Twins Shopping Christian Vazquez

[stringer bell]

6 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

You'd think so, but after this FO was showered with accolades in '19 for breaking the MLB season HR record (largely due to the juiced ball) by focusing on big bats, it all went to their heads & they got their "high", It's like being hooked on a drug. you have no sense of reality. you constantly search down the same avenue to try to regain the same feeling,

I don't think it is fair to view the front office as addicted to home runs. Home runs are valuable and power can cover over other faults. The Twins might value HR power higher than you or I, but they managed to have a very good pitching staff this past year and improved in stealing bases and using "small ball". By and large, you can't have it all. If you rely on the home run ball, most likely there will be strikeouts and more unproductive at-bats. On the other hand, it takes a lot of singles to score 5-6 runs, even with productive outs. 

[FlyingFinn]

On 11/24/2023 at 9:10 AM, nicksaviking said:

or maybe Cossetti later in the year

Cossetti is in A ball. He's not on the Twins next year or probably the following year. Played really sparsely in the AFL but hit .100 something there. I like him but he is about a one level per year advancer.

[Boswell]

The Athletic’s Houston Astros reporter Chandler Rome said players and coaches in his team’s clubhouse were shocked the Twins didn’t start Vázquez once in the playoff series and had major concerns about how it would impact that night’s game had he been behind the dish. His veteran knowledge shouldn’t be discarded because of a poor offensive season.
 

 

[ashbury]

The dilemma I see is that if the Twins still want a veteran catcher on the 40-man, rather than trust the backup role to a rookie plus have no obvious candidate for promotion in case of injury, then whatever team they think will take Vazquez off their hands, why wouldn't that team just go after whoever the Twins have in mind to go after?  Nobody inexpensive is going to be markedly better than Vazquez was last year, and someone projected to perform at the same level will cost less.  The Twins could eat some or all salary to entice a Vazquez trade, but that defeats the purpose of getting salary relief.

I'm predisposed already to look pretty skeptically at whatever the Twins do, if a change is made at catcher.  Especially a year from now, if Vazquez bounces back even a little with the bat.

[Boswell]

Didn’t quite work to post from the Athletic.  :)

I’d agree that Twins were foolish to bench Vazquez for all 6 games of the postseason.   Go with the guy who has the experience of calling the big-time game.   Of course, who knows the whole business of “personal catcher” or “splits with Jeffers and Vazquez” at that time and place.  

I’d definitely be hurt if I was Vazquez… and want the exit from Baldelli station  

 

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, Boswell said:

I’d definitely be hurt if I was Vazquez… and want the exit from Baldelli station 

Enough to void his own contract and seek out a new deal with someone else, say $6M total contract value for a couple of years?  I imagine the Twins would be receptive if he offered that solution.

If he wants the full $20M he may have to swallow his pride and see it all play out.  $14M or whatever is a lot to walk away from.  And does he want to continue playing when he is 35 and older?  Then he'll need to get over the butthurt and keep his performance up to major league standards for the next two seasons, to keep that next contract in sight.

[Doctor Gast]

16 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Ya, winning the division. So lame. 

We largely won the division because of the hiring of Paparesta & listening to him. Our biggest problem in the past was the over-extending of players, they became ineffective, hurt & then ran to the ground & in the 2nd half into the PS they were shot and then blamed it on rotten luck.

 

Next was finally finding a true CF to sub Buxton and this year proved especially important. The FO believes a position is determined by his bat, not his glove. According to them Cave was a great Buxton sub & was very hesitant to move him off the position & Polanco was a great SS.

 

Thirdly, was the hiring of Vazquez which IMO Correa had a lot to do with. Vazquez raised the catching staff from the toilets to average and helped raise the pitching staff from average to top tier.

 

Fourthly. Royce Lewis. He bucked the hitting philosophy & lit the ballpark on fire.

 

This FO inherited a top-tier catching staff. 1st Castro/ Garver, later Garver/ Jeffers/ Rortvedt. I supposed that they thought a top-tier catching staff was too much of a luxury so they totally dismantled it. Because backup Jeffers embraced their hitting philosophy they decided to go all in on him, '22 was the result of that.

 

Twins like to serve us their Kool-Aid like the long list of injuries year after year is just rotten luck, defense isn't important. Cave is a great CF sub, and Polanco is a great SS, These ideas were changed because writers & fans challenged these ideas, they didn't drink the Kool-Aid. 

CF, SS & catcher are premium positions we need to be deep in quality players at these positions throughout the organization. We have absolutely no catchers of value in our system, our best hope are still years away. Jeffers isn't a great catcher, IMO he's not a starting catcher, definitely not worth totally depending on him for the next 5+ yrs w/o having any decent backup plan. Our catching situation is dire & nothing will change if we keep drinking the Kool-Aid that Jeffers is a great catcher. Actually, things will get worse because that perception will lead us to lose Vazquez. We should have traded for an elite catching prospect back when they dismantled our top tier catching corp. So please stop drinking the Kool-Aid.

