Brock Beauchamp

I see your point but I suspect Sano will get his fair share of DH plate appearances as well. While I expect Miguel to start the majority of games at third, I'd be surprised if he gets more than 130 games at third as Escobar rotates in pretty regularly. The more I think about this, the more I want to see Vargas get regular DH duties and occasionally rotating in Grossman based on pitching matchups. If either one stumbles, hopefully Palka will be posting good numbers in Rochester and you roll with him for awhile (ultimately, I hope he takes fourth outfielder duty from Grossman, whom I expect to regress in a bad way). As for Santana, I wonder what the front office sees in him right now. I kinda understand why they haven't cut him but I probably would have set him loose by now. I don't see where he fits on this roster. With Dozier still on the team, he's a worse version of both Escobar and Grossman, who will spend most of their time on the bench. Then again, with whom do you replace him? Guys who can play both the infield and outfield - even badly - are pretty rare. Do you go with an infielder, a glove-first outfielder, or a bat? I'd probably go with a glove-first outfielder because Grossman is so terrible in the field and Escobar, if healthy, is a competent fielder.

I know this one! "A rational conclusion based on the Constitution and 200 years of legal precedent."

I'm not crazy about picking up a DH on the free agency market but what would you rather have: Park for $9m over three years or Carter for one year at $7m? I kinda lean toward Carter, though I'm also okay with answering "none of the above".

I agree, my only "defense" of Santana is that I understand why they didn't cut him two days ago. That's as much praise as I can lay on the guy. I want him gone, I simply don't understand why people are upset Park got the boot before Santana. When you have what seems like a dozen first basemen and DH-type and one really bad utility guy, it makes sense to trim down the 1B/DH logjam before you get rid of the one really bad utility player. Ultimately, you want them all gone but you clear out the redundancies before you get rid of the only guy you have in a designated role, even if he's really bad at that role.

Sure. Agree on all points. My comment about swing rate an Rosario is basically this: Some guys are disciplined and walk. Some guys are disciplined and hit. If Rosario turns into a success story, I suspect he'll fall under the latter category. The Twins don't need him going deep into the count and grinding down a pitcher in the mold of Mauer or Sano, they just need to get him to stop swinging at pitches that bounce three feet in front of the plate. Let his athleticism make contact and drive the ball, just lay off the completely unhittable pitches.

The Twins missed on Jay? The guy hasn't exactly lit up the world but he's held his own thus far. Not a terrible performance from a guy switching from reliever to starter with only 102 professional innings under his belt.

Sure. I wouldn't fire them all at once, just saying I don't really care who goes or if, ultimately, they all go. I want to see more of Vargas but wouldn't give him much of a leash. I was interested to see more of Park but won't be too upset if I don't. I was interested to see more of Grossman but won't be too upset if I don't. I have little interest in ever seeing Danny Santana play anywhere ever again but understand why he's still on the roster as of February 4th, 2017. My hope is that changes before April 1st, 2017.

A guy who can only play first when you have a $23m first baseman on the roster (who is pretty decent with the leather) is a defensive liability. He's not a liability when he's wearing a first baseman's glove but he becomes a liability when you already have a guy wearing a first baseman's glove. The problem is compounded when you have a third guy who also could be wearing a first baseman's glove part time. And a fourth guy, too... Park absolutely competed for a position with Arcia and Plouffe. Arcia is a defensive albatross and retaining Plouffe forced you to put your best young hitter in the big green part of the field wearing a glove he'd never worn in his career. These decisions don't happen in isolation. There is a domino effect that happens throughout the roster. Arcia shouldn't have been in the outfield because he's absolutely horrible out there but Park taking DH reps forced him into left field. Sano probably shouldn't have been in the field at all but keeping both Park and Plouffe forced him not only into the field but into a position he'd never played before.

Yeah, we should probably file all league-wide talk to their respective Minnesota team forum.

To be clear, I'm not criticizing the Park acquisition as much as I'm criticizing all the decisions as a whole. If you acquire Park, then Plouffe and/or Arcia need to go. If you plan to keep them both, then don't sign Park. My point is that this roster is loaded with terrible defenders and guys who can't even wear a glove at all. I don't really care in what order they leave the organization. I hope Santana follows Park at some point but I understand why he's higher up the pecking order than guys who shouldn't have a glove on their hand at all. Seeing how the Twins had three of those guys (Grossman, Park, Vargas), trimming one of them off the roster makes a lot of sense, particularly if the front office believes Park is the least likely to be claimed. Or maybe they have zero faith in Park and hope he gets claimed so $9m comes off the books.

