ashbury

That's quite a case of Hitch Hiker's Thumb. (Probably it's a related malady like Catcher's Thumb, that I never heard of.)

Put "media" in square brackets without the quotes, put the URL, put "/media" in brackets. It might have to be the normal YouTube URL rather than the .be variant. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gORMNmZgE3E There is also the little square turquoise/white button at the top (third from left) of the editing tool, BBCode, that you can click for "Media", but I find it easier just to type the characters on the keyboard most times.

Wow. His poor family.

As I said, I am willing to trade from excess. I just feel we are several months away from knowing this, with regard to starting pitching. Hughes' recovery from surgery is not a lock, for instance. With those additional months, we might have a clearer idea who the excess actually is.

One has little to do with the other. Dozier is a trade candidate because of an excess of MLB talent at his position. Much the same as we traded AJ when Mauer was ready. It might be true that something could be obtained for ESan, and I won't protest if the return is good, but we are not dealing from an excess at his position, and we don't have any productive use I know of for the salary a trade would likely free up. I advocate trying to improve the major league roster going into each season - except for the case at the beginning of a rebuild when the prospect shelf is bare, and that is not us now. Worst to first is rare, so I want improvement this year; there is value in not subjecting our several good young players to a losing atmosphere. Falvey has been quoted that he needs to be overwhelmed in order to trade Dozier, but for me Santana is the real case where a trade offer would need to surprise me. All that said, if ESan was the additional key that unlocked Urias, I would not hesitate. I just doubt it.

It's moot now that San Diego has him, but he was age 20 and Turner was age 24. That's the type of distinction that, for example, separated Eduardo Escobar from Pedro Florimon in my estimation, a few years ago. Torrens has a much better ceiling. Whether Cincy San Diego can keep him on the 25-man all season is a different question...

As mentioned above, the picking team can work out some kind of considerations in order to keep the player and option him. Cash, FA cap room, or another player in trade. That might be San Diego's plan here. They were apparently carrying only 33 on their roster. Get the guys, then see what can be worked out.

Oops, that cancels part of my logic regarding the Reds and Turner. I forgot that with Rule 5 you have to wait a few hours to see how things shake out.

This man agrees: http://golistyourself.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/This-Random-Guy-Paid-Us-to-A-Lot-to-Write-About-How-Sexy-He-Is-360x240.jpg / he's what comes up first when I do a Google image search today for "random guy"

I'm going to stick my neck out and say we get him back via Rule 5's methods, before next off-season. The Reds also took a Yankees catcher in the first round, and probably they are thinking they will try to keep one or the other but not both. Since more than half of Rule 5 picks get offered back anyway, or a trade is worked out satisfactory to both teams, and Turner was apparently the Reds' second choice, I'll be surprised if he sticks. Particularly since he managed only a .646 OPS in AA last year. His bat's just not ready, and has low upside at best, so it'll be hard to keep a glove-only catcher all year.

Mr Pohlad could afford that. We should keep this possible acquisition of talent in mind.

I can be on board with including Kohl, if it is to help get a guy like Urias who we hoped Kohl someday became, when we drafted him. Not "just to trade him".

Dozier is coming to the meetings? That would be significant.

Minus Bellinger/Urias/DeLeon I don't see why Twins management's interest would be "piqued", so I am assuming one of these has been dangled. I'm going to be optimistic. Dozier plus KStewart for Urias would be cool, plus or minus a couple of lesser prospects on either side to blur things up a little. A deal for De Leon would need to include someone highly regarded like Alvarez plus another good prospect, as has been stated elsewhere, and again a KStewart level prospect could be added in order to make it work if need be. For a couple of reasons I'm not too enthused about Alex Wood as any kind of centerpiece. And while I personally could see "helping" the Dodgers by trading for Puig if they are really trying to shed payroll, I doubt the Twins see a fit.

Lux was a 2016 draft pick so they'd have to wait until next June to swap him, don't they? I don't know how long a PTBNL can remain pending after a trade.

Google works for me.

Shall we grant that the headlines nationally and probably in both cities would read "Dozier for Puig plus prospects" in the scenario that this outfielder is even part of a deal?

Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland, in case you didn't find out elsewhere. Just across the Potomac, first exit off of eastbound 495. Can't miss it.

I think Christy Mathewson or Abner Doubleday or someone like that complained that the young players coming up were only in it for the money.

Santiago is the only hard choice to tender. If you had a 25-man roster of players getting what Kintzler will get, for instance, your total payroll would be down in Rays/Marlins/A's territory. A team of Kyle Gibsons would still be below $100M in pay. A team full of Santiagos, by contrast, would be up in the Large Market world. Not that that's how to evaluate payrolls, merely a back-of-the-envelope way of looking at it. It depends on whether the front office can find a better use for that $8+ million. My suspicion is that they can, but I don't have a specific recommendation myself. (I'd probably combine it with other savings such as Plouffe, and use it to pay for the salary of a better starting pitcher I'd go after in trade. But maybe the front office bean counters already feel they combined Plouffe and Suzuki money to sign Castro.) I'm probably most bothered that this kind of money gets us a guy who can succeed only when he nibbles. It looked like Neil Allen talked him into throwing strikes after he came over to the Twins, and Hector got pounded. When he went back to walking guys, he did somewhat better. That's not an asset I would pay a lot to have. I'm also not encouraged that Allen's first attempt at tinkering backfired on this pitcher - is there any reason to think Allen will find the key to unlocking hidden riches on his second try? But the team is not strapped for cash, as the payroll limit they seem to have set for themselves is pretty arbitrary. Paying Santiago should not really bar them from any moves they would like to make. So I won't get mad if that's what happens. But, he won't be much of a mid-season trade chip; at that salary he will be overpriced (unless he steps up his game, in which case the Twins won't want to trade him), and his next team will face the same off-season decision, so no one will give much to get him. He's not fungible. If the Twins tender him, they are stuck with him.

Should close baseball games be decided on Style Points? But joking aside, I am opposed to actions that an umpire can not be expected to police fairly on the field (steroids, gambling leading to throwing of games), and perfectly fine with what goes on between the lines that the umpires can judge within the rules of the game. Play on!

I believe we don't know that yet.

I was shocked when it came away empty at the Academy Awards. I don't think it was even nominated in most categories.