[Rik19753]

8 hours ago, Boswell said:

The Athletic’s Houston Astros reporter Chandler Rome said players and coaches in his team’s clubhouse were shocked the Twins didn’t start Vázquez once in the playoff series and had major concerns about how it would impact that night’s game had he been behind the dish. His veteran knowledge shouldn’t be discarded because of a poor offensive season.

I would take this with a grain of salt given that said team insisted on starting Martin Maldonado over Yainer Diaz for all of their playoff games. Given that there were a ton of criticism about Dusty not using Yainer, but almost none about Rocco not using Vazquez, I think it's clear that the Astros' way of favoring the 'veteran knowledge' is the exception, not the norm.

[IndianaTwin]

23 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

...This FO inherited a top-tier catching staff. 1st Castro/ Garver, later Garver/ Jeffers/ Rortvedt....

This FO signed Castro. 

[Mike Sixel]

16 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

This FO signed Castro. 

And drafted Jeffers 

[Doctor Gast]

11 hours ago, IndianaTwin said:

This FO signed Castro. 

I sincerely thank you Indiana. I admit I was wrong, not only about Castro but also my assumption about this FO. It turns out that Castro was one of their 1st if not the 1st player transaction. Pointing out that the reason of hiring him was due to the poor state of pitching staff & the need of a catcher who could better handle them. That impressed me. That up to the Jeffers decision they have done a wonderful job with their catching.

[saviking]

On 11/23/2023 at 2:52 PM, DocBauer said:

We got outstanding game calling and defense from the catcher spot last season. Also got a lot of offense, even with Vazquez having a down year. I like the potential of Carmago a lot, but I don't know that handing the rookie a job is the smart thing to do. Especially if someone doesn't pick up all, or most of the tab on Vazquez. Otherwise, you basically weaken your depth to save a couple million?

I can guarantee moving him isn't the issue. The league isn't brimming with quality, experienced catchers. Someone could use hum and would love to have him. But, what are they willing to give up for the remaining $20M?

I get the idea here. I just don't know if I like it.

I agree with your assessment but paying one player 36 million dollars and losing your TV contract makes you take gambles you otherwise would be able to afford not to. 

[Hashim]

We should trade Vazquez, $10 mill/year for him is too much. We can use that money on another ace pitcher or marquee free agent. Would bringing Mitch Garver back be a bad idea? 

[Cris E]

Garver is a bad idea because he gets hurt all the time.  Last year's great catcher health was an aberration because teams rarely get through a season using only two catchers, We can probably expect that luck to drift back to normal next year, and replacing Vazquez with Garver would only hasten that.

Edit: They should keep Vazquez unless some organization short on catching gives us decent value in trade. We'd end up replacing him with junk, that junk would still want to be paid so the savings wouldn't be great, and we'd still have a crowded 40 man. What's the point (unless he's really ticked off.)   If they can swap him for Goldschmidt or something where the dollars work out then I'd be happy to fill a hole that way.

[Mike Sixel]

I would not trade him without a good return. I don't see them spending the savings.

[stringer bell]

9 hours ago, Cris E said:

Garver is a bad idea because he gets hurt all the time.  Last year's great catcher health was an aberration because teams rarely get through a season using only two catchers, We can probably expect that luck to drift back to normal next year, and replacing Vazquez with Garver would only hasten that.

Edit: They should keep Vazquez unless some organization short on catching gives us decent value in trade. We'd end up replacing him with junk, that junk would still want to be paid so the savings wouldn't be great, and we'd still have a crowded 40 man. What's the point (unless he's really ticked off.)   If they can swap him for Goldschmidt or something where the dollars work out then I'd be happy to fill a hole that way.

I don't really think there is a crowded 40-man roster at this point. The Twins have 36 spots taken and haven't been linked to any free agents. 

[Road trip]

22 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I would not trade him without a good return. I don't see them spending the savings.

I understand, and agree they aren't likely to spend the savings, but I fear that if they don't trade him then somebody else that is marginally expensive will have to go who might otherwise stay (perhaps all of Polanco, Kepler, and Farmer instead of just one or two of them).

Vazquez might bounce back next year... but consider the consequences if he doesn't.  His contract would be untradeable in the 2024 off-season if he has another bad year.  Then the Twins are really stuck for another year in 2025.

I know Rocco likes to rotate catchers, and it worked well last year, but by using off-days strategically he could essentially start Jeffers 100 games and Camargo for 60.  Camargo will be 25 next year, so he is probably about as ready as he is ever going to be.  Both are young so you can at least hope for good health.  Sign a career backup to a Triple A contract as insurance.