Otto von Ballpark

Thinking more about this -- did it turn around Dozier? Defensively, he didn't turn it around at shortstop -- he was moved to second base the following spring. He also didn't turn around with the bat until ~2 months into the following season, when he made the infamous adjustment to become the Dozier that we all know and love. Also, Dozier struggled at AAA that season where we didn't recall him in September. He wasn't demoted until mid-August and then posted a .499 OPS over 20 games in Rochester. Seems to be a very different situation altogether from Buxton, who as lost as he looked earlier this year, only had 94 PA in MLB in 2018, and he has been hitting well overall at AAA even if the K/BB rates aren't too good. Dozier was a rookie who had a bad year across both levels, which seems like an easier spot to say "stay home." It also appears Dozier went to winter ball for a few games? Dozier's situation as seems similar to Hicks in 2013 -- bad rookie season in MLB, demoted to AAA in August, hit .235/.339/.373 in 15 games down there, wasn't recalled, but they made him the opening day CF again in 2014. Not sure if the 2012-2014 Twins should be held up as models of player development...

If you think Donaldson is likely to get 3-4 years -- what's the risk to the Jays on a QO? Seems like he would be sure to turn it down. Or if he did accept, he'd be an asset on a 1/18 deal (which would actually represent a pay cut from his 2018 salary).

You might be right, I haven't thought about it too much. Donaldson missed about 40 games last year too. Could miss 100 this year, even if he returns soon. I just can't recall 4 year deals for guys who missed most of a season. And it's a fairly crowded market -- Machado, Moustakas, Escobar, etc. And Donaldson may have a QO attached, and those 3 guys won't. Some of it definitely hinges on him returning and hitting this last month. He got scratched from his 2nd rehab game yesterday, so there's still some uncertainty around that too.

And it didn't for Aaron Hicks. Is it too late to snub Sano?

But if you rotate Rosario, Kepler, Polanco, etc. through DH, then you are still giving extra starts to Cave and Adrianza. I am not sure there is any meaningful trend toward no full time DHs around the league. https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=1&season=2018&month=44&season1=2018&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=3,d The A's and Mariners are certainly doing well with them. Compare it to 10 years ago: https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=1&season=2008&month=44&season1=2008&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=3,d Thome would have looked mighty good in a Twins uniform a few years earlier. If anything, a team whose lineup is not that deep or strong should add the best hitters wherever they can, even if it is a full time DH.

Donaldson would have to take a huge discount to get multiple years, I think. I can't really envision what that deal looks like, unless it's got a bunch of options / opt-outs? Kinsler was just one idea. Point is, there are enough FA infielders that they aren't all going to get a lot of years or dollars. If they sign one guy better than that, a cheap short term projected 2 WAR type wouldn't be bad for the other spot. Just thinking aloud, if we want to roll with a guy like Austin starting at 1B/DH, or Cave in CF for a bit, it might make it more tolerable to not simultaneously rely on Sano as a starter too.

Maybe? Donaldson is not getting a long-term deal. Kinsler is mostly defense now, but still 2+ bWAR, and they could get him short term for 2B and get Escobar for 3B with an eye toward shifting to 2B later, and make Sano earn his way back into the lineup. Just an idea, if the market allows.

You could give Sano the Buxton treatment too; he also has an option remaining after this season. A little harder since we already recalled him in 2018, so it would take longer to gain an extra year of control next year -- if we optioned him to start 2019, we probably couldn't call him up until late June. But maybe he could use the work, and the motivation of not being given a job at 3B, 1B, or DH? We've got the money to fill all of those spots externally, if we want.

Buxton can be optioned for ~29 days to start 2019 to get the same extra year of control. The greater chance of an "epic blunder" would seem to be counting on him for opening day 2019, regardless of what you do with him this September.

I know it's mostly a separate issue, but I'm not sure I am comfortable relying on Sano's bat anymore at either position...

Unless they are wildly front-loaded, those extensions wouldn't impact 2019 payroll much at all.

It's not wasted while Mauer is on the DL. Mauer's non-starting, non-DL time this year is more like 14%, and that doesn't have to change for 2019.

Meh. He's not tradeable before late July anyway, if at all, like most players on his expected contract.

What you fear is actually a good test. If the manager can't reduce Mauer's role if his performance drops, then I don't want him as my manager. Same for my general manager. And if ownership gets involved to make him play, then I wouldn't want to work here as a manager or GM either. I am encouraged that we've already seen Mauer play less, and go to the DL quicker, it seems, even while he is finishing out his mega-contract. I am not too worried about his performance leash if he comes back next year on a 1 year, $5 mil deal or whatever. (That said, I can also see other directions to take the position/lineup/roster.)

