ashbury

I agree, that's a very strong inference, in the context of other rumors. The Twins' strategy looks like it was always to allow the first wave of high-demand free agents go elsewhere, and to circle back to the remaining free agents who haven't had their demands met, and ask them whether they have reconsidered now, and try to get the most bang for the buck. As opposed to, the most bang period.

Writing an article stating that the "grapes" truly are "sour" is a thankless job.

"Cruz. Ten mil, one year, no option. I can sign you warm, or I can sign you cold. This is the way. I have spoken."

Tommy LaSorda passed away recently. He was too old anyway. Hard pass.

Kluber's showcase was well attended. If he showed anything talent evaluators would like, basically all the evaluators will like it, and the Twins will be outbid. If he didn't show enough, we don't want him. I have no expectation of seeing him in a Twins uniform at all.

True, but they do have the privilege of picking which inning and which game.

The beauty of paying a full-time DH is that you aren't wasting the additional money that it costs to acquire a player who also has a decent glove, for the one spot in the batting order where the glove is idle. Has to be the right guy, of course - the bat must be stellar, and so an offer to Nelson comes down to your forecast for production at his age and with whatever medical information the team has. For me it also matters whether another team will guarantee that second year fully - someone may, I would not. Ozuna's asking price pretty much presumes he's a starter in the outfield. He's not enough better than Rosario to justify having non-tendered Eddie only to go and sign Marcell. Hard pass from me.

Too early in my life to hit me with that. Check again in a few years.

Sign LeMahieu; now he's ours. Release Buxton; now he's the free agent. Easiest trade evar.

But I thought that's what we were talking about (or roster changes in general, such as free agents). Of course, if the roster remains as it is, we have Jorge and Luis turning the double plays. Royce Lewis is extremely unlikely to be promoted, and there aren't really any other internal candidates for middle infield. There is no similar discussion at third base. Healthy, Josh Donaldson will be the starter, and there are zero rumors about trying to acquire a different starter there. Sano's at 1B, Buxton's our CF, Maeda/Berrios/Pineda make up the front of our rotation - barring injury, in each case - and while there may be contingency plans for filling in for any of these players in case of injury, there are no signs of actually going in some different direction than these locks. SS and 2B, by contrast, could change before Opening Day. The article stated pretty clearly: "Why not clear up a bit of confusion by looking at who the Twins AREN'T trying to acquire?"

The Yankees didn't declare Europe part of their assigned territory?

Better than Jerry Koosman and Milt Pappas. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

Yes. This is pretty key. If teams got a prize for coming in way under budget, say squeaking in to the playoffs with no one on the roster earning more than major league minimum, then Donaldson might be simply a zero or negative-value asset. But they don't, and he's not. Hopefully he bounces back to his assumed level of production, because then it's a decent contract. If he doesn't, then it's a bad contact.

That's probably the indication you're misunderstanding the meaning of their projections. Each number (BA, etc) represents something of a middle spot within a whole cloud or range of possibilities for that one player. Better hitters have a higher middle spot. But it's a certainty that some players will overperform ("career year") and others will underperform ("slump", or obvious injuries). Someone will hit .330 or above, almost certainly. If .313 is the highest middle spot for batting average, it likely means they think that Arraez is the best bet to reach that .330+ level.

In the minors Eddie played far, far more CF than LF/RF combined. They taught him. They apparently weren't impressed with the results, and for a while were trying to convert him to 2B.

One of these gentlemen is on the 40-man roster at present, and one is not. If bets were to be placed right now, for which one sees regular-season action first, I don't know what odds to offer but it would have to be considerably different than even money.

According to baseballtradevalues.com, your own trade value is such that Bonnes would have to include both Seth Stohs and himself in the deal, just to receive a 7-year old still learning his ABCs as a prospect / lottery ticket from the Rockies in return. Oh and yes, violence begets violence, but also vice versa. That's the paradox people tend to overlook.

