Otto von Ballpark

Also, rookie league "starts" vs relief outings don't mean too much. His starts were 2, 3, and 4 innings in length. Basically, I am encouraged by the fact that it wasn't discouraging, but it was too small a sample and too low a level to tell anything, really. Remember Shooter Hunt? College pitcher, ~3 years older, but he pitched great in rookie league ball too...

Agreed. And I tend to think his #1 ranking on that list is mostly due to him being the highest pick of the bunch (although I understand the other guys are shuffled a bit).

Will be interesting to see what kind of "bidding war" there could be. He's been traded a few times, but never as a centerpiece, always an auxiliary part. And last year, the Royals got him from the Blue Jays for cash, not even a PTBNL. (And they only "committed" to his $3.5 mil salary for 2014 knowing full well they could cut him later for $500k. And, they're the Royals, so questionable roster/financial decisions are standard operating procedure )

I think it's supposed to be one month's salary, which is effectively 1/6?

Innings-eaters span the same quality spectrum as any other players, I'd suggest. I'd say 185 IP is a fair innings-eater. It at least implies reasonable health/effectiveness and close to 6 IP per start. But, Correia has only hit that level twice in 5 seasons starting, so he's a bit of an inconsistent innings eater (which somewhat defeats the purpose of the role). Nolasco is a better example of innings-eater, but even he has walked the line of effectiveness a bit. Obviously, 200+ IP is a BETTER innings-eater, and probably how the term is more likely used by fans of contending ballclubs. Guys like Arroyo, or even Lohse or Ervin Santana (or Garza when healthy) -- in reality, quality #2 starters. It will be nice to get back to that frame of mind again, and leave 2012-2013 behind! I'm more concerned when we profile Hughes and Pelfrey as effective innings-eaters, when neither logged 150 IP last year or even averaged 5 IP per start. I don't know how likely those guys are to even equal Correia's 2013 level, which seems like the upper limit on their upside.

The guys you list have absolutely nothing to do with Nolasco vs. Garza (or signing both Nolasco and Garza this offseason). And the Brewers are obviously hoping to contend in 2014 and 2015 -- they still have a ton of MLB talent on their roster. They're probably +20 wins over the Twins right now. Yes, they need to improve their farm system, but they can't (and shouldn't) punt the next two years and focus on 2016, which seems to be more akin to the Twins strategy. And 20 wins is still a huge gap to overcome in 3 seasons (much less reverse as implied by "considerably better"). And frankly, most of the guys you list aren't really that great of prospects. Buxton and Sano are great but they are only two guys and neither has even hit AAA yet. The difference between the Twins and Brewers in 2016 is really going to come down to: how well their current MLB talent ages (advantage: Brewers, simply due to quantity), how well they develop ALL prospects including non-elites (leaning Twins with Buxton and Sano although no real results are in yet), and how well they sign MLB free agents (leaning Brewers).

I have no problem with TR acting quickly, if only to quickly address the perception from past offseasons that the Twins wouldn't act at all. It was a big relief to get that out of the way. However, I don't think acting early should necessarily preclude continued action. As much as we may still want to sort through a few of our 2013 strugglers, we were probably the closest team in the league to having 5 wide open rotation spots to fill (basically, only KC on a 1 year 5 mil deal stood in the way of that, and that's hardly going to block anybody). Waiting on Pelfrey and/or making a push late for the remaining guys could have been a very good value play to inject some much-needed upside to the rotation. This is all the more important when TR's quick-strike targets were all of very modest upside. As it is, as much as we've "stabilized" the rotation (very important after 2012-2013), we're still counting on our minor leaguers or some future FA class to provide all the upside. Would have been nice to kill two birds with one stone, or rather address two needs (stability and upside) with at least one signing.

No jokes about the Twins medical staff either! (Hope this doesn't count as such a joke ) Glad it was detected and is being treated quickly. As long as he's been around the game, it's easy to forget that TR is only 60 years old! By all rights, he should have a lot of years left, both for the Twins and for his family. Best wishes to all of them through this process!

Remember, this was the same club that traded Wilson Ramos for a relief pitcher and kept Drew Butera as the sole backup for several seasons, ensuring virtually zero depth behind Mauer and a parade of AAA nobodies once Mauer went down for an extended period in 2011. The evidence already strongly suggested they overrated Mauers ability to stay at catcher (and long-term catcher health in general). This new nugget adds very little (although like Seth, I am not sure what difference it would have made anyway).

