Otto von Ballpark

Replacing Deduno could shift bullpen burden by putting Deduno back in the pen as a long man. Not a huge fan of a 13 man pitching staff, but our bench isn't seeing much action right now anyway (i.e. Florimon and Parmelee). Burton probably wouldn't be missed either (nor frankly would Swarzak if a better long-man option presented itself.) Another way to look at it, total innings last 6 starts (to reward those pitchers going further than 6 innings): Deduno 27.2 Correia 36 Johnson 39.2 May 39.2

Well, Vargas is already on the 40-man roster, so it costs nothing roster- or transaction-wise to call him up in September. Barring injury or uncharacteristic struggles at AAA, I have to imagine that is almost guaranteed. Could be sooner if he keeps raking and there is an opening/injury on the 25-man roster.

I know, you qualified your Webb comp, I was just fired up from my Erickson defense. Others certainly know his "stuff" better than I, but I don't think Gibson's minor league K rates are evidence of much of anything at this point.

That's still not a good outcome, when you had the worst starting staff in the league in 2012 and you added 2 new pitchers via free agency. If their Worley expectations weren't really to blame, then their Correia-Pelfrey expectations were, or their Diamond expectations, or just their general willingness to punt the season... nothing about the 2013 MLB starting staff reflects terribly well on the Twins front office. And I say that as a full endorser of the Revere trade too.

Not really. He's already off the roster. (Technically, I suppose they could release him and re-sign him and put him back on the roster.)

So, they could have shifted Bartlett to the 60-day DL to claim Fuld and kept Mastroianni, then let Bartlett retire, right? THAT was roster mismanagement. Would love to ask Antony or TR details about that. (I know they said the retirement paperwork couldn't be processed until Monday -- don't know if that means it was already irreversibly submitted, but then the lesson there should be that you should never submit retirement paperwork until it can be processed immediately. Especially when Fuld was already DFA'd and could become available on waivers at anytime.) Now, thankfully, we seem to be back to debating player evaluations and not our front office's clerical competence!

Outlook not so good. Last August, Arizona ate his salary and all they got was a fringe 40-man reliever who is now pitching independent ball. Even if that's what Berardino means by "lower-level prospect", I doubt the Twins could even get that now, as Kubel looks less fit for an MLB roster than ever before. I think the only way the Twins could trade him at all is if he was willing to take a minor league assignment, which does not appear to be the case (although maybe a more favorable geographic location or path back to the majors would change his mind).

Quite possibly. Retired players are sometimes kept on 40-man rosters (and 60-day DLs) for awhile for insurance purposes. Albert Belle is a common example -- I think he was rostered for two whole seasons after retirement. Still, they are essentially active all winter, then placed on the 60-day DL as soon as the season starts. Would be interesting to look back and see if those teams immediately replaced Belle or Puckett, or if they just went down to 39 guys on the 40-man. I suspect they immediately replaced them since it was the beginning of the season and most teams keep full 40 man rosters at that point anyway.

I think you are misinterpreting the other posts. The discussion appears to clearly be "the outcome of Vance Worley's time with the Twins", NOT the Revere trade as a whole. The trade may have been worthwhile (I think so), and Worley, even if damaged goods to some extent, was a worthwhile gamble. But it's hard to dispute that the Twins erred in counting on him as much as they did (he should have been a 4-5 and not 1-2) and failed to get any kind of decent results/value out of him.

The Twins finished a full 5 wins behind the next best team in 2013 (66 vs Seattle's 71), so I don't think Worley mattered much in getting us Gordon. (Although if we had let him start the whole year, and he posted the same negative rWAR rate all season, we could have drafted as high as #2.) And of course Stewart's draft position was determined before Worley arrived. That's all the further I will wade into this debate.

If it's not a rule, it's the only common sense way to do it. It's not optimal to always carry 40 healthy guys on your roster. You add guys when you have to, or when you want/need them, not simply anytime you have an opening or potential opening. Even the rule stating your 40-man has to be full to put a player on the 60-day DL seems unnecessary -- there is no benefit to stockpiling open 40-man roster spots during the season (and the DL does not exist in the offseason). In this case, I think the Twins simply decided they don't want/need Romero, at least not as much as Florimon. Which is still debatable, just not any kind of obvious roster mismanagement.

So... you're saying there's a chance?

