Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Hayes: "The [Minnesota] Twins Have Expressed Interest In adding A Veteran Shortstop"


    Matthew Lenz

    The Minnesota Twins might not be done yet. Dan Hayes of The Athletic is reporting that “multiple league sources confirmed the Twins have expressed interest in adding a veteran shortstop, recently inquiring about free agents Luis Urías and Paul DeJong.” Let’s get into it.

    Image courtesy of Urias (left): © Steven Bisig-Imagn Images; DeJong (right): © Jay Biggerstaff-Imagn Images

    Twins Video

    Let’s start by quickly getting to know Luis Urías and Paul DeJong. Urías played for the Seattle Mariners in 2024, but spent most of the season at Triple-A Tacoma Relatively speaking, he is a bat-first utility infielder, but in reality, he’s a below-average producer on both sides of the ball. In 41 games and 109 plate appearances, he carried a .697 OPS with four home runs, a high strikeout rate, and a low walk rate.

    If you’re not impressed by his hit tool (you shouldn’t be), you’ll be even less impressed with his glove. He's only nominally or vestigially a shortstop; he hasn’t played there since spending 200 innings as an injury replacement in Milwaukee during the 2022 season. Even then, it was ugly. While Hayes may have had this related to him as interest in a shortstop, Urías would be much more about giving the team another plausible option at second and third base.

    DeJong spent time with the Chicago White Sox and Kansas City Royals last year, and had a far more productive year at the plate—but he has similarly concerning strikeout and walk rates. In addition to being a better bat, he brings a better glove as well, and played both middle infield positions in 2024. I think most would agree DeJong moves the needle quite a bit more than Urías. DeJong might cost them as much as Harrison Bader did. Urías is likely to sign a minor-league deal.

    Regardless of whether they end up signing either player (or anyone akin to them), what can we make of this news? My first reaction to this news was to think of two guys on the roster who primarily backed up Carlos Correa in 2024: Willi Castro and Brooks Lee. Regarding Lee, this report tells me that the Twins must not like the prospect of him playing shortstop. While multiple scouting reports suggest he could be an average shortstop at the big-league level, he posted a negative rating in multiple defensive metrics during his 200-plus innings there as a rookie. Thinking about Castro, who played 465 innings at short in 2024, led me to a bigger question which was: “where is all of this money coming from!?”

    It’s been a weird offseason to follow, as we initially believed that the Twins wouldn’t be reducing payroll below the $130 million they carried in 2024 but that, due to arbitration and other raises (Pablo López, e.g.), they would need to cut roughly $10 million in salary to get down to that number. Then there was the announcement that the Pohlads were exploring a sale of the team, and many thought that could mean two things:

    1. The Twins aren’t going to make any expensive moves that might deter a prospective ownership group; and/or 
    2. They may look to offload a bigger salary (i.e., López or Correa) to make the finances of the organization appear more attractive.

    We were never going to get a clear answer to those hypotheses unless they actually happened. Last week, Hayes reported that the Twins had roughly $5 million in leeway to their 2025 payroll. Now the Twins have added over $9 million in payroll, and are reportedly looking to add more? Assuming some sort of move for a backup shortstop comes to fruition, the Twins have more up their sleeve, and Jamie Cameron is asking the right questions.

    What it likely means for at least one of Chris Paddack, Christian Vázquez, and Willi Castro is that their days with the Twins are numbered. Each of them has been the subject of trade speculation for the entire offseason simply, because they carry salaries north of $6 million for the 2025 season. This speculation grew bigger after yesterday’s signing of Harrison Bader, and will likely only grow as we hear rumblings about their contingency plan at shortstop. Or maybe they’re thinking of zigging, when everyone else is thinking of zagging, like Nate Palmer suggests.

    We’ve also talked about the redundancy of Matt Wallner and Trevor Larnach on this team, as two corner outfielders who struggle against left-handed pitching. Might they view Castro as more of an outfielder, given his poor infield defense, making one of Wallner or Larnach expendable? Given their age and controllability, it’s definitely possible the Twins could be trying to tie one of those two to one of the three contracts above to try and complete a deal that is more than just a salary dump. In fact, recently, I suggested that now is the time to trade Larnach, arguing that his value will never be higher.

    After a quiet offseason, the last week or so has been fun. We have moves to analyze and speculation to run with. However, at the end of the day, it’s just speculation. We can read tea leaves all we want, but this front office has always kept their cards close to their vest, so we likely won’t get any answers until corresponding moves are made.


    What do you make of the Twins trying to add a backup shortstop? Join the conversation in the comments!

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

    During the time of Garlick... Kyle was the only short sider on the roster. Kyle Garlick didn't cost 6 million. He cost the minimum.

    The Twins have taken it up a notch since then... actually all of the notches... utilizing 6 roster spots the past few years.  

    We have transformed from one guy at the minimum to over 10 million spent annually for the full allotment. 

