BREAKING: Twins Agree to One-Year Deal With Outfielder Harrison Bader

[USAFChief]

31 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

If Emma is a year away they should trade him immediately. His value will never be higher and he's not the piece they want if he's a year away. And, I agree, Keirsey is a "floor setter." But he costs 6 million less than "floor setting" Bader. Just like Zebby costs 7 million less than Paddack and Elias Diaz costs 6.5 million less than Vazquez. My point is that "floor setting" should be done by people making significantly less than these types of guys so that their money can be spent on "ceiling movers."

Keirsey is a competent glove. So is Emma. How are they going to prove they can hit left-handed pitching when Bader and Martin are taking all those PAs? And, right now, I'd argue very strongly that Bader isn't taking away PAs from them, but he's getting more than them. Because he won't be platooned, and he's currently the starting LFer with Larnach at DH. So he'll start every game Larnach and Wallner do while also getting starts against lefties. Unless you think Lee or some other young guy is starting over Bader. And if he can't beat out Lee, Julien, Helman, or Keirsey on paper right now what is he really bringing to the table? Either he's better than those guys and he's starting or he's not better than them so we paid over 6 million for a guy who they could cover with minimum salary guys. Which is it? Margot was a "traditional fourth outfielder," too. There's no such thing on this team. They're all key players who will get real at bats. You better be prepared to use them as true starters because they will be at some point. 

I don't think Bader is the every day starting LFer. 

But I'll play along. If signing Bader moves Larnach to DH, who was DH prior to signing Bader?

 

Also, who plays CF if something really odd happens, and Buxton doesn't play 162 games?

[Jocko87]

45 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

You might not know these players but both Jackson Chourio (LF-Brewers) and Jackson Chourio (CF-Padres)

I’m going to go out on a limb and assume someone that frequents a baseball message board in January is vaguely aware that these Jackson’s don’t have the same name.  

[sampleSizeOfOne]

4 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

My response, at least text based.

 

Some day i will bone up on pop culture...

[Danchat]

3 hours ago, IndianaTwin said:

Apologies if this is a repeat from someone else's comments -- I scanned pretty quickly. 

• Michael A Taylor (career 80 OPS+) was coming off a 90 OPS+ season as a 31-year-old when he came with an excellent defensive reputation. 

Taylor has caught some strays in this thread, but Baseball Reference has him at 1.9 WAR for his 2023 season even despite his inability to get on base. Getting that out of Bader would be nice.

I do agree with those saying that this is a "floor" move. It's a move the front office needed to make because they can't develop their own CF backup from the minors... it's been years and we're still waiting.

[sampleSizeOfOne]

13 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

All reverse splits are an illusion. 

Every. Single. One.

 

Disconcur. I can keep my legs together like nobody's business.

 

But within the context you ment it, meh. It's a statistic. Which is almost the same thing [as an illusion]...

[chpettit19]

Just now, USAFChief said:

I don't think Bader is the every day starting LFer. 

But I'll play along. If signing Bader moves Larnach to DH, who was DH prior to signing Bader?

 

Also, who plays CF if something really odd happens, and Buxton doesn't play 162 games?

Correa, Lewis, and Buxton are the only "every day" starters they have. So, sure he isn't the everyday starter, but he's the main starter there. Unless you have a different lineup you think they'll go with.

Nobody was, and it was a problem. Emmanuel Rodriguez is my answer to both of those questions, though. He'd have been my opening day LFer and he's the CFer when Buxton gets hurt. And after that I'm fine with Keirsey, Helman, Martin, Castro, etc. filling in for any role Bader plays. I don't believe their collection of young players with options would perform meaningfully worse than Bader with a chance to have someone who performs better.

My complaints are about their strategy as a whole that has them continually bringing in veteran players who they pay millions to that they won't ever move on from while they could be getting the same production from minimum salaried players and pooling those veteran salaries into an individual veteran player who actually raises the ceiling.

