Luke Keaschall Expands His Defensive Toolbox

[arby58]

2 hours ago, karcherd said:

 This isn't a board game where you can just move players around because it sounds like a good idea.

In fact, this IS a game where you can just move players around.  Most teams have a player or two they can just 'move around' as needed. 

It isn't a brand new thing either. I remember the 1968 World Series, where Detroit manager Mayo Smith made the gutsy move of OF Mickey Stanley to SS - the criticism then sort of sounds this now. It worked out well, as it allowed Al Kaline (who had been injured) to return to RF and keep Jim Northrup in the lineup (he had a breakout year when Kaline went down). In the series, Stanley went 11-29, scored 4 runs, and had 8 RBIs. Kaline has said they probably wouldn't have won the series without that move by Stanley - who had played there in just 9 games that year. While he mostly played OF the rest of his career (and won 4 gold gloves), he did play 59 games at SS in 1969.

[HarmonK03]

40 minutes ago, arby58 said:

In fact, this IS a game where you can just move players around.  Most teams have a player or two they can just 'move around' as needed. 

It isn't a brand new thing either. I remember the 1968 World Series, where Detroit manager Mayo Smith made the gutsy move of OF Mickey Stanley to SS - the criticism then sort of sounds this now. It worked out well, as it allowed Al Kaline (who had been injured) to return to RF and keep Jim Northrup in the lineup (he had a breakout year when Kaline went down). In the series, Stanley went 11-29, scored 4 runs, and had 8 RBIs. Kaline has said they probably wouldn't have won the series without that move by Stanley - who had played there in just 9 games that year. While he mostly played OF the rest of his career (and won 4 gold gloves), he did play 59 games at SS in 1969.

Yes having one or two versatile guys can be helpful, but we are talking about Keaschall.  And they are not talking about getting a Kaline or Northrup into the lineup, they are talking about getting Clemens into the lineup.  That makes no sense and you know it.  The backup shortstop will be the utility player, you don't need every player to play multiple positions.

[ashbury]

11 minutes ago, karcherd said:

Yes having one or two versatile guys can be helpful, but we are talking about Keaschall.  And they are not talking about getting a Kaline or Northrup into the lineup, they are talking about getting Clemens into the lineup.  That makes no sense and you know it.  The backup shortstop will be the utility player, you don't need every player to play multiple positions.

I like both sides of this discussion.  To buttress Arby's point I was about to bring up Pete Rose, who rather bravely took on the 3B role with almost zero prior experience there and it was instrumental in the Big Red Machine finally breaking through for a WS win in 1975,  But the upshot of moving Pete from LF was to replace not-ready-for-primetime (and miscast at 3B) Dan Driessen in the lineup with George Foster.

Like you say, the move has to be for a bigger purpose than optimizing some Terry Crowley / John Vukovich type's usage.

If Clemens has a breakthrough 5+ WAR season at age 30 I'll happily eat those words, of course.

[HarmonK03]

14 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I like both sides of this discussion.  To buttress Arby's point I was about to bring up Pete Rose, who rather bravely took on the 3B role with almost zero prior experience there and it was instrumental in the Big Red Machine finally breaking through for a WS win in 1975,  But the upshot of moving Pete from LF was to replace not-ready-for-primetime (and miscast at 3B) Dan Driessen in the lineup with George Foster.

Like you say, the move has to be for a bigger purpose than optimizing some Terry Crowley / John Vukovich type's usage.

If Clemens has a breakthrough 5+ WAR season at age 30 I'll happily eat those words, of course.

I agree with your points here.  The difference, they are not talking about moving Keaschall to LF.  This article is about having him play some LF along with 2B.  And the reason to do this is to get Clemens in the lineup.  Even for one game, this is misguided, if 2B is his position  Let him play there every day and learn the position and get better at it.  Now if Lee and Culpepper are both just raking and we need their bat's in the lineup and the corner outfielders are not producing then I would be in favor of moving Keaschall to LF on a permanent basis to get the better bats in the lineup.  But just for a game here and there to get a lesser bat in the lineup, why would you do that.

