ThejacKmp

Matt Hague is the definition of a AAAA player, if he has even a small chance of making this team we should riot. He's 31 and has never hit in limited MLB time. His minor league numbers are okay but not great - they certainly show no indication that he's anything exciting as a 1B/DH option. He's hit in a small sample this spring while batting late in games against minor league relievers and marginal pro pitching. One should not pay attention to spring training numbers but one should REALLY not pay attention to numbers of replacements in spring training games. Vargas especially should be on this team to see what he can do - he's young enough to have upside. If not Vargas then Park, who we actually have an investment in. If Vargas and Park both don't deserve it, Grossman every day and another OF. Matt Hague, ugh.

Grossman/Mauer - high OBP but less pop. If Bux hits like last September, he should be in the middle of the lineup. To start the season: RHSP 1B Mauer (L) SS Polanco (S) 2B Dozier ® 3B Sano ® DH Vargas (S) RF Kepler (L) C Castro (L) LF Rosario (L) CF Buxton ® LHSP LF Grossman (S) 3B Polanco (S) 2B Dozier ® DH Sano ® 1B Vargas (S) RF Kepler/Rosario (L) SS Escobar (S) C Backup ® CF Buxton ® Move Buxton up the lineup quickly if he keeps hitting like September. He'd fit nicely in the six hole or even the two hole.

They get interviewed every day - and Spring Training often involves more non-traditional-media types since it's a bit more low-key so there's even more interviewing. Spring Training also involves a lot more hypothetical questions because the games themselves don't even matter so a reporter has less to work with. If you interviewed me every day and asked me a bunch of random questions, I shudder to think of things i would say offhandedly. I saw nothing that said Dozier wouldn't suit up wherever he was asked to. He just expressed a preference and valued his own experience over analytics depiction of a typical leadoff hitter. Hard for me to read a lot into that.

Those same idiots spent the past two years saying that Dozier couldn't finish a season well even though that was clearly a false narrative. Excuse me for not taking anything they say seriously. If you're asking me to give credence to those spouting baseball platitudes, I think your argument has begun to spring some leaks. Dozier was chatting with reporters after the second week of spring training. I'm not holding him to anything he's said. We don't know the context of the question or the depth to which Dozier feels this way - players say things in interviews all the time. Especially early in spring training. We do know he's a consummate professional and will hit wherever he is told to. He hit second for chunks of last year without complaint, he has no known history of disagreement with the Twins organization -- he's a model citizen. The numbers are prone to small sample size but even if you take them at face value they don't show what you're saying. Dozier has his highest OPS hitting 4th and 5th in the lineup, not leadoff. I think you're making a problem where none exists. "Ack my house might start on fire! I should burn it down now so it's controlled!"

But is that what's going on? Are the Twins telling Dozier to use analytics in some specific way and he refuses? I've heard nothing saying he refuses to scout pitchers' tendencies or use video. All he's done is state a preference for batting leadoff and say that he finds the analytics focus on OBP at the top of the lineup unconvincing. It's not his job to set the lineup and he isn't trying to do that. To stick with the analogy, the equivalent of lineup ordering isn't one worker failing to use a new technique for screwing on tops (in baseball that would be refusing to use a new approach like a new kind of scouting report or watching video), it's a failure in the process all-together (e.g. having an inefficient machine for screwing on tops, having one that breaks all the time.) If the lineup is constructed poorly, Brian Dozier (can-screwer-extraordinaire) won't be to blame for it -- he didn't put the machine process together, he's just a cog. No one is saying that Molitor isn't listening to Dozier or other players or running rough-shod over them. Don't put words in my mouth. Molly will definitely listen to Dozier if he has suggestions for a fielding arrangement or if he has a nagging injury that keeps him from playing on a given day. But he isn't going to Brian Dozier (or Joe Mauer or Miguel Sano) and saying "Hey, is this lineup okay? Why don't you just write yourself in there where you want and I'll take it from there." Blaming Dozier for having an opinion on where he hits or saying that he has an easier time focusing when he leads off is pretty misguided - he's allowed to have that opinion and it shouldn't affect how the lineup is constructed anyways. As to your final point, I don't think even the stupidest of columnists (Reusse) would make a convincing argument that a Dozier struggling in the 3 spot is due to where he is hitting in the lineup. And for Molitor, it doesn't matter what Reusse says or Dozier says, it matters what his bosses say. Molitor's job will hinge on whether his bosses think that he can make their vision come true on the field. Dozier struggling will be on Dozier - his view on analytics and lineup order will have nothing to do with it.

