If Buxton could, he would be

[Mike Sixel]

If Buxton could play the field, he would be. The idea that the front office and manager would not play an elite fielder out there if they could is absurd. Especially when you have Julien as an option at DH.

I'm not sure how this needs to be said, or is controversial, but apparently a lot of people here think that he could be in the field, but isn't for some reason. 

[Parfigliano]

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

If Buxton could play the field, he would be. The idea that the front office and manager would not play an elite fielder out there if they could is absurd. Especially when you have Julien as an option at DH.

I'm not sure how this needs to be said, or is controversial, but apparently a lot of people here think that he could be in the field, but isn't for some reason. 

He isnt playing CF because he cant health wise.  I would be shocked if he plays a game there all year.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Parfigliano said:

He isnt playing CF because he cant health wise.  I would be shocked if he plays a game there all year.

Some people here seem to think he could be out there....

[jkcarew]

15 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

If Buxton could play the field, he would be. The idea that the front office and manager would not play an elite fielder out there if they could is absurd. Especially when you have Julien as an option at DH.

I'm not sure how this needs to be said, or is controversial, but apparently a lot of people here think that he could be in the field, but isn't for some reason. 

But if he can run the bases...and he's been attempting steal, even...why can't he play in the field?

I think it comes down to the 'wear and tear' issues...which are subjective. It's a risk computation, isn't it? The Twins are going with the low risk approach, which is also the low reward approach. Seems debatable to me.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, jkcarew said:

But if he can run the bases...and he's been attempting steal, even...why can't he play in the field?

I think it comes down to the 'wear and tear' issues...which are subjective. It's a risk computation, isn't it? The Twins are going with the low risk approach, which is also the low reward approach. Seems debatable to me.

That's a fair question. I mean, anyone can play the OF if they can run, but that's not the same as playing the outfield effectively.

And, yes, it is about risk some for sure. Perhaps you are right, and he could effectively play the OF..... What risk level would you tolerate on him? Both health and effectiveness......

[jkcarew]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's a fair question. I mean, anyone can play the OF if they can run, but that's not the same as playing the outfield effectively.

And, yes, it is about risk some for sure. Perhaps you are right, and he could effectively play the OF..... What risk level would you tolerate on him? Both health and effectiveness......

I'd be asking (as the Twins staff)...under what circumstances will we EVER let him play CF again. And as soon as that criteria is met, I'd play him in CF.

Maybe, they're doing this. Or, maybe they've simply put a time-frame on it (a different one than what we heard at the beginning of the year)?...to 'prove' that the leg is holding up first.

But maybe they're headed toward logic that dictates that it will ALWAYS be the low-risk (and therefore 'correct') choice to DH him. Here's were it's a slippery slope, IMO. Prolonging the career of an 'ok' DH doesn't do that much for the team in terms of wins and losses. Especially, with 'good' DH alternatives proliferating as I type (Julien, as you pointed out, Wallner to name a couple)...and no viable CF alternatives (beyond MAT) on the horizon. (Also why I don't get anchoring Lewis at 3B.)

FWIW, they're losing me with backing down from the statement at the beginning of the year when they said Buxton would be playing the field sometime around the middle of the year. What's changed? Maybe it's MAT hitting better than expected?

Probably 80% of the frustration with me is that I simply don't know what they're doing...what their longer-term plan is with Lewis and Buxton position-wise. I can't see the logic/pattern with what they're doing, and usually you can see one. Doesn't mean that whatever it is they plan isn't reasonable or 'good'.

[Nine of twelve]

30 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

...and no viable CF alternatives (beyond MAT) on the horizon. (Also why I don't get anchoring Lewis at 3B.)

Lewis is not anchored at third forever, it's just where he fits best at the moment. Celestino is a viable alternative defensively and here's all it would take to make his hitting acceptable:

So we have at least two viable or nearly viable CF alternatives. But, like everyone, I wish Buck could be out there almost every game.

[LastOnePicked]

1 hour ago, jkcarew said:

FWIW, they're losing me with backing down from the statement at the beginning of the year when they said Buxton would be playing the field sometime around the middle of the year. What's changed? Maybe it's MAT hitting better than expected?

Here's my guess: they now know that Buxton's knees simply will not support him playing CF. Certainly not this year, likely not ever again. However, they know that the fanbase would have a meltdown, so they're continuing to play coy and kick the can down the road. I don't know this for sure, but it's just me reading the leaves, so to speak.

