Otto von Ballpark

Marwin Gonzalez's Steamer projection largely agrees with you, pegging him at 104 wRC+ for 2019. That would be a repeat of his 2018 season wRC+, but in the 4 years prior (2014-2017), he exceeded 104 three times -- and of course he had that peak of 144 in 2017. Eyeballing it, it looks like he has a decent chance of beating that projection, and a non-negligible chance of beating it handily. Adrianza, on the other hand, is projected at 85 wRC+ and he's actually never even reached that mark, really (72 wRC+ in his Giants career, then 84 and 82 in his Twins career so far). He might have the same chance of reaching 100 wRC+ as Gonzalez has of approaching 144 again. Adrianza is virtually the same age as Gonzalez too (both turn 30 this year). Adrianza has the edge defensively, but Gonzalez isn't bad for his career -- his career UZR/150 at 2B, SS, and 3B ranges from -5 to -7. I'd say it largely comes down to how much you buy their small sample numbers at 3B, since they could see most of their infield action there. FWIW, Gonzalez has rated well in the corner outfield and at 1B, and could be a viable starter at those spots -- and the Twins have some uncertainty at those spots too. Obviously it all depends on the terms of a deal. I'd rather target pitching, but a short term deal for Gonzalez might be better than simply sitting on the cash.

No worries, I don't think the Phillies plan on flipping Realmuto right now.

Update! The Diamondbacks just signed Nolasco to a minor league deal: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/02/diamondbacks-sign-ricky-nolasco-marc-rzepczynski.html

FWIW, article tag lines are not visible in the forum view. Although I think the satire is obvious enough that it shouldn't require the tag!

The Royals had a lot of leverage, though. Merrifield is already 30, and wasn't even arbitration eligible -- I imagine he felt it was too risky to wait for an even bigger payday. Injury or under-performance could quickly tank his career earnings at that age, as compared to a young guy like Schoop.

That poster wasn't quite correct -- the Royals did get a team option for Merrified's first FA year in that deal. Of course, because of his late start, that first FA year won't come until Merrifield is already 34 years old, so it's not much of a template for the Twins right now.

Is this true? At Baseball Prospectus, Realmuto seems to be rated as average for 2018, and above average for 2017, after being below average for 2015-2016.

Relevant video (probably behind a short ad, sorry): Saturday Night Live: "Wave Starter at a Baseball Game" https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/wave-starter-at-a-baseball-game/2724290

For those who support the proposed 3 batter minimum -- why 3? Why not 2? That would seemingly address the parade of LOOGYs and ROOGYs just as well, correct?

From what I've read, that is exactly the idea being discussed by MLB -- it's just the "end of inning" part doesn't get mentioned in most reports.

The Twins signing a SP was unexpected?

Span's was .718, and that includes his breakout repeating AAA.

But that also means there is still plenty of chaff to cut on the pitching side too -- why single out Granite? It's not like Granite, or Duffey, or whomever is holding the FO back on external upgrades anyway.

I'm not sure what you think I am arguing. I just jumped in to say that signing both Perez plus a better SP would not necessarily bump any of our current top 4 starters. That's all. I am not necessarily unsatisfied with Keuchel, that was you -- I was just acknowledging our options are more limited today than at the start of the offseason (Corbin, Eovaldi, Happ, Morton). Still a chance Keuchel is available on a fair contract, though, and could help this team. Really though, you can't just isolate one offseason. Last offseason was filled with "competent" short term deals too (and their first offseason had even less than that). An over-reliance on a short-term, competent strategy will likely leave us deficient of the quality of assets required to compete.

Gonsalves, Stewart, and Romero are only 24 years old, and Thorpe 23. I hope the 2019 Twins win more than 75-80 games. If it's looking like that is all they will win, though, I hope we will see the aforementioned pitchers after a few months.

I think Perez's actual role is 5th starter, before taking into account potential injuries. But yeah, he would be a fine depth piece -- after you've already added a quality piece. Maybe it's down to Keuchel now, but there were others available before.