My bad, responding to you made it seem like it was just to you. More to the general tone of the thread. I get your point but I'm never going to criticize a player for his view of broad analytics (maybe if he refuses to watch video) because he's just a player. It's not his job to do that, it's his job to get up there and hit the ball. Thinking analytically works for some guys but doesn't for others - I trust the players know the best way to get themselves ready. The manager (and front office) is solely at fault if applying broad analytics goes wrong. It'd be like if there was a manufacturing problem at the Gerber factory and we got mad at the guy who ran the top-screwing-on machine. He may not be the most knowledgable or progressive about manufacturing processes but it also isn't his job. The plant manager and the Gerber executives are at fault - it was their job to ensure the manufacturing process was optimal. Nothing in what Dozier has said comes anywhere near making him part of the problem. He expressed a healthy skepticism of analytics and expressed his preference to bat at the top of the lineup. He didn't make demands to hit there, he didn't say that he refuses to watch video, he's been professional. It's not his job to decide the lineup and any organization that is swayed by Brian Dozier's opinion has a bigger problem to begin with.

It's not exactly the same thing but I play a lot of softball over the season and I definitely like hitting leadoff and wouldn't like moving down in the lineup. It's a mentality thing -- the same way hitting cleanup is a mentality thing and playing SS vs RF is a mentality thing. Baseball isn't just numbers, there's a human component to it. I don't think we can criticize Dozier for wanting to hit leadoff and having a preference for it while we call for Buxton to hit further down in the lineup so he doesn't have the pressure to start the year. Management shouldn't be doing what players want just because they want it but Dozier's allowed to have a preference. I trust he knows that he gets a little extra juiced starting off the game -- and I also trust he'll figure out a way to stay juiced if he's hitting in the #3 hole. He's never been anything but professional. This whole thread seems a bit critical. Plenty of spring training left.

Let's be fair to Dozier - he has never been afraid to take a walk. He took the same number of walks last year (in less PA) while hitting 50% more home runs. It isn't like he sold out walks for HR to pursue a contract. He's a patient hitter. And he hit a bunch of home runs leadoff but that isn't something all leadoff hitters with pop do - it took skill. He's also not 100% wrong overall. Getting on base 40% of the time is always nice but it isn't necessarily the best way to score runs -- Dozier got on base 34% of the time but hit 40+ HR last year. Him pumping up his OBP at the expense of power would likely be a step back. Dozier may be coming from the wrong spot but the overall message (don't get too bogged down in OBP, it doesn't tell the whole story) is likely something to keep in mind. It might temper the way you look at Buxton and Polanco in the leadoff spot by year's end - we may like Buxton further down the lineup because of his XBH skills, even though his speed and OBP would suggest higher in the lineup. (knock on wood. hard.)

Dozier trade won't happen til early June at the earliest - that's two whole months. I think it does matter who they make the 25th man if that's how it goes to 12 . . .

If they're going to go to 12 position players at some point anyway, I guess it doesn't matter if it's Park or Adrianza or Dan San . . .

That was me. Santana is 40/57 in his career. At 70%, he's just a bit under the break-even point. I'm not a huge pinch runner person (hate when they do it for Sano in a tie game in the ninth and then the runner comes up in a big spot in the eleventh) but there are times where a pinch runner is great for scoring on a double or stealing into scoring position down one in the ninth. And without Santana, that person is likely Escobar or Adrianza, both whom are no good at it. It's nice to have that tool in a manager's belt (people can argue Molitor wouldn't use it well i imagine) and like "decent OF and IF defense", Dan San is the only guy who provides that. Alas.

