Otto von Ballpark

Depth sounds good in theory, but Triunfel doesn't look like great shakes. No BB, minimal power or steals, not a great AVG despite hitting in the PCL... it would come down to an evaluation of his defense. And to be fair, we do have Santana at AAA already. Triunfel has played a few games at 2B, though, and we're pretty soft there while Rosario is out. It probably wouldn't hurt to slide Beresford to utility and take a look -- as you said, the 40 man roster spot is open and Bernier is about as close to freely available talent as you are going to find. Although if you don't care for Triunfel's defense now, I can't blame them for passing. If the Dodgers won the claim, that means most teams passed on him. The Dodgers may just be looking for a bridge to their Cuban infielder anyway?

Pinto's (or any player's) preference for the majors vs AAA has no bearing on the best course for his development. And I agree that him being a MLB backup now might be better than being the AAA starter, but that doesn't mean it is optimal either. He should probably be more than a backup at the MLB level, either through more starts at C or DH. Hopefully the Twins plan to transition to this soon, but I wonder what benefit is there to delay that arrangement at all? I mean, a 50-50 split means Pinto has ~13 games on the bench per month, as opposed to ~18 if he's the backup. Are those extra 5 games per month sitting next to Steinbach really providing a lot of marginal value over the first 13? And I will add that minor league catchers rarely take on a full load, I think, especially if they are fairly well-regarded prospects. It appears Mauer had 30-35 games at 1B/DH in his full minor league seasons. (Plus, it appears that in 2013 Pinto had a couple weeks at AA where he didn't catch at all, suggesting minor injury, and in 2012 he caught very little after his late season promotion to AA where Hermann was already starting and they were making a late season playoff push, I think.)

This is true (and I probably wouldn't have started this thread yet, certainly not with its current title!). But consider the following: - Twins broadcasters previously suggested the split would be 2/3 Suzuki, 1/3 Pinto (which is basically starter-backup for catchers, not really a split at all) - the first series is going exactly according to that "split" - we have started 3 other guys at DH already, not even counting Colabello, suggesting very limited DH opportunities for Pinto even if Gardy was willing - Gardy has also passed on very obvious Pinto PH opportunities in both games so far This all suggests that what we have seen of Pinto's usage thus far isn't a function of small sample; this looks like "the plan" for the time being, which is a notable confirmation of previous suspicions and worthy of discussion, I think.

With a 1/3 share of starts (which was speculated by our esteemed broadcasters recently), that opportunity is only 2 games per week. Playing only twice a week is essentially a bench spot / true backup catcher. And thus it qualifies as "jerking a player around" and messing with his hitting development and rhythm, far more than (for example) sitting Parmelee 2 games a week last year. Hopefully Pinto is good enough to shine through this, but we're not exactly giving him a clear path here. I'd prefer a true 50-50 split, or better yet, Pinto getting 2/3 of the starts (either at C or DH).

Yeah, not pinch hitting for Bartlett was pretty inexcusable. Basically, if we ever pinch-run for our DH, we should definitely PH Pinto if the spot comes up again and he's available on the bench. That way, you're not "burning through" Pinto -- he stays in the game, and if something happens to Suzuki, you just lose the DH (which is a much better outcome than having to use your emergency catcher).

To be fair, Ramos has caught more games than Mauer the past three seasons... just without the other games at 1B/DH. And the extent of his missed time thus fair seemed to be knee surgery in 2012, and I suspected his hamstring issues in 2013 could have been related to working his way back. Not sure what's up with the wrist this year, though.

Yes. Capps was a complete non-factor in 2010, and we wound up paying him almost $13 mil for 2 rWAR / 0.3 fWAR over 2 1/3 seasons. Ramos has so far given the Nats 4.9 rWAR / 5.5 fWAR over three seasons at league minimum salary. And they still control him for 2 more seasons after this one (which will probably be discounted too, thanks to the injury). He's remained a very good player throughout his injuries so far, and he's still a very valuable asset. And don't forget that Ramos' healthiest and most productive season to date was 2011, the year Mauer's injury exposed some of the worst positional depth in modern MLB history (which played no small role in getting our GM "reassigned" -- that might be the only silver lining on this cloud).

Why even burn one player, when it is at best a lateral move? My sense is that Gardy knew he should be pinch hitting for Florimon late in a close game, which is generally sound, but then really didn't bother to re-analyze the problem after removing his top two bench bats from consideration.

To put my money where my mouth is, my complete take on Seth's slash lines: Likes: Pinto, Dozier, Willingham (unfortunately), Arcia, Kubel Slight downgrades (maybe -.025 OPS): Suzuki, Florimon, Plouffe, Hicks, Escobar, Bartlett Bigger downgrades (maybe -.050 OPS): Mauer, Colabello (although I'm rooting for Cola as much as anyone)

Again, depending on how you allocate PA, both lists probably average to .260, which is a bit of a jump from .242! It's not excessively optimistic for any single player, but it's a little optimistic for pretty much everyone, which leads to being overly optimistic for the group. Kind of like the pitching projections from another thread that suggested our 7 starters would all have ERAs between 4-4.5. More likely, at least one person on that list will "unexpectedly" hit closer to .200, and another guy or two will lose playing time in injury to a fill-in at that level too.

Actually AL average OPS was .725 last year. Depending on how you allocate PA, I have Seth's list at about .735.

