it left 3 rookies to pick up the pieces in RF for the last 50+ games. And let's not forget, Reed didn't actually distinguish himself positively that year.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Not really a wash, although admittedly somewhat unspectacular, I thought the Twins could have done better, usually when you "sell", it's because you want to get a younger prospect with some upside.

 

Rick Reed WAR ( from after trade to retirement) 2001-03 3.1

 

Matt Lawton oWAR (from after trade) 2001-05 7.0

 

You're kidding, right?

 

A few problems... First, you're using oWAR for one player and WAR for another to make Lawton look good. Second, you're using two more years of Lawton's numbers to (again) make him look good, even though the Twins (or the Mets) didn't have him under contract.

 

Rick Reed's WAR:

2001: 2.8/-0.2, 2002: 2.6, 2003: 0.7

 

Matt Lawton's WAR:

2001: 2.0/0.2, 2002: 1.0, 2003: 1.0

 

It's a wash and actually slightly in Reed's favor if you want to put that much stock in WAR's accuracy. Like I said, the trade was a wash. Reed didn't pitch well for the Twins in 2001 but it wasn't a bad trade, as Reed was a solid pitcher in 2002 and a mediocre one in 2003.

[Badsmerf]

For those that think Mastroianni will start the season in CF do you think the Twins sign a 4th OF type last minute or bring up one of the AAAA guys? Who is available to be the back up CF that is currently in the Twins minor leagues?

Benson should be going north with the Twins. I really doubt Hicks starts in CF if Benson has a good spring. They will get another year of control by keeping him down and I don't think Hicks has done enough to jump over Benson yet, despite his struggles last season.

[jun]

I'll be stunned (and pleasantly surprised because that means TR beat enormous odds in Dumpster Dive Roulette) if Pelfrey and Harden are in the rotation for the whole month of April. What scuttlebutt there is out there is that the Twins are "hopeful" that Harden can somehow find some productivity as a reliever and we know about Pelfrey and 11 months out from TJ.

I really don't think Blackburn and Florimon should be on major league roster.

[johnnydakota]

This team isn't going to go out and add anyone for CF unless there is an injury. This is what I hope the lineup is and I think it has a good chance:

 

CF Mastroanni

2B Carroll

C Mauer

1B Morneau

LF Willingham

DH Parmalee

3B Plouffe

RF Benson

SS Florimon

 

no Doumit?

[071063]

Here is how I envision the starting line-up coming out of spring training.

 

SS Dozier

2B Carroll

C Mauer

LF Willingham

1B Morneau

DH Doumit

RF Parmelee

3B Plouffe

CF Benson

 

SP Diamond

 

I realize that Dozier has been working out some at 2B but with SS being a premium position, I don't think the Twins give up on him there yet without a potential top line replacement in the minors, and that doesn't exist yet.

 

Even though his age is against him, I think Carroll gets the starting 2B job with Escobar being a possibility. Steady defense is the deciding factor with the Twins starting pitching as it is. I think Escobar and Floriman both see significant time in the starting line-up at 2b and SS respectively with the Twins allowing things to sort themselves out as the season goes.

 

Parmelee will start in RF. The Twins have pretty much said this since the trades of Span and Revere.

 

Benson gets a chance in CF with Hicks starting in AAA. I thinks Hicks may very well earn a roster spot but the Twins will start him in AAA and let Mastroianni start the season as the 4th OF. We should see Hicks if there is an injury, if Benson is horrible and plays his way out the line-up, or once June 1 is past.

 

My thoughts are based on how the Twins typically handle things and what seems realistic.

[ericchri]

The thread is to guess the opening day lineup, not the long-term lineup? I have a hard time filling it out for that, cause I honestly suspect they're "giving" the MI jobs to Florimon (cause apparently he's a defensive wizard or something) and Dozier (who probably does deserve another chance, especially compared to the other options, he has the potential to hit some at least), meaning one of the only decent OBP guys (Carroll) they have isn't in the opening day lineup. Carroll's going to play a lot this year, but they're pretending they have their Middle Infield of the future on opening day to try and sell hope. I don't think it lasts as Florimon hits (misses) his way out of the lineup eventually. Reading the tea leaves says Gardenhire wants Hicks as his CF as well. So guessing:

 

CF - Hicks

2B - Dozier

C - Mauer

LF - WIllingham

1B - Morneau

DH - Doumit

3B - Plouffe

RF - Parmelee

SS - Florimon

 

If that was the opening day starters, I'd drop Dozier down to 8th and slide everyone else up, but I don't think Gardenhire does that.