At $2M, you can still think of him almost like that. He is out of options but probably will pass through waivers, if he stinks and they need to send him down. If it's worse than that and they need to cut him entirely, the contract won't cause them excessive heartburn.

Me, I want them to use that right foot to hold the gas pedal ALL the way down. Merry Christmas to all and I hope your stockings were stuffed this morning!

Neither of these resources should be mistaken for an accurate picture of what real GMs may be thinking; that's not available to the public at any price. But both try to connect the remaining contract value to reasonable forecasts of future production, to imitate a GM's thinking regarding trade value. baseballtradevalues.com is a public website so you can "have" the tool to the extent you want it. OOTP is on sale at the moment for $5, because the version for next season will be available soon; its statistics don't reflect 2020 results so its trade evaulations are basically a year out of date at the moment (and thus are a bit more favorable toward Sano), while the Trade Values site is presumably up to date. I didn't find a speculation by Rosenthal (Ken?) regarding Sano and Marquez. Perhaps it's behind The Athletic's paywall. Basically, Sano's trade value looks damaged due to 1) an inability to play a full 162-game season (this year's abbreviated season was his best health-wise), and 2) a very sub-par 2020 season statistically for the money. He's locked into a contract for 2 more years at approx $10M a year, plus an option for $14M a season after that - that's a pretty fully-priced market value for a guy playing 1B and with an OPS of only .757 this year (he finished very weakly). Another team can obtain that kind of production on the free agent market for about that price, so why would a team give you anything of significant value in return for Sano? You could try to sell the other team on Sano's ceiling, I suppose - but he turned 27 this season so he's by no means a "prospect" anymore. At that salary, the Trade Values site considers Sano a negative asset at the moment. This stings. But even if some real-world GM considers his value to be positive, it can't be high. Marquez's estimated value is - sky high indeed. I apologize if by trying to be brief (never my strong suit) I came across as brusque and dismissive. But I don't see how Sano moves the needle whatsoever in trying to acquire a difference-maker for the rotation. Those arms are in high demand, and I suspect that trade discussions for Marquez would start with probably two of our top few prospects. If Colorado happens to like him, Sano might be a Duensing-like "sweetener".

Neither of the trade evaluation tools I refer to (baseballtradevalues.com website, or Out Of The Park video game) views this as remotely close to acceptable to the Rockies. Hard to imagine the Rockies' analytics team seeing differently. One can dream of acquiring a top shelf arm, but this straight-up offer looks like wishful thinking only.

No mention of Royce Lewis in this analysis? While he certainly belongs foremost in the shortstop discussion, his name comes up often as a possibility in center.

The way it strikes me, Doug Fister is the same as Hand, but doubled.

That's often how it is done, but doesn't have to be. 1) What's important for platooning isn't the batter's handedness, but how he does against pitchers of one hand versus the other*. Garver seems to have a normal platoon split in his time in the majors, doing a little better against lefty pitchers (but hardly futile against righties). But Jeffers showed an opposite-platoon split in his short time in the majors last year, and his 2019 and 2018 in the minors were likewise. For practical purposes, Jeffers's results looks like he hits as though he were a lefty. 2) Platooning at catcher isn't like at other positions. You might platoon in left field because you don't have a satisfactory guy to play there everyday, which would be one's normal preference - so you cobble together the equivalent, from two players with complementary abilities - but you would not platoon two stud hitters in LF just for the sake of lefty/righty splits, instead you'd find some solution that gets them both in the lineup, or trade one of them. But at catcher, it's a given that no one is enough of an ironman to start 162 games. The ideal for catcher is to have two guys who both hit so well that you're happy to have either one start on a given day, and can decide perhaps on a given opposing matchup on the mound that day if both are rested. It is possible we have that situation right now, if Garver bounces back, and Jeffers proves to be the real deal. * A few pitchers likewise have reverse platoon splits, which complicates the record-keeping a bit. I imagine advanced analytics teams have this detail sorted out by now.

There was even a squirrel at Target Field a year or two ago (and of course one who lives here at TD now).