Riverbrian

If you believe in him... You believe in him. This contract isn't cripplin by any stretch of the imagination. If it goes bust... Oh Well... That's life. The contract isn't crippling. Now...The Super Two status... That's a little tough to swallow... .We wasted 16 days of service time in April 2016, The OF was falling apart, the team was falling apart and he got 12 AB's during this time on the bench in April. Those 16 days of bench time would have had him pretty close to the super two cutoff. I'd build a statue for Terry Ryan in his honor... but there are times like these where I would walk up to the statue and yell at it.

My issue with Grossman is two-fold and both points are the opposite of each other... My issue with Grossman is both... that we needed him in the first place and that he didn't play enough while he was here. We traded Hicks because we didn't need a 4th OF'er. We didn't sign another RH OF'er to provide insurance for Rosario, Buxton and Sano like Chief and I were asking at the time. It was May 17th, 2016. Buxton had already been sent down... Kepler was back down (he was never really up) he came up and sat bench for while with Polanco while the team crashed around them. That was the day that Grossman was signed to a minor league deal after he opted out of his minor league deal with Cleveland. That night... the Twins were playing the Tigers in Detroit. We had: Rosario in LF hitting .196 Danny Santana in CF Sano in RF We lost 7-2 to go 10-28 and Eddie Rosario was sent down to AAA leaving Sano as the LONE SURVIVOR from the opening day OF . Grossman probably doesn't get to enjoy Rochester at all because he is quickly called to the Twins. Once he was here... He was as good as we had in 2016... Still only got 389 AB's. So yeah, he probably should have played more. But, I can't stomach that he was the best we had. And we've had the chance to find better every off-season for 2017, 2018 and 2019... And we have yet to accomplish it.

Flexibility is a natural by-product of depth. The Astros have depth and they strive to keep themselves deep. Lose Marwin... Make a trade for Diaz... Problem solved. As they stand right now... they have Springer, Reddick, Marisnick, Kemp, Brantley and even Bregman who can play OF plus this Tucker Kid who is knocking on the door. They have Gurriel, White and Brantley to play 1B. Altuve, Diaz and Kemp to play 2B. Bregman, Gurriel and Diaz to play 3B. Correa, Bregman and Diaz who can play SS. They have purchased insurance for everything. They are bulletproof. Michael Cuddyer was asked at the Winter Meltdown about his playing multiple positions and he said something along the lines of "I'm a Ball Player". Austin, Cron, Duda... sign as many as you like but in the end... They can't all play 1B. Someone will have to track some flyballs or we end up being a team that has extreme depth at 1B and lacking depth every place else.

Yep... that’s why the possibility can’t be dismissed. Players are deployed based on availability all the time. Nick Senzel is learning OF as we speak because the Reds have Suarez and Scooter at 3B and 2B. The list of these type of position shifts is lengthy. No idea if he can play OF but playing 1B with Yankees would not be a trustworthy indicator in my opinion. Do I trust Molitor usage with the Twins as an indicator. I absolutely do not. Austin should have received OF time in September. He did not. I’m not ready to blame Tyler Austin’s ability for that. Lucas Duda could certainly push Austin out the door if Austin isn’t capable at a different position. Casualties like that happen all the time.

Ever since he signed with us... I've had Camptown Races in my head on repeat. He certainly can do that for me.

My wish is this From your fingertips to the eyeballs of the front office.

After last year... I worry about everybody.

If my math is right. The Twins just purchased one year of free agency and potentially a 2nd year. He should be 32 when he becomes a free agent. I believe it's a good gamble and I'm happy for Max. I'm just going to continue my perpetual hope that the Front Office recognizes the gamble for what it is and understands that the money being paid is the cost of doing business and is therefore fully prepared to not go down with the ship... if the ship goes down. If Kepler is hitting below average and still playing all 162 games just to try and justify the extension by forcing it... It will be a bad move. If Kepler is hitting below average but they allow someone else to surpass him for playing time despite the millions owed. I will be OK with the extension because... they took a shot. They rolled the dice and they can try again next year and the money does not bankrupt them. Extensions are fine... as long as the organization doesn't allow an extension to kill your team if it doesn't work out. With that said... Go Get EM MAX!!!

Who knows but restoring trade value is a big part of any equation. It isn’t just what they can do for us. You have to consider what they could also bring us.

Starters are absolutely more valuable. Good starters that is. And of course I’m talking in the traditional sense. But... Bad starters will kill you completely and consistently and teams are rolling out bad starters just to fit a traditional model. Even with modern usage. The goal is still to get more innings out of your top performers. If Romero is hanging zeros in the majors. Give him more innings to hang those zero. This effectively stretches him out regardless if he starts or comes in later. If he isn’t hanging zeros. He should go to Rochester for that reason and throw innings down there to improve. What I don’t want to see is 60 good innings when he is capable of 140 good innings. It’s a waste of 80 good innings.