[twinsnorth49]

1.Benson CF

2.Mauer C

3.Willingham LF

4.Morneau 1B

5.Doumit DH

6.Plouffe 3B

7.Parmelee RF

8.Dozier 2B

9.Carroll SS

 

SP. Diamond

 

They need to find out if Benson is going to produce this year, I believe he'll get that chance, considering the year of control the team will want to keep on Hicks. Florimon could just as easily start at SS but the team is better off with Carroll's bat . SS is just a mess and an all round crappy situation.

 

I also wouldn't be too surprised if Worley got the start over Diamond.

[Oxtung]

Benson should be going north with the Twins. I really doubt Hicks starts in CF if Benson has a good spring. They will get another year of control by keeping him down and I don't think Hicks has done enough to jump over Benson yet, despite his struggles last season.

 

If Benson plays well enough to go North with the Twins to start the season I don't see any way he isn't the opening day CF. If Benson is the 4th OF behind Mastro that means the Twins have totally given up on him (which leads to all kinds of questions). So if people think Mastro is going to get the start in CF to me that implies neither Benson nor Hicks comes north with the Twins. So who is the 4th OF in that situation?

[TheLeviathan]

If Benson plays well enough to go North with the Twins to start the season I don't see any way he isn't the opening day CF. If Benson is the 4th OF behind Mastro that means the Twins have totally given up on him (which leads to all kinds of questions). So if people think Mastro is going to get the start in CF to me that implies neither Benson nor Hicks comes north with the Twins. So who is the 4th OF in that situation?

 

Well, I can only speak for me, but I'm hoping the Twins keep a 25 man roster with the following hitters coming out of ST:

 

C - Mauer/Doumit/Hermann

1B - Morneau

2B - Carroll/Dozier

3B - Plouffe

SS - Florimon/Escobar

LF - Willingham

CF - Benson/Mastroani

RF - Parmalee

 

Which allows them some flexibility with how they play their outfield/DH/1B. Personally, I think Doumit is ideally not an everyday player but more of a 4 times a week guy. Fingers crossed that Benson does exactly that.

[Oldgoat_MN]

The AAA team last year had no one with a good year who didn't see time in a Twins uniform.

The surprise guy could wind up being Arcia.

 

I'd bet he has a better chance of coming north with the team than Hicks.

[Oxtung]

The AAA team last year had no one with a good year who didn't see time in a Twins uniform.

The surprise guy could wind up being Arcia.

 

I'd bet he has a better chance of coming north with the team than Hicks.

 

That would be incredibly surprising for several reasons. First, he only has 250ish AB's at AA is only 21. Second, he doesn't have a position to play with Morneau, Parmelee and Willingham on the team. He hasn't played CF since Rookie ball in 2010.

[Brock Beauchamp]

That would be incredibly surprising for several reasons. First, he only has 250ish AB's at AA is only 21. Second, he doesn't have a position to play with Morneau, Parmelee and Willingham on the team. He hasn't played CF since Rookie ball in 2010.

 

Yeah... I'd put the chance of Arcia going north with the team out of ST at zero, barring a series of freak injuries to the entire outfield.

[spideyo]

1. Hicks CF

2. Mauer C

3. Willingham LF

4. Morneau 1B

5. Doumit DH

6. Plouffe 3B

7. Parmelee RF

8. Dozier 2B

9. Florimon SS

 

SP: Diamond

 

Got the pitcher wrong, but otherwise Nick nailed the lineup two months ago

[Ultima Ratio]

Got the pitcher wrong, but otherwise Nick nailed the lineup two months ago

 

Not to be overly pedantic, but Plouffesie and Parmeleesie are swapped in order.

 

Correction: Now there are lineups posted with Plouffe batting ahead of Parmelee, a change from yesterday.... so even more kudos to Nick

[Guest USAFChief]

Got the pitcher wrong, but otherwise Nick nailed the lineup two months ago

Nicely done, Nick.

[Nick Nelson]

Thanks guys. I had a feeling Gardy was going to come around on Mauer hitting second, considering the other options available.

[cmathewson]

Thanks guys. I had a feeling Gardy was going to come around on Mauer hitting second, considering the other options available.

 

The best part is how he came to that conclusion. According tot he PiPress, he listened to his stats guy.

[minn55441]

nicely done Nick. Now how are you at predicting the number of runs that will be scored by this lineup?

[stringer bell]

nicely done Nick. Now how are you at predicting the number of runs that will be scored by this lineup?

#2 thru #7 is pretty solid. Veterans hitting 2-5 and guys with a chance to emerge at 6 and 7. I think the potency of the lineup will depend on the health of the veterans and productivity of Parm, Plouffe, Hicks, Dozier, and Florimon, with any offense supplied by the shortstop considered a bonus.

