Otto von Ballpark

Pavano was an expiring contract, trade deadline deal. Castillo was more notable -- he had one year, $5 mil left, plus a $5.75 mil club option. (Actually I was racking my brain recently trying to think of TR trading prospects for anyone, and the Castillo deal was all I could really come up with.) No doubt, Buehrle would not be my top choice to dispense with $19 million. But if I struck out in other avenues, or the other avenues cost an extra $50+ million that I didn't want to guarantee, and the Jays were willing to dump him, I'd do it.

When I've read it, the rule was just about uniformed coaches in the dugout. Does that mean you can have any number of coaches you want otherwise? And if you wanted them at games they'd have to sit elsewhere and/or not be uniformed? Seems like you could work around it if you wanted -- particularly for coaches that don't really have to be present during the game. The way shifts are being done, will we see a coach's booth soon, like football?

Zach Duke just posted an 11.4 K/9 in MLB. Wheeler has never pitched out of the pen as a pro, Gilmartin has one relief appearance (a rehab one in rookie ball). O'Rourke is an interesting name, but he's almost 27 years old with 1 inning of AAA ball to his credit.

Thielbar has two option years left -- he would probably get claimed. Very different from Gilmartin, who is merely subject to Rule 5 at this point (although I am certainly warm to the argument he should be protected over a few of our other 40-man bodies).

Further picky picky picky... why was a post about players being added to the "major league roster" moved to the minor league forum? 40-man ("major league") roster talk is probably of great interest to the main forum too, if you could keep it cross-linked there.

Good post. I actually thought of that before, in terms of whether the Twins might want to go after Cabrera, and taking Buehrle's salary off Toronto's hands, while not a bad move in isolation, might give us more competition for Cabrera. Haven't heard us connected to Melky, though. Then again, if you really want a player, another (good) player's one year, $19 mil commitment (at a different position, no less) probably isn't going to be that big of an obstacle.

The issue isn't that he's an "inside" guy or that he thinks just like Gardy/Anderson or that he has no qualifications. Those are obviously untrue. It's more like, why is being a former Twin or local guy apparently such an important criteria for Twins hiring? While none of the choices thus far look egregiously misguided or anything (thank goodness they didn't seriously consider Blyleven or Morris), I don't have much confidence that the Twins are even looking at the best candidates, much less hiring them. And this is with a great veteran baseball man in TR at the helm of the whole thing. And it extends beyond just this winter's coaching hires -- we've seen it in past coaching hires, in free agency (let's immediately address our OF defense by... pursuing Torii Hunter?!), in trades (perhaps too often over-rating our own prospects?), and basically in the front office too (automatically promoting the long-tenured assistant GMs). It's almost like the Twins view "their guys" (coaches, execs, players, draft picks, past associations) as just as good any other guys -- and they rarely need to look beyond them. To some degree, it's probably true, especially on the margins (third base coaches, lower draft picks, etc.), and it's a refreshing reminder that it is still a sport. But on the other hand, it seems kinda lazy, it results in a very draft-dependent franchise, it's not a great way to build any kind of edge, nor is it a good way to sustain success (as we saw after TR left). For a related example, look at Jack Goin. Now, I appreciate his visits here and his candor, and I have nowhere near enough information to judge his specific job performance (which is ultimately also the case with most coaches, execs, etc.). But as another example, given the Twins track record of hiring decisions, I also don't have much confidence that his position and retention is based much on effectiveness or results -- he was one of "our guys" (admittedly lower on the totem pole) when the need arose for a stats person, and he's only further entrenched himself as one of "our guys" since. (Again, not to pick on Jack Goin, just using him as an example.) I don't necessarily think a Minnesota connection is a worthless factor, but it probably shouldn't dominate to the extent that it has, not in a highly competitive, results-oriented field, anyway.

I think the only guys you can't remove/replace on the 40-man during the winter are the prospects you add to the 40-man in November (for Rule 5 purposes). So you can't add a bunch of guys to protect them from the Rule 5 draft, then drop them immediately afterward. Other 40-man guys can be dropped and replaced at any time.

As far as former Twins go, Willis is one of the more legit candidates -- he's got plenty of experience at the highest level with other organizations. But it still feels like the Twins put too much importance on "former Twin" as a qualification in selecting candidates, and probably in making job offers too (and sometimes in free agency as well). When there's talk of an organizational shake-up after four 90+ loss seasons (not to mention numerous playoff failures before that)... it remains a little disappointing that TR generally limited himself to calling numbers already stored in his phone (if not on speed dial). Shouldn't a shake-up imply moving out of one's comfort zone, and challenging oneself, at least to some degree?

To add to jokin's excellent 4 point response above, I don't think contention in 2015 has to be THAT remote of a likelihood, especially if we are aggressive with some higher-upside FA. We were a 75 win pythag team last year, despite some glaring weaknesses. Target those weaknesses immediately through FA, and deploy Meyer/May as bullpen weapons or SP reinforcements (and similarly use Rosario/Sano/Buxton if you can), and all of a sudden, 2015 doesn't look that bad. Not saying I'd bet on that team contending, but I'd sure prefer betting on them through some 1-year contracts than betting on our prospects and 2014 leftovers filling those holes immediately in any meaningful way. (And those holes are still big enough to accommodate a couple FA and any prospects that want to force their way into regular action.)