If Cruz is healthy and hitting, having him start 155 games would be a fantastic problem for the Twins to have! If that means Rosario and Sano each sit a few more days, I have no real issue with that -- neither one is a star right now anyway, with or without a few DH days.

You want a placeholder at 1B? For Rooker? I think Rooker is an interesting prospect, but I am not sure he is quite at that level where you try to keep a short term path clear for him. I think if you sign Mauer to a Morrison or Rondell White type contract, I think it could absolutely come with an expectation that his playing time could be reduced by June if he struggles or is hurt. I'd like to see the front office make that clear and achievable among the stakeholders rather than avoid it entirely out of fear.

I don't know if Cruz would completely preclude it. Aside from Mauer, the Twins have only had a handful of guys use the DH spot in that fashion, mostly since we punted on the season anyway. A benefit of a mostly young lineup. Cruz will need an occasional day off anyway.

Cruz feels like a great low-risk add. The years and money almost certainly won't be enough to preclude cutting him or parking him on the DL if he struggles or gets hurt, but if he succeeds, he could be an ultra-reliable bat that could strengthen our everyday lineup or get flipped for prospects. The suspension risk doesn't worry me at all. He forfeits his salary on a suspension, and as a DH he is relatively easier to replace. It is a little tricky to fit him in as a DH only. But if we are planning on Sano and Austin on the team anyway, maybe not so tough. Or adding a 2B with some versatility.

Maybe not a full-time, everyday DH, but I think this is an exaggeration. I suspect most teams have a Mauer/Morrison type plan at DH, unless perhaps you are stacked with great position players (which the Twins most certainly are not).

See, I think Mauer in a greatly reduced role is actually *worse* than re-signing him to start. He is pretty useless on a modern MLB bench. Backup 1B/DH? He can pinch hit, probably only for a few guys, and most of the time you will need someone else to take over on defense. Whereas, if he starts, depending on your roster configuration, he doesn't necessarily affect the size or composition of your bench.

Can Cruz really expect a long term deal? I have to admit, I am intrigued by him...

Correct, Buxton is Super-2 regardless, since he is just shy of 3 full years. If he is called up for 13 days, he will hit 3 full years service time. He'd remain in the same 3 years service time group following the 2019 season, if we option him for ~29 days next season.

I have tried to be very clear about the 86%, no intent to mislead. It is the number of games Mauer starts, at 1B or DH, while he is on the active roster. If we are carrying another DH/1B anyway who starts the rest, which is what we did with Morrison and what we are doing now with Austin and what we could do with Sano, what does it matter how the 1B starts are divided up? You don't need a third 1B on the roster, and indeed the Twins haven't kept one (aside from wanting reps for Sano over there, which as you suggest could be a separate consideration). Adrianza didn't start at 1B this year until the front office was readying to punt (July 14) with Sano still in the minors and Morrison on the DL -- it wasn't because of Mauer. (FWIW, Mauer started that game at DH, and Garver was on the bench, as was Astudillo and Grossman. I am not sure exactly what was going on that day, but I don't think you can really fault Mauer for Adrianza starting at 1B. Belisle and Astudillo both pitched that day too, so maybe it was something in Molitor's coffee. ) Mauer's health time on the DL should absolutely be a factor in the decision whether to re-sign him, but it really has little to do with causing a short bench. His replacement at 1B can take his roster spot when he is on the DL. And the team can be more aggressive about putting him on the DL when he is day-to-day, if they haven't started that already. Now, if you want to acquire a new starting DH who doesn't double as a 1B, that could be an issue with a Mauer pairing. But it would be just as much of an issue with a Sano pairing, as he's not starting significantly more than 86% of the games at 1B either. Likely the same for Austin.

2 things: 1. I think it can be overstated. That extra year of control is clearly less valuable now than at previous points in Buxton's career. (Same for Sano too, which I suspect is why they didn't try to option him earlier this year than they did.) Maybe the extra year is still valuable enough on its own, but I think we should keep that relative value in mind -- there is clearly not the same imperative to securing the extra year now as there was, say, back in Buxton's rookie year. 2. This was addressed in the earlier thread, but for those that missed it: seeing Buxton in September and securing the extra year are not mutually exclusive. The Twins still have a minor league option on Buxton, which they could use for ~29 days in 2019 to achieve the same thing. He'd be up before May 1st. Frankly, if he is healthy, Buxton needs reps, not rest. At least when high-level reps are available, and he's about to get 4+ months of offseason rest anyway. My plan would be to play him in Minnesota after the AAA season ends, but also plan on someone else being the opening day CF in 2019 while Buxton gets some extra reps at AAA to open the season. We need to prepare for the possibility that Buxton won't be the 2019 answer in CF, just as much as we should want that extra year of control.

That is a reasonable alternative to Mauer for sure, but it doesn't really change the composition or usage of our bench either. You still need a starting DH and a utility infielder, same as the Mauer plan.