In fact, I doubt Buxton will even finish this contract. The yearly aggravation, pain and complete inability to stay healthy and productive have perhaps ground him down to the bone. 

I often hope I'm wrong about the Twins, but on this I hope I'm 1000% wrong.

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's a fair question. I mean, anyone can play the OF if they can run, but that's not the same as playing the outfield effectively.

And, yes, it is about risk some for sure. Perhaps you are right, and he could effectively play the OF..... What risk level would you tolerate on him? Both health and effectiveness......

I saw the start to this thread and was about to post, "people are treating the phrase could play like it's a simple yes/no situation."  But the conversation immediately turned more productive, with this observation about risk. I'm not sure I have much to contribute except that different decision makers would have different criteria, thresholds, and circumstances for their choices, and I haven't been much for second-guessing the consensus that FO/manager/player have reached, except to note the less-visible cost in terms of strain on the roster with the present situation.  Replacing MAT's marginal bat with Julien's untested bat is part of the calculation too, since it's not quite a sure thing.  It's complex, and I'm only inclined to lament the fact.

[Nine of twelve]

21 minutes ago, ashbury said:

 I haven't been much for second-guessing the consensus that FO/manager/player have reached...

You left out the most important part of the consensus: the medical staff.

[ashbury]

4 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

You left out the most important part of the consensus: the medical staff.

Very true.  My editor had the day off today and I was just winging it.  That'll teach me.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Of course there is risk, and of course teams weigh risk differently. To spell this out every time before starting a discussion would be tedious. 

We can go back to what another poster said in another thread a while back: would the front office of a good team like the Dodgers even be interested in a player like Buxton in the first place? Likely not.

[Mike Sixel]

3 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

Of course there is risk, and of course teams weigh risk differently. To spell this out every time before starting a discussion would be tedious. 

We can go back to what another poster said in another thread a while back: would the front office of a good team like the Dodgers even be interested in a player like Buxton in the first place? Likely not.

You don't think the Dodgers sign him to that contract at the time, or don't want him now? Those are two very different things....

[SwainZag]

If we could quit beating a dead horse about the following topics I would love it:

A) Buxton not playing CF.  

B) Kepler not playing/being off the team

C) Pagan being cut

I feel like 60 percent or more of all topics/posts contain one of these.  I get it.  Most people think one of these should happen, but until then.......can we use our post power for other things?  There's a lot of Twins happening that doesn't involve beating one of these topics further into the ground. 

[weitz41]

3 hours ago, SwainZag said:

If we could quit beating a dead horse about the following topics I would love it:

A) Buxton not playing CF.  

B) Kepler not playing/being off the team

C) Pagan being cut

I feel like 60 percent or more of all topics/posts contain one of these.  I get it.  Most people think one of these should happen, but until then.......can we use our post power for other things?  There's a lot of Twins happening that doesn't involve beating one of these topics further into the ground. 

Agree 100% with this but would like to add:

D) Arraez would fix the offense.

[Nine of twelve]

4 hours ago, SwainZag said:

If we could quit beating a dead horse about the following topics I would love it:

A) Buxton not playing CF.  

B) Kepler not playing/being off the team

C) Pagan being cut

I feel like 60 percent or more of all topics/posts contain one of these.  I get it.  Most people think one of these should happen, but until then.......can we use our post power for other things?  There's a lot of Twins happening that doesn't involve beating one of these topics further into the ground. 

 

54 minutes ago, weitz41 said:

Agree 100% with this but would like to add:

D) Arraez would fix the offense.

And I would like to add:

E) Fire Baldelli.

[TwinsDr2021]

15 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

If Buxton could play the field, he would be. The idea that the front office and manager would not play an elite fielder out there if they could is absurd. Especially when you have Julien as an option at DH.

 

14 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's a fair question. I mean, anyone can play the OF if they can run, but that's not the same as playing the outfield effectively.

And, yes, it is about risk some for sure. Perhaps you are right, and he could effectively play the OF..... What risk level would you tolerate on him? Both health and effectiveness......

This is why there is a discussion, because even you, concede in the first 5 posts that maybe he could be playing out there but it is about risk mitigation.

