Riverbrian

YES... A thousand times YES. Buxton, Lewis and Correa have spent enough time on the injured list that any idea that you can get by with just 9 decent ball players is a bad idea. These roster spots are GOLD. Camargo just watching Vazquez OPS .575 is just a waste of a roster spot. We committed 30 million dollars and bunch of AB"s to players who were below of average last year. Kepler, Margot, Farmer and Vazquez add up to 30 million dollars. You can't just sit back and say Oh Well... It happens. You need players to compete for playing time. Larnach's locked in utilization doesn't allow for competition for playing time... it requires Larnach to be locked into a role and it requires Margot on the opposite side. So sub par plays just gets to keep doing what it was doing because Larnach can NEVER be the replacement and Margot is MARGOT.

This is a pretty big con. We should sit back and think about Wallner and Larnach. Some may not care about Julien but let's throw him in that group and let's ponder the future of all 3. Here's the question I have for everyone. What does everyone see Wallner and Larnach doing with the Twins in 2027? Will they still be platooning? If the answer is no... they won't be platooning in 2027... Then the next question would be... What the hell are we doing with them now and how does it help for the moment they won't be. If the answer is yes.... they will still be platooning in 2027? That will mean that 2025, 2026 and 2027 all 3 of them will require a right handed hitter attached to them for all 3 of those years. They have to sign a Margot type for one year and do it again just to fill that role. If they don't sign Margot... then the role will have to be filled from the farm. So now... You got Keaschall from the right side of the plate only facing left handers and this becomes his development. Some young guy important to our future getting bench stains on his butt until he is forced to face the righties due to injury. So in 2027... The top prospects coming up to make us competitive in 2027 are a bunch of parts that have been stripped mined and this is huge... Why? Well because we all know that the team can't fill the roster spots in 2027 with Pete Alonso or Anthony Santander. Pete isn't coming. We have to develop Pete and we can't do that because we have limited to them to impossible to EVER become Pete. And another point that matters to me... but may not matter to some because it is mainly important to the player only. Larnach becomes a free agent after 2027. He could OPS 1,000 vs Right handed pitching in 207 and Trevor will not be able to fully cash out if he is not allowed to face lefties for the entire time he was under our control. Teams will be interested but the best he will be able to do is 2 years like Joc Pederson and Joc had to sign a series of 1 year deals before he got that 2 year deal. If I'm Erod or Walter Jenkins. I'd want out of Minnesota NOW!!!!

Good Post String. Just for clarity. It isn't so much advocating but saying that you have to have to five players on the roster who must face both hands because the system demands it. The system demands it because you need 6 roster spots to platoon just to commit to this system. Add in two catchers and you are left with 5 that have to face both hands. Those 6 roster spots committed also guarantees that you are LOCKED into this system because you can't escape it. If Margot is on the roster so you have someone to face lefties instead of Larnach. When Margot is hurt you have to call up a right handed hitter because Larnach still needs that protection. Erod getting the call when Margot gets hurt. Well... that can't happen because you are locked in. You must call up a right handed bat to replace Margot or else Larnach runs free. OK... Let's say you call up Erod anyway... So you have a 4th left hander. And let's say that you allow Erod to face left handers because someone has to. Then Larnach gets hurt. You are still locked into this system so Erod no matter how he is performing against left handers has to drop into the Larnach role because you have Margot on the roster that shouldn't face right handers. The system to this degree is lunacy and will kill the franchise in the future.

I don't recall citing Betteridge's law of headlines. However... I love those TV or Radio ads that start with a question. Are you looking for a fish? Come to Bob's Goldfish Store. I'll say... Nope... Not looking for a fish and I'm done. It's probably better to sell the reason that you need a fish instead of settling for the tiny amount of the already converted fish people. Anyway... Hooked me with this article. Yes I need a non-platooning fish.

