Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Offseason Status Update: 40-Man Shuffling, Missed Opportunities


2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

I think that's easy to understand when other fans are getting it now.

Waiting things out mean you get the guys who will meet your asking price, where as being aggressive means you get the guys you want most.

3 pitchers signed, One to the team he played for, one on a one year build value contract. Neither will anchor the team.

Two play a waiting game The teams and the players,. The Rodriguez signing shows that either he wanted to play in Detroit or the market is not going to be as high as people seem to think. The latter may be confirmed by what Berrios signed for. If the market is not going to be as hot the players will wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

As mentioned, I understand they can do this. But might you name some examples of past players they tendered arbitration contracts and then cut in spring training (or before)? I'm having a hard time thinking of a single one. Let's not act like it's a common occurrence.

My understanding is there's nothing left with arbitration anymore. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. My understanding is they signed him to a 1 year major league deal for 800K (that isn't fully guaranteed until ST). So not sure why we wouldn't see him as any other fringe roster guy on a 1 year deal that could be cut at any time. There's 40 guys on the 40 man right now. I don't think even the angriest of Twins fans think these are the 40 guys they're going into 2022 with. Not sure why Cave on an 800K deal should be seen as less likely to be cut than any other position player right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says Cave is unpopular? Granted, last year was not his best, but a lot of players had bad seasons for a lot of reasons.  When Cave is mentioned I think of his many good catches, accurate throws and timely hits that have helped the Twins to victory.  Just because you don't like Cave, don't assume that feeling is universally shared. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

What is about to materialize? IDK and neither does anyone else...

Don't mean to speak for Nick, but I'm pretty confident he was referring to upcoming labor issues related to the expiring CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

Don't mean to speak for Nick, but I'm pretty confident he was referring to upcoming labor issues related to the expiring CBA.

The context of the exchange was about signing free agent. That you think it was about the labor agreement is your opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, old nurse said:

The context of the exchange was about signing free agent. That you think it was about the labor agreement is your opinion

Nick: "And guess what's going to be happening during those months? This comment seems entirely oblivious of the reality that is about to materialize. It would be nice to have any semblance of good news or encouragement before the baseball world shuts down completely."

 

What would you speculate Nick is talking about here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Nick: "And guess what's going to be happening during those months? This comment seems entirely oblivious of the reality that is about to materialize. It would be nice to have any semblance of good news or encouragement before the baseball world shuts down completely."

 

What would you speculate Nick is talking about here?

Sounds like me speculating about finding a Prom date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Nick: "And guess what's going to be happening during those months? This comment seems entirely oblivious of the reality that is about to materialize. It would be nice to have any semblance of good news or encouragement before the baseball world shuts down completely."

 

What would you speculate Nick is talking about here?

Even at that my comment was 100% accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

The context of the exchange was about signing free agent. That you think it was about the labor agreement is your opinion

Thought I was being pretty clear in referencing the lockout, which is expected by essentially everyone involved with the sport. For the Twins to go into such a hiatus while surrounded by several unfavorable storylines would not be great for their brand. I didn't think it to be very controversial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thegrin said:

Who says Cave is unpopular? Granted, last year was not his best, but a lot of players had bad seasons for a lot of reasons.  When Cave is mentioned I think of his many good catches, accurate throws and timely hits that have helped the Twins to victory.  Just because you don't like Cave, don't assume that feeling is universally shared. :)

I can say with confidence Cave is not popular, neither with the casual nor hardcore crowd. That's not an assumption. I interact with a lot of fans here and on Twitter. Why would he be? He's been a terrible player receiving an inordinate amount of playing time (when healthy) for two years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

My understanding is there's nothing left with arbitration anymore. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. My understanding is they signed him to a 1 year major league deal for 800K (that isn't fully guaranteed until ST). So not sure why we wouldn't see him as any other fringe roster guy on a 1 year deal that could be cut at any time. There's 40 guys on the 40 man right now. I don't think even the angriest of Twins fans think these are the 40 guys they're going into 2022 with. Not sure why Cave on an 800K deal should be seen as less likely to be cut than any other position player right now.

Nick pointed out the lack of precedent for such moves, but there's also the potential (likelihood?) of a MLBPA grievance being filed if/when the Twins do cut Cave. 

