Otto von Ballpark

Yeah, I too noticed that Finnegan didn't have an extended impact, back when I was researching Tyler Jay and the fast-track suggestions. Finnegan was on a team with a much better bullpen -- they didn't really need him in September. The regular season was primarily about acclimation and evaluation for him. But in the wild card game (which is 100% in any playoff path of the Twins, unlike the Royals last year who had a shot at the division), Finnegan was a critical piece when the game went to extra innings, allowing them the freedom to use their best bullpen options early in a do-or-die game. Given our staff, Berrios could potentially help us in that way earlier than the wild card game (although since our path to the postseason is 100% thru the wild card game, it wouldn't hurt to have him available then too). And Berrios could contribute either in the pen or in a start (which Finnegan was not prepared to do). If he's effective, I also wouldn't necessarily shut him down for the playoffs -- pacing him needs to be part of the plan. I wasn't necessarily comparing Berrios to Price either as pitchers or in pedigree, but he is another example of a September/October difference making rookie out of the pen. You don't have to be a #1 overall pick or super-elite prospect to be a difference-maker down the stretch -- you just have to be a really good pitcher. Berrios is by far our best shot at adding such a pitcher to an otherwise shaky staff at this critical juncture. He doesn't even need to make a Price 2008 level difference to have more than a marginal impact of the 2015 Twins season.

I think Sano gets a pass on that, given his recent rate of runs driven in!

I get that, didn't mean to pick on you. But to me, there really isn't any valid argument against it anymore (unless/until he's fatiguing or struggling). Not with how he's pitched, and how our staff looks right now.

Agreed, but I think the bullpen and rotation are still weak enough that Berrios absolutely needs to get a chance. It may not work, the attempt may get scuttled after a couple appearances, even if it does work they don't have to run him into the ground -- but there's just no way they can pass up the chance, given the current state of our pitching staff, over a few days service time. Which is why I am starting to think it will happen.

Fien, turning 32, earning several million next year, with a 5.4 K/9 since coming off the DL and his third straight season of dramatically dropping K rate? You want him, an admittedly wearing out Perkins, and Rays reject Jepsen as three-fourths of your bullpen front line? And you still need to sign some guys to fill it out. If May was the top setup guy, I could easily see TR filling the rest with mediocre vets on guaranteed deals again, maybe re-signing some of Boyer, Duensing, or Cotts. After all, no young guys have claimed spots or earned trust yet. If you've got to sign some guys anyway, why not sign good guys? A new top setup man? And then try them first while you strengthen the rotation with May (and put some pressure on your big-money SP under-performers)? Heck, maybe May's dominant bullpen turn will make him an even better, more confident starter.

If one of those guys can't perform, I don't want TR to keep running him out there to start. (The Cubs released Edwin Jackson after 2.5 years, Nolasco potentially isn't too far from that point. We could eat some salary in trade too.) And that's only 3 guys, with a pretty big "if healthy" qualifier. Odds are we will employ at least one regular SP without a big contract who is worse than May next year.

He's not going to intentionally make his team worse in a playoff race to save ~30 days service time, no. Not sure any GM in the game would do that.

Montreal is a pretty sweet city! I've gone there for fun with no baseball -- I would undoubtedly do so again if I could catch a ballgame too. But yeah, it's not likely. The city would need to pony up for an expensive new stadium, which it didn't do last time when said stadium would have been much cheaper. There's probably some regret from a few folks up there, even important business/civic types, that they let the Expos get away, but that is hard to undo.

I've been through Tampa, and the stadium is definitely in an odd location, but the Marlins don't exact draw well with a new ballpark in Miami. I think their location problem might be their city/state rather than the part of town.

"Was" being the operative word on Miller. Dude was traded for nothing in 2010 then non-tendered, the same winter we were busy trading Hardy for Hoey. We need to target guys like that, and high-upside injured guys like Madson. Holland, Herrera, Shreve, and Wilson came up as relievers. (As did Robertson who is now departed from NY, and Finnegan arguably came up a RP too, in his short stint in the KC org.) Davis, Hochevar, Betances, and Miller were failed starters (some spectacular failures). Neither KC nor NY has recently moved a starter performing like May to their bullpen, certainly not permanently.

Am I missing something? Why wasn't O'Rourke available, despite not pitching at all in 9 days? Option him if you're not going to use him. And was Perkins really unavailable the last 3 games? He'd already be 10 days into a 15-day DL stint if we had disabled him when he flew home for his cortisone shot, eligible to return in just 4 more games (Sep. 2nd, when we wouldn't even have to demote anyone to make room for him again due to expanded rosters). Add in our insistence on rostering multiple unmovable "less enticing options" like Duensing and Boyer through it all, and I've got no sympathy if our bullpen is short-handed because of these decisions.

So you are saying our GM absolutely rejects the concept of timing investment?

TR may be cautious and conservative with his promotions as a general rule, but I doubt it has anything to do with his forecast for our 2015 playoff chances or player service time right now. I honestly think TR believes he's got his best 2015 team on the field at the moment, although hopefully he is thinking long and hard about how Berrios could improve it and expanded rosters could help it too.

But that same guy, while no superstar, has better SP upside than arguably all 5 guys in your current rotation, and probably everybody but Berrios next year too. If you can replace May as a bullpen weapon with a no more than a 2/12 (Neshek) or 3/18 (Gregerson) contract, then use May as a SP replacement for one of your four weaker starters, that makes you a much better team overall. Or would you rather TR settle for more Boyers and Stauffers out of the pen, and commit to Nolasco-Santana-Hughes-Milone in the rotation regardless of performance?