Illustrative purposes only. Good for vets like Mauer, not so much for rookies like Pinto who will be battling for playing time (or even a roster spot). Basically, depth charts, roster composition, and health reports are not direct inputs into ZiPS. I think this is covered in most overviews of the system.

That's an incredibly low bar, though. The "quantity" was necessary only because how epically bad the starting staff has been the past two years. So they're already starting from a super-low point. And the "quality" added is very modest -- the best and healthiest guy is a career 94 ERA+ pitcher. Heck, the two other guys barely even provide quantity if you want to look at their recent IP totals. It's really only "quality" in that it's an improvement over our historically bad performances. It doesn't compare in the slightest with Chicago's starting staff (even acknowledge Chicago is far from perfect). Sale is legit ace, and the White Sox had two additional starters basically top any performance by the Twins starters or signees last year (Quintana and Santiago, although the latter has since been traded for offense). Plus Erik Johnson, who's like a younger Kyle Gibson without the injury and with a successful MLB debut. And to this, just remember that none of Quintana, Santiago, or Johnson have ever been ranked as BA top 100 prospects. (Although Johnson may get ranked this year) I'm not going to argue if someone says the White Sox are better at the moment, at least not until the Twins future is at least a little closer -- our best prospects have yet to even take the field in a AAA game (or AA, in the case of Buxton and all of our pitching prospects outside of Meyer).

The White Sox offense indeed looks pretty dreadful, but man that starting pitching staff looks good. Sale is a legit ace, of course, Quintana's been pretty darn good too, and we'd love to have a guy like Erik Johnson right now. I feel like the Twins have a lot more question marks at the moment -- Mauer is probably our most "solid" projectable guy but even he's coming off that concussion. Everybody else, outside the bullpen, has been up and down (or is thoroughly mediocre). And as much as the starting staff is improved, there is plenty of doubt that any of them can exceed a 95 ERA+. Meanwhile, Sale and Quintana project as confidently as any SP in the game right now -- quality, young, durable, etc. On the other hand, the Twins do have some minor league reinforcements, but outside of Sano and Meyer they're not terribly close to arrival.

For the record, ZiPS doesn't "project" playing time. (Oliver probably doesn't either.) Most projection systems just use a player's historical MLB/MiLB playing time as guide to present counting stats, with no regard to a player's current health or role. The rate stats are what's important there. Then, to project standings, Fangraphs or Clay Davenport or whoever will make subjective estimates on playing time. Davenport has him at 176 PA, and Suzuki at 358: http://www.claydavenport.com/projections/MIN.shtml Fangraphs has Pinto at 320 PA, Suzuki 288: http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=ALL&teamid=8 I might guess the former split is more likely, but referencing the 563 ZiPS number in any critique is completely meaningless.

Bonifacio is a career 79 OPS+ hitter, which I guess is an upgrade over Florimon's 70 (or Escobar's 74) last year. He isn't a standout defensively -- his best position looks like 2B, and he looks worse than Florimon at SS. His biggest offensive skill seems to be stolen bases, but he hasn't added a ton of value by that method -- maybe half a win per full season? Escobar is apparently out of options -- would you swap him for Bonifacio, and at what cost? $1 million? $2 million?

Depends on the AAV. If Boston's offer is 2/20 or 2/24, then something between 3/30 or 3/36 could still be in play.

Assuming both are free agents, once one of them signs here, the other is less likely to follow suit, just because it will be more difficult to win a job against that competition. It would be most obvious in the case of Kubel who seems to be our presumptive DU despite his minor league deal. I would guess no other DU candidates would want to sign here after that (unless their salary was significant enough to guarantee playing IME, like Morales). Guerrier might factor similarly -- it is already a crowded MLB pen and Guerrier is a vet and familiar with the team. That could easily dissuade similar guys from signing here.

Downside would be something like Mike Trombley circa 2002.