This is an ownership group & FO that sold a relatively high draft pick to SD rather than just eat more of Phil Hughes contract when he was traded. If there's a decent possibility they end up on the hook for the full 800K I'd place strong odds on Cave surviving ST cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Nick pointed out the lack of precedent for such moves, but there's also the potential (likelihood?) of a MLBPA grievance being filed if/when the Twins do cut Cave. 

This is an ownership group & FO that sold a relatively high draft pick to SD rather than just eat more of Phil Hughes contract when he was traded. If there's a decent possibility they end up on the hook for the full 800K I'd place strong odds on Cave surviving ST cuts.

Likelihood of a grievance against an MLB team for cutting a player who's hit .203 over the last 2 seasons? I'm not following at all. My understanding of the situation is that Cave was eligible for arbitration. The team never offered him arbitration as the 2 sides came to an agreement before it was even necessary. Cave agreed to a 1 year $800,000 major league deal. My understanding is due to the current CBA that deal is not fully guaranteed until Spring Training. I don't have any idea how any of that leads to even the potential that there's a grievance filed if he's cut. That's just everyday baseball operations.

And Phil Hughes was traded with the 74th pick (not super high, but not nothing) to get rid of almost $7 million, not 800K. I don't see the connection there at all. This ownership group and FO release players making more than 800k all the time. They signed Addison Reed for 2 years and 16.75M before releasing him and eating more than 6 million. I'm not seeing any reason why they wouldn't be willing to release Cave if they find someone they feel is a better fit for the org in 2022 and beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nick Nelson said:

Thought I was being pretty clear in referencing the lockout, which is expected by essentially everyone involved with the sport. For the Twins to go into such a hiatus while surrounded by several unfavorable storylines would not be great for their brand. I didn't think it to be very controversial. 

Even if the team signed a top free agent pitcher, extended Buxton, traded for another starter, released Jake Cave and signied a short term shortstop before a potential lockout, there will be people ripping away. All of that still will be forgotten by many because the lockout, if one occurs,  would be the last action. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody that watched the playoffs had to be thinking about the Twins own talent deficit.  We are a million miles away from being a legitimate contender.  Even the possibility of having Cave in the outfield next year shows the shocking lack of talent.  The hole the front office is making just keeps getting deeper.

They are going to have to offer 5 dollar seats.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Nick pointed out the lack of precedent for such moves, but there's also the potential (likelihood?) of a MLBPA grievance being filed if/when the Twins do cut Cave. 

This is an ownership group & FO that sold a relatively high draft pick to SD rather than just eat more of Phil Hughes contract when he was traded. If there's a decent possibility they end up on the hook for the full 800K I'd place strong odds on Cave surviving ST cuts.

Hughes contract was much larger than Caves. It seemed like just last season the Twins were picking up somebody off the waiver wire. If Larnach, Celestine or Rooker look like they are ready Cave will be cut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Likelihood of a grievance against an MLB team for cutting a player who's hit .203 over the last 2 seasons? I'm not following at all. My understanding of the situation is that Cave was eligible for arbitration. The team never offered him arbitration as the 2 sides came to an agreement before it was even necessary. Cave agreed to a 1 year $800,000 major league deal. My understanding is due to the current CBA that deal is not fully guaranteed until Spring Training. I don't have any idea how any of that leads to even the potential that there's a grievance filed if he's cut. That's just everyday baseball operations.

And Phil Hughes was traded with the 74th pick (not super high, but not nothing) to get rid of almost $7 million, not 800K. I don't see the connection there at all. This ownership group and FO release players making more than 800k all the time. They signed Addison Reed for 2 years and 16.75M before releasing him and eating more than 6 million. I'm not seeing any reason why they wouldn't be willing to release Cave if they find someone they feel is a better fit for the org in 2022 and beyond.

That's my understanding as well, however I do believe that @Otto von Ballpark linked this site a few days ago which further hammers home the notion that Cave is here to stay. The grievance would be over Cave's ST performance vs. his peers; it would have nothing to do with his '20 or '21 seasons. 