[ashbury]

4 minutes ago, karcherd said:

I agree with your points here.  The difference, they are not talking about moving Keaschall to LF.  This article is about having him play some LF along with 2B.  And the reason to do this is to get Clemens in the lineup.  Even for one game, this is misguided, if 2B is his position  Let him play there every day and learn the position and get better at it.  Now if Lee and Culpepper are both just raking and we need their bat's in the lineup and the corner outfielders are not producing then I would be in favor of moving Keaschall to LF on a permanent basis to get the better bats in the lineup.  But just for a game here and there to get a lesser bat in the lineup, why would you do that.

I'd be simply repeating myself to address your valid concerns - just go back and look at my post regarding Klemens on the first page of this thread.

[TL]

Agree with the sentiment that displacing him for Clemens isn’t the best idea (Clements can play LF too). But, looking ahead Keaschall may value versatility on the chance that 2 of Lee, Culpepper, Houston and the #3 draft pick (likely a SS) are locking down the middle infield due to superior defense. His best path to a full time starting spot may actually be first base starting next year.

[NYCTK]

16 hours ago, arby58 said:

In fact, this IS a game where you can just move players around.  Most teams have a player or two they can just 'move around' as needed. 

It isn't a brand new thing either. I remember the 1968 World Series, where Detroit manager Mayo Smith made the gutsy move of OF Mickey Stanley to SS - the criticism then sort of sounds this now. It worked out well, as it allowed Al Kaline (who had been injured) to return to RF and keep Jim Northrup in the lineup (he had a breakout year when Kaline went down). In the series, Stanley went 11-29, scored 4 runs, and had 8 RBIs. Kaline has said they probably wouldn't have won the series without that move by Stanley - who had played there in just 9 games that year. While he mostly played OF the rest of his career (and won 4 gold gloves), he did play 59 games at SS in 1969.

I just don't understand why a bunch of people on this website have seemingly never watched baseball before. A 2B also playing the OF is such a regular occurance in baseball, and always has been. 

Reading these complaints is like listening to people complain about the weather. People love to complain, they need to complain about something. 

[NYCTK]

15 hours ago, ashbury said:

I like both sides of this discussion.  To buttress Arby's point I was about to bring up Pete Rose, who rather bravely took on the 3B role with almost zero prior experience there and it was instrumental in the Big Red Machine finally breaking through for a WS win in 1975,  But the upshot of moving Pete from LF was to replace not-ready-for-primetime (and miscast at 3B) Dan Driessen in the lineup with George Foster.

Like you say, the move has to be for a bigger purpose than optimizing some Terry Crowley / John Vukovich type's usage.

If Clemens has a breakthrough 5+ WAR season at age 30 I'll happily eat those words, of course.

We watched that in the world series this last season. Bo Bichette played 2B for the first time in 6 years or something like that. 

It's not bad practice to move players around. In fact, it's bad practice to refuse to do so. 

[USAFChief]

13 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

I just don't understand why a bunch of people on this website have seemingly never watched baseball before. A 2B also playing the OF is such a regular occurance in baseball, and always has been. 

Reading these complaints is like listening to people complain about the weather. People love to complain, they need to complain about something. 

Complete hogwash.

I've watched a lot of baseball. 

Learning and playing a regular position has always been the norm in baseball. Supplement that by finding a utility player that, while not good enough to hold down a regular spot, is good enough to fill in for a regular (ideally at multiple spots on the field) to be acceptable when necessary. 

What's not normal, nor do I believe beneficial, is to have a team full of players who learn no position, rather are thrown around the diamond willy-nilly. 

Have players learn the most important defensive position they can handle. Then leave them there. When they can't be in the lineup, find a replacement, but leave the rest of the positions alone as much as possible.  There's zero need to weaken multiple positions just because one player is missing. And there's zero need to live with substandard defense solely in the misguided name of "flexibility."

That has NOT been the norm throughout history. It shouldn't be the norm now.

[NYCTK]

35 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I've watched a lot of baseball. 

Well your stream of commentary betrays this fact. 

Your opening comment is just "Old Man Yells At Cloud" level of discourse. 

[Linus]

There are some (few) players who can play multiple positions reasonably well. The Twins mistake is thinking that every player can do it. 

[RpR]

It would be sad to have a rookie who CAN hit Major League pitching quite well but whose glove work is as steady as a knuckle ball.

