Riverbrian

It's like Mike Sixel says... It's a dial not a switch. I'm not even anti-platoon. All teams platoon and I recognize this. Right now... I'm just asking that they stop with the template. I'm asking that they don't spend limited budget on specialists in order to keep the template intact. Because the template requires sacrifice to maintain over the course of a season. I'm saying that the combination of money spent on Farmer and Margot to serve as short siders while using up two precious roster spots could be combined into one player. Combine the money spent (maybe add some more cash to it) to acquire a single player who makes more sense for one of the 5 guy spots than Castro or Santana. One better player... one roster spot used instead of two roster spots to cover one spot in the lineup. . Wallner? I'd give him one of the top 5 spots. I don't like the strikeouts but he is simply one of our best 5 players because he does damage when he hits the ball to the tune of an .895 OPS. Will facing left handers drive the strikeouts higher? Probably... maybe not... maybe he improves his strikeout rate against righties and the addition of lefties equalizes it. Will facing left handers drive the OPS down? Probably. But .895 is a nice start... he's got some room to come down if he comes down. Triston Casas has a high strikeout rate. Oneil Cruz has a high strikeout rate but they also hit the ball very very hard. Here's another question... will increased exposure to lefties help Wallner improve his OPS against lefties? Improve it from .600 to .700 or .750... I don't know but I'm going with... it might. Exposure can do that. Which is better than locking him in by denying exposure. We don't have to lock him in at .600 against left handers for the slight advantage in one AB in the 5th inning of game 35 in May. And that adds another consideration... You don't know what you need until you need it. If you deny Wallner for two years... deny him in 2025 in April, May, June, July. If you deny him consistently... do you have to deny Erod being the call up when Buxton gets hurt in August or September? You may have to because Erod becomes that extra lefty that you can't protect. You can only protect 3 of them due to roster limitation. So calling up Erod to replace Buxton... is going to all of sudden force Wallner into a role that you have denied him and it's going to happen in crunch time instead of game 35 in May. Ultimately... I have these concerns about the development of a Wallner or Erod and Jenkins in the future when they hit the shore... but that is just one issue with the template that I have. The worse problem with the template is the requirement to spend 10 million plus that we don't have... just to commit two or three roster spots to specialists that will just end up facing more right handers that they are not special at because our top 3 guys can't stay on the field. If Buxton needs the day, week or 2nd half off... Wallner or Larnach isn't his replacement in the lineup... They are already in the lineup against the right handed pitcher. It's Margot or Farmer who faces Wacha because that is all you have on the roster. I'd rather they combine that limited money and get one guy for the 5 Guy Spots or at the very least focus that limited available money on someone who specializes with the 75% rather than the 25%. In order to do that. You might add a left handed hitter bringing us to more than we can protect and someone will now have to face them. It doesn't require 13 left handers... It just requires adding more than can be protected. Which can give you better odds against the 75% instead of the 25% even if only incremental improvement... it's improvement toward the majority instead of the minority. Think about this String and I know you know this because you pay attention to these things. There were multiple times last season that we had all 9 spots in the batting order in the right handed batters box against a left handed starter. We focused on this in the off-season and we we were able to load up against the lefty. We don't have this type of platoon advantage against Right handed pitchers. That's backwards. Add more lefties. Cleveland for example has more left handed hitters than they can hide. The Orioles have more left handers than they can hide. Cleveland can send 8 batters into the left handed batters box against right handers. Cleveland is better off against the 75%... We went after the 25%... we can send up 9 against the left hander. The splits are real... We played the split wrong. We have it backwards. Baltimore and Cleveland are showing us that it's OK to have extra left handers. More than you can protect. It's OK... They didn't need 13 of them.

Thank you for not being abusive in your response. Buxton, Correa and Lewis are the top 3 of the five. They are all we have in the five at this current moment. The question is... who are the two that will join them. Those three require maintenance days when healthy but if healthy they are in the lineup against left and right handers. Lewis if healthy doesn't require a platoon. Buxton if healthy doesn't require a platoon... Correa if healthy doesn't require a platoon. You need 5 who don't require a platoon. Those 3 unfortunately most likely won't stay healthy all year and therefore are going to require your hired short side specialist to fill a top 5 role when they go down during the season because our left handers are not eligible for such duties. I think I understand your point but it's possible that I don't. Are you suggesting that it's not realistic to have a roster entirely made up of above average against right handers? I agree that it's not realistic. But... you can improve against right handers. However... you can guarantee that you won't improve against right handers if you purposely spend millions from a limited budget on Margot and Farmer who struggle against right handers using up limited roster space in the process. And then continue to spend limited millions and spend limited roster space on their look a likes in the following years because you will have to just to purpurate the template of hiding the young lefties from the lefties. I have said that I'm not looking for 13 left handers. I'm hoping you understand that. You keep implying that I'm saying that... I'm not.