A team that's supposed to win by building from within, i.e. drafting and developing sold a 2nd round pick for $6M. To me that's a pretty clear indication of where priorities lie. Hughes and Reed each shared a long leash; I view Cave's situation as granting him one longer than I'd prefer as well. I don't doubt that if he's as atrocious as he was last season MN will move on, the quibble is over the opportunity he'll have to prove it one way or another. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, old nurse said:

3 pitchers signed, One to the team he played for, one on a one year build value contract. Neither will anchor the team.

Two play a waiting game The teams and the players,. The Rodriguez signing shows that either he wanted to play in Detroit or the market is not going to be as high as people seem to think. The latter may be confirmed by what Berrios signed for. If the market is not going to be as hot the players will wait.

I'm not writing them off being aggressive yet.

But I don't think they can have it both ways. They can't claim to be trying to 'contend' next year AND wait until the free agents come to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

I'm not writing them off being aggressive yet.

But I don't think they can have it both ways. They can't claim to be trying to 'contend' next year AND wait until the free agents come to them.

Well, the Giants got DeScalfani and Wood back, and now this:

I know Wolfson doesn't have a ton of fans here, but I don't see any reason to doubt his reports. At this point, the Twins have watched a lot of starting pitchers sign quickly, and we only know of an offer to Andrew Heaney. If anybody is expecting an "aggressive" offseason for the Twins... well, I wouldn't get your hopes up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Danchat said:

Well, the Giants got DeScalfani and Wood back, and now this:

I know Wolfson doesn't have a ton of fans here, but I don't see any reason to doubt his reports. At this point, the Twins have watched a lot of starting pitchers sign quickly, and we only know of an offer to Andrew Heaney. If anybody is expecting an "aggressive" offseason for the Twins... well, I wouldn't get your hopes up.

 

Wolfson as usual makes definitive claims. Also as usual, I don’t like the content but I love the matter-of-fact-ness.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

That's my understanding as well, however I do believe that @Otto von Ballpark linked this site a few days ago which further hammers home the notion that Cave is here to stay. The grievance would be over Cave's ST performance vs. his peers; it would have nothing to do with his '20 or '21 seasons. 

A team that's supposed to win by building from within, i.e. drafting and developing sold a 2nd round pick for $6M. To me that's a pretty clear indication of where priorities lie. Hughes and Reed each shared a long leash; I view Cave's situation as granting him one longer than I'd prefer as well. I don't doubt that if he's as atrocious as he was last season MN will move on, the quibble is over the opportunity he'll have to prove it one way or another. 

I'm still completely confused as to the idea of a grievance being filed by a player who gets cut. Especially an 800K player. Do you have any examples of this happening? I am just not seeing the idea that Cave is somehow uncuttable because he signed a 1 year, 800K deal. 

This FO has done some things I don't understand, and I don't understand giving Cave this contract to start with, but I just don't think it's cause for great concern yet. We're not even to Thanksgiving yet and people are acting like Cave has been named the starting CFer and 3 hole hitter. All I'm saying is it feels like more anger than there needs to be just yet. Free agency just started. Lets give it a month before we start freaking out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Feels like much ado about nothing with Cave. He's easily cuttable. They didn't give him 10M or something. I don't like him and have no problem with people preferring they had just released him, but lets not make this out to be more than it is. Less than $1M to a 4th outfielder they'll cut immediately if/when they find a better option.

Now on to the other players being thrown around as preferable over Cave. Yes, Castellanos and Canha are far better options, but, again, Cave signed for 800K, those 2 are getting way, way, way more than that. They're not the same type of signing. It's like saying "why did we extend Kepler? I would've signed Bryce Harper over Kepler." Yes, Bryce is far better, but they're not comparable signings.

Clint Frazier can't play CF. We need to stop that talk right now. I don't like Cave in center, but Frazier is a Rooker-esque corner outfielder. As in one of the worst defenders in all of baseball. In fact, Rooker may be the best comp for Frazier there is on the Twins right now. Better contact skills, but he's a power corner bat who's a negative asset in the field. I wouldn't be upset with bringing him in, or even him replacing Cave, but lets not make him out to be what he isn't. He's a terrible fielder. I'd take him over Cave because I'd use Gordon in CF before I'd use Cave. But I'd never use Frazier there. 

