TwinsDr2021

Are they trying? Comparing teams that aren't trying to sign guys to "larger" contracts to teams that supposedly are trying, isn't much argument. IMO if Miami decides they want to get involved in signing players to "large" contracts they won't have a problem getting them to sign there. Mauer established residency in Florida just to sign his first bonus, and if I am remembering correctly quite a few players do that. In the last 4 years I know about dozen families that have moved out of MN for Florida, Texas and Tennessee and not all of them are conservatives.

Difference might be Bonds was 43 and Bauer is 31 and is owed 64 million. It is my understanding that the dodgers paid him 40 million last year, so unless MLB suspends him for close to 2 years I see him playing again. I can't see a suspension of that long holding up on appeal, with the precedent that has been set.

It will make MLB look really bad if being a Jerk is worse than steriods or Domestic Violence.

No it would have been terrible for the Twins to sign him to that or really any contract. The "but" was now the players aren't getting as much of the overall Revenue because guys like that aren't getting the money and teams are smart enough not to pay somebody like or Rosario/Dozier for example and give those jobs to younger cheaper guys. For example take Ricky Nolasco for example and what he got, Pineda has been similiar and can't get that. Good for teams bad for players.

Because of the first line I wrote - The number 1 factor is money and years. Tampa isn't going to compete against other teams for big name free agents, because they can't or won't spend that kind of money, so weather and taxes rarely if ever play a part, The Twins on the other hand were supposedly trying for guys like Wheeler and Darvish so to get them they probably are going to have to offer more than some other teams. Charlie Morton signed a two year 30 million contract and Franco signed for 200 mililon, because of money and years.

The number 1 factor is money and years. But for the twins to offer 10 million a year to somebody and Tampa offers 10 million. The player is taking about 487500 less. (I know it is a hair less than that) (Salary/2 * 9.75%) So for the twins to compete with no tax states evenly their offer has to be higher. Now if the players family isn't really interested in relocating to MN, because of weather, family, or whatever reason. The Twins also have to up their offer because it is going to cost the player more to have two places and be flying family back and forth. Now if there aren't other teams also interested in that player, the Twins don't have to take that into consideration, they can offer a take it or leave it type contract. But if you have a few teams interested in that player and one team happens to be close to where that player grew up (of wife grew up) and another is a no tax state, the twins have to take that into consideration when offering a contract. They can't just match the other teams contract and believe they offered the same (I mean they can but they would be wrong).

I would add another thing that got MLB to this point is analytics. Take Brian Dozier for example, here is a guy that hit 42 homers at age 29 and 34 at age 30, and has only made 30 million in his career. In the past at 32 he probably would have gotten better than 9 million 1 year contract. Stuff like this is good for mid to low revenue teams but....

Agree with you on all of this, except I think Minnesota fans are much more forgiving on what their athletes do then what they get paid. AP, Cruz, Pineda all of done something recently or in the past that most would think is wrong at best, horrible at worst and the fans forgave them. But Mauer, Cousins, and Donaldson for example get raked though the coals for seemingly being good people but getting paid way too much. (IMO) So if Bauer came here on the cheap he would be loved, but if the Twins have to pay him a big contract he would be hated. (again IMO)

? agree with this statement. The season is over we have what players actually did, not what they should have done. But we can look at those numbers and use them as prediction going forward.

That is the great thing about thinking the plan solely relies on promoting from within for long-term success (which most won't provide what that actually means), as long as their are prospects in the wings the plan is working or just about ready to work.

Agreed on the biggest issue is money, but I will say I think taxes might play a part in some cases. Joe Mauer moved to Florida to save a few hundred thousand. So guys pick the place they want to play regardless of the tax implications, but I believe others do look at that when it comes down to a couple of cities they have no real ties with. If the Twins offer you 10 million and year and the Rangers offer you 10 million a year. That is someplace north of 400K a year. (Assumption is that only 5 million is made in MN at 9.85%) Now for us that grew up or live in MN that probably isn't a huge deal since dumb enough to live here already ? and we are still going to make a boat load of money. but for somebody that grew up in the south or maybe a country south of the US that could be a big factor.

