jkcarew

Somehow there is the impression that "innings limits" is what got Graterol into the predicament he's in. And that simply "stretching him out" is the solution. No. Last year, the organization was more than willing to stretch Graterol out. But he broke down...just like he did the year before, except even earlier. It's simply not wise...not realistic to think you're getting much more than 100 innings out of Graterol...regardless of what you "want" him to be. So...how best to use the 100 innings this year...that's the question. Starting?...maybe get him to 120 innings?..some of which undoubtedly would be in the minors? That could be very useful in the first-half of the year, to be sure. Or put him in the mlb bullpen, maybe 'open' him a few times, and worry about the possibilities of converting him to a starter in a theoretical future year? Given the current window/opportunity, it's hard to argue with a plan that makes those innings available to the major-league club throughout the year...and maximizes the likelihood that they're available in the post-season, as well.

The only practical alternative would have been to have him start until Pineda returns, shut him down, and bring him back in September. And that’s probably not very realistic either. Theoretically at least, as a reliever he can be available for the entire year. We’ll see.

Things I'd like to see, but never will... Donaldson hits home run. As he rounds the bases... Video board: clip of excited Dustin Hoffman as Rain Man: "Oh-oh! Oh-oh!" Does Donaldson strike me as a guy that would appreciate the bit going in that direction? I don't think so. No, definitely not. Definitely not.

If anything, the ‘inefficiency’ is the incredibly horrible job of drafting and developing pitching that goes back several years now. Once enough bats arrived to produce a competitive club, this regime has been forced to get creative in putting a pitching staff together...especially given the financial parameters they are required to work with.

Sometimes the defensive metrics are ridiculously misleading. Sometimes they tell you what you already know. At first glance, OAA seems to fall into the latter category.

Sign-stealing is an advantage, we can be sure...or the players wouldn't attempt it. But how much of an advantage...and how effective is the process of steeling signs in actual practice...even in the case of video-aided steeling? We don't know. How often is the signal not relayed in time, or misunderstood? How often does the system work perfectly, and then the pitch is in the dirt or 6 inches outside? How often does the process need to reset due to the pitcher/catcher changing sequences, etc. etc? We don't really know. After all, Alex Wood was able to hold the Astros to 1 hit over 6 innings at Houston in game 4 of the 2017 series. Meanwhile, in games 2 and 7 at LA, the Astros lit up the likes of Brandon Morrow, Kenley Jansen and Yu Darvish without the electronics in place. Like most scandals in sports and society, the guilty parties will be remembered as much for the cover-ups, the denying, and the lies, lies, lies...as much as the act itself. If the Black Sox, or Pete Rose, or Steroids would have occurred in the era of blogs, Twitter, and Instagram...absolute armageddon. To be sure, none of these things were good for baseball. But major-league baseball has never been perfect...or anywhere close. (And it's not like the NBA/NFL or any other sport or institution involving humans shines in comparison.) Will passionate fans ever agree on the punishments? No. But, I'm moving on already. If I can live with the record books showing Barry Bonds with 762 HR's, I can live with them showing the 2017 WS champions as the Houston Astros.

Yes, infield defense is important (although it's becoming less important all the time). It's just not nearly as important as infield offense.

I like Buxton right where he is...9th...especially against right-handed starters. But, you need to make a lineup for a third 'main' scenario...with Avila starting at catcher against a right-handed starter. Garver will start practically every game against a left-handed starter...and he and Avila will split starts against right-handed starters. It's not inconceivable that Avila will make more starts against right-handed starters than will Garver (not by a lot, of course). And we know on Garver's off days, Rocco is unlikely to play Garver at first-base or even DH. Against Right-Handed Starters, Avila playing catcher... 1. Luis Arráez ( L ) - 2B 2. Jorge Polanco (S) - SS 3. Max Kepler (L) - RF 4. Nelson Cruz ( R) DH 5. Josh Donaldson ( R ) - 3B 6. Eddie Rosario (L) - LF 7. Miguel Sano ( R ) - 1B 8. Alex Avila (L) - C 9. Byron Buxton ( R) - CF

Mrs. Hansen called from 8th grade English in 1974. She says... "of which they aren't taking advantage". But, yes.

This illustrates a great point that can't be overstated... The playoffs is about the top end of your pitching staff...both starters and relievers. The bottoms of the rotation/bullpen are barely used. The match-ups are strength against strength. "Deep", "balanced", "solid" are descriptors of pitching staffs that will win you division titles and get you to the post-season. Studs are what will bring you home once you get there.

Accumulated bWAR in seasons where primarily playing first-base for Twins.. Hrbek------------38.6 Killebrew--------25.3 (Lot of Killebrew's WAR was 3B/OF...and/or Senators) Morneau---------23.2 Carew------------21.5 It would be just fine for Sano to knock two or three of these guys down a peg before he's done

Definitely will be interesting to see what Donaldson't impact on the clubhouse will be. Club definitely took on a bit of the 'laid back' vibe last year...reflecting, at least to some extent, Rocco's relaxed/cerebral style. Donaldson is anything but laid back. I'm not much of a 'clubhouse' guy...at the professional level, teams tend to win or lose based on how well they hit, pitch, and field...not how well they get along or how much they hang out together. Still, could be very interesting.