I did exclude the catchers because they seem to have their own rotation. However... I do admit that this is also wishful thinking on my part because there was a stretch last year where Jeffers was the short side platoon at the DH position in addition to his catching split with Vazquez. If Jeffers slides into that role this year. The Twins can then accommodate protection for a 4 left handed hitter on the roster. You know... in case Erod or Jenkins get the call. As our Joc Pederson ceiling development program cranks up even more. I do not hold your optimism for Correa, Buxton or Lewis health. At the very least... if we did get extended health out of any of those three... there will at least be maintenance days but I do admire the optimism. Grichuk turned down the 6 million dollar mutual option with the D-Backs. He is either looking for a two year deal or a full time gig at age 33. Probably both. If the Twins sign Grichuk. It won't be for full time duty. It will become full time duty during stretches of the year. It would signify to me that the template is still controlling the roster construction of our club. It would signify the willingness to commit almost their entire available limited shopping budget to the template. Much like they did this past off-season. It would signify the willingness to pay 6 million blowing most of the budget on a vet who flashed up to 140 OPS+ in 279 heavy platooned AB's at age 32 after 104, 93 and 87 ops+ in 471, 538 and 585 not platooned AB'S in the three years prior. Refsnyder isn't available. Grichuk would be the short side Refsnyder, Margot type specialist that the club is probably looking for but shouldn't be. Grichuk shouldn't be on any wish list. He would be perpetuation. We will be looking for a Grichuk this year and the year after and the year after that and the year after that and the year after that. We will need to find a Margot, Grichuk or Garlick every single year because Erod and Jenkins can't fill the Grichuk space. Jenkins will never be Juan Soto. Randal Grichuk types will guarantee it.

Mama says that Alligators are ornery because they got all them teeth but no toothbrush.

When I look at what we have in our pocket. Who we have in one hand and what we can spend in the other hand. I'm not sure what can be done. In my mind the off-season will be bone breaking chaos or it will be grab a pillow and wake up in late March and miss very little off-season action. I don't see middle ground. My expectations are low. If they simply blow up the 3 left handers/3 short side right handers template I'll be happy. I'll consider that progress. If they don't bother signing specialists and have honest to god competition for playing time with the players on the roster. I'll be happy. No innings eaters. No spending low dollar millions on right handed hitters who can't hit right handers. No left handers in the bullpen who can only get left handers out and develop the youngsters because they are the ones who will help get out of this boat.

The Math is pretty easy. If the Twins spend around 130 Million a Year. If you forget about the 40 man for simplification and just focus on 26 roster spots. 130 Million divided by 6 is 5 Million. For each roster spot you can spend an average of 5 million dollars. You can fill the team with Santana's and Chris Paddacks at 5 million per. But... But... If you want to roster upper level veterans like Correa, Lopez, Buxton and Vazquez. That's about 76 million on those 4 players. 130 Million minus 76 million = 54 Million 26 players minus 4 players = 22 54 million divided by 22 = 2.45 million That's it... You have 22 spots to staff at an average of 2.45 million. 2.45 million will buy you crap out of the veteran pile. It will buy you a team full of Michael Tonkin types. Now factor in the Arb Eligible Guys - No longer rookies but guys who have shown a little something. We have 11 of those and they will cost about 33.3 million this year. 54 million minus 33.3 million = 20.7 million 22 spots minus 11 Now you have 11 spots to fill with 20.7 left and you are down to 1.88 million per. Next time you want to complain about rookies. Do the Math. It shouldn't take someone very long to realize that not only are rookies making the minimum about the only thing you can do... but perhaps the most important thing you do. Instead of complaining about them over and over again... I take the opposite approach... I full throatedly cheer them on because I've done the math and I know without a shadow of a doubt... those young players are the only thing that can save us.

No... Not true at all. Not even close. Players with options who struggle are sent down. Some are even sent down if they did not struggle. If they are not sent down... Celestino was someone who hung around while struggling. The only one of the group you list who got an extended run while struggling. It was because the injured list was full of the guys that you like. The minors are indeed for developing players. However... There is a clock on that. Once they hit the 40 man and... eventually the players that you want to keep will have to be added to the 40 man. Clubs can't just hold players in the minors forever. Once they hit the 40 man... they will need that major league development... but... what they really need is the opportunity to compete. A chance to be just as good or better than that Vet who can't be sent down and hitting .200. Then once you develop a player and you pay him the major league minimum... instead of 4 million here and 4 million there and 4 more million over here and 4 more million over there. You have some money left over that you can spend on a player that has actual game changing ability.

