ThejacKmp

Sano is really coming back at the perfect time. Even though he may struggle, people will just be glad it isn't Cave DHing and hitting 6th.

What's sad is that Dozier is going to get hot in the leadoff spot because he was bound to heat up and then Molly is going to refuse to move him when Mauer gets back because "Dozey just does better leading off." There will not be a real correlation/causation but that won't stop Molly. Sighs.

Would you rather have Goodrum than Adrianza? I think Adrianza is a better fielder but Goodrum is a fairly capable batter with some pop. I think it's an interesting call.

First of all, this looks like a poem. Not sure if it was intentional or not but I kept looking for rhymes. I think you're thinking about it too simplistically - you're making it out vs. run when its way more complicated. Moving guys in to make the play at the plate means you're less likely to get a ground ball. And not a little less likely, you're way less likely. In the first inning you're trying to prevent a big inning, not trying to prevent one run. So playing at normal depth is the right strategery. So let's say you get the ground ball in the first inning playing at normal depth. When guys play at normal depth, it's very difficult to come home with certainty. The middle infielders are just too far back on anything but a really hard smash that they one hop, not letting the runner on third move for fear of being doubled off. Rarely happens, they’re going to try to turn two rather than have an uncertain one at home. Your first or third baseman might be able to go home on a more typical ground ball and to the extent you see them go home in the first few innings it’s on a relatively hard grounder right at one of the corner infielders. Even then, you often see them go for two. It's a lot harder to get a double play going home to first than it is to go second to first. For one thing, the throw is almost always longer to home than to second. For another, the catcher has a harder time getting into a position where he can quickly make the throw to first due to where he starts the play and the armor he's wearing. Finally, the catcher is not as used to turning two as the middle infielders and has to worry about hitting the runner going to first since he's running away and doesn't have to slide/get out of the way. You could argue that it’s better to get the one at home than the two but again, you’re looking to prevent the big inning. A pitcher who loads the bases in the first inning generally isn’t pitching well and you don’t want to give the other team multiple chances with the bases loaded (and the middle of the lineup up). That double play early is the right call. Give up the one run and not the big inning and go do some hitting.

I always believed in Lance Lynn. Never doubted him for a second. Named my newborn son Lynn, that's how confident I was.

Not taking it personally. And I think when you post on a board and you mischaracterize someone's stance that badly and create that big of a strawman argument, others might jump in. Because we know Mike and we know that he's not the kind of guy who wouldn't pee on Hughes to put out the fire. Probably.

Those Johan and Liriano decisions were made in the Metrodome context (though Liriano should have been made with Target Field in mind). Johan was just going to be too expensive and Liriano was coming off injury and the Twins were far too risk-averse to make the smart move there. Garza was a dumb trade but the Twins felt strong in starting pitching (ha!) and were very light in the outfield. Tough to defend that one though (except to say that Garza was more like a #2 lite than an ace).

Though it would be hilarious if he now came back on and was like, "Oh no, I do hate Phil Hughes the Human. He ______'d my _______." I would eat some crow.

And with Perkins the issue was that they didn't trade him. That's my biggest Twins transaction regret of the past 7-8 years. They could have jumpstarted the recovery from the "rebuild" by moving Glen Perkins at the deadline in 2013 or 2014. He was a proven closer and all-star on an absurdly team friendly contract. He's also a lefty and would have slotted in nicely as a set-up man for any contender, taking over as closer down the line. This is also back when teams mortgaged the farm for that mythical beast, the proven closer. It makes me so sad that they didn't make that move. And that's not hindsight - at the time I wanted it too. I love Perkins but those teams stunk and he was their only real asset. He'd have gotten back impact guys.

You respect an opinion you assigned him, not one he ever expressed. He's clearly talking Hughes the Player and not Hughes the Human.

I also think this had to do with starting pitching depth. May not be a coincidence (pun intended) that Hughes got let go as May started amping back up. The Twins have shown in years past that you need to have 10 starters sometimes. With Santana out (and Lynn struggling) the Twins minor league depth is an injured Mejia, Slegers, Enns, Little and Gonsalves. I'd be excited to see Gonsalves but the others are not inspiring. The Twins may have kept Hughes around as a veteran guy and then with May back and 40 man decisions happening, felt they had the depth to move on.

C'mon. This is a b.s. hot take response. No one on here is saying, "I hate Phil Hughes. If I saw him on fire in the street I would pee on a bush and laugh at him." No one is talking about these guys as people - maybe unless it deals with player misconduct. I think it's pretty clear that he was talking about Phil Hughes the ballplayer and asset. You can be happy to see Phil Hughes go because it makes the Twins better. It doesn't mean that you're wishing ill on people.

I think you have to look at this through the lens of the Twins hoping to acquire an ace (or ace lite) pitcher that was not in their system (best bets then were May and Myers, not optimal ace candidates). At that point, taking the gamble of 2/16 to 5/58 makes sense. If he repeats it, he's going to free agency and he's out of your price range. If he doesn't then you're not on the hook for that much given what a #4 starter costs. The Twins just hit the worst case scenario - major injuries (and not TJ, which would be just a year most likely) that made him completely ineffective. It was a bad outcome but I get the gamble. The Twins had no one near an ace and no other reasonable way to get one. Very little risk for a lot of gain.