It's questionable, give where he is in his career, that Donaldson will have a year with the Twins that would exceed what the Twins got from prime Gaetti or prime Koskie. Still, it seems very reasonable to expect something in that general area for a year or two...if he remains healthy. Definitely could be a huge boost to a club that has a chance to seriously compete for a pennant.

So, defense was the difference in the postseason last year?

I like it. Now make the pitching move prior to the start of the season. Already have help coming near the deadline, but very thin to start the year. Turns out that negotiating smartly looks a lot like negotiating cheaply. Who knew.

There have been many world series won by teams with first-baseman that had no defensive skill whatsoever other than that they could catch a ball thrown to them. Almost every major-league player (almost) has that skill. A wizard at first is nice, fun to watch, but not a necessity. The first-baseman needs to hit. The best argument for not acquiring Castellanos IMO is the argument that his aggressiveness (over-aggressiveness) is not an ideal fit for our lineup. Definitely could use another guy for the middle of the lineup that has some good plate discipline, and Castellanos ain't that.

It's the quintessential Minnesota thing to assume that the reason your teams lose is because something unfair happened during the game/season...and that your team is never guilty of anything. As a life-long Minnesotan I can attest that there's nothing more Minnesotan than that. It's the way we remain so proud of all those division titles and playoff "appearances". Would I rather finish 2nd honestly than in 1st dishonestly. 100%. But, let's not lose track of the fact that the Twins primary challenge over the last decade-plus has been both lack of commitment and lack of execution. Not external factors.

There were two players the Twins initially failed to reach deals with prior to the arb deadline. Sano and Berrios. Seems pretty likely that the reason for that was the club and player/agent were focusing on extension negotiations before resorting to spending time and effort on narrower discussions to avoid arbitration. Sano got finished very quickly. Not yet with Berrios. We'll see. If anything, I'd be worrying about the other arbitration-eligible core pieces that reached 'easy' agreements prior to arbitration (e.g., Buxton). At least with Berrios we have possible indications that both parties are currently willing to spend time on longer-term discussions.

I think a lot of the debate on this thread is caused by this statement in the article: "if the Twins are intent on moving Miguel Sanó to first base to improve the defense". That's an unnecessarily narrow premise. What about if the Twins want to improve the offense?...or better, improve overall? They don't have two corner infielders (of the proven major-league variety). The question should be...do any of the 3rd-basemen in the article make the Twins a better overall team, with Sano at first...that they would be with Sano at 3rd and player x at first? Clearly, the answer is YES for some of the options in the article...even considering any of the current possibilities for player X. So, IMO...as always...it comes down to the cost for Arenado, Seager, Bryant, Donaldson.

Front office is going to have some explaining to do if they trade for Donaldson.

But you need a first-baseman and a third-baseman. IMO, the Twins should be exploring a proven first-baseman or a proven third baseman for 2020. Can they slap a rookie in there...or a bench player...or Garver? Well, there's been no indication that the Twins want Garver to play first-base on 'rest' days. A current bench player would make the entire lineup less deep and less flexible. And slapping a rookie into a premier offensive position for a contending team...that's probably pretty risky as well.

But, why? The Twins don't have both a third-baseman and a first-baseman. They either need a first-baseman or a third-baseman. The season starts in 2 1/2 months. That's a fairly big deal for a team that is expected to compete for a pennant. Meanwhile, using anything other than a proven player to fill the gap in a year where the team has a chance to seriously contend....well, I would expect the topic of what to do about third (or first) isn't going away anytime real soon.

Good deal. No-brainer for the Twins. More team-friendly than I imagined would be the case for Sano at this particular point in time. But who knows what motivates each guy.

I'm sure Sano could play first base beyond 30 years of age. But, more importantly, I don't care how old my first baseman or DH are if they can hit. The Twins paid $14M to a 38 year-old to play DH last year. It was worth it...because even at first-base/DH, there's a huge difference between good-hitting and great-hitting. Sano's not a 'great hitter' at this point, but he's trending well...and his power is anything but 'available every off-season'. With regard to "lock yourself in". The Twins committed only one additional year.

Last season, as a whole, was a huge success as a step toward legitimately competing for a pennant. I think some (including me) have tried to make the point that additional steps just as significant need to follow...that the 'failure' of the post-season was real. It wasn't bad luck. It was indicative of the significant gap that remains (from the top teams) is real...despite the considerable ground that was gained. Nothing wrong with fans celebrating 2019 and a future that looks much brighter than it has for some time. But, the FO should be looking at the 2019 post-season...and the season-long challenges against teams with winning records...not the number '101'. Can some of the gap be made up from further steps for current/internal options? Possibly. But, IMO (and I think in the opinion of others as well), the 2019 results exemplify exactly why the FO should be helping with immediate (2020), needle-moving, moves. So far, that hasn't happened.