Now it is, yes. But in the hypothetical where we signed another, better SP, I could see Perez being a better fit for that role (assuming we don't lose Mejia -- him being out of options certainly complicates matters).

Injury insurance? A 6th starter that you don't feel bad about stashing in an unpredictable long relief / mop-up role until the need arises?

I think it's more likely a second starter acquisition would push Perez out of the rotation.

That's fair. I am certainly no fan of a parade of mid-inning pitching changes. But I don't think each factor is equal. The pitch clock factor has the potential to be huge. I know it's just comparing two games, but the example I linked illustrates that -- just 10 seconds between each "inaction pitch" added up to 25 minutes for the whole game! I feel like even talking about pitching changes, or mound visits, or intentional walks just obscures this elephant in the room The average time of game in 2018 was 3:05. I know averages are of limited use here, because it's highly variable -- if every game was predictably 3:05 like football it wouldn't be so bad, but you're right, we get too many close to 3:30 and there's no way to predict them. So let's say the range for most games right now is 2:40-3:30. If that average came down to 2:40 with a pitch clock, and the range for most games was 2:15-3:05, I don't think I'd care all that much about the occasional burst of mid-inning pitching changes within that range. Or a few more mound visits, or whatever. Just keep the game moving when no one has any real reason to slow it down, and I can tolerate a few slow downs.

*as the pitch is delivered* That's not the 30-45 seconds that players are taking between pitches. The catcher isn't leaning the moment he throws the ball back to the pitcher. Fielders aren't moving during that time either. All I want, and all the pitch clock is purporting to do, is to trim those 30-45 second gaps down to 20 seconds or less. Virtually nothing will change from a strategic perspective, and in fact it will be easier for fans to pay attention to the little things that happen right before/during/after a pitch -- because you know they're going to happen within the next 20 seconds. Not some longer time that varies based on each batter's glove routine, etc. And that trimming will add up, to significantly swifter games.

Here's another way to look at it: Pitching changes are up, but not enough to explain much of the time of game increase. Here's some breakdown: http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/comments/are-there-more-mid-inning-relief-changes-these-days#4 An extra 2.2 mid-inning pitching changes per game (combined, both teams) between 1984 and 2013. On average, they probably only explain about 5 minutes of the 23 minute time of game increase between those two years (up to 30 minutes by 2018). I still understand how they are annoying when they happen, although -- they don't happen excessively every game, or even for more than an inning or two when they do happen. I guess there are multiple perspectives on the pace problem: some folks think the game moving at X speed, then shifting down to Y speed for an inning, is bad. But I actually don't mind that, particularly when it is connected to actual strategy -- I can at least ponder and discuss the strategic implications of pitching changes during the 1-2 minutes it takes to happen. Personally, I'm more concerned that the X standard pace of the majority of the game is unnecessarily slow to begin with, as compared to the Z standard pace used previously throughout MLB history, and still used at all other levels of play. There's no strategic implications to discuss about MLB batters adjusting their gloves or MLB pitchers circling the mound, certainly not for 30-45 seconds between every pitch for the whole game. That said, I wouldn't mind efforts to speed relief pitching. Although I'd probably try less invasive adjustments first, before I'd change substitution rules.

No, there isn't? Between batters, sure. But not between pitches with no one on base, generally. It's not like fielders regularly get repositioned once the count goes to 1-0 or something. Even with runners on base, movement and shifting is pretty limited between pitches, unless it's a SB situation -- and that's generally done right before the pitch, or during the pitch, not constantly during the 30 seconds leading up to the pitch.

I think it is entirely fair if a team doesn't want Gonsalves, Thorpe, and Stewart as starters 6-8 on their depth chart right now, especially with how Mejia's 2018 season ended early due to elbow concerns. Doesn't mean they don't care about those guys -- it is just an honest assessment of their readiness to contribute at the moment. Romero could do it, but the team seems to want to see him in the pen, which doesn't seem unreasonable either.

I agree, Perez plus Mejia is better for this team than just Mejia. But if "this is the time to win", I think there must also exist another SP acquisition who is better for this team than Perez.