The data says don't give up the out. I can't argue with that. You only get three outs per inning... giving up the out via the bunt may increase the odds of one run but it will severely decrease the odds for a crooked number and crooked numbers win ball games. So I'm fine with the low bunting totals. However... Here is what I'm not fine with... and actually kind of pissed off about. The Twins went the entire season not bunting. Extremely rare occasions... Rare and I mean rare occasions did they lay one down. And then... ALL OF SUDDEN with the season on the line. Needing wins in the last week of the year with the playoffs on the line. They start laying down the bunts in desperation. They executed 10 successful sacrifices all season long. Last week of the season... here comes the bunts. IF YOU ARE GOING TO BUNT WITH THE SEASON ON THE LINE... OR BUNT IN THE PLAYOFFS. It kind of suggests that Bunts can be useable in the chase for a W. After all... they really needed W's that week and they start whipping them out like a bear coming out of hibernation. If that's the case... If you are going to bunt in the playoffs. BUNT IN APRIL... BUNT IN MAY... BUNT IN JUNE... BUNT in JULY... BUNT IN AUGUST... Then maybe you won't look so ridiculous trying to bunt in September or October.

I believe that Wallner could be promoted to one of the five guy spots. He would already be one of mine but they never ask for my advice. For Wallner to graduate to one of those vital five guy spots. All it would take is a 4th left handed hitter on the roster which would then eclipse the number of extra right handers who could take their place. It's really that simple. Building your roster to accommodate this extreme split has limitations and those limitations cause extreme limitations on how you build your roster. That's the lunacy of building your roster to fit this system. It requires a rigid template. You need to sign a Margot to keep Wallner away from lefties. You need to demote a Kepler because you signed Margot and he needs to be kept away from righties. You still need to play Margot against right handers because Buxton is always hurt. Of course... if the Twins were to add that 4th left handed hitter in let's say August. Wallner would be suddenly asked to do something that he wasn't allowed to do in March, April, May, June and July... not to mention 2024 and 2023. You are right... Kepler was one of the five guys to start the season in 2024. We had Kepler, Wallner, Julien and Kirilloff to start the season... too many lefties to keep them all clean. Kepler got demoted out of a five guy spot not because of his numbers at the time (even though they were not stellar) but because Julien crashed and burned reducing the number of left handed hitters to 3 and the right handed hitters still need to be fed. I have one wish for this off-season. I would like them to stop using this template.

This is a huge issue. That gets overlooked by way too many fans. The Twins have to develop talent. Have to... unequivocally have to. There is absolutely no debate... they have to. Every Margot, Farmer, Kepler, Gallo, Vazquez, Morrison that they bring in that struggles. Makes it a little bit harder to develop talent. Every Margot, Farmer, Kepler, Gallo, Vazquez, Morrison that they bring in that is allowed to keep struggling through the entire season... makes it even harder still to develop talent. Every left handed bat that isn't allowed to face left handers makes it harder still to develop talent. Every young right handed player that they short side platoon makes it harder still to develop talent. If the Twins fail to develop talent... We all know that we won't be signing an expensive free agent to fill that undeveloped space. The Twins are not going to sign a Freddie Freeman. We all know this. They have to develop a Freddie Freeman. That's the only way that we will have a Freddie Freeman on our roster. It's the only way that the Twins can remain at the very least competitive year after year. Buxton, Correa, Lewis and the gang of role players isn't going to work. I support this front office... That will support will stop quickly when I feel that development has stalled. I like what I'm seeing from the incoming arms. On the offensive side of the coin... I am getting close to feeling that we may need to be a patchwork of cheap vets to get through every season going forward. I will get a little bit closer to support losing doubt every time the expiring contract vet with the .600 OPS strolls to the plate in August with no competition allowed for his spot. I will keep getting closer to not trusting our development every time Larnach is pinch hit for because some guy named Daniel Lynch IV entered the game in the 4th inning just so (insert cheap vet here) can face Erceg in the ninth. I will get a little bit closer to being ready for a change at the top because of development issue perception every time a team with a .623 OPS in September is paralyzed with a stubborn willingness to go down with that ship instead of getting into that unproven player dingy hanging from the side of the roster. I will get a little bit closer to pulling my support any time that I don't feel there is competition for playing time with the younger player getting the short end of that stick.