Disagree that Santana has no business being on the 25 man roster. I have similar feelings about Santana's future as the rest of ya'll but still see a role. Being #25 on the roster is a different thing than being the Twins' 25th best player. Santana provides a decent number of things as the 25th guy - he can pinch run, he can play decent OF defense, he can fill in in the infield, he's a switch hitter. He's not amazing at anything (or even good sometimes) but that versatility is valuable in a day where 12 man pitching staffs are the norm and 13 deep ones are not uncommon. I guess the question you ask yourself is who would provide more use to the Twins as the 4th bench guy? (assuming backup C, Grossman and Escobar are the first three bench people). - Park has a better bat but is largely redundant behind Grossman. Plus no pinch-running skills, can't play OF well. - Adrianza provides a slick SS and is also a switch-hitter but he's not a base stealer, doesn't provide a reasonable backup OF option and it's debatable how useful that fielding tool is if he can't hit (he would need to be deployed in games the Twins are up in late - that may not happen very often). - Phooey to carrying a third catcher like Gimenez - he doesn't hit any better than Santana, can't pinch run, his corner OF D is going to be worse and I refuse to devote the 25th spot to some worst-case scenario where the Twins two catchers are both out - just lose that game and bring someone up the next day. - You could go with an OF option like Stubbs or someone but those guys can't play IF and aren't particularly useful as pinch runners. Do they hit much better than Dan San? About the only argument I could see is that carrying a 13th pitcher would be better than Santana. Assuming that isn't going to happen, Danny Santana seems like a bad player who is a decent 25th man. He isn't a guy you depend on for anything but a guy who fills in all of the deficits the Twins position player pool has: a backup middle IF for when one of Escobar/Polanco/Dozier is day-to-day, a backup OF with defensive range for late innings (aka not Grossman), a pinch runner who is a threat to steal (otherwise it's Escobar who has 7 career steals) and another switch hitter (granted he doesn't hit well but at least it's with a handedness advantage!) Basically, Danny Santana allows you to weather when guys like Buxton or Sano or Polanco are out for a few days with something that doesn't warrant the DL. I'm not arguing Danny Santana is a great player. I am arguing that he has a place on this 25 man roster. We don't want to see him play much but having him at the back of bench should be relatively comforting.

Playoffs I get, World Series seems like hyperbole. Making the World Series involves making it through the ALDS and ALCS where anything can happen. The Red Sox, Rangers, Astros etc. could all be formidable.

That is nuts. Well done. I guess I won't care if the Twins (it'll be FO and not just Molitor) start Mauer in the #2 hole on opening day against a LH pitcher. I get that sometimes stats are trumped by personal things and business things. Opening day is a big day for casual fans and not having Mauer out there in his "normal spot" likely hurts excitement. It also ensures a big narrative from Day 1 about Mauer being benched that you can just avoid by having him play. Since it'll be an adjustment for him, why make him have to answer questions opening day? That seems like the wrong way to handle a veteran who has meant a lot to the organization. But after Opening Day, I want Mauer sitting against most/all lefty starters.

I don't get why you'd put Polanco or Buxton in the #2 hole instead of Mauer. Assuming that the goal of the #2 is to get on base before Dozier and Sano, Mauer/Grossman is clearly the best choice with the highest OBPs on the team (and a track record by Mauer of doing this very thing). Polanco may someday turn into an OBP machine but he's not particularly close to Mauer or Grossman at this point in time. Putting Polanco or Buxton in the #2 hole also negates their speed. You're not going to run a lot with Dozier or Sano at the plate. In the #1 hole, they will - Mauer takes a lot of pitches and you're not worried about teams walking him to fill first because Dozier/Sano are on deck. But in the #2 you lose that. I don't much care if Buxton or Polanco hits #1. I guess I like trusting Buxton but can see the other side. But I'm much more inclined to bat the other one in the lower part of the lineup (#6 to #9) where they can do some fun things on the base paths. If Polanco leads off, I'd put Buxton #9 and if Buxton leads off I'd put Polanco #6 or #7.

Counts and Mauer in 2016: - If he gets ahead in the count (230 PA): His OPS is in peak-Pujols range (1.135). Weirdly, his OBP is higher than his slugging - lots of walks. - If he is even or gets behind in the count (346 PA): this is where the power comes in. His average and OBP are low but he had more HRs and more 2Bs in counts he was even or behind than when he was ahead (granted more opportunities but you'd expect a bigger swing the other way). Seems to speak to approach. When he's behind in the count, he's looking to drive a ball somewhere and doesn't worry as much about making an out. When he's ahead, he looks to maximize getting on base and is more likely to look for singles than extra base hits. This makes me like him in the #2 hole. With a Buxton type annoying pitchers, Mauer is more likely to get ahead in counts and be able to create "lots of ducks on the pond" situations.

Mauer still had the second best OBP on the team (after Grossman). And that's with a low BABIP. In the #2 hole, I think you're looking for OBP to put guys on for Dozier/Sano. If Buxton performs well, Mauer should have some distracted pitchers behind in the count. Could be dangerous. (Also, if Buxton is looking to steal, nice to have a guy who looks at a ton of pitches hitting behind him).

Injuries. He was in a lot of pain throughout the year. That's a big body to be dragging around for 15+ years, even if it's just to DH and run the bases.