It does the exact opposite. Other than Willi Castro who is a switch hitter and therefore the player who led the team in AB's because of versatility in the field and his non-platooning. There is such thing as "thriving" for the players you list as benefactors of the platoon system. They may get roster spots as a result but no thriving. Let's look at the names you list Austin Martin just facing left handed hitting does nothing for Austin Martin. It gives him a roster spot. Eventually, someone gets hurt and now Martin has to face right handers. If Martin could hit right handers, there would be no reason to limit him to left handed hitting. The Platoon only hurts Martin and makes him a development failure. Michael Helman: It gives him a roster spot and keeps the team from giving someone better that roster spot. Of course... the giving someone better the roster spot comment assumes that Helman isn't that good to begin with. Is he or isn't he... We won't know. He's just there because you failed to develop Wallner or Larnach beyond the point that they require someone like Helman to be attached to them. This year and every year after that. DaShawn Keirsay: This guy is going to be punished beyond recognition. There is no thriving for him... just a big huge unscalable wall. You can only protect 3 left handed hitters. If you have Wallner and Larnach occupying two of the three spots how do you find a spot for Keirsay? He can only wait for an injury to either Wallner or Larnach for a call up. Keirsay isn't eligible to be called up if Buxton gets hurt because he would bring the number of left handers on the roster beyond what they can protect. This is important to understand so I'll repeat it and bold it. If Buxton gets hurt... Keirsay isn't eligible to be called up because he would bring the number of left handed hitters on the roster beyond what they can protect. If Keirsay gets a roster spot with Wallner and Larnach also hanging around. One of them will now have to... all of a sudden... move into a full time role which means... all of a sudden... they have to face left handers because you have too many on the roster and you can't protect them all. The extreme platooning that we do... limits the number of left handers that we can roster to 3. If you go to 4 left handers... one of them must face left handed hitting. The platooning that we do... KILLS Keirsay. OK... That's Great... Keirsay added to the Roster. Wallner can face left handers now... I've been asking for this. WALLNER won't be prepared for this. We have spent two years hiding him from this. Wallner has been developed to guarantee that he needs a handcuff at all times. But... Hey... now we need him. And this is going to happen in September with the playoffs on the line. Go face Framber now Matt. I know we didn't trust you to face him for 4 years but we need you now.

I'm ok with the managing of player workloads. Because of the frequent injuries that occur and occur every single year. I'm all for the utilization of all 13 players on the 26 man roster. Not because I think the managing of workloads prevent injuries but because the utilization of all 13 players PREPARES the players that you will need to step up when injuries occur... and the injuries will occur. However, You don't need to set up platoons in order to manage workloads. Just manage workloads. Simple enough. The players you list Correa and Buxton are not part of this platoon world. They are the reason that platooning comes back to bite you. The consistent injury frequency of Correa, Buxton and let's add Lewis to that group guarantees you that Farmer and Margot are going to end up facing more right handed pitching. Platoons don't prepare you for these injuries. Platoons prepare players to platoon. They prepare right handed hitters to face left handed hitters. They prepare left handed hitters to face right handed pitchers. When the injuries come and they will come... you are forced to turn to the right handed hitter to face right handed pitching because the entire roster is carved into these niche deployments. When Buxton goes down? Who takes over. I don't know who that will be but all you have to choose from are those guys you have been keeping away from right handers or the guys you have been keeping from left handers because your entire roster has been carved up to serve the platoon to maximum utilization. The Twins won't have a player who can face both hands ready to go. You have no choice because you have committed every single last drop of your roster to execution of this strategy. 2 Catchers, 5 players who play every day. 3 left handed hitters who you only want to face right handers and 3 right handed bats who you only want to face left handers. Injuries are real bad reason to justify platooning.

I am not anti-platoon. I am anti-platoon to the degree that we do it. Really Really Anti-Platoon to the degree that we do it. On paper it makes perfect sense for Kyle Farmer to replace Julien against left handed pitching. A .751 OPS is decent... It's above average. However... what is gained if Kyle Farmer has more AB's vs Right Handed pitching. Any potential gains from the platoon utilization is erased when Farmer faces more right handed pitching.