Yeah, Seth has every player except Willingham (and Escobar, marginally) improving on their 2013 OPS (or in the case of Bartlett, even his 2011 OPS). Plus Mauer bettering his career OPS, Plouffe basically matching his career high... it's all within the realm of the possible, but collectively it's not all that probable. Also, that team doubles total would have ranked #3 in all of MLB last year, behind only BOS and STL.

Much, much better? His minor league AVG is 20 points better than Florimon, true, but it was only .269. And his minor league OBP is still worse than Florimon's, and his minor league career ISO is lower than Florimon's too. I was a little intrigued by Escobar's late season run at Rochester last year, but he looked pretty much the same as ever in the Winter Leagues and in spring training: http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=l135&lid=135&t=l_bat It was clearly the most lateral move on the bench yesterday.

Additional thought: should we have pinch-hit Pinto for Suzuki later in the inning?Still wasn't a tying run scenario, but with 2 outs, reaching base was critical for extending the inning, and a HR or XBH was especially critical to scoring runs. We all "Zuke" was the hero of the day, but in general, wouldn't that be the preferred move? You lose your backup catcher, but you get a fresh one, with a better bat, and in this situation, you potentially get Sale out of the game at that moment (assuming Chicago would have gone to the pen there to face a better RH bat than Suzuki).

At the time, we were still down 5-2. Hicks scored the third run later in the inning. So, Florimon's spot did not represent the tying run, although I'm not sure how much that distinction mattered. It clearly looked like it could be our best chance to get back into the game.

Maybe Gardy thought he may have to pinch-run for Suzuki. Although Suzuki was on 1B with 2 outs and Mauer up, and he stayed in the game... Also, maybe Gardy is in agreement with the folks who like Escobar better than Florimon vs LHP. Still, Florimon handled himself fairly well in his first two PA against Sale (no strikes missed or caught looking, worked the count full in his previous PA too) so it seemed a weird time to change course, for marginal benefit. That situation pretty much screams for Pinto. He's more likely to get a hit, more likely to draw a walk, less likely to strike out, and FAR more likely to hit a HR than any of the other bench options, pretty much regardless of pitcher handedness. Wonder if Gardy would have approached it differently if the batter was the potential tying run? Part of the benefit of playing a veteran like Suzuki (particularly one with a reputation as a durable gamer) is that it's less critical to always have a backup catcher available. If Suzuki gets dinged up, you're not risking your future to keep him in the game (where you otherwise might remove Mauer, Pinto, etc. for precautionary reasons). Basically, Suzuki shouldn't have to come out unless he suffers a catastrophic injury, so we should be able to deploy Pinto a lot more liberally, especially in the late innings. Swapping Bartlett for Hermann might be necessary here?

Didn't mean we had to get a better offensive catcher than Mauer or Pinto. Just that intangibles are cool, but the idea wears a little thin when all of our offseason hitter acquisitions are based on it. If we aren't getting good hitters, it would be interesting to try some other analytical targets to improve the team too (defense, framing, etc.).

BigTrane, Not so much a negative, just not an improvement over Mauer. We have seen that a respected veteran catcher doesn't guarantee any particular performance or consistency from a pitching staff. Character and chemistry is nice, but that and unmeasurable intangibles was about the extent of the efforts to improve the offense this offseason.

Also, smaller markets can deal with QO. Pittsburgh was silly for not making the offer to Burnett, he was clearly worth it.

An idea I heard just removes the player deadline to accept the qualifying offer (or moves it much later). So Drew could have taken his 1/14 at the start of ST.

Major League Ready, Why the focus on long-term deals? With prospects on the way, short-term would seem to be ideal for this club. And in your positional analysis, in addition to SS which you admit is weak, you also left out DH which was wide open (or, shifting Willingham to DH, an OF would be wide open). Cruz or Morales or Corey Hart would have been interesting guys for that spot. And I wouldn't rule out a short-term CF just because we want to try Hicks again and Buxton is on the way -- better to have a good CF playing a corner than lack for any CF. Chris Young or Grady Sizemore were possibilities there. And if you look short-term, since Sano was 90% likely to start at AAA anyway, you could get a 3B to push Plouffe too -- Mark Reynolds? Not inspiring names by any means, but I think what has disappointed me most is that the Twins basically did nothing. They had a bunch of mediocre performers last year, and have basically rolled the dice on the exact same group this year. The only new additions have been Suzuki (not a bad sign, but uninspiring as a primary starter) and Kubel and Bartlett (who, coincidentally, were two of the cheapest options available, and also the two former Twins). We're just handing jobs to Hicks, Plouffe, Arcia, and Florimon, without pushing any of them or getting any depth. Seriously, Mastro, Parm, Cola, and Escobar are all still first in line to take over again. It's actually a lot like the rotation entering 2013 -- carrying over a disappointing group, add a couple marginal guys, but still a poor forecast and little depth, with most of our hopes still a year or two or more away in the minors.

Agreed. TD has been pretty awesome the past month-plus (even if our favorite club hasn't been!).

Update: Tuiasosopo just cleared and was outrighted to AAA: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/03/blue-jays-cut-matt-tuiasosopo-transaction-pending.html Interesting that Toronto just picked him up on waivers a week ago. That's kind of their thing lately (pick guys up and then waiver them again).

Diamond accepted his outright assignment, according to Lavelle (via MLBTR): http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/03/twins-place-scott-diamond-on-waivers.html

Problem is, most of these guys are out of options, I am guessing? So to put them on the 40-man, but not the 25-man (send them to AAA), we'd have to pass them through waivers again. I guess if no one else wants to give them a 25 man spot, it should be possible, but it's tricky. Would be easier with open 25 man spots.