I wouldn't advocate a full-time move anywhere for Mauer right now, but I'd like to see some (any) flexibility. As much as Mauer is struggling, he is still one of our 9 best hitters... but exclusively playing him at 1B/DH means either he or one of our other 9 best are sitting on the bench too often for my liking. The primary case is Morales has to go to the bench to give Willingham a break from the field at DH. Or perhaps even worse, it means we ride Willingham too hard in the field and reduce his effectiveness or increase his likelihood of injury. Could Mauer make occasional corner OF appearances and not embarrass himself? Ideally, this would have started back in spring training, if not 2012-2013, but given the other in-season positional trainings we are doing this year, they could probably do it now too.

The only rule I've seen about it says the 40-man has to be full before you can put someone on the 60-day DL. I assume that means full before the move; perhaps it means full afterward too? Could just be common sense. The only benefit of the 60-day DL is opening the roster spot, and there is no benefit to opening the roster spot early, you can instantly move Pelfrey to the 60-day anytime you need to. I wonder if they are keeping the spot flexible in case they could add a CF should one become available (the 40-man is otherwise well-stocked with pitchers, catchers, and infielders, but is still rather short on real outfielders).

Yeah, I was thinking, bouncing around in-season, which is a little tougher. But if he had prepared for it, taking reps at those spots in the offseason and spring training, it probably wouldn't be that bad. Like Ben Zobrist around the weaker side of the defensive spectrum. He could still have his regular position at 1B, but just be more capable of moving as needed. I'm sure the Joe and the Twins want him to be an everyday asset at 1B, and they think he needs 100% reps to make that happen. But I think the odds of that happening, the 100% reps requirements, and the benefits of it are somewhat dubious. Seems the benefits could be easily outweighed by playing Willingham and Arcia in the OF corners everyday, not to mention several layers of lost offense when we have to give Willingham a rest (Parmelee/Nunez/Fuld would start in LF, and Morales would have to sit to get him at DH).

Before Pinto was sent down, I suggested trying Mauer in corner OF spots as a means to get Pinto more DH reps, keep Morales in the lineup at 1B, and rest Willingham. Maybe take his mind off hitting for a bit. 3B is quite a bit more stressful defensively, so probably not recommended (although it could take his mind off hitting even more!). I do wish they weren't quite so quick to give him a full-time position -- he could have easily been subbing at 3B and the OF all season. I know both he and the team might feel a little weird to have their "star" player bouncing around, and they all feel like he could become a defensive asset once he settles in at 1B, but I don't like the idea of going straight to the far end of the defensive spectrum full-time.

Note that Deibinson Romero has been a minor league free agent the past 3 winters, and re-signed with the Twins every time. I am pretty sure if we wanted to audition him in Plouffe's absence, he could clear waivers to be removed from the 40-man again later. And if you're not going to call him up now, with your top two 3B on the shelf, why do you really care if he might get claimed or elect FA down the road? Heck, you could make the argument that Romero deserves some kind of MLB look now as a reward for continually re-signing here.

Erickson's ERA was 4.27 through age 32, before his extended injury/hanger-on phase. And that was in a pretty good offensive environment, so it was a 105 ERA+. And remember, that was over 10 seasons, 2000 innings. Look at the ERA/IP rank chart I posted above. I think Erickson is getting under-rated around here, big time. Gibson right now is at 3.91 ERA, pretty much equal to his FIP, and it is only a 102 ERA+ in the current offensive environment. Oh, and league K/9 was a lot lower in Erickson's time (and BB/9 was actually slightly higher too), so even if Gibson matches his modest peripherals, he's not as likely to have sustained success with them in 2014 and beyond. Webb met or exceeded the league K/9 every season of his career, I believe. Gibson is at 60% of the league K/9 this year. Also, like Erickson, Webb was pitching in a much higher offensive environment. Webb's career 3.27 ERA was good for a 142 ERA+. That's like 2.90 in the present-day AL. Gibson has to work on sustaining 3.90 before we should even mention Brandon Webb.

Accepting the assignment now would have done nothing for him. Since he already made the major league roster this year, he's guaranteed his full salary either way. He would just have been bound to stay in Rochester for the rest of the year or retire, right? He could probably always catch on with some AAA team under those terms, if he wanted to, maybe one with a preferable geographic location, or a clearer path back to MLB.

Not to stray too far from my usual pessimist/realist ways, but... If Berrios is this good, could he be fast-tracked? He just turned 20... a midseason promotion to AA and a decent showing there would at least put him in line for an MLB spring training invite in 2015, right? Where he could, in theory, pitch his way onto the roster (a la Jose Fernandez 2013) or at least impress enough that his AAA stay is relatively brief. Maybe the Liriano path would be more realistic: 3/4 of this season at high-A, 1/4 at AA, and next year split evenly between AA and AAA with an MLB call-up at age 21. He may be short... but he is taller than me. Okay, I will return to my pessimism now. (But the Twins are due for a healthy phenom, aren't they?)