    The article guy that the Twins sign will most likely be able to play SS but... take it to the bank... article guy will be right handed and he will pair with Julien at 2B. 

     

    Which of the six spots were not good back-ups?  Margot was bad.  Santana, Salano, and Taylor were quite good.  Farmer was good in 2023, bad in 2024.  Gallo was adequate given we ended up needing the coverage at 1B.  Does Sanchez count among these additions?  Which players are you thinking of other than Margot that had a substantial number of PAs and failed? 

    1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

    Which of the six spots were not good back-ups?  Margot was bad.  Santana, Salano, and Taylor were quite good.  Farmer was good in 2023, bad in 2024.  Gallo was adequate given we ended up needing the coverage at 1B.  Does Sanchez count among these additions?  Which players are you thinking of other than Margot that had a substantial number of PAs and failed? 

    Gallo was terrible. If we can't agree on that, I'm confused

    1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

    Gallo was terrible. If we can't agree on that, I'm confused

    Granted, he was a great example of a 3 outcome hitter but his OPS and wRC+ were slightly above average.  Without looking up his defensive stats, he looked perfectly adequate on defense, and his ability as an above average 1B turned out to be needed.   So no, I would not agree he was terrible.  He is also one of several discussed here, let's not ignore the originally stated position that all of these players have been a waste of a roster spot.  Santana, Solano, and Taylor were all quite good.  Sanchez and Farmer were decent too.  The only player of this ilk that got a significant number of PAa was Margot.  Can we agree that while some of these players have been a bust, there have also been inexpensive veterans that have provided value.   

    4 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

    Granted, he was a great example of a 3 outcome hitter but his OPS and wRC+ were slightly above average. 

    Normally aggregate numbers tell the story.  I'm not a big believer in separating out "clutch" from "non-clutch" performers.  However, anecdotal evidence while watching games led me to question Gallo's seeming "ability" to crank out homers only when the game was NOT on the line, and b-r.com's splits confirmed to my satisfaction (bases occupied situations, and Win Probability added) that not only was this a problem in his time with the Twins but for a time before that.  One of the few players I have pigeonholed as less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts on offense.

    2 minutes ago, ashbury said:

    Normally aggregate numbers tell the story.  I'm not a big believer in separating out "clutch" from "non-clutch" performers.  However, anecdotal evidence while watching games led me to question Gallo's seeming "ability" to crank out homers only when the game was NOT on the line, and b-r.com's splits confirmed to my satisfaction (bases occupied situations, and Win Probability added) that not only was this a problem in his time with the Twins but for a time before that.  One of the few players I have pigeonholed as less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts on offense.

    It may have been you that mentioned this last year and I completely agree.  He was able to hit when it did not matter.  However, his mediocrity does not support the contention that moderate priced free agent veterans are a waste of a roster spot and this is from a pretty darn pro prospect fan.

    53 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

    It may have been you that mentioned this last year and I completely agree.  He was able to hit when it did not matter.  However, his mediocrity does not support the contention that moderate priced free agent veterans are a waste of a roster spot and this is from a pretty darn pro prospect fan.

    I wasn't addressing your larger point, merely your assertion that Gallo wasn't terrible.  In my book, Gallo was Margot-level terrible - he harms his team's chances to win, season after season.  I'm glad he was not here more than one season, but I'm not glad he was here in the first place.

    9 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

    Which of the six spots were not good back-ups?  Margot was bad.  Santana, Salano, and Taylor were quite good.  Farmer was good in 2023, bad in 2024.  Gallo was adequate given we ended up needing the coverage at 1B.  Does Sanchez count among these additions?  Which players are you thinking of other than Margot that had a substantial number of PAs and failed? 

    First off all... I don't use the word back-up. With the amount of injuries that the Twins suffer year after year... use of the word backup is problematic. Regardless, I don't believe Gallo, Taylor and Santana belong in any backup conversation no matter how the word backup is intended. 

    I think Taylor was brought on board to play CF full time because Buxton didn't play a single inning in the field that year. Buxton was going to be the DH exclusively that season and that is exactly what he did. 

    Gallo... I believe was brought on board to play LF primarily full time and occasional 1B if needed. 

    I believe Santana was signed to play 1B full time. 

    Solano might have been brought on board for platoon work... not totally sure. Although, his splits are almost neutral and I gotta question any decision by any front office to bring in SOLANO to platoon at 1B. That would make no sense... Regardless... I have no complaint with Donnie Barrels... Yeah... he did nothing for a future but I do not question that he did something for our present at the very least.  

    The platooning to the degree that we platoon...  as we know it... or at least I know it. Seemed to begin when Wallner and Julien arrived. Gordon/Farmer seemed like the only platoon set up coming out of spring training. The club maxed out later in 2023 when the young developing left handed hitters arrived.  

     

     

     

     

     




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...