Some people just don't give a crap about the risk part because the believe taking the risk and the side effects of this is more important to the teams wins and loses this year then having him DH with these results, and if he gets hurt so be it, didn't we all expect that anyway, add in the dislike for the FO and manager and viola, somebody's hot take.

Not saying I agree with that take, but I understand it.

 

[MABB1959]

What is worse?  Admitting Buxton won't likely play CF again or leave us wondering in frustration.  Either way the fan base is not happy with the FO or Buxton right now.  Even if they don't know for sure at least let us know why.  The Twins are not particularly up front about things and I get it but I would much rather know that the chance of him ever playing CF again is less that XX%. 

Also I kind of agree that some of these topics are getting old, but what would there be to discuss or at the very least have a place to vent our frustrations.

Happy that Correa seems to be having a little bounce back for sure.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

11 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

You don't think the Dodgers sign him to that contract at the time, or don't want him now? Those are two very different things....

I found that other post and will share with you: 

“I think I have to turn my attention to how FalVine have constructed their roster.  To make ends meet, our FO has demonstrated a willingness to assume more injury risk, in the name of acquiring top-tier talent.  The Dodgers by contrast have the financial luxury to make all their decisions based on bang, not bang-for-buck.  Or else, they've just done a great job at accumulating top-tier ironman talent, but being able to pay all April starters but young'uns Gavin Lux and Will Smith above $10M in 2022 couldn't have hurt.

It occurs to me now that the Dodgers might not accept Byron Buxton and his injury history in trade, no matter how small the price.  He doesn't fit their profile.

It's hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison but I think the discussion of the Twins 2023 roster comes down to how would other teams deal with the individual players in question.  If the Dodgers were forced to accept Buxton on their team, would they work him like a rented mule in CF, or let him DH and have an occasional day off during April.  I don't know how to answer that because Buxton is a different player than it looks like LA would even choose to have.”

[Mike Sixel]

8 hours ago, SwainZag said:

If we could quit beating a dead horse about the following topics I would love it:

A) Buxton not playing CF.  

B) Kepler not playing/being off the team

C) Pagan being cut

I feel like 60 percent or more of all topics/posts contain one of these.  I get it.  Most people think one of these should happen, but until then.......can we use our post power for other things?  There's a lot of Twins happening that doesn't involve beating one of these topics further into the ground. 

That's what I was trying to do, but clearly failed. Oh well.

[Mike Sixel]

6 minutes ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

I found that other post and will share with you: 

 

“I think I have to turn my attention to how FalVine have constructed their roster.  To make ends meet, our FO has demonstrated a willingness to assume more injury risk, in the name of acquiring top-tier talent.  The Dodgers by contrast have the financial luxury to make all their decisions based on bang, not bang-for-buck.  Or else, they've just done a great job at accumulating top-tier ironman talent, but being able to pay all April starters but young'uns Gavin Lux and Will Smith above $10M in 2022 couldn't have hurt.

It occurs to me now that the Dodgers might not accept Byron Buxton and his injury history in trade, no matter how small the price.  He doesn't fit their profile.

It's hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison but I think the discussion of the Twins 2023 roster comes down to how would other teams deal with the individual players in question.  If the Dodgers were forced to accept Buxton on their team, would they work him like a rented mule in CF, or let him DH and have an occasional day off during April.  I don't know how to answer that because Buxton is a different player than it looks like LA would even choose to have.”

That's a reasoned take, that understands why the Twins almost had to do the deal. 

[farmerguychris]

Lack of understanding (for the fans) of if he will just be a DH forever, or will return to the field someday is what is frustrating most of us.  If he's unable due to lingering knee injuries to play the field as a 29 year old, what happens 2,3,5 years from now?  They don't need to tell us anything, but as fans - we simply want to know if there is a plan.

[SwainZag]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's what I was trying to do, but clearly failed. Oh well.

Post wasn't aimed at you, just in general, but I understand your goal of the post. 

[DJL44]

18 hours ago, jkcarew said:

But if he can run the bases...and he's been attempting steal, even...why can't he play in the field?

I'm assuming it's the extra hour of outfield practice every day before the game that they think he can't handle. If he runs an extra hour every day he will irritate the (chronic?) knee injury. I don't think the issue is the 9 innings during the game.

All speculation but that's what makes sense to me.