Vs. Righties (75% of starters): CF Buxton R 1B Mauer L 2B Dozier R 3B Sano R DH Vargas S RF Kepler L SS Polanco S LF Rosario L C Castro L (could switch Rosario and Castro if you want speed in the #9 hole.) Vs. Lefties (25% of starters) CF Buxton R LF Grossman S 2B Dozier R DH Sano R 1B Vargas S 3B Polanco S RF Kepler/Rosario L C JRM R SS Escobar S NOTES: 1.) Grossman may seem weird in the #2 hole but he's the RH version of Joe with that high OBP. The guys behind him aren't speed demons so being slow won't hurt him. 2.) I like that the lineup vs. lefties gets Polanco out of SS and Sano to DH - the defensive loss of having Grossman in left is helped by getting a more adept left side of the infield. 3.) Escobar has hit much better from the right side than the left so getting him out there against lefties should make him more potent. Lots of doubles. 4.) Both of those lineups seem pretty dangerous 1-9. Never a Twins-batting half inning you can run to the store for more beer.

1.) Agreed that the Mauer platoon has already begun and that it will escalate. I'm looking forward to it - I'm excited to see a Mauer who is being used correctly get his numbers up. No reason he can't hit .300 if he's used more judiciously - the days off will help him stay healthier too. And even in the platoon he's still playing 75% of the time and is a great bench bat for late-inning situations. 2.) Sano will be at 3B most days but if he were to play all 162, I imagine he would get somewhere around 30-40 games at DH too? Likely on days Mauer sits and Vargas/Park is at 1B. Those days will see Polanco move over to 3B and Escobar/Adrianza at SS. That lineup will still be pretty nice: Buxton R, Dozier R, Sano R, Vargas S, Grossman R, Kepler/Rosario L, Polanco R, backup catcher R, Escobar S. 3.) I know many are counting down the days until Mauer's contract ends but I think we should be thinking about life beyond that contract. Mauer's current deal is an albatross but the Twins don't have tons of 1B prospects extremely close and Mauer is still a productive player when used correctly. Unless Sano is really unable to play 3B (and I think he's got 4-5 years there), the Twins don't have a can't miss prospect who needs to be at 1B in the next three years (Diaz hasn't made low A yet and is raw). You can really see the Twins having Mauer around until 2020 as a platoon 1B with any number of RH guys (the only real LH competition is Palka, who can play OF supposedly and may not be able to get his K issues down anyway). A two year extension at age 35 seems appropriate ($5-$7 mill per year?), especially for one of the best Twins of all time. Some of that is dependent on Mauer wanting to be here and play but (and I know this is a surprise) he is from here and has two little kids starting school in a few years. His brother is in the organization (and seems in line to potentially be the next Twins manager) and Twins spring training is even close to Mauer's FL place. The only team that seems like a comparable fit are the Rays. I don't get the sense that Mauer is a guy who needs to be an all-star to keep playing and I think he likes the rhythms of the the season. If he can stay healthy, it may seem like a nice late-career role. Yay optimism!

Has Grossman ever been a late inning defensive replacement? I'll be interested if the Twins bother to carry a traditional 5th OF or if they use an IF as an emergency version. Gone are the days of a plodding Delmon Young or Josh Willingham who you wanted to replace in the field when you lead going into the 8th. Our three starters profile as our three best defensive OFs. The future is now.

Likely true at some point. I do think they will start the season with a 12 man staff (if for no other reason than to show Molitor who is boss). The point of the discussion on this thread is what the opening day 25 man will be so I think it's okay to talk about there being four bench spots to begin the year. Park or Vargas (if they both made the team) would likely be the position player sent down in that moment -- though of course Danny Santana is always on the brink. But yeah, I'd be very surprised if the twins carried a 13 man staff to begin the season.

Yeah, thought about that. But I remember reading somewhere (can't find it now) that the new guys want a 12 man staff.

Yeah, Adrianza is clearly a better player if you're looking to have a strong defensive SS on the roster. Santana's only hope (though I think it's a good one) is that he solves all of your issues as the 25th guy - 5th and defensive OF, backup IF, pinch runner. I won't be super upset if he's the 25th man but I'm not hoping for it.

Not sure I believe that at all. Park was removed because the FO smartly knew he was a guy who would get through waivers so why risk losing others? Not sure it's evidence that Vargas has an upper hand. This is especially true since the end of spring training will likely open up any number of spots on the 40 man. Perkins may end up on the 60 day DL for instance. Guys like Adrianza, Haley, Boshers and O'Rourke may no longer be with the organization. Let's just say that I haven't heard anything saying that Gimenez will have a harder time making the team because he isn't on the 40 man. I think it's unlikely that has an effect on Park's chances either. He can win this or lose this on his own.