Interestingly enough, here is Hughes through 13 starts in 2010 (the majority of which were in the new Yankee Stadium): 13 GS, 82.1 IP, 10-1 W-L, 3.17 ERA (0 unearned runs), 8.5 K/9, 0.8 HR/9, 1.1 WHIP Compared to this year, 2014 with the Twins: 13 GS, 82.1 IP, 7-2 W-L, 3.17 ERA (1 unearned run), 7.9 K/9, 0.8 HR/9, 1.1 WHIP The difference? He's traded 1.8 BB/9 for 1.8 H/9 (also lost 0.6 K/9). A lower BB/9 should hopefully be more sustainable than a lower H/9, although it would be pretty crazy to stay at 0.9 BB/9! That's lower than Radke's career low (1.0, career 1.6), lower than every season of Carlos Silva except his historic 2005 (0.4, career 1.7), almost as low as Bob Tewksbury's lowest (0.8, career 1.5). Also, 2010 was his first full year starting after 3 partial years of injury and relief, so he should be stronger this year too.

For fun, here are the ranks of my comparable Mike Pelfrey for his 4 full Mets seasons: [TABLE] [TD=align: right]YEAR[/TD] [TD=align: right]ERA[/TD] [TD=align: right]IP[/TD] [TD=align: right]2008[/TD] [TD=align: right]18[/TD] [TD=align: right]16[/TD] [TD=align: right]2009[/TD] [TD=align: right]43[/TD] [TD=align: right]31[/TD] [TD=align: right]2010[/TD] [TD=align: right]26[/TD] [TD=align: right]16[/TD] [TD=align: right]2011[/TD] [TD=align: right]44[/TD] [TD=align: right]27[/TD] [TD=align: right]AVERAGE[/TD] [TD=align: right]32.75[/TD] [TD=align: right]22.5[/TD] [/TABLE] His two good years are very similar to Gibson's 2014 in not only BB/9 and K/9, but also FIP and low 0.5 HR/9 (half the league rate). The defining statistical feature of Pelfrey's two bad years? A league-average HR/9 rate (0.9-1.0), plus another ~0.4 H/9 over his good years too.

Careful not to shortchange Erickson. Here are his yearly AL ERA and IP ranks for his first 10 seasons: [TABLE] [TD=align: right]YEAR[/TD] [TD=align: right]ERA[/TD] [TD=align: right]IP[/TD] Notes [TD=align: right]1990[/TD] [TD=align: right]4[/TD] [TD=align: right]23[/TD] (rookie year prorated to 32 starts) [TD=align: right]1991[/TD] [TD=align: right]12[/TD] [TD=align: right]24[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1992 [TD=align: right]14[/TD] [TD=align: right]22[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1993 [TD=align: right]40[/TD] [TD=align: right]16[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1994 [TD=align: right]40[/TD] [TD=align: right]28[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1995 [TD=align: right]29[/TD] [TD=align: right]16[/TD] (Baltimore half season prorated ranks: 13, 6) [TD=align: right]1996[/TD] [TD=align: right]24[/TD] [TD=align: right]12[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1997 [TD=align: right]11[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1998 [TD=align: right]14[/TD] [TD=align: right]1[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1999 [TD=align: right]25[/TD] [TD=align: right]2[/TD] [/TD] [TD=align: right]AVERAGE [TD=align: right]21.3[/TD] [TD=align: right]15.4[/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TABLE] That looks like a top-20 starter to me, even with his disastrous last 2.5 seasons in Minnesota. (Throw those out and he's about top 15 on average.) By comparison, Gibson ranks 25th in ERA and 43rd in IP so far in 2014. If you prorate that to 32 starts and compare it to 2013 qualifiers, he'd rank 25th in ERA and 28th in IP. Still quite a ways to go to reach Erickson in either effectiveness or durability (not to mention longevity).

Does his choice of Froot Loops contradict the maturity statement?

For reference, here are a few direct links to look for Futures Game / celebrity softball tickets (and monitor prices): TicketKing (don't forget to use the DAILYDOUBLE 10% off discount code): http://www.ticketkingonline.com/ResultsTicket.aspx?evtid=2131235&event=2014+MLB+All+Star+Sunday SeatGeek: https://seatgeek.com/2014-mlb-all-star-sunday-with-all-star-futures-tickets/7-13-2014-minneapolis-minnesota-target-field/mlb/2136040/ StubHub: http://www.stubhub.com/mlb-all-star-game-tickets/2014-mlb-all-star-sunday-with-all-star-futures-7-13-2014-4432913/