We including me keep saying that but it would be interesting to see if it is actually True, Miranda for one came back better. Maybe the guys that are going to be good did fine or improved and maybe the guys that take way longer or never were going to make it suffered. It will be interesting to see what happens going forward. On another note if Lewis wasn't already trending down on the national lists, I don't think the injury would have affected his status as much as it has. Starting high on the top prospects lists, there are really only two paths, one is quick to the majors and the other is down the prospects lists and hope to prove them wrong. Lewis has always seemed the guy that was going to follow the second path. Enlow on the other had has probably never been on the national prospects radar, but since we are super fans we see a guy that was a 3rd round pick that was supposed to go to LSU and see a future ace. He hasn't done anything in the minors that screams that, but we hope and hope and then he gets injured and we get to use that as an excuse to hope and hope and dream so more. Enlow has probably always been over hyped by us, he turns 23 and never has pitched above high A, if not for the Covid missed year, he would have to come back from injury lights out to even be considered a prospect anymore.

With the 40 man current construction, for every none pitcher that gets put on somebody must go on the 60 day or be cut, so to see Palacios, my guess is Gordon will be gone or more pitching injuries. Also IMO, I don't think a team is going to take a 25 SS that has a lifetime .715 OPS in the minors (He has been playing AA since 2018) so for him to do what he did at Wichita last year shouldn't be surprising, it should have been expected. Nick Gordon put up better numbers in AA at age 21 and 22. And for a guy like Palacios, the Covid missed year shouldn't be an excuse, he has been in the minors since he was 17 in (2014), lots of people get hurt and miss a year. He has had a couple of good years in the minors after basically repeating a level. It is almost sad that as Twins fans we are talking about guys like Palacios being a help or possible solution to a problem. Do other "real" teams talk about losing a guy to rule 5 that was a FA minor league signing?

They added a plan C for SS, hopefully it is plan C.

what I said was and you quoted it - "If teams are willing to keep an older prospect in the minors (Winder for example age 25) because they feel the need to make sure that they have him at age 32 instead of just age 31, that seems weird to me' And that is my opinion, others can certainly have their own opinion. We can debate all day how valuable having control over them the last year is, I just think it might be more important to hold back a guy to get that last year when they are 27, 28, 29, then it is when they are 31, 32, 33. In your scenario, it would seem smart to not waste active roster spot on somebody that is going to pitch twice, which is also a different argument than keeping him down for they get an extra year at the end of his rookie deal. We could create hypothetical all day, for example if the go to a hybrid or stacked strategy, he could pitch 5 times and have between 10- 15 innings in and the manager and FO could have a real good feel for him, but those are just hypothetical and mean nothing until the FO decides what is going to happen.

That isn't at all what I said, Maybe follow along to what I wrote instead of projecting. Berrios made his major league debut at 22, Bumgarner at 19, and Darvish was signed out of Japan, and was not part of the 6 years rookie control. If teams are willing to keep an older prospect in the minors (Winder for example age 25) because they feel the need to make sure that they have him at age 32 instead of just age 31, that seems weird to me. Then I said if poor teams can't afford to sign any 31/32/33 pitcher to a expensive type contract, in theory wouldn't they get a better return for a 29/30 pitcher than a 31/32 year old pitcher? Lets use a few pitchers as example, which pitcher do people think will cost the most in prospect capital? ( Bassitt, Montas) Now it is not apples to apples because Montas has an extra year, so lets ask it this way which A's pitcher would return the best prospects, trading Montas (28) before this year or Bassitt (32) before last year.

I agree with that, I guess the rule makes sense when you are bringing up younger prospects (20,21,22) but when the prospects are older the rule or teams keeping them in the minors seems weird, Winder is 25 for example, are teams really worried about that extra year when they are over 30? I have read people say we should be trading Garver since he is already 31, and he won't hit FA until 2024. Also if the poor teams really want to trade guys to get prospects, wouldn't it make sense to trade them during their prime to get better prospects in return?