The quote from Falvey suggests rather unequivocally that Rocco is the one responsible for the amount of platooning being done by suggesting that Rocco makes out the lineup card. OK... I'll believe that. Most front offices make similar statements in similar regards concerning the manager and the lineup card. However... it does lead to a another rather important question. Did Rocco trade for Margot enabling Rocco to platoon more than any of the other 29 baseball teams. At the very least did Rocco encourage the front office to trade for Margot? I understand that the daily lineup card is Rocco's decision. However... is it also safe to assume that we have some coordination between the front office and the manager to supply the players necessary for this sort of thing? Chicken or Egg... Did the front office provide players that require Rocco to manage in this fashion or did Rocco's managing require the front office to provide these players.

This may shock some of you. However... The answer to the question posed in the title. In my opinion is... YES!

In regards to our catching situation. I'd rather the Twins just slept in the bed they made. I'd rather they don't pay the over inflated trade prices necessary or the over inflated free agent prices to acquire someone who will play 120 games at most because of the maintenance that catchers require. Please consider these points. 1. Jair Camargo was given a 40 man spot last year. 2. There are two reasons that you give someone a 40 man spot. 2a. To call them up to the majors. 2b. To protect them from another team claiming them. 3. If you don't feel that another team would claim them. You wouldn't need to give a player a 40 man spot. For example Ricardo Olivar needed to be protected or exposed and was not protected. The Twins either didn't think Olivar interested other clubs or didn't care if other clubs were interested. 4. Camargo was protected. The Twins must have felt that other teams would be interested in him. 5. Since he was protected. It suggests that THEY DIDN'T WANT CAMARGO TO BE CLAIMED, 6. Christian Vazquez produced a .575 OPS in 2024. Camargo got 7 AB's because the Twins couldn't afford to give up that incredible Vazquez production. 7. Despite giving Vazquez 7 AB's over 20 games on the 26 man roster. Camargo is STILL ON THE 40 MAN roster. In other words. The Twins simultaneously feel that Camargo isn't good enough to replace a .575 OPS but good enough that another team would put him to work. He's good enough for others but not good enough for us. What they did with Vazquez and Camargo last year was a huge deal. Vazquez will not be here next year. Will Camargo be here next year? I don't know but he is still on the 40 man roster for some reason. The front office can stop buying or trading for new blankets and pillows and just lie in this bed they made.

By golly... that catching is sure expensive to acquire. How many games do you think we would get out of this Feduccia fella?

The very second that framing gets removed from the equation. I'll say Yippee loud enough to be heard in Crookston. As for today... In light of the value attached to catchers in the marketplace. I'd would have been hyper focused on the development of catchers. I would have started day one and done my best to pile them up and trade the extras for the value returned. The Dodgers trade extra catching value despite drafting in the upper 20's every year. However... At a minimum. Catcher is such a defensive position... so much so that there are many light hitting defensive catchers across the baseball landscape that still cost 4 million. Why can't teams (plural) at the very least... produce a catcher or two on the farm with the defensive skill necessary but can't hit a lick. I know we want them to hit and catch but the market is already paying 4 million for catch only. It just leads questions that I can't answer. How bad do the Twins think Camargo was that he couldn't get some exercise on the 26 man roster last year with a .575 in front of him blocking the way? How bad is the sum total of catchers across the league if Camargo still has a 40 man roster spot despite not getting exercise with a .575 in front of him? How bad is the sum total of catchers across the league if McCann is the answer to any question. The Market value of catching is so inflated and it has been for years. The Twins (And other teams) by failing to cash in on that inflation... have simply dropped the development ball and every time they dip into the McCann bucket they extend the dropping of the development ball with no end in sight.

