Otto von Ballpark

Funny how Winder was promoted to AAA yesterday. Why, it's almost like his promotion to AAA had nothing to do with picking up Burrows or Barraclough or anyone else!

Getting themselves fired is safe?

I think you're too fixated on .500. .500 isn't great but it's not particularly meaningful without context. Not all .500 teams/records are in equal circumstances. The Twins would still be under .500 through July 21st with a 15-6 run in our next 21 games. But a 9-10 White Sox record in the same time period (with Cleveland no better than 11-8) would put us 6.5 games back. I highly doubt the Twins FO would say "welp, under .500, have to sell" at that point. At the very least, they'd let things play out closer to July 30. 2017-2018, they may approach that record with an eye to sell, but not 2021 -- they've invested too much in contending already this season to give up that easily.

Only 7 of the 10 games vs CWS are before the trade deadline anyway. But as I alluded to at the end of my previous post, if we can climb to around 6.5 games out after July 21st as the deadline approaches (likely aided by 5-2 or better vs CWS), I'm not convinced the 2021 Twins will be sellers. We were sellers in that range in 2017-2018 but we were in a different phase of the cycle then (pre-Donaldson, lots of young players, etc.). Selling in that spot in 2021 (or just failing to get back in the race) may just be setting up the front office and/or coaching staff to lose their jobs if 2022 isn't a massive rebound. I think they've got to try to make a good run here at the end of 2021, even if they ultimately fall short, to reclaim a little leash for 2022.

I think we're talking about different things. If the Twins swept 10 out of 10 from the White Sox, even though it wouldn't erase the full current 11.5 game deficit, the Twins would be considered the favorites at that point -- it would obviously signify a massive CWS collapse and MIN turnaround. Heck, we might have a commanding lead by Sep. 1st in that scenario. 9-1 might have similar effects. Even 8-2 would mean at least one MIN sweep of CWS on the road -- CWS would still be favored but it would be a dramatic shift. But my threshold here isn't a dramatic shift from just 10 games. Would be great if that happened, but that's probably not realistic with an 11.5 game deficit, and not how these comebacks generally go: 1978 Yankees went 7-3 vs BOS during their comeback 1995 Mariners went 2-3 vs the Angels in theirs 2012 A's went 7-6 in their final 13 games vs TEX And I've already posted about the 2006 Twins comeback vs DET/CWS So that's why I set the "getting back in the race" / " not quite done" threshold at 7-3. 7-3 won't give us good playoff odds, we'd require luck and good performance in our remaining games, and we'd still more than likely fall short in the end, maybe even require a game 163 -- that's just the reality of comeback attempts like this -- but it would represent a start at the attempt. (Obviously more wins beyond this threshold would be great, and we shouldn't concede any of these 10 games just because we hit the threshold early!) * And that 7-3 assumes an even distribution of wins across series -- sweeping them 3-0 in August after a 4-3 July might be too little, too late. Really, we'd need to be at least 5-2 vs CWS through July 21, and make up another game or two outside of head-to-head games by that point too. Then buy at the trade deadline and try to keep it up through August and September.

8 of 10 would be 5.5 games back. not 4.5.

Chicago's offense? Their team OPS+ is worse than the Twins. They've scored 27 runs the last 9 games. They've got injuries just like the Twins, but worse depth and Mercedes is turning back into a pumpkin. Their starting pitching has been much better, I'll grant that, but I don't think they're invincible (probably performing a bit over their head so far) -- and in the modern game, you still need to score more than 3 runs a game and have a deeper pen, or the SP advantage can easily vanish. They've given up 53 runs the past 9 games. Not that the Twins will dominate, but nothing particularly unlikely about a split. (At least not before game 1 was rained out )

FWIW, Doolittle had potentially 3.5 years of affordable control when he was traded. (Was also bundled with Ryan Madson who had 1.5 affordable years left.)

I mean, no one disputes that it will take a lot of luck (plus improved play) to come back at this point. Your 10-0 vs Chicago, with 7 of those games on the road, would represent an incredible concentration of luck and improved play. It would be great if they can do it, and they should obviously try to win as many as possible, but no, they don't "need" to do that unless you just mean to say a comeback is impossible. Very few 3 month comebacks in history have had that concentration of luck and improved play. I think 7-3 over those 10 games represents the *minimum* amount of luck and improved play (and poor play, from Chicago's perspective) necessary to give us a fighting chance. That would leave a deficit of 7.5 for the remaining 76 games, or the need to make up 1 game on average per 10 games. If we can do that through August 11 (the end of our season series with Chicago), we'll be 4.5 games behind them with 46 to play. We've already made up 4.5 games over our last 8. Cleveland will be another hurdle, but like I said, fighting chance. I've heard Chicago announcers making the same argument in reverse -- they really want to split the 4 game series this week to keep the Twins down and put a stop to their recent slide. They'll still be the favorite regardless, but they're not going to be comforted if they only win 1 out of 4 at home.

We're 11.5 games back with 86 remaining. If we can go 7-3 vs Chicago, then we have 76 games to make up the other 7.5. Still a tall order, like I said, but if these Twins actually have it in them to take 7 of 10 from Chicago (with 7 of those 10 games *in* Chicago), and Chicago has it in them to lose those games, then a 7.5 game swing over the other 76 games is not insurmountable. (Not likely, of course, but we're well beyond the point where a comeback is likely. We just have to chip away.)