[ashbury]

8 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

I found that other post and will share with you: 

 

“I think I have to turn my attention to how FalVine have constructed their roster.  To make ends meet, our FO has demonstrated a willingness to assume more injury risk, in the name of acquiring top-tier talent.  The Dodgers by contrast have the financial luxury to make all their decisions based on bang, not bang-for-buck.  Or else, they've just done a great job at accumulating top-tier ironman talent, but being able to pay all April starters but young'uns Gavin Lux and Will Smith above $10M in 2022 couldn't have hurt.

It occurs to me now that the Dodgers might not accept Byron Buxton and his injury history in trade, no matter how small the price.  He doesn't fit their profile.

It's hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison but I think the discussion of the Twins 2023 roster comes down to how would other teams deal with the individual players in question.  If the Dodgers were forced to accept Buxton on their team, would they work him like a rented mule in CF, or let him DH and have an occasional day off during April.  I don't know how to answer that because Buxton is a different player than it looks like LA would even choose to have.”

I come to TD for trenchant observations like this, not to mention the crackling prose with such meticulous wordsmithing.

[Stew]

Buxton will either be ready at some point or it will never happen. And at trade deadline we will look for relief help and another bat. Probably a right hander. Knowing the front office. We will not get a sure fire superstar. And if we do , where does he play? Usually we get either rebuilds or someone with some baggage. Either way he may end up dh. So Buxton will have to get his glove and get in the game.

[ewen21]

What is the difference if he can or can't?  He ISN'T and that is all that matters.  This is a guy touted as a world class athlete in his 29 year old season and he is not fit to play the field somehow.  His injury history and physical challenges will not improve with age. 

In reality, he is a player in his 9th season who has played more than 92 games just once.  He has a lifetime OBP of .301 and a lifetime batting average of .240.  He has never driven in more than 51 runs and never scored 70 runs in a season.  

 

 

[StormJH1]

7 hours ago, ewen57 said:

What is the difference if he can or can't?  He ISN'T and that is all that matters.  This is a guy touted as a world class athlete in his 29 year old season and he is not fit to play the field somehow.  His injury history and physical challenges will not improve with age. 

In reality, he is a player in his 9th season who has played more than 92 games just once.  He has a lifetime OBP of .301 and a lifetime batting average of .240.  He has never driven in more than 51 runs and never scored 70 runs in a season.  

 

I wish that this was wrong, but it just isn't.  I really like Byron Buxton as a professional and at least what he appears to be as a person.   As a number of people have said, there isn't much more of him you could ask for in those regards.  But I think there's an overemphasis on "per-game" efficiency, as if that's a thing that actually matters.  The theory was that 100 games of Byron Buxton was so valuable that even if you had to rest him, or even if he ended up on the IL for 1/3 of the year, he was still so valuable as a CF and as an impact bat that it almost didn't matter. 

 

It's the Joe Mauer scenario all over again, only much worse.  The projected value of both Mauer and Buxton was based on cherry-picked data from the best-case version of their value, and the assumptions that they would continue as plus/elite defenders at critical defensive positions while remaining relatively healthy and continuing to produce in ways comparable to their peak seasons.  That isn't happening for Buxton, and it didn't really happen for Mauer either.  However, to Mauer's credit, he did reinvent himself by learning 1B, and while he was never really a "plus" bat again after he turned 30, he actually enjoyed a relatively consistent and healthy 2nd half of his career.

 

Buxton's merit's as an impact hitter are based on extremely small sample sizes, spread out over many years.  He's thought to have middle-of-the-order power, but has one 20-HR season once in his career.  He was thought to be the "fastest guy in the game" when he emerged, but only stole 15 bases once.  (Admittedly, he's also been caught only twice on the basepaths since the end of the 2019 season, which is amazing.  But the point remains, that he's either been hurt or not allowed to run.)

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

1 hour ago, StormJH1 said:

The projected value of both Mauer and Buxton was based on cherry-picked data from the best-case version of their value

It's the blindspot of every fan. 

People want to project how good Buxton might be, by saying "what if we projected those good 90 games out to a full 162 game season?"

Turn it around, and the reverse is, "What if all the other players in the league were able to cherry pick their best healthiest 90 games, and remove their bad stretches when they were hurt?"

We'd be in the same place. 

[Craig Arko]

What if nobody ever made an out? We’d still be watching Willians Astudillo pitching in a game that started a few years ago.