I think it's bad strategy trying to force the spending of more money by taking away money that they have to spend. Sounds like a good way to get the team moved to Nashville. "Pining" isn't really accurate. I could care less about moves like this. I have no idea what Gasper will be. But he didn't cost 4 million so let him be who he will be. If all he has to do is clear the Margot bar... then we can spend that 4 million elsewhere. I did have a pretty good idea of what Margot was and he certainly was... and he was for the entire 2024 season. I'd rather not spend 4 million here and 4 million there and 4 million over there when that 12 million could be combined to bring in something actually better then the guy with options making the minimum.

Agreed... McCann was a much better hitter and still not good enough. In the end... It's like choosing between a 5 dollar cup of coffee at Starbucks and 5 dollar cup of coffee at Caribou. Make your own. Spend that 5 dollars on something else.

Exactly... You are spot on. I can't see anything that makes sense here. What teams wants Vazquez at the entire 10 million when Jansen and Sanchez costs 8.5 million? How much money will the Twins have to eat just to move Vazquez in order to clear some cash to possibly spend? McCann is basically Vazquez value wise. They are carbon copies of each other with McCann just one year older. McCann cashed in a big year with the White Sox in 2020 for a 4 year 40 million contract with the Mets in 2021. 2 years later... the Mets traded him to the Orioles with the Mets eating 19 million of the remaining 24 million getting a low level prospect in return. So, the Orioles valued McCann for two years at 2.5 million AAV in order to part with a low level prospect. So if you consider what the Mets ate. Now consider the Vazquez similarity. He cashed in a decent year with the Red Sox and Astros in 2022 for a 3 year 30 million contract with the Twins. Look at Vazquez and then look at McCann and then look at how much money the Mets ate to get McCann of their roster for the remaining two years of his contract. The question remains... How much money would the Twins have to eat to shed Vazquez? Which leads to the next question to make the proposed scenario work. With Vazquez and McCann performing nearly the same over the course of their big contracts and similar age. If the Twins don't eat significant money in a trade. Why would any team trade for Vazquez for more money when they can just sign McCann for much less especially when McCann was better offensively last year? If the Twins have to eat significant money which I assume they do. Trading Vazquez, eating money and signing McCann would leave how much to spend on Pete Alonso? I assume... not much if you could convince a team to take Vazquez with McCann STILL ON THE BOARD. This is why Camargo sitting on the bench for 20 games on the roster watching Vazquez produce a .575 OPS is a HUGE deal. Camargo would make the minimum for 3 years before reaching arbitration. Camargo making the minimum frees up money that could be spent elsewhere and all he had to do was clear an extremely low bar set by Vazquez. Yet the Twins didn't believe that Vazquez could do that. So he sat and watched. Develop catchers or Die via the yearly commitment to poor offensive veteran catchers one after another after another after another.

We committed 2,241 Plate Appearances (36%) to players who were significantly below average at the plate in 2024. We paid Max Kepler 10m to OPS ,682 over 399 PA's. We paid Kyle Farmer 6.25m to OPS .646 over 242 PA's. We paid Manual Margot 4m to OPS .626 over 343 PA's We paid Christian Vazquez 10m to OPS .575 over 315 PA's 30.25 Million spent on players that kept their jobs all year long despite being rather not good enough at the plate. I'm simply not inclined to be concerned about Mickey Gasper making the minimum. I will only become concerned about Mickey Gasper on the 40 man. A. If he remains on the 40 man all year and also remains in AAA all year while 36% of the team MLB AB's are committed to players who are significantly below average. If he is just another Severino or Camargo hanging on the 40 man all year that they refuse to turn to while those above are struggling. I'll then be concerned about Gasper. B. He makes the team and remains on the 26 man roster all year despite significant below average performance at the plate. If he is just a cheaper version of a bad baseball player that you can't get rid of. I'll then be concerned about Gasper. Would I rather pay Margot 4m or pay Gasper the minimum? Gasper please and thank you.

If he hits. Let me be the first to say...Welcome to Minnesota.