I guess what I was saying, no matter the 3/3 or 4/4, if the first pitcher doesn't do the required 3 or 4, you are playing two ends of the relief pitcher game. In the 3/3 if the first pitcher goes 1, then you to use RP pitcher(s) just to get to the 4th, you aren't bringing in the second guy early because that isn't the strategy, then at the end you are doing the same to get to the end of the game. Or lets say they are doing the 4/4 and the first guys does great for 3 innings and the Twins are up 1 -0 or 2-0, and in the 4th the starter gets an out but a couple of guys get on, don't they have to play that 2/3 like it is the end of the game and bring in a good RP to get the last two outs and not the last pitcher off the bench? I don't know the answers to these that is why I am asking. As for trusting young pitchers have the Twins shown at all that they do? Who is the last young pitcher that has gotten more than a couple hold opportunities in the last few years? So in a 4/4 the second guy is almost never going to get 4 innings in. So what we are really talking about is a 3/3 or more of a hybrid model like Major League Ready has talked about. Also I think it is different than the normal starter, in that if your starter had a short start you hopefully have a long guy that can go 3 or more innings if they were having a good day, you don't have to play every inning like it is the playoffs. I will repeat I am not against this idea, I am just bringing up scenarios that might make it hard to stick to it and thus make it look like the FO doesn't really have a plan. If you stack you stack, you tell the second pitcher what inning they will be starting and let them prepare for that inning like it is the start of a game for them, you don't jack these pitchers around and say OK, your up second be prepared for it to be at anytime, that is what relief pitchers are for. Unless the plan is to put the second tier guys in the second spot, the ones they don't think will ever be starters anyway, Dobnak, Jax, Strotman or whoever they think they are, because in all reality they are just trying to get the studs some innings without blowing up their arms or confidence. I pitched in high school and college and I can tell you, starting pitchers and relief pitchers have different routines to get ready. One more reason I think it will be hard to fully stick to this strategy is if they truly want to get a few of these pitchers to 120 or so innings, that is 30 starts of 4 innings, or less starts and more innings a start, thus making it hard to stick to this strategy. They can't let guys that are being Ober type successful not pitch; and go out and make 20 starts and pitch 60 innings, if these rookies are pitching like Ober did last year they have to let them get to the amount of innings they are hoping that get to. (I am guessing each pitcher will be different) Sorry to be long winded, but it seems that maybe the Twins let Bundy, Ober, and Ryan be more of a traditional 5,6 innings starters, and start the season with the other two spots doing a 3/3 with a Winder/Jax and Sands or Strotman/Dobnak, and the ones that do well you move to 4 inning type start, the others either go to the bullpen or down to the minors to get their innings.

That is super easy to do when things go as planned, but what happens if they Twins are consistently giving up 3,4,5 inning in a 4 inning or less start? (That happened in a 1/3 of Ober's start for example, only one of Ryan's to be fair.) I am not saying this isn't the right or possibly the only strategy the Twins have. Plus the team might have to come out and say this is the plan and why (the people on this site understand) but there are way more fans of the Twins not on a site like this then there are on it. They will look genius if they do this and it works, but man if it doesn't there will be call for their heads on a plate.

Kinda agree with fans showing up for wins, if the opening day line up is what some are suggesting, fans and wins might be hard to come by. And with the restrictions currently in MPLS there may be less fans than ever. I know plenty of people that are vaccinated that won't go any place they have to show their card (now if the Twins are winning and looking good I bet they might change their mind, but if they are losing they will probably even be more adamant) The strategy of stacking isn't a bad one, but can go bad quickly if both of the starters are bad and you tax the bullpen, and it if starts happening more than expected things could go real bad. They will have to be prepared almost every game a young guy goes out there to bridge the gap. Also, I don't see the Twins doing a 4/4/1 strategy, there is no way they are leaving a rookie pitcher out there in the 7th or 8th in a one run game when they have Duffey, Rogers or whoever else might be pitching really well. So it may have to be highly thought of prospect starting going 4 and a lesser one starting the 5th and 6th and possibly 7th if there are pitching well, or it isn't a tight game.