I'm not sure the point of the .500 framing? We need to gain ground on Chicago, not on .500 (.500 is just a marker along the way). Twins moving up 2 games and the White Sox simultaneously moving down 2 games is a 4 game swing. The Twins are 11.5 games back of Chicago with 86 games to play. It's a tall order any way you slice it, but it's simply not reasonable to demand they must make up 87% of their deficit over just 12% of the remaining games. Comebacks like this generally don't happen all at once. 2006 Twins were 11 games back on this date, and went 6-4 in their remaining 10 games with 1st place Detroit, and 8-4 vs 2nd place Chicago. (And before anyone chimes in that the 2006 Twins were better than the 2021 club, sure they were, but the point is their standing relative to 1st and 2nd place, not absolute team quality. FWIW, 2006 Detroit and Chicago were better than their 2021 counterparts Chicago and Cleveland too.) 7-3 is simply a baseline for this 10 game slice, to get back in the hunt. (More wins are always better, of course.) If you set the bar at 10-0, just save us all the time and say it's impossible -- you wouldn't be the only one saying that.

Because it's head to head, moving up 2 games from 5-5 to 7-3 would be a net 4 game gain in the standings. 11.5 out now, so we'd still need to make up an additional 7.5 games outside the head-to-head games, which won't be easy. But if CHW is struggling enough to lose 7 of 10 to us (with 7 of those games in Chicago), it's possible. (FWIW, we've made up 4.5 games over our last 8.)

The last report on Refsynder was 6 days ago: Twins' Rob Refsnyder: Close to running Hopefully he found better motivation to start running than I usually do.

From an article posted Friday June 25th: https://www.mlb.com/news/mitch-garver-working-his-way-back-to-action

I endorse your optimism, although note that winning the division is more likely than the wild card. We are a similar number of games back in both races right now but we have fewer/weaker teams to pass in the division — and a ton of head-to-head games left with those teams too. Here are the current projected win totals from Fangraphs: Division: CHW 90, CLE 84 Wild Card: TBR 90, OAK 89, NYY 88, TOR 88 Fangraphs gives us a 2.4% at the division right now, vs only 0.7% for a wild card.

White Sox won their nightcap, although a late 7-1 lead turned into a save situation and they had to use Hendriks to close it out, final 7-5. Twins are 11.5 games back, same as KC and DET. (Tied with KC for last place, percentage points behind DET.)

Berrios and Buxton are already married to non-Minnesotans, with children.

Hicks was an extension with NYY, so it included his last year at $6 mil in arbitration. Buxton is already at $5.13 mil in his 2nd to last arb season, when Hicks was still at $2.825 mil, to give you an idea of their relative values. Hicks was a year older than Buxton too -- his first FA season would have been at age 30, while Buxton will only be 29. And of course it was padded to 7 years to even out the luxury tax burden on NYY, which Hicks was more willing to do because of his age.

It's tricky to draw specific conclusions from the FA market, because the sample of top FA is so small to begin with. A general conservative trend is likely happening, but it could be having a greater affect on guys like Pablo Sandoval and Mike Leake. I'm not sure there are a lot of dynamic Buxton comparables that have hit the market lately. Also, general 3/70 offers may not be that different from a 5/100 winning bid after we account for the remaining arb season (~$8 mil) and the likelihood that an extra year might be required to actually win the bidding. For example, MLBTR predicted 3/75 for Donaldson but it took 4/92 to get him to sign here -- and I think ATL and WAS may have been the only other serious bidders.

Balazovic is still in Wichita and Duran is on the shelf right now, unfortunately. That may have been what the other poster was referring to.

Jax might need to make a start next week. There are still a few rested arms in the pen plus Shoemaker if they need length, so they might not need a move until after the next short start.

Are we not scoreboard watching yet? White Sox lost at home 9-3 to Seattle, their 6th loss in 7 games. Twins have gone 5-2 to climb from 16 games back to 12 games back in that time. We're still tied for last place though as Detroit was rained out vs Houston.

I don’t think he said it is easy. But compared to his peers, Buxton’s aggressiveness at the plate (and in the field) might be making him more vulnerable to these kinds of injuries. Of course, Buxton’s aggressiveness also helps him be a better hitter and defender than his peers, so it really is a difficult situation!

The Twins best chance of keeping Rosario was to offer him arbitration, and his estimated arb award was $10 mil. It's possible that Rosario would have signed with us for $8 mil after we non-tendered him, but it's also possible that may not have been enough to top an $8 mil offer from Cleveland, if he felt insulted by our non-tender and/or could see the writing on the wall here with Kirilloff and Larnach.

Above the game logs at Baseball Reference is a nice summary of RBI opportunities: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=rosared01&t=b&year=2021 RBIs in 278 PAs 41 Actual Runners on Base 165 (85-54-26) Avg. MLBer w/ 278 PAs 31 Avg. Runners on Base 167 (84-54-28) Rosario has done well this year in RBI, with +10 over the average player. But note that, despite being on a poor hitting team, his RBI opportunities are about the same as an average player too. That's probably due to batting 4th/5th behind a good hitter or two (and the poor Cleveland hitters may be failing in their own RBI opportunities and leaving those baserunners for other players like Rosario?). FWIW, Kirilloff has the exactly the same positive RBI rate, with average opportunity, just in fewer PA: RBIs in 161 PAs 24 Actual Runners on Base 98 (47-35-16) Avg. MLBer w/ 161 PAs 18 Avg. Runners on Base 96 (49-31-16) Larnach on the other hand has a low RBI total compared to average, but even more opportunities than average too. Not a large sample yet, of course: RBIs in 152 PAs 12 Actual Runners on Base 116 (57-41-18) Avg. MLBer w/ 152 PAs 17 Avg. Runners on Base 91 (46-29-15)