Ryan Kreidler's Arrival Should Lead to James Outman's Exit

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

This is usually the part where I get shouted down. It's a dial not a switch. It doesn't have to be either or. It shouldn't be either or.  

Erod could get 5 games a week. Larnach could get 5 games a week. Wallner could get 5 games a week. Martin can get 5 games a week. Bell could get 5 games a week. Buxton could still play damn close to every day with the occasional DH day or rest day.  

That is 5 players for 4 positions. LF, RF, 1B and DH. Each player sits 1 game out of 4. That will not kill Erod's development. It will allow him to compete with Larnach and Wallner. It will allow him to show that he deserves everyday playing time like Buxton gets or it will allow him to struggle and figure out what he needs to learn for the future. 

It's a dial... not a switch.

How does almost everybody get themselves into the mindset that it's Larnach every day or Larnach being called awful things and tossed completely overboard for no return. Why is there nothing in between playing everyday and not a playing a single day. 

 

This is not 5 players for 4 positions.

Bell is not competing for LF or RF playing time. His 5 games a week must come at 1b or DH. And realistically, his bat must be in the lineup every day. Scratch him from your scenario, other than any DH time reduces opportunity for the other 4..

Conversely, none of the other 4 factor in 1B playing time. Wallner, ERod, Larnach, and Martin are competing for RF/LF and DH...if DH is never covered by Bell, Buxton, Jeffers, or Caratini. Lets say 6 games, 12 OF spots avaliable per week and 4 DH spots--total of 16. That leaves 4 starts per week, if you let all of them switch between RF and LF willy nilly and minimize others at DH. Realistically, though, they're not going to put Martin in right. Probably not putting Wallner in left, and I have no idea what flexibility there is with ERod...all of which further complicates getting even 4 starts per week.

All 4 are taking up 26 man spots,  leaving 8 to cover CF, 3rd, SS, 2nd, and 2 catchers. You have in effect 2 bench spots left.

 

Edited 13 hours ago by USAFChief

[Riverbrian]

49 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

This is not 5 players for 4 positions.

Bell is not competing for LF or RF playing time. His 5 games a week must come at 1b or DH. And realistically, his bat must be in the lineup every day. Scratch him from your scenario, other than any DH time reduces opportunity for the other 4..

Conversely, none of the other 4 factor in 1B playing time. Wallner, ERod, Larnach, and Martin are competing for RF/LF and DH...if DH is never covered by Bell, Buxton, Jeffers, or Caratini. Lets say 6 games, 12 OF spots avaliable per week and 4 DH spots--total of 16. That leaves 4 starts per week, if you let all of them switch between RF and LF willy nilly and minimize others at DH. Realistically, though, they're not going to put Martin in right. Probably not putting Wallner in left, and I have no idea what flexibility there is with ERod...all of which further complicates getting even 4 starts per week.

All 4 are taking up 26 man spots,  leaving 8 to cover CF, 3rd, SS, 2nd, and 2 catchers. You have in effect 2 bench spots left.

 

For complete clarity. Even if I layed things out equally in the post. It doesn't have to be exactly equal. My post was just a starting point for a dial not a switch. Dial up or dial down based on performance. 

I just question which players should be dialed all the way up to everyday designation. I question the either or mentality with nothing in between.    

Ok... If you want Bell to play everyday. Play him everyday at 1B. Now we are talking about 4 players Larnach, Wallner, Erod and Martin for 3 positions LF, RF and DH. Playing 3 out of 4 isn't going to hinder the development of anyone. It isn't going to rust a veteran either. Now consider that 3 out of 4 a dial and not a switch. 

Personally... I love the start that Bell has had for us... I also love the start that Larnach has had for us. I'd like them both in the lineup as long as they are getting themselves on base like they have been. I'm loving what I'm seeing out of Martin as well. However... we still have 140 games to go and you and I have watched players look different in June compared to how they look in April. We still don't know who is next to hit the injured list... we just know that players are going to hit the injured list.     

Bell every day? Bell currently has a .799 OPS in 2026 and that is wonderful but he is also a guy that has produced merely decent OPS numbers of .744 .725 and .741 the 3 seasons prior at the DH and 1B positions. We can't treat Bell like he is irreplaceable like like he is Freeman, Vlad Jr or Olson. We shouldn't treat Larnach or Wallner like they are irreplaceable either. Like the Twins can't do better than merely decent.

It's a dial not a switch. If this team can't find playing time for young players because merely decent can't be taken out of the lineup.

We will be complaining evermore. 

     

 

[JADBP]

On 4/19/2026 at 10:03 PM, JADBP said:

Arguing over Outman vs Kreidler vs. Lee vs. Larnach/Wallner/whoever is just a waste of energy.  The argument is when do you bring up the next outfield in AAA?

We all know it is enormously challenging to jump from AAA to MLB and we expect Emma/Jenkins/Gonzo/C-pepper to stumble when they show up.  But I would MUCH RATHER pay to watch our them than watch any of Outman/Kreidler/Lee and most especially Wallner.  

At some point Zoll has to grow up and know that he is now running the show, not Falvey.  He needs to put his big boy pants on and make his own decisions, not repeat the same crap that Falvey did.  He needs to learn that some players just are not gonna succeed in MLB, no matter where they were drafted.  He has to let them go (Outman, Wallner, etc) or send them down for retraining (Lee, maybe Lewis?).  He has to be able to let go.  Every once in a while he will lose a Brent Rooker or Spencer Steer, but that should not stop him from moving on from some players.  If Rooker has a good career elsewhere, so be it.  You tried.  I'm OK giving Lewis and Lee types more time (and maybe some specialized AAA time), but it the Wallner, Outman, Kreidler, group needs to be gone.  They are doing more harm than good to the current and the future team.

You guys may disagree, but this was the problem with Falvey/Rocco.  Why does this team keep repeating failed attempts with players (Manual Margot going 0 for 30)?  How many times do you need to hit yourself on the head with a hammer to prove that it really does hurt?  This team holds on to one-dimensional (one-skilled) players like Outman and Wallner, letting them flail away day after day.  Its inane.  I was hopeful that the "this team will be competitive" mantra and new management might have changed this repetitive failing.  Outman and Wallner do not make the team more competitive--they make it LESS competitive.