I don't disagree with what you are saying at all and to be honest I don't know how they would do something different. (other then signing a couple of vets that they have go 4-6 innings regardless of how they are doing, I am not for that) With that being said sometimes doing what is right for the team doesn't translate well to watching/viewing a game. If your choice is going to watch Ryan pitch on Saturday or going to a stacked or bullpen game on Sunday, which choice do you think most fans would make? Also I think the fans could sour very quickly if Winder for example has a no hitter though 3, gets taken out and Jax comes in and gives up 4 in the 4th. Also it could make Rocco's job almost impossible, again for example the plan is for Winder to go three and Balazovic to go three. What if Winder is finishes his 3 innings with 36 pitches, does he stick to the plan or let him go another. Or maybe they are stacking 4/4/1 and the Twins are winning 5 - 0, Winder has 48 pitches after 4, what does Rocco do? He is in a no win situation, he leaves him in Winder does bad in the 5th, that is on him, he takes him out and Balazovic doesn't do good, also on him. IMO it is so hard to manage a team this way, and probably is why they didn't do it last year, when they absolutely could have with way lesser prospects than they have this year. Bullpen games are much easier, you are asking bullpen guys to do what they normally do, but stacking is asking pitchers to do something they don't normally do.

I personally don't think we will see any prospect currently not on the 40 man until they figure out if Dobnak, Jax, Sands, Strotman, Winder and Vallimont are worthy of continuing to be kept on the 40 man. So it would not surprise me to see a starting 5 of Bundy, Ryan, Ober, Dobnak and Jax. And if Ryan or Ober struggle they could get sent down and replaced with one of the above, but if Dobnak or Jax struggle the could get released, opening up 40 man spots for others. Now if that is how the season starts, I personally won't have to worry about watching crappy baseball, because I won't pay to see that disgusting staff and I stream so currently can't watch on TV as far as I know. I will sit on the side and complain how bad this FO is and Rocco should be fired, OR I will be in the backyard grilling crow (and still complaining about Rocco because I don't like him as a manager)

I guess it depends on the definition of helpful. Does getting to play because there are no other options count as helpful. At this point all three are on the 40 man, so if something happens to somebody they should get a chance, Combined last year they played in 135 for a negative WAR, but it seemed helpful because the Twins had nobody else. Based on the lineup MikeLink45 above these 3 are or should be counted as plan B for injuries or being terrible. The sad part is I don't see a plan C. The Twins can't trade Kepler until AK, Larnach or Celestino prove they are capable otherwise the Twins could have the worst OF in the majors no matter how good Buxton is, Can't trade Garver until you know Jeffers has it figured out, because that turns what is considered a strength into a hole in the lineup. Can't trade Donaldson because if Miranda doesn't pan out, they have no back up 3B, unless you want an infield with Arraez at 3B, Gordon at SS and Polanco at 2b, and Sano at first. And the biggest problem of all is there isn't much if any room on the 40 to replace offense. In the end I will say Gordon he seems like the most likely to be on the Twins opening day.

In my personal opinion teams are teaching the younger kids to go all out for as long as they can, because the stats say that getting though a lineup a 3rd time is hard to do. So again in my opinion and I have no data to back this up pitch counts and limiting innings might actually be hurting these pitchers. Obviously while trying to stretch somebody out and coming back from injury these are good tools to use. I believe I remember reading that huge jumps in innings from year to year isn't a good thing on a arm, but maybe teaching pitches to actually pitch and no always have to go all out might be good as well. But I don't think the way teams are using pitchers is going to change until it starts actually affecting the salaries of starting pitchers and the union steps up.

Sorry if you assumed I meant starters were going to complete every game. I meant there is about 1458 innings in a season. The Twins have 3 starters, and Alcala, Cotton, Duffey, Garza Jr, Jax, Rogers, Stashak, Theilbar, Throrpe, if they each pitch 75 (675), they are still short quite a bit of innings.