I have no idea who or what Camargo is. I can only take my clues based upon actions. He was kept on the 40 man... That indicates value. He was on the 26 man roster for 20 games last season and was given 7 trips to the plate even though Vazquez was setting a pretty low bar to clear for playing time. That indicates very little value. As I watch the actions on Camargo. The actions are conflicted and therefore... So am I.

The outrighted don't interest me much. The players that remain on the 40 man are the ones that interest me. Jair Camargo is still on the 40 man. Helman and Kiersay are still on the 40 man. Of course... those 3 players could easily be off the 40 man as the team starts filling in the available space as the off-season progresses. At least for the moment... The Twins seem to feel those three have some value. They didn't have much value last year when we needed some players to step up.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in order to remove Severino from the 40 man roster... he was exposed to the other 29 teams and is returning to the Twins because nobody claimed him for basically no cost at all. Therefore his trade value is pretty low if not none at all. Unless not having to keep him on the 40 man increased his value. Even if that is the case... Still can't see him as a needle mover.

Do not sign any innings eaters!!! Let the farm fill the spaces as needed.

Can the Twins pin their hopes for 2025 on Brooks Lee. No they can't. They need decent insurance. They need competition for each and every roster spot. They need to avoid all eggs in one basket. The worst thing they can do is just hand him the job out of spring training Que Sara Sara.

Willi Castro was super utility last year. Super Utility is a utility guy who plays every day. Willi led the team in PA's with 635 of them. That is a problem in my opinion. I don't have a problem with Castro being on the roster but when we turn him into the most valuable player on the team he becomes a problem. It speaks volumes that Castro and Santana were the only two Twins who had enough AB's to qualify for a batting title. Those 635 PA's for Castro was tied for 51st in all of baseball. Tied with Nolen Arenado and Yordan Alvarez. Of those 54 players in the top 51 in plate appearances. Only 6 had a lower OPS than Castro in 2025. The Twins haven't been healthy at the top end for year after year after year. No reason to expect anything different this year. The 4th and 5th spot with in the Five Guy group needs to be addressed because of hte injury history of spots 1, 2 and 3. I'm doubtful that Castro is good enough for the role.

Santana was a decent ball player last year. I wasn't very excited about his addition last year while still OK with it. However, he did a decent job... let's say slightly above average job which is much better then the below average play we got from others on the roster. Am I ok with another year of Santana... Yeah I am... but only kind of OK with it. His numbers certainly fit the role you have planned for him. But... I just don't see him remaining in that role and if he stays healthy his utilization would increase significantly and he will just be another kick the can down the road year of addressing the position longer term. With the assumed financial constraints. This off-season is going to be either: Insane with lots of player movement via trade as the roster is completely retooled or this off-season is going to be as boring as it could possibly get with someone like Santana being the most exciting thing that happens. I don't see a lot of middle ground.

I know where Five Guys is located in Grand Forks. In a strip mall by Kohl's near Target on the south end of town. Tasty Burger but kind of pricey so I don't go that often but I know where it is if I need Five Guys. The Twins need Five Guys... Do they know where to find Five Guys... Can they Afford Five Guys? They need Five Guys for the rotation. They need Five Guys for the 40 man with it currently sitting at 35. But... those will not be my focus. It is important for all of us to understand that the Twins will need Five Guys who will play most days by not being subject to platoon. Last Year... Buxton, Correa, Lewis, Castro and Santana were the Five Guys. Buxton, Correa and Lewis are often injured. They ranked 7th, 8th and 10th on the team in Plate Appearances. Where are these Five Guys currently located for the Twins. These Five guys should be the players who carry your team. They are the everyday Five Guys. Is Castro talented enough to be one of the five everyday guys? Is Miranda the fifth of the Five Guys? Is it Lee? Will Lee even break camp with the club out of spring training? We know that Wallner, Larnach or Julien are not eligible for one of the Five Guy spots due to severe platooning restrictions. And we know it's not the three right handed bats that they will roster to platoon with Wallner, Larnach or Julien. Those spots will go to the Margot and Farmer replacements that the Twins are obligated to sign to keep the platoon integrity intact. Can the Twins find Five Guys who can be every day leaders? Can they afford the expensive burger? If there is one thing that scares me this offseason. It's those Five Guys. 3 players that could carry you but are often injured and an over relied upon Castro and you are still one short.

The Orioles are retaining O'Hearn. Miranda has thus far been more effective against right handed pitchers and thus far has been a bad short side platoon option.