[Mike Sixel]

First good sign of the year, Mauer in the 2 hole.

[jokin]

You're kidding, right?

 

A few problems... First, you're using oWAR for one player and WAR for another to make Lawton look good. Second, you're using two more years of Lawton's numbers to (again) make him look good, even though the Twins (or the Mets) didn't have him under contract.

 

 

 

.

 

Subject Reed/Lawton trade, vis a vis, 2013 Twins as sellers.

 

Actually, IMO, the trade wasn't a wash (and stop calling me shirley:roll:), Reed actually hurt the Twins in 2001 (which apparently was the point of the trade?) and the point of my post was to emphasize that Lawton was a very productive player and attractive trade bait at the time for the Twins in 01 and continued being productive for an extended period of time after. Reed pitched well for the Twins in 2002, but was very lousy in 01 and his career ended ignominiously in 03 with a 5.07 ERA and a commensurate collapse of career peripherals. The trade has to be regarded as a failure for the Twins, as they at least theoretically could have traded for "less-proven but more upside" talent of a younger age than Lawton (who was near 31 at the time of the trade). With one of the primary focal points in 2013 being who gets traded in-season, and for what talent is acquired in return, it's incumbent on the FO to take a little risk (like with the Meyer and May off-season trades) and attempt to get as much potential upside+ level players that could be part of the long-term solution and not the "safe" 37 year old retreads (Rick Reed) and/or cheap alternatives that the trading partners comfortably regard as so much detritus.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Congrats to Nick on the spot-on lineup!

[PseudoSABR]

The trade has to be regarded as a failure for the Twins, as they at least theoretically could have traded for "less-proven but more upside" talent .

If we're using what theoretically could have happened as a measuring stick, the Mets trade for Lawton is an equal failure. The trade really didn't work out for either team; that's what makes it a wash.

[Brock Beauchamp]

If we're using what theoretically could have happened as a measuring stick, the Mets trade for Lawton is an equal failure. The trade really didn't work out for either team; that's what makes it a wash.

 

Yeah this. After the trade in 2001, Lawton posted a 0.3 WAR, Reed a -0.1 WAR.

 

In 2002, Lawton posted a 1.2 WAR for Cleveland while Reed posted a 2.8 WAR for the Twins.

 

In 2003, Lawton posted another 1.2 WAR for Cleveland and Reed posted a 0.9 WAR for the Twins.

 

I don't know how that trade can be considered anything but a wash, with a slight nod toward the Twins if you have to choose a "winner".

[jokin]

If we're using what theoretically could have happened as a measuring stick, the Mets trade for Lawton is an equal failure. The trade really didn't work out for either team; that's what makes it a wash.

 

Refer back to potential value of Lawton who was having a great season following a pretty decent string of seasons- at the time of trade. Hopefully the Twins can be in a similar situation this year and do better than a 37 year old pitcher on his last legs.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Refer back to potential value of Lawton who was having a great season following a pretty decent string of seasons- at the time of trade. Hopefully the Twins can be in a similar situation this year and do better than a 37 year old pitcher on his last legs.

 

It's unlikely that trade happens in 2013, as the Twins probably won't be in contention. I was a bit puzzled by the Lawton trade when it happened but it wasn't a bad trade. The Twins were pushing for a division championship in 2001 and needed pitching help. Reed filled that need in the short-term.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Yeah, that 2001 team was in rough shape, pitching-wise, after Radke, Milton, and Mays. Santana was injured (and not yet dominant), Kyle Lohse just got called up from AA I think, Adam Johnson and Brad Thomas had already struggled...

 

And while Lawton was having a solid year (crazy to look back at his K/BB numbers), he had some issues with the Twins front office, was going year-to-year on his contracts, and was up for his final arb season in 2002. I don't think his value was as high as it might seem from the numbers.

[DaveW]

If we're using what theoretically could have happened as a measuring stick, the Mets trade for Lawton is an equal failure. The trade really didn't work out for either team; that's what makes it a wash.

 

I dunno, Rick Reed wasn't sexy by any means but he did help them get to the playoffs in 2002 with a sub 4.00 ERA and almost 200 IP. (Had the most IP of any Twins starter and the 2nd lowest ERA behind Santana)The Twins also had an abundance of outfielders at the time.

 

Those are the kind of good trades good GM's make, was it a highway robbery ala the Frank Viola or AJ deals? Of course not, but it was a very good move for the Twins that ultimately helped get them to the playoffs and ALCS the next year.