Those injury clauses are not necessarily a red flag. John Lackey had a very similar clause in his contract about injury time adding a cheap option year, and he was known as one of the more durable pitchers in the game at the time. It's a fantastic clause for teams, and I wonder if it isn't becoming more popular due to contract insurance changes (i.e., if you can't insure the contract as much, add a cheap option year in event of injury). All told, I think it's a very solid deal for the Brewers, and the Twins debate shouldn't be whether they should have waited on Nolasco to sign Garza, it should be, why didn't they simply try to sign both? The Twins rotation is improved now but far from perfect, and Garza has better upside/projections than pretty much anybody we have. (I do think the Garza reunion was never meant to be, personality-wise, and I also think the Twins never had any intention of signing more than one "big" contract this offseason.)

96.3 is the flagship, just like 830 and 1500 before. But you can listen online to 96.3 anytime outside of games, so you should be able to catch the Sunday morning shows regardless of whether you get the signal, or what your local affiliate plays. Just need an internet connection, of course.

I know they don't carry the games online, but I assume you can listen to the other shows with their online stream. Just find the "Listen Live" link on the K-TWIN web site: http://www.ktwin.com/index.php With any luck, maybe they will even post recordings of the shows when they are done, like their offseason Hot Stove show: http://www.ktwin.com/page.php?page_id=971

I'm not even sure how to respond to this stuff anymore. Drew's career OPS (which is slightly lower than his 2013 OPS, by the way) is 150 points higher than Florimon's 2013 OPS. Again, that is the difference between Morneau pre- and post-concussion. That is the difference between Mauer's 2011 lost season and the rest of Mauer's career. It's big. You may not be impressed by Drew's extra 30 points of AVG, or 50 points of OBP, or 70 points of ISO, but it adds up. He crushes Florimon offensively, and he has almost 4000 career PA of evidence to back it up.

Drew may very well be holding out for that 4/48 contract. I don't know. But just because he's not signed by mid-January isn't much evidence that he can't be a good player or a good value. Last year, Kyle Lohse held out until late March (!) and finally settled for... 3/33. Then promptly turned in a 117 ERA+ over ~200 IP, quite possibly the second-best season of his career.

OBP +50 points, also ISO (isolated power) at least +70, plus another 30-40 points AVG. Combined that's about 150 points of OPS, which is greater than the difference between Dozier 2012 and 2013. Or equal to Morneau's career OPS pre- and post- concussion. Think that's not significant? EDIT TO ADD: Also the difference between Joe Mauer's career OPS and his disastrous 2011 season OPS. I think you're underestimating just how large the offensive difference is between Drew and Florimon. It was about 2.4 rWAR last year. Well, they haven't proven much yet, but the point is, there are still more bucks available, and there isn't another obvious spot to spend it, nor is there a really compelling reason to save it.

Actually, relievers might make the best non-tender candidates (or at least akin to bench players). Not necessarily at $2 million, but if they command anything more than that, you've got to consider it (or unload them in advance) even if they are "generally effective". They just pitch so infrequently and are relatively easy to replace, as compared to other positions. Even a guy like Plouffe would be harder for the Twins to immediately replace than Duensing.

In regards to Drew's value, last winter he was coming off an injury-shorted year with his worst numbers since his first full MLB season. 2012 also saw him pass through waivers, get traded for peanuts in August, and get paid a $1.35 mil buyout instead of a $10 mil option for 2013. (An aside: where were the Twins in competing for Drew's services in 2012? At such an obvious position of need, gambling ~$12 mil on a quality MLB player bouncing back from injury seems like a smart play for a team like the 2012-2013 Twins.) In any case, after this terrible 2012, Drew still managed a 1 year, $9.5 mil deal with a big market contending team, only missed ~26 games directly due to injury according to B Pro, and went on to produce the second best rWAR and OPS+ figures of his career to date. (On a rate level, he pretty much equaled his career best in those categories, at least well within any margin of error.) He then turned down a 1/14 qualifying offer, and was predicted by MLBTR to get a 4/48 deal (with a low estimate of 3/36-42). Just as an asset, I think if you can snag a player like this for 3/30, due to an off market and the draft pick compensation issue rather than anything wrong with the player, you absolutely have to do it, almost regardless of what else you have at the position. If you refuse to sign this quality of player unless you can get him for true pennies on the dollar (and a 1 or 2 year, sub $10 mil annual deal for Drew would certainly qualify as that), then you will never get this quality of player on the free agent market. And you will basically be Terry Ryan in the arena of free agent acquisitions (at least pre-Nolasco TR, hopefully!).