Those debates can happen with any player... especially from us in the Twinsdaily crowd. Those debates will continue on into the future with other players. Gabriel Gonzalez included in the trade indicates to me at least decent value in the eyes of Seattle and in the eyes of Minnesota because of what was paid by Seattle and what Minnesota asked for. Hindsight can justify the questioning by us in Twinsdaily land. Hindsight can even determine weather Seattle was wrong or Minnesota was wrong or maybe both were wrong in the end. In my opinion... At the time of the trade... Polanco was a player who didn't need to be platooned and we needed at least 5 of those upper end types of players who didn't need to be platooned and we had no budget to work with. Yeah... He may have been an injury risk just like Lewis, Correa and Buxton consistently are but we needed those upper end guys because this was a team trying to win today... not rebuild with more prospects. We need those 5 upper end guys... Especially if we were going to commit 6 out of 11 spots to players to serve platoon roles. Polanco may have tanked this year in Seattle and not been an upper end guy. But at the time of the trade. Seattle and Minnesota didn't know that he would tank. Minnesota then spread the Polanco money around to players who were not upper end guys. Anyway... I can see your logic of getting all prospects. I hope you can see my logic by saying that we needed an upper end guy instead.

I can see the logic in this thinking. And I can agree that in hindsight trading for all prospects would have been better than what actually happened. At the very least... by making prospects the entire return in the deal. There may have been money left over to add someone at the trade deadline and that may have provided some 2024 benefit. However... With that said... in consideration of where the Twins were in the competitive cycle. Coming off a decent playoff performance with lots of young talent taking up a decent chunk of the roster. The timing for off loading a good MLB player for future benefit would have been wrong and therefore even though it may have been better than what actually happened... it was still a bad idea.

You are spot on. At the time... it might have been difficult to see how Farmer was connected to the Polanco trade. I didn't see it at first but it didn't take long to eventually see it. After the dust settled... you could see that Farmer was indeed clearly connected. Once Farmers 2024 role was clearly defined, you can see that he was clearly connected to the Polanco trade. Once you look at his 6 million cost swimming upstream against a downstream budget... you can see that he was clearly connected to the Polanco trade. Others can debate the shallow waters of weather the trade itself was a win or loss. Gabriel Gonzalez by himself may make this trade a win for the Twins. However, in order to trade the Polonco 10 million... you had to keep the Farmer 6 million and then add the DeSclafani 4 Million and the Margot 4 million and the Santana 5.5 million (which we both can acknowledge in hindsight that Santana worked out). The team spent 19.5 million to shed 10 million. If the Twins won the trade... OK... maybe they did but Farmer, Margot and DeSclafani negated the trade win. You see it. Good luck with the folks in the shallow waters who don't.

I'll let others debate the winners and losers of the trade. To me... it was always about the following question. In the context of where the Twins were in the competitive window. Did it make sense to roster one bigger better piece or break that bigger better piece into multiple lesser pieces? If you don't understand that question. Your response will matter very little to me. Just keep debating who won the deal with others. Don't look at the question with hindsight... look at the question at the time of the trade. If you had the ability to predict Polanco's downfall due to injury or age. Good for you. That's impressive. Seattle didn't know what you knew. They gave up a lot for Polanco. The Twins won the trade based on what Seattle gave up. I will not use hindsight. AT THE TIME OF THE TRADE. It was my contention that Polanco was the best player involved in the trade. And the best player out of the players who were acquired with the money saved in the trade. Even after knowing how it turned out with hindsight... it doesn't change the question I had at the time in the current context of the Twins. Did it make sense to roster one bigger better piece or break that bigger better piece into multiple lesser pieces? If anyone wants to talk about log jams... Just don't. If anyone wants to talk about how Cleveland, Tampa and Oakland built their roster over and over again... just don't. I wasn't sure while it was happening but I was drug through the mud for just asking the question and forced to defend the other side. As of November 2024. as we get ready to build for 2025 with the full benefit of hindsight. I believe the Twins won the trade and I believe we absolutely shouldn't have made the trade, If you don't understand how I feel both ways... Go back to the bolded question.

Pay the exorbitant inflated price for a catcher who will only play 60% of the time. Regardless if they trade or sign a catcher... it will be an inflated painful price to pay. If the catcher you acquire is not expensive... he will be a catcher that no one or very few teams want. It's the bill come due for not developing your own. It's paying 10 Dollars for a dozen eggs because you don't have chickens. You don't want to roll the dice on a John Ryan Murphy type. I don't either... he will cost you an Aaron Hicks type. Do you want better than J.R. Murphy. He will cost you more.