I might pursue both, with the likelihood you could only land one. Not sure if two bounceback guys, who absolutely need playing time to rebuild their value, want to go to the same place at the same time. Particularly here, now that our rotation isn't quite the vast wasteland it was in 2012-2013.

If our rotation is "just as bad" next year, that's not solely because we took a chance on Masterson or whomever. It will also be because (some combination of) Gibson doesn't step forward, Nolasco doesn't rebound, Hughes regresses, etc. (And while nobody likes to lose, I don't buy "discouragement" as a serious factor holding back our young hitters.) If Masterson is bad again, and he's worse than your other starters, you can trade/disable him by early July, just like Cleveland did, just like we did with Nolasco, even earlier with Pelfrey, etc. But with two rotation spots that should be up for grabs in spring training, that's a chance I am willing to take with one of those spots for a couple months.

MLB Trade Rumors predicts a one-year, $12 mil deal for Masterson. Is that serious money, in modern MLB? If the guy is healthy, he's one year removed from being a legit All-Star, and he gets the same guaranteed cash as Pelfrey last winter?

To be fair, B-Ref's park factors now have Target Field similar to Texas and Chicago of recent years.

True, although "due diligence" for AAA pitching coach is probably quite a bit different than the same for MLB pitching coach. And even if these matters have been discussed before, that doesn't mean they are no longer relevant to a promotion. Maybe they are factors in how the Twins see him as fit for minor league assignments, but not top MLB staff? Anyway, I don't know anything about Mason, so I certainly was not trying to cast aspersions on him. Just noting that it was a little odd. From my vantage point, though, I certainly prefer Mason to simply reaching out to former Twins pitchers or Minnesota natives (and maybe also preferable to the journeyman Cuellar?).

Tampering? They were trade negotiations. If the Red Sox or Yankees weren't negotiating in good faith, then the Twins let themselves be used, simple as that. Probably criminal to force that situation upon Bill Smith a couple months into his tenure (and borderline criminal to make Smith the GM in the first place), although even Smith should have known that, in the face of indecisive trade partners, keeping Santana for a year and taking the picks ("the TR method") wouldn't be the end of the world.

I sorta do. As much as Anderson really hadn't delivered much results recently, it's also true he didn't have a ton to work with, and I doubt he had a bad reputation around the league. And if Hughes thought he could benefit from a reduction in walks, that had been noted as Anderson's speciality.

Last 9 seasons? Not sure if his age 25-27 seasons (particularly the good defense components) are particularly relevant now, entering his age 34 season. He's 3 for his last 6 in terms of 3+ fWAR, and only 2 for his last 6 in bWAR. According to Rbat at B-Ref, Rios has only twice been an above average hitter in the past 6 seasons. And both B-Ref and Fangraphs have him as a slightly below-average defensive RF the past 2 seasons (even if "slightly below average" is an upgrade for the Twins OF defense ). By comparison, Masterson only has 5 seasons as a full-time starter, so only two 3+ WAR seasons isn't that much different than Rios' recent record. (And, of course, Masterson is 4 years younger.) Not that the debate should be Masterson vs. Rios. Since 2009, when Rasmus joined the league, he has beaten Rios in WAR roughly 13 to 9 (despite Rasmus playing CF the entire time, and Rios playing in more games). Also, looking ahead, in the event of a bounceback 2015 season and lack of a deadline flip, who would be worth a qualifying offer for 2016? Masterson and Rasmus, almost certainly. Rios? Probably not.

About Mason: I wonder why the Cardinals dismissed him after 2010? I know a lot of coaches have been dismissed at one time or another, so I try not to read too much into it, but it is curious -- there was no front office or coaching shake-up for the Cards that winter, just Mason. And he had been with them a LONG time. And they haven't missed much of a beat since then. The Cubs let him leave for Rochester after 2012 too, after one season in the minors under the Epstein regime (he was hired by the previous front office).

Cuellar is an odd candidate. As you mention, he's got some big names on his resume, but he's been dismissed as a big league pitching coach several times, and he's been stuck in mostly minor or minor league positions with not-so-prestigious organizations (2006-2007 Pittsburgh, Twins since).

The FA may not know much, but they may have an opinion. (Not unlike posters here ) The FA's agent might have clients that have worked with the coach. They may have teammates/friends that worked with the coach, or in an organization/program that included the coach. And if the FA pitcher is like Hughes last year or Masterson this year, a guy who needs to get back on track, I would think his opinion about the pitching coach could be a pretty big deal -- easily could be a tiebreaker for Masterson if he's mulling multiple similar offers. And thus the absence of a pitching coach could be a problem.

What kids? He's already giving another chance to Hicks in this scenario, and there are no realistic OF "kids" ready to guarantee an opening day job right now (Hicks doesn't even deserve it, really). He's also got Meyer in the rotation, with May in the pen presumably as the 6th starter (unless he becomes a dominant relief weapon). Again, there are no other "kid" pitchers ready.

The Arizona GM also got fired before the end of the season.

That was Milone's Twins ERA+, in just 21 innings. His season ERA+ was 90. I'm not bullish on Milone, and I am concerned about his poor finish, but even I don't think his performance baseline for bouncing back is a 57 ERA+.

Anytime an OPS can be swung by 80 points in one game, you're probably dealing with a too-small sample! Although I agree it was encouraging for Rosario. With a good spring, I could see him opening in AAA despite his 2014 regular season performances.