How many more wins do you think this signing brought us for that 6.25+ million? How many more wins does Paddack provide for his 7.5 mil? Vazquez for his 10? Castro for his 6.4? That's over 30 million in salaries for those 4 guys. I'd argue you could get more or less the same production out of about 5 million in their place while using the other 25 mil to sign a legitimate difference maker. My complaint isn't about Bader alone, it's about what he represents in their team building strategies.

[Brock Beauchamp]

27 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

All reverse splits are an illusion. 

Every. Single. One.

Keston Hiura had legit reverse splits.

But you're right in that it's incredibly rare.

[Brock Beauchamp]

56 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

4 of his 7 non-2020 seasons had him hitting better against righties than lefties. It wasn't just 2024. In the other 3 years his stats against lefties were insane, but more often than not he's had reverse splits.

This is a really weird way to slice up splits. While splits numbers definitely fluctuate, giving a binary result on a single season doesn't make much sense, especially seasons like 2021 where he was .024 better against RHP.

[David HK]

 

😂 "Congratulations to this year's winner of the Byron Buxton's Injury History MLB Outfielder Fellowship."

Downright Lardner-esque! 🤣

 

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

My point is that they don't have to fill it with a FA like Bader or a trade. Let the young guys try. I'm arguing against these types of $2-8 or 10 million veterans that don't provide more than a collection of minimum salaried guys can provide. Take all those below average to (at best) average vets and use their salaries on 1 bigger, actual needle moving vet and let the kids fill the below average to average role for far less money, and no prospect capital in trade. It's what Cleveland does. They dump their veteran underperformers and they cycle through their young guys until they find one that's clicking that year. Then if they aren't clicking the next year they start cycling more young guys.

And there are many other examples throughout MLB of guys who don't bounce back in the 2nd half. Like Kepler for the entire rest of his career or Margot last year or Gallo in his 1 year with us. Of course guys can bounce back, but how many games are they costing in the meantime? And how many more if they don't? If Farmer and Margot weren't both horrible in the first half do the Twins win 3 more games? 1? 5? And Castro is one of the guys in the range of veteran contracts that I'd be happy to move to free up money for a better player. If they cleared out Castro, Vazquez, Paddack, and Bader they could afford a star. I'd rather have the star.

Teams do discard players like trash. All the time. The Twins are an outlier in keeping these underperforming vets all year. They got Tonkin last year because multiple other teams discarded him. My, and other's, argument is that if you rely on young guys to fill these roles then you don't have to discard them at all. You just option them and bring up the next one. And it saves you millions to go spend on an actual needle mover. Bader, Margot, Farmer, etc. are all "floor setters." They're guys the front office hopes keeps them competitive and from completely falling apart. But none of them are "ceiling movers." They don't provide any realistic upside. It's planning to be an 80-85 win team and hoping to catch lighting in a bottle. I don't want that. I want guys with realistic upside even if it increases the variance. I'll take a 75-95 win range over an 80-85 win range. 

I have always been basically in line with your first paragraph.  If you have young guys that can fill the role, give them a chance because there is upside and greater potential long-term benefit.  

As you know I have compiled the acquisition method of every player on every 90-win team in the bottom half of revenue since the turn of the century.  Where free agent impact is concerned, lower priced free agents have contributed at least as much as the $15M+ free agents. 

Cleveland has only had one team with any impact from free agents in the last decade or so.  Their 90+ win teams in 24 / 22 and 19 did not have a free agent that produced 1.5 WAR.  You have to go back to 2013 to find any impact from free agents.  That year 24.8% of WAR was generated by free agents.  Scott Kazmir was getting paid from the Angels and Ryan Raburn got paid $1M.  Michael Bourn got paid $7M so somewhat consequential and he produced 1.7 WAR.  The highest paid FA was Nick Swisher who produced 2 WAR while the two cheapest free agents produced 2.2 and 2.7.  So, they got 6.6 WAR for $8M + league minimum for Kazmir from 3 players and 2 WAR for $11M from Swisher.  BTW ... I am assuming league minimum for Kazmir because baseball reference list all of his salary as being paid by the Angels.