[arby58]

On 3/8/2026 at 1:26 PM, USAFChief said:

Learning and playing a regular position has always been the norm in baseball. Supplement that by finding a utility player that, while not good enough to hold down a regular spot, is good enough to fill in for a regular (ideally at multiple spots on the field) to be acceptable when necessary. 

Check out the top 7 non-pitching prospects at MLB.com. Here's the list and their 'position"

1. Connor Griffin, SS/OF
2. Kevin McGonigle, SS
3. Jesus Made, SS/2B
4. Leo DeVries, SS
5. JJ Wetherholt, INF
7. Sebastian Walcott, SS/3B
8. Samuel Bassallo, C/1B

Only two of the top seven are listed at one posiiton (unless you think INF is one position). I doubt any of these players is being groomed to be 'just' a utility player. Sort of flies in the face of your 'norm in baseball.'

[jorgenswest]

Is it possible they are still hoping to find a position that fits other than 1B/DH? .

The Twins have drafted Steer, Encarnacion-Strand, Julien and now Keaschall. All college infielders. It shouldn’t be surprising that they have had a difficult time finding a position that fits. They didn’t finish college at shortstop. Major league second basemen almost all were drafted as shortstops and started their minor league careers as a shortstop.

[stringer bell]

.Luke Keaschall played infield and outfield prior to having elbow surgery. He played second base exclusively in the field in 2025 as he was recovering arm strength. His defense at second base was below average. 

Because he profiles as a solid or better offensive player, it may be just fine for Luke to play other positions and perhaps settle on one that is not second base. Personally, I think he may end up as a first baseman when all is said and done. Not every player can be Willi Castro versatile and trying to make Keaschall into that would most likely be a mistake. However, being able to move him to another position to get a better defender in the game could be a good idea.

Given the Twins' current roster, I really don't see much opportunity for Keaschall to go to left field and if the choice is to move Keaschall to get Clemens in a game, just move Clemens to left field. I don't think he is that superior to Keaschall at second.

I think with work and sufficient reps, Keaschall can be at least adequate at second base. I'm not sure the Twins feel that way though. 

[Major League Ready]

14 hours ago, arby58 said:

Check out the top 7 non-pitching prospects at MLB.com. Here's the list and their 'position"

1. Connor Griffin, SS/OF
2. Kevin McGonigle, SS
3. Jesus Made, SS/2B
4. Leo DeVries, SS
5. JJ Wetherholt, INF
7. Sebastian Walcott, SS/3B
8. Samuel Bassallo, C/1B

Only two of the top seven are listed at one posiiton (unless you think INF is one position). I doubt any of these players is being groomed to be 'just' a utility player. Sort of flies in the face of your 'norm in baseball.'

The two that are listed at one position play a premium position (SS).  Organizations are reluctant to move guys off SS.  They give them every opportunity just like the Twins did with Lewis, Martin, and Lee.  A very high percentage of guys listed as (SS) end up playing elsewhere.  If you look at the scouting reports, McGonigle and LeVries, it's quite possible they get moved to a different position. 

I would think Keaschall's greatest value would be to back-up CF.  

[arby58]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

The two that are listed at one position play a premium position (SS).  Organizations are reluctant to move guys off SS.  They give them every opportunity just like the Twins did with Lewis, Martin, and Lee.  A very high percentage of guys listed as (SS) end up playing elsewhere.  If you look at the scouting reports, McGonigle and LeVries, it's quite possible they get moved to a different position. 

I would think Keaschall's greatest value would be to back-up CF.  

I agree with you on both why teams do it and what would be Keaschall's value to the Twins in the OF. My point, in the original post, is that teams other than the Twins do in fact do it, and not just with marginal utility-type players. 

[Mike Sixel]

5 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

The two that are listed at one position play a premium position (SS).  Organizations are reluctant to move guys off SS.  They give them every opportunity just like the Twins did with Lewis, Martin, and Lee.  A very high percentage of guys listed as (SS) end up playing elsewhere.  If you look at the scouting reports, McGonigle and LeVries, it's quite possible they get moved to a different position. 

I would think Keaschall's greatest value would be to back-up CF.  

You want one of their best hitters to be a backup and sit on the bench? 

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

You want one of their best hitters to be a backup and sit on the bench? 