Argument against being that if he repeats it, there's no chance he's signing a long-term deal because he'd be one year form being 29 and an ace pitcher. That's $100 million easy, especially with his pedigree. It was a crazy original deal. As you said, Twins gave up some of that value in order to stretch it further. Too bad he got injured, it would have been interesting to see if he could have repeated it. I remember the underlying numbers backing up the performance - if you don't walk people and don't give up home runs, you generally do okay, even with an average-at-best K rate.

I remember most people being excited. I remember there being some muted "well, they gave up on one of the best deals in baseball but I get wanting to take a chance on it being sustainable since if he did it again next year, he'd have no incentive not to be a 29 year old free agent who could get $120 Million+". Very few "This is a terrible idea." Likely because it wasn't. You could think that it was risky but it made sense. A lot of people were also excited to see the Twins put their money on the table after two decades of being incredibly risk-averse.

But can you think of something where a guy turned down the QO, hit the market, and then resigned with the original team? That never happens. When the QO is rejected, the guy is done with that team. I'm sure it's happened but I can't think of a single case. I'd say that the draft pick attached is the reason but that doesn't make sense either. The team losing it values that pick at roughly the same amount as the team getting it so they'd both take it into consideration relatively similarly when mulling their offer. Maybe it's a union thing? Maybe players take it personally? Maybe prepping yourself to leave makes it weird to stay?

I think it's a players union thing. In other leagues, guys negotiate with their teams after stuff like this all the time - the franchise tag in football, restricted free agency in basketball etc. But in baseball, once that QO gets put out there, guys seem to write off that team. This spring would've been an interesting time for it but I don't remember anyone signing back.

It seems extra unlikely since there wasn't a starting spot by the end of the winter since the Cardinals went out and signed other pitching, assuming that Lynn would not return. But I think it's pretty disingenuous to say that the Cardinals had no interest in Lance Lynn. They likely had a number they'd've extended him at, he thought he could get more and then baseball's weird indentured servitude rules kicked in and a reunion became unlikely. But it isn't due to a lack of interest.

I'm still confident that they should keep Lynn based on the marginal cost of cutting Lynn but good info. Those two weeks could mean that the Twins end up in a situation where they would need to keep him in AAA longer next year. If he doesn't start this year (not crazy with the Twins starting depth) but is ready next spring, the Twins may want to delay the clock and find it harder with the two weeks. That said, I think that's pretty unlikely. I also think it's usually a poor choice to worry about the clock with pitchers rather than position players. Pitching is so uncertain that unless a guy is a clear stud, it doesn't make sense to take that service clock too into consideration.

Amen. He was always a class act and always worked his butt off to get back, even when the Twins were bad. I hope he gets another shot somewhere.

1.) Not true that the Cardinals had no interest. They extended him a qualifying offer, indicating that they were willing to pay him like $17 million to pitch for a season. Once the market fell out, I imagine that they would have taken him back but likely paid less than the Twins (because they'd be giving up the opportunity to get a draft pick). Also, no way Lynn goes back to the team that wouldn't extend him. I don't remember that ever happening, there's pride involved here too. 2.) This isn't 1990. GMs look at the whole picture with Lynn, not his ERA. If he shows some signs of coming around (walk rate drops etc.) someone will see him as a buy-low candidate at the deadline. There's no medical reason for him to be this bad. 3.) Along those lines, he's not Matt Harvey. Harvey has had two plus pretty bad seasons in a row and has had issues with velocity and a drop in his K rate that points at medical issues. That's not true of Lynn. There's no medical concern and his velocity/K rate haven't dropped, this is a pitching mechanics issue. Someone will gamble on that because pitching doesn't grow on trees. 4.) Hughes is totally different. There's a medical reason that he is no longer a good pitcher - he's lost movement and velocity on pitches and has been bad for years now. (He's like Harvey). Lynn has been bad for 8 starts (and really only 6 of those starts). That's not enough to rip things apart, it's time to chill and give it some time, painful as that is. 5.) Perhaps the courage is to stay the course and trust your pitching coaches and catchers to work with a veteran and fix his issues.

Any chance Phil ends up in the Twins minor league system? I wouldn't hate letting him get some AAA work in as a reliever to see if he can find something.

The clock is not dependent on age so that really has little to do with it. I think they'd have no issue if Santana/May weren't in the mix. Gonsalves would have a shot to grab the open spot. But that spot isn't open, it's a temporary one. It'd be shortsighted to bring Gonsalves up for 2-3 starts when you know that barring injury, he's going to head back down. If you were starting Sam Deduno instead, it's be one thing. But Lance Lynn is a vet with a track record of success and it's not unreasonable to give him a bit more rope. Finally, Gonsalves has only 9 starts in AAA. Not crazy to give him some more time, especially because he's not a stuff pitcher. I could be totally making this up but it seems like a guy with great stuff would have an easier time adjusting to a level change than a guy who is more about pitching like Gonsalves. again, total conjecture.

Rosario's play was totally a slowpitch softball move. Tagging on an infield fly. I will always love Eddie. :-)

Lynn won't be replaced by Slegers or Gonsalves. Slegers is a depth starter and they don't want to rush Gonslaves/start his clock. Lynn has until May or Santana is ready. That gives him a few starts at least, maybe up to 3-4 if the Twins want to baby May (not crazy coming off surgery). Hopefully this lights a fire, it makes no sense that he's been this bad.