I didn't mean to imply that a single "solid reliever" would fix the pen. But look at a guy like Mark Lowe. Great season, maybe a little too costly in terms of prospects for a 2-month rental, but do you really think the Twins can't afford to be aggressive in FA bidding for him and his 11 K/9? Or Darren O'Day? Shawn Kelley? Ryan Madson? None of those guys are going to break any bank, maybe 2-3 years around $6 mil AAV just like Gregerson, Neshek, Duke, etc., and they all represent fairly high upside options. Then there are high-upside rehab projects, like Madson was last winter, which we should be able to attract to our organization after a winning season, and another tier of guys who can reliably fill out the rest of your staff cheaply if you so desire. Guys like Hawkins and Oliver Perez. The Twins have neglected their bullpen so long, I think some have forgotten that these avenues exist. You don't have to rely on Duensings, Swarzaks, Boyers, Thompsons, and Stauffers...

It is not that hard to add a solid reliever if you are willing to spend $6 mil AAV on one (or even less for guys like Hawkins). There are other avenues too, like trades and fliers with upside, not to mention finishing the job on developing Meyer and the recent RP draftees. If the Twins are even mildly aggressive in these areas, there should be no need to prematurely convert one of their better starters to relief, barring catastrophe.

You are misremembering, rather badly. Buxton's earlier 4 strikeout game was actually a 6-1 Twins win: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIN/MIN201506240.shtml

Accepting May in the bullpen for 2016 is just giving the front office an excuse for yet again not signing any decent relievers in the off season. Boo to that. Go out and sign a few guys like Neshek or Gregorson (examples from this past winter, haven't studied this winter's class yet). May in the pen right now, I understand there isn't much other choice to improve the pen. But this team will have the opportunity to fix that in the off season and they should be expected to get with the times and actually pay the modest sums due good FA relievers.

I doubt you read many that wanted to trade him for a catcher. There just aren't great catchers available in trade right now. He was mentioned in regards to Tulo, although actually most posters wanted to deal Gibson instead, as he was one of the Rockies targets named in Jeremy's rumor.

Remember, 34 days is the max, if they call him up Sep. 1 and let him finish the season (meaning, he's good and useful). If they let him finish in Rochester first, it may only be 27 days. If they give him a couple MLB appearances and decide he's fatiguing and option him to shut him down, it could be as little as 6 days or whatever. And if you are absolutely committed to getting that extra year of control, you have to keep him in the minors for ~12 days regardless in 2016. You can't risk that being ~18 days to see if you can catch lightning in a bottle this September? I think your risk-reward calibration is off. Royals fans are sure glad you weren't counseling their team on Brandon Finnegan last year. And Rays fans about David Price in 2008. Two young pitchers who made quite a difference as just "a pen arm" in September and October (one in the wild card game, no less). If that's the "risk reward game" surely there are some examples of MLB teams holding back pitchers similar to Berrios in health, talent, and experience for service time reasons in a pennant race? I can think of a ton of hitters getting the service time treatment (not generally in pennant races, though) but not any pitchers with Berrios's profile. I think you are over-thinking this extra year of control and exaggerating its importance. TR certainly hasn't shown much care for service time with even more elite prospects than Berrios (Mauer and Liriano). Buxton was only called up due to Hicks' injury (twice), and Sano wasn't called up until almost a month past the Super-2 threshold had passed. Given that, there's probably a decent chance that Berrios could make the team next spring anyway -- I don't think the Twins care all that much about service time. If he makes the team to begin April 2016, wouldn't you feel silly for not having a "free" tryout for him in September 2015?

I get the quick hook, but I wouldn't want to make it a bullpen game. Just getting 3-4 effective innings out of guy (or two) could be huge, especially if the game stays close late or goes into extras. There should be someone in this starting group trustworthy enough on regular rest to try that.

By my calculations, it's 15 days service time or so to give him a couple MLB looks. That's not much of a cost. Easily regained next April if they want, especially since shutting him down at 15 days suggests he wasn't ready or was wearing down. And if he looks to be an asset in our 2015 pennant race, it's 34 days service time, max. Also not prohibitively difficult to recapture in 2016, if the extra year of control is really as important as you say it is. That's ultimately what I don't get about your argument -- this extra year of control is SO important, to not even try seeing if he could help us in a pennant race... but not important enough that they couldn't justify an extra 2-5 weeks in the minors in 2016?

See my post above -- the original poster actually meant "wild card game." If there is actually a game 163 tiebreaker, that will almost certainly be whoever is on regular rest. There's still a chance that we could have time to re-arrange things for the wild card game, though, if game 163 is unnecessary. In any case, Hughes and Berrios give us some interesting options to arrange things well in advance.

Minor nit-pick: the wild card game is not "game 163" in that it is not officially part of the regular season, but rather the postseason. A tiebreaker game would technically be "game 163", though. It's still pretty far away, and there are off days left and Hughes' return to consider in addition to Berrios, but for the sake of looking, it would be Gibson in line to take the start right now (assuming no skips or re-arranging). There is a day off scheduled before the wild card game, so the next starter (currently Pelfrey) could take it on regular rest too (especially if we had to play a tiebreaker game 163 on that off day, to determine who advances to the wild card game).

It might be whoever is in line for the start. Not sure this race is going to be easy enough for us to juggle our rotation.