But let's pump the brakes on the Cave rage. He's my least favorite Twin right now, and I don't think he plays a role on a contending team, but it's not even Thanksgiving yet, and he's on an incredibly releasable 1 year contract.

"Easily Cuttable," I like that phrase.  I like the way it rolls off the tongue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm still completely confused as to the idea of a grievance being filed by a player who gets cut. Especially an 800K player. Do you have any examples of this happening? I am just not seeing the idea that Cave is somehow uncuttable because he signed a 1 year, 800K deal. 

This FO has done some things I don't understand, and I don't understand giving Cave this contract to start with, but I just don't think it's cause for great concern yet. We're not even to Thanksgiving yet and people are acting like Cave has been named the starting CFer and 3 hole hitter. All I'm saying is it feels like more anger than there needs to be just yet. Free agency just started. Lets give it a month before we start freaking out.

Specific examples? No. I couldn't name a single player that signed a contract outside of arbitration and was cut, let alone one that subsequently filed a grievance. I didn't know 1 year contracts for arb eligible players weren't fully guaranteed either.  He isn't uncuttable. I just feel like all signs point to him being on the active roster and he has some armor to help ensure that happens. 

I wouldn't say I'm freaking out. I do think it's poor use of a roster spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

As mentioned, I understand they can do this. But might you name some examples of past players they tendered arbitration contracts and then cut in spring training (or before)? I'm having a hard time thinking of a single one. Let's not act like it's a common occurrence.

It wasn't an arbitration contract, but the Twins have made similar moves under Falvey like eating $2.5MM on Anibal Sanchez in 2018 before cutting him on March 11, less than a month after he signed. If the Twins are willing to eat $2.5MM, they'll also be willing to eat $200k if they cut Cave before the season.

I don't think it's even a bad look for the Twins as I'd be surprised Cave would be able to get an MLB contract from anybody right now. I think it's basically just free money for him right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Specific examples? No. I couldn't name a single player that signed a contract outside of arbitration and was cut, let alone one that subsequently filed a grievance. I didn't know 1 year contracts for arb eligible players weren't fully guaranteed either.  He isn't uncuttable. I just feel like all signs point to him being on the active roster and he has some armor to help ensure that happens. 

I wouldn't say I'm freaking out. I do think it's poor use of a roster spot. 

I didn't mean you personally were overly angry or anything, sorry if it came off that way. I'm just saying there seems to be a general theme that this 1 year 800K deal is a bigger deal than I think it is. As of 11/23/21 I'd say Cave would be the 4th OFer for the Twins based on the current 40 man roster. My point is simply that it's 11/23/21 and there's a whole lot more time to sign and trade for more talent and 1 year, 800K isn't going to stop the Twins from releasing Cave and not thinking twice. 

If people think the Twins are now actively not going to look for upgrades because they're so enamored with Cave that's 1 thing, but signing someone they're comfortable with to a barely more than league minimum 1 year deal is no clear sign to me that he's locked into the #4 spot. To me this was an 800k insurance policy as they believe Cave is capable of manning CF as the 4th OFer while nobody else on the roster is. Had Cave been set on going to arbitration and refused to sign this deal my guess is he'd have been released, but he agreed to a minuscule (in MLB contract terms) deal with a hope and a prayer that the Twins can't upgrade and he'll make the opening day roster.

To me there's no sign whatsoever that the Twins have their 4th OFer in place and aren't going to look to upgrade. Don't like Cave and definitely don't want him as the 4th OFer, but I don't see the big deal with retaining your best fielding 4th OFer just in case you miss on your other targets over the offseason. It's just an 800K insurance policy as far as I'm concerned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

If people think the Twins are now actively not going to look for upgrades because they're so enamored with Cave that's 1 thing, but signing someone they're comfortable with to a barely more than league minimum 1 year deal is no clear sign to me that he's locked into the #4 spot. 

Some would say their comfort level with him is exactly the problem. It led them to part ways with LaMonte Wade Jr. last offseason. It led them to give him 300 PAs the past two seasons while he hit like trash. It leads them to treat him as their primary backup CF even though he's not good there. Now it's leading them to give him a 40-man roster spot during the offseason, which has plenty of opportunity cost on its own, never mind the contract.

Why are the Twins so "comfortable" with Jake Cave? That's what many of us have trouble understanding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...