[KirbyDome89]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It was 150 plate appearances with a .213 BABIP. I'm not sure how much stock to put in his 2024 splits for a couple of reasons. Unless someone can find evidence to convince me otherwise, I'm going to weight his career splits much more heavily.

Or he's a player in decline?

His career OPS is basically 700. He hasn't been close to touching that the last 3 seasons and I don't expect this season to be much different. Ditto for his ability to hit LHP. It's up and down over that span, but in two of those seasons he hasn't hit LHP anywhere near well enough to justify the playing time he's likely to get in MN. 

[David HK]

Looks like we got the right guy.  For more $ than the other two. 

[KirbyDome89]

57 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

What good is an array of bad players with options? That just means you're cycling through bad players hoping someone has a 2-week hot streak that fools people into thinking they're good. Then you have to spend the month watching them suck before they make another move. Bader has a higher chance of being useful than all of Helman, Keirsey and Martin do collectively.

It sounds like you think the GM needs to prevent themselves from improving the team because management can't make decisions about who to play. If the management can't figure out who to play, then the GM needs to FIRE MANAGEMENT because that's their primary job.

He can't play CF, we saw that last year. He's just another bad choice.

I'll take bad players with options over a bad veteran without one. This club has made it painfully obvious they don't want to move on from struggling vets. One month of a young player struggling is better than 3+ months of a guy like Gallo being a black hole. People are terrified of Keirsey, Martin, ect (and FWIW I'm not exactly on the bandwagon for any of the 3 you mentioned) tanking, but it's not like Bader isn't dangerously close to the edge of cliff either. 

The platoon philosophy that will ensure Bader gets more run than any of us want isn't a product of Rocco. No chance. That's coming from the top down. Rocco clearly agrees, but he isn't on an island when it comes to decisions involving player usage. 

[chpettit19]

20 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

This is a really weird way to slice up splits. While splits numbers definitely fluctuate, giving a binary result on a single season doesn't make much sense, especially seasons like 2021 where he was .024 better against RHP.

By year is a weird way to splice up splits? You said you don't care about 2024 because you care about the bigger sample size. You don't think looking at what compiles the bigger sample size matters? 

If the question is how much you can count on him to be good against lefties in the upcoming season, you don't think how consistent he's been at accomplishing that goal makes sense? Isn't that what you'd do with their OPS as a whole? You wouldn't use the stability of his OPS numbers season to season as an indicator of how well you can predict how he'll perform in the next season?

I think looking at the wild fluctuation in his numbers is pretty telling that there's no telling what he is really like against lefties or righties because he's been wildly inconsistent against both. I think having no faith in what you're going to get from a player is important. Consistency is very helpful in predicting the future. And that's what they're trying to do, predict the future. 

People here seem to think he's here to be a short-side platoon bat 4th outfielder. If that's his role I'd think you'd want to be awfully confident in how he'll perform against the short-side, no?

[Mike Sixel]

Every single projection system, every single one, predicts Martin will outhit him. Every. Single. One.

[Riverbrian]

5 hours ago, Twins_Fan_in_NJ said:

As for Martin, he had some nice catches last year - but he also looked like a deer in headlights at various times. Will never get that from Bader and I'd lean towards giving Bader AB's over Martin. Yes, Martin is younger but I'm not sure there's much upside.

There is absolutely no upside for Martin. 

 

 

 

 

If you give Bader his AB's. 

 

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

14 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

By year is a weird way to splice up splits? You said you don't care about 2024 because you care about the bigger sample size. You don't think looking at what compiles the bigger sample size matters? 

Not when you're treating it as a simple up/down, no. Did he beat his splits by .020 or .220? There's a big freakin' difference that matters between the two.

[Brock Beauchamp]

17 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Every single projection system, every single one, predicts Martin will outhit him. Every. Single. One.

What about Bader's +10 OAA in center field last season? 

Or Martin's -4 in just 275 innings?