I would also like to be paid the minimum MLB salary and I can't imagine myself complaining about it. At least until someone whispered in my ear and pointed out how much revenue above that minimum salary is being brought in. At least until someone whispered in my ear and pointed out that an open market for my services during my prime years would force teams that WANT TO WIN to outbid the other team for my services. I have no complaint making the minimum salary even if I'm playing for the Chicago White Sox and I hate the White Sox... But I will start complaining if the Minnesota Twins would pay me more but can't because the White Sox own my rights and they can keep me at minimum salary because they own me.

Perfectly stated. I believe you are exactly right. If I was advising the owners (I'm not). I would advise them that a little self inflicted damage would keep the advantage they hold in the next CBA and keep the peace. The current collective bargaining agreement (in my opinion) is already in the owner's favor. I believe this because the owners basically control players past the age of 30 in most cases. The players association seems to be OK with this... as long as they get paid when they gain free agency. As long as Ricky Nolasco gets 48 million... they keep signing a similar document each negotiation session. Once the Nolasco types are forced to settle for a 1 year 3 million deal instead... they have basically taken the entire pie now. It's like a smack upside the head to the players union...with a strong message that they didn't do a good job negotiating the last CBA... with a strong message that ownership will take advantage of their mistakes... with a strong message that they wrongly trusted things to remain the same. The sleeping bear was poked. Offense makes people play defense. The players are now witnessing in real time with actual events that they have given their prime years away during a time when the front offices are weighting their pay scale based upon what they are underpaid during their prime years. Like I said earlier... A little self inflicted damage (willingness to compensate the players who make it to free agency and compensate them above what their metrics suggest) would help keep the peace. I've used this analogy before. If England would have allowed Representation while levying taxes... Does the revolutionary war happen? England took it all, therefore forcing the colonists to fight back (AND WE WON). Taking advantage of the players union mistake will only lead them to try and correct the mistake. It's going to be ugly and it will end up being the owners fault in my opinion. The players won't stand for minimum compensation with no control over the outcome during their prime years if the free agent reward for giving up that control has been taken away.

Here's what I imagine in my head. I could be wrong... I could be right. All teams have increased analytic departments. A collection of smart people will eventually get around to analyzing the value of every free agent ever signed. They will look at the money spent and the production received for that money spent. At the same time they will get around to analyzing the money spent and the production of players that haven't reached free agency. They will then look at both sets of numbers and compare. The end result is the end of free agency as we know it. I feel fine

I know you do and I get your point. Everybody is doing the analytic thing these days. They are going to have to take this thing to a different level beyond that. Jury is still out. You just shocked some of us with the take Ryan back comment.

It's not just the immediate metro. Seattle also gets Portland. Minnesota has the Twins Cities and a lot of towns with Grain Elevators. That's why MLB has to force team relocation's or possible expansion cities. Every market has been claimed by the existing franchises as part of their territory. The Mariners are going to fight tooth and nail to keep Portland from getting a franchise just like the Orioles fought the Expos move to D.C. The commissioners office and the other owners had to basically cram it down the Orioles throat. The Giants were able to stop the A's from moving to San Jose. Atlanta has the South claimed. St. Louis has Memphis. We got Sioux Falls and Fargo and of course... Little Falls.

I admit the jury is still out on Falvey and Lavine. On the other hand... In regards to Terry Ryan... The Jury has rendered it's verdict. He was one of us for many years, he deserves a statue at 1 Twins Way. but the future is here and Terry wasn't ready for it.

As of February 12, 2019... It is possible to throw 140 innings or more out of a (non-traditional) bullpen. It matters not... if the the pitcher gets those 140 plus innings by starting at the beginning of the game or if the pitcher comes into the game in a different inning down the line. Starters can throw less than 5 innings and relievers can throw more than 1 inning. The only question or concern I will have is this: Will he deserve to throw 140 innings based on his performance, as it happens? I will absolutely have both eyes and ears on utilization this year and every year in the future.

Exactly... Waiting on the core to show something is just plain bad strategy. If they show something this year... you'll want the proper support to augment the improved performance. If they don't show something this year... You'll want the proper support to try and remain competitive. Our 2019 level of breakouts and bounce backs or lack thereof... isn't just worse case scenario or best case scenario... the possibilities are everywhere in between worst and best case scenarios. No matter what... proper support is necessary because we are not the Orioles in need of a complete tear down. If we are in need of a complete tear down... the organization is broken.

The players simply didn't see it coming. They were fine with the structure as long as Ricky Nolasco got 48 million and Ricky Nolasco got 48 million for years upon years. Then the number guys came along and noticed that the league minimum guys were just as productive as the Ricky Nolasco types being paid 48 million and they just stopped doing it and they stopped collectively as a group and this activated the trap door in the CBA that was always there. Now that number guys are consistently refusing to pay longer term contracts to players in their 30's... the players are going to be forced to fight back by demanding that they reach free agency earlier. It will be a battle between the owners and players for control of the 27 year old. I side with my front office within the framework of the current agreement because it was agreed upon... but I side with the players for a much better future agreement on their behalf. If I were the commissioner... I'd tell the owners to throw some free agent bones out there to keep the peace. That isn't happening... the owners are squeezing on the front end and now the back end. Therefore the players have no choice but to band together and fight back. It will be ugly.