I agree Danny Santana should probably be off this roster but he's not going to fix the DH/1B situation, as he's not even a part of that situation. My point is that, at large, the Twins have a slew of bad fielders and guys who shouldn't be wearing a glove at all. And I don't really care which one of those guys gets the boot, but at least one of them needed to get the boot. As I mentioned earlier, I wouldn't get too upset if all of them got the boot. Well, Vargas would upset me. A little. As far as I'm concerned, close to 50% of the 40 man roster could be liquidated and I wouldn't get too upset about it.

I agree that teams can and should field 12 man pitching staffs. But, again, you need good pitchers to do it, particularly good starters. The Twins have neither good pitchers nor good starting pitchers.

Thank you for this article. I'm not sure why we're complaining that this front office is eliminating player redundancies we complained existed under the previous front office. Any single player on that list can be considered a questionable move. Some people liked Park. Some liked Turner. Some liked Walker, though I'll never understand why. When those moves are combined, I see a lot of roster movement that fixes a problem I hated about the previous front office; that they'd sit on their hands and give a mix of players 300 PAs indefinitely until that player ran out of options. And then the front office still managed to keep most of those players a year or two longer. Every team has chaff at the end of the 40 man roster but it seemed like the Twins often committed 25%+ of their 40 man to chaff. I'm glad to see many, if not all, of these players out of the organization.

While I agree a 12 man pitching staff gives the lineup a lot more flexibility, this team will not have a 12 man pitching staff most of the season. One needs good pitchers to field a 12 man pitching staff. The Twins do not have good pitchers. They have a boatload of question marks and it's likely at least half the pitching staff sees significant turnover this season. A team simply can't field a 12 man staff in this era when a "good night" is your starter pitching 6 IP with 4 ER allowed. Going from memory, the last time anyone on the Twins staff pitched 200 innings was Phil Hughes in 2014 and that guy's shoulder fell off last season. That doesn't instill faith in the rotation.

Yeah, I actually care less about Rosario's walk rate than I do his swing rate. It's likely he'll never be more than a 6% BB guy and that's okay, provided he makes contact when he swings and drops that K rate under 20%. Basically, Rosario's ceiling is probably Puckett-Lite and that's a pretty good player. The type of guy you don't mind hanging around through his arb seasons until he loses a step and/or becomes expensive. But he needs to stop swinging at everything or he's, at best, a fourth outfielder.

At that point, what do you do with Grossman? I don't mind Grossman as an occasional fourth outfielder but I'm not in love with him as the fourth outfielder. To me, it comes down to this: The team can't field a rounded roster with Grossman, Park, Vargas, Sano, and Mauer on the roster. Remove Santana and the same problem exists so Santana isn't the problem here. Mauer isn't going be waived. Vargas, outside of Sano, has the most potential of the bunch and is the youngest. He's not going to be waived. Sano is a beast but may not stick at third. That leaves Grossman and Park. Park is a better defender but only at a position that literally everyone else can play. Grossman is younger and coming off an outlier season. Waive one. Waive both. I don't care. Waive Santana. I don't care. Waive them all. I don't care. What I don't want is all of them staying on the roster and Santana is the only guy out of the group who has a remote possibility of being a defensive asset somewhere that isn't first base. And I still want to see Santana gone by April unless he's an absolute beast in Spring Training and has shown the coaching staff he's serious about playing the outfield and infield. At the very least, the guy has the ability to play those positions. The athleticism is absolutely there to do it.

My sentiments exactly.