That's what I don't get about this conversation. Would I have chosen Bader over literally every other option? Probably not. But it's entirely rational to choose a defense-first, legit CF when the only other CF you have on the roster is made of papier mache.

People are acting like the Twins are stashing 2015 Byron Buxton in the minors due to this deal when the reality is that they literally do not have another legitimate CF that will be ready in the first two months of the season (and Rodriguez might not be a MLB CF at all).

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Not when you're treating it as a simple up/down, no. Did he beat his splits by .020 or .220? There's a big freakin' difference that matters between the two.

When you're coming from the base of "he's not a good overall hitter" then I don't know that .020 or .220 really matters. His OPS against lefties should, theoretically, carry his OPS up to an acceptable spot. I mean, that's the whole theory around platooning, isn't it? Take away their weak side so they face mostly their strong side and they're then an overall better hitter because you've put them in position to succeed at their strengths while avoiding their weaknesses. It's why you platoon guys. So if he's a bad all around hitter to start with and he's hitting worse against lefties who cares if it's an inch or a mile. It's either an inch or a mile worse than bad. And he's been either an inch or a mile worse than bad more often than not.

[Riverbrian]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Personally, I find WAR dubious at best.  Both flavors, although if forced to choose I'd use bWAR over fWAR.

 

But it's interesting none of those pooh-poohing this signing bring up WAR, where Bader was between 1.5 and 2 WAR better than Martin in 2024, depending on version. 

Many of thise same folks throw around WAR regularly...when it suits their arguments. 

I don't throw around WAR... Don't even look at it. 

So... 

[Jocko87]

57 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

My complaint isn't about Bader alone, it's about what he represents in their team building strategies.

So be patient for the follow up move.

A decent money contract, with an option, screams that the follow up move will be related to the outfield depth.

Bader has a spot until one of Emma or Jenkins plays him off it. That's my hunch.

[Mahoning]

I doubt that Kansas City and Detroit are more worried today than they were yesterday. This is marginal stuff, though rather expensive.

[Riverbrian]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Well, there's a strong possibility we'll see Bader PHing for Wallner in the 5th, so i agree he's going to get lots of playing time. More than just time in CF 

But Rocco would be doing the same with Martin, so the problem lies there, not with Bader.

I'm not sure why everyone is comparing Bader with Martin.

I'm pretty sure that Bader doesn't knock Martin off the 26 man roster. 

Helman or Kiersay just got knocked off the opening day 26 man roster.  

[chpettit19]

9 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

So be patient for the follow up move.

A decent money contract, with an option, screams that the follow up move will be related to the outfield depth.

Bader has a spot until one of Emma or Jenkins plays him off it. That's my hunch.

What outfield depth? Everyone is telling me they didn't/don't have any and that's why this is such a good deal. And I actually agree that they don't have any. Larnach is the DH as I see it right now. Bader, Buxton, Wallner across the outfield. Nobody seems to think any of the rest of them are worth a darn. So trading Larnach (the outfielder I think is most talked about as trade bate) just puts them back to having only 8 lineup spots filled but now 1 of those 8 is a no bat, glove only LFer instead of a legit bat in Larnach.

Until they have 9 legit guys to put in their starting lineup I'm going to care about their offensive additions. Trading one of the 8 guys worth actual starter PAs is a real concern to me.

[USAFChief]

27 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

So be patient for the follow up move.

A decent money contract, with an option, screams that the follow up move will be related to the outfield depth.

Bader has a spot until one of Emma or Jenkins plays him off it. That's my hunch.

I don't think either ERod or Jenkins are Bader's competition for a roster spot.

Neither of those 2 will be 4th outfielders for the Twins in 2025. Maybe for.the last month of the season. Prior to that. If they're in Minneapolis, they're playing every day.

Bader isn't a full time player, unless/until Buxton is on the IL.

ERod/Jenkins are competing with Wallner and Larnach for spots.