Squeezing the cable companies, while the cable companies are bleeding would be counter productive to what they are probably trying to do here. Cable is bleeding while that cable bill is getting higher, keep in mind that no content costs more than sports. About 20 bucks of each cable bill goes to ESPN and Fox. Have you ever met that person who could care less about sports. That person pays 20 bucks a month for ESPN and Fox and never watches it. This makes it vulnerable. As the price of cable goes up... the cords get cut and eventually the cable companies are going to say to Fox... "We're out" and baseball (all sports) will lose access to this (getting smaller) yet still large and important audience. There is no guarantee that digital is going to be there with a check to pick up the pieces when Fox and ESPN kills the traditional model with pure greed. The way people consume content is changing, behavior is changing and with that... the economic models must change along with it. This is a smart move for Pohlad. It gives him control of his content. The landscape is changing fast and it's going to be tricky navigation ahead. WIth control they can help prop up cable while working simultaneously with increased digital. The future is here and baseball will need to be everywhere... everybody is... just to roll with the changes.

Yep There are no victims here. Besides you and me drinking that 10 buck beer.

you forgot to include the entire San Francisco Giants roster.

I think having money allows you to absorb bad contracts. Teams with less money to spend may not end up crippled with a bad contract but They will at least limp as a result. Big money teams just carry on. In my opinion... it is possible that when you just look at the production... everybody is playing by the same arb rules so it evens out a little.

They either establish decent value or we choke on them is my thinking. There is no way I could stomach watching them establish themselves someplace else while we are left to wonder if that left handed reliever we got in return gets a cup of coffee.

Not quite. I can't stress this enough. I don't believe in a "25th man spot" and refuse to designate someone in that sense. I only see roster spots. Tyler Austin would have a roster spot and the right to compete for as much playing time as he earns in comparison with his teammates. I believe that as soon as you designate someone for a 25th roster spot role, or designate anyone for reduced playing time and then subsequently give them one of the 25 man roster spot. You've blown it before the season even starts. The reason is real simple... we can count on someone (usually multiple players) from the "projected starting 9" to either get hurt or struggle. I have probably the same concerns with Adrianaza as you do by my concerns will manifest themselves differently. I'm saying that Adrianaza BETTER GET 300 AB's if you give him a roster spot or you have wasted that roster spot. With Adrianaza... I don't know if he is the guy I would have chose for a roster spot but if the front office has chosen him.... they must believe in him... now they must provide ample opportunity for him to justify the selection. They could have traded for someone like Profar or signed someone like Lowrie or Tulo but they didn't... instead they offered a contract to Adrianaza early. I will wait until the off-season is complete to see how the roster shapes up... I will also wait past that... right into the season before I make any judgements What I don't ever want to see again... Is struggling players playing every day like they are Mike Trout. And I especially don't want to ever hear again... "we have to play the struggling player every day because all we have is Ryan Lamarre. I got beat up last year by posters... I was accused of being a Ryan Lamarre bobo. My point about Ryan Lamarre was consistent... You gave him a roster spot with whatever methodology that I don't have access to... He's gathering dust on the bench and we have players who suck right now playing every day. Play him or cut him. Quit wasting precious 25 man roster space with players that you don't want to play. And rostering a player with the intention of playing in a diminished role is a player that you don't want to play. I've looked at playing time allocation and roster management for the Twins over the past decade. I studied it and I looked at again... 3 4 5 times and came to the same conclusion each time. The Twins consistently reward Average to Below Average to Bad Players with everyday playing time when they should be competing for that playing time. This fundamental issue has slowed our rebuild to a crawl. The reason it's crawling is because nobody is increasing in value. Just look and see what we got back for the limited trades we made. It's a laundry list of names who became nothing. Look at what our departing free agents got for contracts and how soon they were out of baseball after being everyday players for us. We got nothing of value to trade... we have no room for rookies to play and increase in value because we have been blocked up with 9 starting AVERAGE baseball players. I'm saying that if you are going to take this approach with the average baseball player. You need more of them... Don't go average one at a time with a starting 9... You need to flood it and reward the best performer. That's how you find Astudillo and Cave. That's how you find Chris Taylor, Max Muncy, Justin Turner, Kike Hernandez, JD Martinez, David Ortiz. That's how you stop Logan Morrison from playing every day... that's how you become bullet proof and how you stop yourself from going down with the ship. Speaking of Astudillo... Yep... we agree 100%. He has options... players with options remaining allows you to keep the player close by while you give a player without options a chance. Players with options remaining should blow the doors down before you waste that potential depth. Because either Castro or Garver is going to get hurt and someone needs to show up from Rochester and it better not be Bobby Wilson. One last thing... I'm still thinking of Ash's word "Appreciably" from an earlier post. We all seem to imagine in our head the starting 9 playing "Appreciably" better than the others. In the past decade... how often have we had starting players performing "Appreciably" better. There's been a few but not that many. Certainly miles from close enough to ever think we have this "STARTING 9" thing down to a science". Alright... i feel better. Til next time. I'll be back with this again I'm sure.