ashbury

Unless they can opt for free agency from the start of their careers, whatever number of years they are tied to their team amounts to guaranteed contracts (complete with opt-outs!) in the team's favor. I think it's a fair symmetry to allow players to ask for similar in return, when that time finally comes.

In 2018 across the majors, OPS with RISP was .753, while with bases empty it was only .710. I'm not saying Castro isn't clutch, just that the situation lends itself to higher production ... for at least a couple of reasons I could think of but which aren't a tangent probably worth pursuing in a thread about catchers.

Interesting reaction.

I don't believe anyone is advocating that Astudillo be the one removed from the 40-man roster, and thereby risk being lost, to make room for Marwin. However, once the 40-man is back in balance, Astudillo is one of the choices to be sent to Rochester for the start of the season, because he does have minor league options remaining. (Jake Cave likewise, also Mitch Garver if you really like Astudillo behind the plate.) Because, at that point, you again have to deal with exposing another player to waiver claims, if you try to stash someone at Rochester but they don't have any remaining minor league options - a player has 3 for his career. You might even send someone to Rochester who you like slightly better than a guy you bring north with the big club, because you can try out both if you do it that way, otherwise you are 100% committed to the one guy if you lose the other on waivers. It's an aspect of asset management by the front office. Make sense?

Minor league options matter when cutting down the 40-man list to the 25 active players who are available to play in a given regular season game. The option is exercised but the player stays on the 40-man. If your 40-man is full and you want to add someone, as is our situation here, then someone needs to be either released, or else exposed to waiver claims before they can be assigned outright to the minors, or else traded (presumably for someone not on another team's 40-man).

Churrasco silly question, chugetta silly answer.

It was a good run. Wait 'til next year.

If Marwin was a serious 4-WAR candidate we wouldn't be having this discussion. For one thing, Houston would have worked out a contract extension.

Darn. My unpaid front office internship using Out Of The Park 19 lets me down in countless little ways.

You didn't work for these guys, then.

When does the 60-Day Injured List become available again? I think it's sometime early in spring training - maybe already. That could be the solution for whom to drop from the 40-man when Marwin is added - retroactive to when the surgery occurred - defer the decision, in other words, since other injuries could arise.

If I got to know 'im, I'd expect to take away something to remember about 'im from the experience. Smart guy (Duke being academically selective), not yet very experienced, knows what the minors are like... a profile that fits a lot of people, one that gives him a chance to succeed but not a guarantee. So far, so good, from his perspective.

Yeah, those road trips to Houston and Eduardo's mysterious "visa problems" preventing him from making the flight... both from Venezuela... the pieces are starting to come together.

In basketball, you often see players who are termed "tweeners". Talented but not supremely so. A little tall to be a guard and lacking the quickness for the position or the deadly three-point range, but not quite strong enough to play forward. Or, similarly, a tall guy who lacks the muscle to play a purely inside game, but isn't quite quick enough to give the guys on the wings trouble defending him if he plays outside. Marwin Gonzalez is a tweener, in my view. Unless he has another 2017 in him. If you put him where his glove is an asset, such as LF or 1B, his bat really doesn't shine in the company of other players at those positions. If you put him where his bat is an asset, like at SS, his glove gives away about as many additional baserunners (compared to more gifted defenders) as he gains at the plate. At third base, his bat's a little light. At second base, the glove probably isn't quite what it needs to be. Houston is a hell of a team, but still there are 7 positions aside from catcher and pitcher, and Marwin (in several seasons now) never was viewed as a guy who should be penciled in to any one of them on a permanent basis. Free agency is an expensive way to acquire talent. $11M for a 2-WAR type of player is about the going rate. Marwin's a very good backup, where often the backup is a 1-WAR type. Those who suggested that signing Marwin didn't improve our ceiling very much, but did raise our floor quite it bit, are on the right track. And I think John Bonnes said it best, that Marwin is a solution to a problem that we don't know about yet. Again, if 2017 Marwin still exists, then he's not a tweener, and he needs to play every day.

Followup: ha, I brought up Eduardo Escobar's b-r.com page while checking something for the above post, and guess who shows up #2 in the Similarity Score career rankings, and #1 through age-29 seasons? Marwin. Small world. Maybe this was already been brought up?

That's my first reaction too. But - they did get a pretty good return in the form of prospects when they traded him. And it's far from a 100% chance that they could have signed him - he played pretty much as a regular for Arizona as a third-baseman, whereas at MN the evidence is pretty clear that he's viewed as a backup. Maybe he's been promised a starting 3B role for 2019 at Arizona. It might have taken nearly the same money as for Marwin, to convince Eduardo to sign an extension last July (or to lure him back as a free agent, which I think he never became). And, we do have those prospects. I just worry that by mid-season there's going to be a lot of carping here about Marwin's fielding, unless he is confined to corner-defense duty. I haven't watched him and I could be wrong about that. / edit - I took too long typing, and basically repeated dbminn

Pronunciation: \MAR-win\ You're on your own, for the last name.

Concur. I envision the third-best reliever in your bullpen for the role. A guy you would be calling into service anyway, only later, in a game you intend to try hard to win. If you are sending Matty Belisle out there to begin the game, You're Doing It Wrong.

This is on the right track but I would add a little more. If the guy who would otherwise be your starting pitcher is like this, then there's no chance in the world he's pitching a complete game, and extremely unlikely to pitch even six full innings, even if he does pretty well within his limitations. So your bullpen is virtually certain to be used heavily. In that case, bite the bullet. Get a quality short man in there to face the top of the lineup right away. With luck, the "starter" you bring in for the second inning will do well with the lower portion of the lineup, and then get through the complete lineup two more times after that. This strategy potentially gets an extra inning or so out of the starter, compared to having to come rescue him when he gets in trouble the third time through the top of the lineup. Then you turn the game over to the bullpen as you otherwise would have to, when he's about to face the top of the lineup a third time (fourth time overall in the game). It's basically matching up mediocrity against the bottom of the lineup, more times than against the top. You don't do it with a starter who has a track record of holding his own. And you use this as carrot-and-stick with your shaky starter, to tell him that when he starts to demonstrate better staying power, for instance by letting him go ahead and face the top of the lineup a third time if the game is going well and you have a decent lead, then eventually you can take the training wheels off and let him start the game like normal. It's training wheels for youngsters. A walker for the older starter who is just hanging on.

I wonder what Cole yells at the opposing dugout when a lefty is brought in to pinch hit against him.

Physics. Good man.

FTFY

Closer to Hammond Stadium is Six Mile Cypress Slough Preserve, IMO a worthwhile alternative/addition to the nature activities already mentioned. There are guided walks twice a day this time of year. Further south is Naples Botanical Garden, which Mrs Ash and I enjoyed.

Hammond sells out too, for an easily predictable set of opponents. Yankees and Red Sox come to mind. You can pick up tickets from scalpers, but I personally rebel at too high a price for a game where the stars only play part of a game. Anyway, planning ahead is probably a good idea for every Twins game too, unless you are OK with a backup Plan B for your afternoon.