[Jocko87]

8 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

What outfield depth? Everyone is telling me they didn't/don't have any and that's why this is such a good deal. And I actually agree that they don't have any. Larnach is the DH as I see it right now. Bader, Buxton, Wallner across the outfield. Nobody seems to think any of the rest of them are worth a darn. So trading Larnach (the outfielder I think is most talked about as trade bate) just puts them back to having only 8 lineup spots filled but now 1 of those 8 is a no bat, glove only LFer instead of a legit bat in Larnach.

Until they have 9 legit guys to put in their starting lineup I'm going to care about their offensive additions. Trading one of the 8 guys worth actual starter PAs is a real concern to me.

Probably should say "depth". It is a lot of guys. 40 man moves are required.

But if that's true, why are you worried about finding a spot for Emma?

I think he plays more than anyone thinks. Like full time regular.

[Jocko87]

1 minute ago, USAFChief said:

I don't think either ERod or Jenkins are Bader's competition for a roster spot.

Neither of those 2 will be 4th outfielders for the Twins in 2025. Maybe for.the last month of the season. Prior to that. If they're in Minneapolis, they're playing every day.

Bader isn't a full time player, unless/until Buxton is on the IL.

Not this year, at least not right away.

But my hunch is that the next move makes him a full time player.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Correa, Lewis, and Buxton are the only "every day" starters they have. So, sure he isn't the everyday starter, but he's the main starter there. Unless you have a different lineup you think they'll go with.

Nobody was, and it was a problem. Emmanuel Rodriguez is my answer to both of those questions, though. He'd have been my opening day LFer and he's the CFer when Buxton gets hurt. And after that I'm fine with Keirsey, Helman, Martin, Castro, etc. filling in for any role Bader plays. I don't believe their collection of young players with options would perform meaningfully worse than Bader with a chance to have someone who performs better.

My complaints are about their strategy as a whole that has them continually bringing in veteran players who they pay millions to that they won't ever move on from while they could be getting the same production from minimum salaried players and pooling those veteran salaries into an individual veteran player who actually raises the ceiling.

How many more wins do you think this signing brought us for that 6.25+ million? How many more wins does Paddack provide for his 7.5 mil? Vazquez for his 10? Castro for his 6.4? That's over 30 million in salaries for those 4 guys. I'd argue you could get more or less the same production out of about 5 million in their place while using the other 25 mil to sign a legitimate difference maker. My complaint isn't about Bader alone, it's about what he represents in their team building strategies.

Buxton isn't an every day starter. That's one reason Bader is a fit.

I don't think ERod is anywhere close to being an MLB starter. If he is, great. That'll be known quickly and he can come up and take a regular job in RF, most likely.

But I don't think that's very likely.

[chpettit19]

Just now, Jocko87 said:

Probably should say "depth". It is a lot of guys. 40 man moves are required.

But if that's true, why are you worried about finding a spot for Emma?

I think he plays more than anyone thinks. Like full time regular.

He'd be on my opening day roster because I think it's so easy to find him a spot. I don't think the Twins will do that, though. And if they do trade Larnach (or Wallner) then adding Emma just puts them right back where they are. Short a bat. 

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Buxton isn't an every day starter. That's one reason Bader is a fit.

I don't think ERod is anywhere close to being an MLB starter. If he is, great. That'll be known quickly and he can come up and take a regular job in RF, most likely.

But I don't think that's very likely.

He is until he gets hurt. And, yes, I understand he will get hurt. But knowing he'll get hurt means you need a real everyday guy to take his spot, and Bader isn't that.

We disagree on Rodriguez. It's all good. 

You don't think Bader is a starter right now and I do. I'm happy to hear what other people think their lineup looks like most days (I understand it's a shifting thing). I'm interested who people think is taking the opening day LF job from Bader if the roster is healthy. And if it isn't he's even more likely to be starting. I don't think Lee or Julien or any of the other young guys are pushing Castro to LF on opening day or taking the DH spot so that Larnach is in LF. I think the most likely answer is Bader starts in LF with Castro at 2B and Larnach at DH.