I am not sure why you would come to that conclusion.  He could play every day at 2B and in the event Buxton was out, he could cover CF.  We have better back-up options at 2B than we do CF.  In theory, this would eliminate the need to roster Outman.  

[Mike Sixel]

58 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

I am not sure why you would come to that conclusion.  He could play every day at 2B and in the event Buxton was out, he could cover CF.  We have better back-up options at 2B than we do CF.  In theory, this would eliminate the need to roster Outman.  

You said his highest value is backup CF? But yes, all that makes sense. 

[Major League Ready]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

You said his highest value is backup CF? But yes, all that makes sense. 

You're right.   I did a poor job of articulating what I meant.  I meant that in terms of secondary positions, Backing up CF would be more valuable than playing a corner OF position where we have very good prospects on the horizon.  So, I guess I do know what you came to that conclusion.  My bad.  

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

You're right.   I did a poor job of articulating what I meant.  I meant that in terms of secondary positions, Backing up CF would be more valuable than playing a corner OF position where we have very good prospects on the horizon.  So, I guess I do know what you came to that conclusion.  My bad.  

I generally agree with this. 

[Riverbrian]

I'm not talking about Keaschall specifically. However... for a young player... Multi-Positions gives them more doors to walk through for a major league job. 

A young SS doesn't have to wait for Corey Seager to get traded or hurt to get a taste of the big leagues... more doors to walk through if they are multi-positional. 

If you are a player about to hit free agency. Multi-positional capability means more interest. If you are Royce Lewis... it won't just be 3B needy teams that will call him. If you can play a corner OF or 1B. More teams are interested. 

Multi-Position capability means any opportunity could be cashed in on. If the Brewers wanted to trade Brice Turang to the Twins for some reason... yeah I know... they won't... but if they did. Multi-Positional capability means you could do it. 

I'm pro flexibility. If a player can do it. Encourage it. If a player can't do it... then don't do it. It doesn't just have to be... what everybody in the world... labels as bench players. Players can move around.

Put your best SS out there. Your top defensive outfielder should play CF. You don't have to move them around for the sake of moving them around. As needed... stay fluid... get your best players in the lineup. 

I know some disagree... but these guys are ball players... best in the world ball players that are multi positional capable. 

[arby58]

16 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

Put your best SS out there. Your top defensive outfielder should play CF. You don't have to move them around for the sake of moving them around. As needed... stay fluid... get your best players in the lineup. 

I know some disagree... but these guys are ball players... best in the world ball players that are multi positional capable. 

Look at what the Cubs are doing with Matt Shaw, who had a decent rookie year at 3B but now needs another 'home' after they signed Alex Bregman. So, in 12 spring training games, he has started in right field, center field, first base, second base and third base. I guess the Cubs don't know what they are doing with young, promising players either.

[USAFChief]

31 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Look at what the Cubs are doing with Matt Shaw, who had a decent rookie year at 3B but now needs another 'home' after they signed Alex Bregman. So, in 12 spring training games, he has started in right field, center field, first base, second base and third base. I guess the Cubs don't know what they are doing with young, promising players either.

I don't wanna hear any whining about Twins defense, then.

"Anybody can play anywhere."

[arby58]

5 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I don't wanna hear any whining about Twins defense, then.

"Anybody can play anywhere."

It is an assertion without substantial proof that the root of the Twins defensive problems is players playing more than one position. Some players are not going to be good defensively at any position, and the Twins seem to have more of those than they should - that is not because 'anybody can play anywhere.'

The claim that a player can become better defensively by sticking to one position is just that - a claim. Yes, there are stories about some player who fielded hundreds of balls and became better defensively. Interestingly, many of these stories are written about players switching positions. There are examples of players who handled switches quite well on pretty much any team - and for the Twins, it goes much further back than the current regime.

Joe Mauer was a great athlete, and he made a very easy switch to 1B. Mookie Betts is a great athlete - he can play pretty much anywhere. The Cubs seem to believe that Matt Shaw has the ability to play pretty much everywhere (as did his Cubs predecessor Ben Zobrist). Luke Keaschall is fleet of foot and, prior to TJS, was thought to have a strong arm (one can hope that is again the case). Those are important traits for a centerfielder. I'd say it's worth a shot.