It may be an unnecessary risk or it may be the first steps to building a more well-rounded roster that can win baseball games. The Park signing was, at best, a questionable decision by the previous front office. The Twins already had Mauer, Plouffe, Vargas, Sano, and Arcia clogging up the roster. It was a poorly designed roster with little flexibility to field a competent defensive alignment through the season. The Twins acquired Palka that offseason, who had a very nice season and will be knocking on the door in 2017. We'll say he replaces Plouffe in that bat-first logjam. The Twins jettisoned Arcia but acquired Grossman, a more balanced hitter but equally atrocious fielder. A net wash defensively and probably offensively as well. Meanwhile, Vargas had another middling season but acquired another option year for evaluation. In essence, the Twins were headed toward 2017 with the exact same issues we criticized them for in January of 2016. At some point, someone has to go. Teams can't field five guys between 3B, 1B, and DH. That leaves no space for actual roster flexibility in the outfield and infield. So Park is gone (likely, anyway). Why are we upset about this? I was fine with the Twins running with what they had, knowing full well their roster was as inflexible as it was last season, provided roster cuts happened fast and furious throughout the season. If Park or Vargas struggle, waive one or both of them no later than June. Call up Palka. If Sano can't hack third and Vargas is struggling, demote Kennys and shift Miguel to DH or a 1B platoon with Mauer. I was fine with "giving guys a chance" but I'm thoroughly sick and tired of seeing those "opportunities" span 2-3 years with 300 PAs per season. A guy either plays or he doesn't. Make a ****ing decision and stick with it. This team was chock-full of plodding mashers who hit for an extremely low average (and most had, at best, questionable plate discipline as a cherry on top of that **** sundae). Teams don't win baseball games that way any more. I'm not going to get upset if Falvey looked at that group of players, picked one, and said "this guy needs to go". And, no, I don't want to use Vargas' option year because I don't want to see this situation happen again in 2018. I don't know about the rest of you but I've had enough plodding no-glove DH types clogging the roster to last a lifetime.

Good point. Done.

John Ryan Murphy had a .413 OPS last season. When he was demoted in May, his OPS was a laughably bad .219. Jason Castro has a career .699 OPS. In 2016, his OPS was .684. His three season OPS was .660. Murphy's framing was -0.07 calls per game last season according to StatCast. Castro was +0.92 calls per game. So, no, not the same thing at all.

Another thing to think about that may or may not be a factor: The Twins have a new hitting coach in Rowson. I'm sure he's been studying film of all the players and may be weighing in on each player. It's possible he sees something in Santana and nothing in Park. As with all of the moves/non-moves that have happened this offseason, I'm giving the front office something of a pass and will base my opinion on results throughout the season.

Again, I think getting too upset about this is short-sighted unless you're really high on Park, which few of us seem to be. There are still 2+ weeks before catchers and pitchers report and nearly a month until Spring Training starts in earnest. If it ends up that Falvey swapped Park for Belisle while keeping Santana and another bullpen arm, that's probably a mistake. But if it ends up that a middling arm is is off the roster for Melotakis or the Twins pick up another arm in free agency, that makes more sense. And/or it ends up that Santana is waived before April, that makes more sense. Given the roster construction, I can see why they may want a few more weeks of evaluation on Santana. I don't really agree with the move but I kinda get it. Santana may have a place in a well-rounded team as a 24th or 25th man. Park needs to mash to deserve the vital 24/25 man space on an AL roster. Vargas is an interesting piece in his last option year. Daniel Palka had 250 decent plate appearances (.779) in Rochester last season and 350 very good plate appearances (.894) in Chattanooga. I don't see why we care that much about Byung-Ho Park. I don't know if I would have released him but I suspect this is going to look a lot like the Joe Benson, Aaron Hicks, and Oswaldo Arcia moves from past years. Fans get upset about a move, absolutely nothing comes of it. And if Park isn't claimed or traded, it's a big win for the 40 man roster.

I wonder if it's a direct result of not trading Dozier, though I struggle with the idea it's a distraction. With Dozier still on the team, this is a low OBP slug-happy lineup. I wonder if sacrificing Park is a result of Dozier still being on the roster. Time will tell with additional moves and whether the Twins strive for more lineup balance with a higher average/OBP hitter to replace Park.

I'd prefer neither but don't really care either way. Santana can play the field, albeit badly. And if the front office has no faith in Park after getting a closer look at him, I understand releasing him. I simply don't care much about any of this. If Santana looks inept in Spring Training but somehow makes the team, then maybe I'll be upset about it because the Twins will be playing games that count with a suboptimal roster. Until that day comes, "meh".

Maybe I have that backwards, going from very old reading. I'll have to dig into it more.