Pretty impressive company kept by Matt Wallner. Dear Front Office, Please let Matt Wallner face left handers in 2025. Even if he is only producing 112 MPH exit velo's against them. Sincerely, Riverbrian

This is the question. I honestly don't know what the Fishers will get out of the deal or if outside investors or the city itself is going to take all of the Casino revenue. I'm sure it's complicated. However... If I was an owner talking with other cities about relocation. If I'm talking with Las Vegas. I'm asking for a Casino attached to the stadium for the additional revenue. I'll sink money into it which is easy for me to say when it's not my money. 😎 Once the Braves started pulling in non-traditional revenue from the Battery. Why wouldn't the A's ask for that for that diversification. If the A's get it. The other 28 teams will be surely start putting pressure on cities to provide the same. We will hear the same thing we heard when the Metrodome wasn't producing enough suite sales or parking money to the club that the newer stadiums of the 80's were now producing. I don't know the details of the agreement but if the revenue from the entire complex (all or a portion) ends up in Fisher's pocket. It's a game changer regardless if the Fisher's reinvest it back into baseball. Who knows... The only thing that I can assume. This new stadium regardless of market size is going to produce more revenue than Oakland's crappy old stadium ever could. That's why they are leaving the highly populated Bay Area for a smaller population in the middle of a desert with an average July temperature of 165 degrees. I was in Las Vegas in July once. It was 110 degrees at 12 Midnight. I left a sweat trail walking the strip. As my sweat flowed from the sidewalk into the storm drains. I single handedly increased the water level of Lake Mead and probably provided enough to keep the Bellagio Fountains going for about a month.

Agreed... Although... I'm not sure that they would simply take on his contract. The nature of free agency itself puts himself out of everyone's price range. A team with a newly developed gaping hole at SS would be the only candidates in my mind to take on the entire contract. And that is kind of funny... just like you mentioned. The most obvious team with a gaping hole at SS... would be the Twins if they traded Correa.

Who hits 4th? Whoever lands in the 4th spot on that given day. Here's how I would construct a lineup? Space your lefties and righties out... don't pile up the left handers so a left handed reliever can come in and take them out in the 5th inning. If you are going to pinch hit them in the 5th inning and the Twins have consistently done this. Don't place them 1, 2 and 4 in the lineup so one lefty can just remove every single one of them from the game in one fell swoop. Then... You put your best hitters at the time at the top of the lineup. What do I mean by best hitters AT THE TIME. If Kepler is in a 1 for 16 streak. You can move him down in the lineup. He doesn't have to stay in the 4 spot rain or shine for some psychological reason or for some I need to know where I am in the order for stability reason. If you move him down because he struggling for a stretch and he heats up in the 8th spot. You can move him back to the 4th spot. Using that simple criteria. On Opening day... using the current roster against a right hander and projecting who I think would be the best hitters. Assuming that Wallner and Larnach are in the lineup to represent the lefties. I would rank them in that order. Assuming that Castro and Lee are in the lineup as switch hitters standing in the left handed batters box. I would rank them in that order. And Assuming that Correa, Lewis, Buxton, Miranda and Jeffers are in the lineup as right handed hitters. I would rank them in that order. Starting with the lefties... I would space them out Wallner 2, Larnach 7 I would then space out the righties, Correa 1, Lewis 3, Buxton 4, Miranda 6 and Jeffers 8 Leaving the Switch hitters to space out with Castro into the 5 spot and Lee in the 9th. Leaving you with a lineup on opening day 1. Correa SS (R) 2. Wallner RF(L) 3. Lewis 3B or 2B (R) 4. Buxton CF (R) 5. Castro LF (S) 6. Miranda 1B (R) 7. Larnach DH (L) 8. Jeffers C (R) 9. Lee 3B or 2B (S) This batting order is for opening day or the opening weeks. It would not be static. It would adjust according to actual performance on the field and availability. The players will let you know who should be at the top of the lineup, therefore getting more AB's based on performance not projected performance. Just keep them spaced out. If Royce Lewis starts the season 0 for 20. You can move him down to the bottom of the order in the RIGHT HANDED SPACING. If Correa then starts to heat up, you can them move him back up based on his starting to be Royce Lewis again. I love Royce Lewis and I think he is a superstar. However, Royce only hit 6 or below in the order just one time in 2024. He was pretty locked into 3, 4 or 5 in the lineup. Which is a big deal when you consider his .620 OPS after the all-star break. I know we were not over flowing with offensive options post all-star break due to the key injuries of Correa and Buxton but... .620 OPS after the all star break is an EXTENDED slump with no reaction or consequence from management in regards to his place in the batting order. Be Fluid... It's ok to move them around in the order. Best of the bunch at the time toward the top of the lineup. Space them out so opposing managers can't easily counter move. The answer to the question... Who should replace Kepler at the 4 spot? Nobody specific. Whoever pencils into it that particular day. The players will let you know.

I wish I had your skills. 😉 You were able to say what I was saying perfectly in just one paragraph. For the reasons I listed and the reasons you listed more concisely. A Correa trade would return very little player value. It would only provide a dump of salary that would require either X amount of money or X amount of additional players/prospects in return to right size the remaining contract. The money left could in theory be spent elsewhere in order to improve the club but before you can spend the money, you have to find out what it would cost... just to make one team interested so you can get your hands on the remaining cash just to spend it on improvement elsewhere (including a SS). By the time that happens, where could it be spent? Who will be left to spend it on? Not to mention the No Trade Clause that Boras and Correa could utilize to further limit trade options in the off chance you actually could find a trade partner willing to take on the bulk of the risk inherent in the contract. Myself, if a trade happens, I'll be surprised. Stranger things have happened. Until this stranger thing happens... I'm just going to enjoy watching C4 play SS for us.

In my opinion, this discussion doesn't have much legs to it without one key question answered? No way we could possibly know but the question is this: How much money would the Twins be required to eat for just ONE TEAM to be interested in his contract? He has 4 years left for a guaranteed total of 133 Million left to be paid out. Followed by 4 years of vesting options for a potential of 8 years. If he reaches 575 Plate Appearances in 2028. It would trigger a vesting option of 25 million as a 34 year old. If he reaches 550 PA's in 2029. It would trigger a vesting option of 20 million as a 35 year old. If he reaches 525 PA's in 2030. It would trigger a vesting option of 15 million as a 36 year old. If he reaches 502 PA's in 2031. It would trigger a vesting option of 10 million as a 37 year old. If Correa doesn't reach those triggers he then becomes a club option year by year for the remaining years. The vesting options are decent protection for the Twins. Assuming of course that the mere reaching of 575 PA's means productive player worth bringing back the following season. So just focusing on the 4 years remaining before the vesting options. 37.3 million, 32.8 million, 31.8 million and 31.3 million. When he signed with the Twins. He signed for the biggest contract he could get. The Giants and Mets did offer more initially but they pulled it back leaving the Twins with the best contract offer. That alone tells you that the Twins most likely paid more than others were willing to pay. That alone tells you that the Twins will have to eat some money to move his contract to get where others are willing to pay. UNLESS... he has somehow increased his value in the two years since signing the contract. The first year of the deal - 580 AB's and a .711 OPS The 2nd year of the deal - A fantastic .905 OPS but only 367 PA's due to injury. I love Correa... I'm glad he's a Twin and playing for my team. My comments are not slams on Correa. It's important to ask this question. Do the first two years of his contract indicate a value increase so teams who wouldn't pay more two years ago are now all of sudden willing to pay it? Two years less on the contract will increase the value some but two years older should also decrease the value. So... the question remains. How much money would the Twins be required to eat to make his contract palatable to just one team... let alone multiple teams?

Additional non-traditional revenue streams. Hotel, Bars, Restaurants, Casino, Retail, Parking plus the traditional revenue. Baseball in Vegas is going to survive quite well until the other 29 teams add similar additional revenue streams. Baseball in Vegas is more likely to trigger the other teams to request new venues from local government with non-traditional revenue. Target Field just became outdated.

With what was left in store... You surely could have added more.