Kipp35

Don't forget he has also been hurt while batting. I think he need to be switched to another team.

He is continually a 'special guest'.

The Twins were making up for Tom Kelly stating that David Ortiz "was never going to amount to anything in baseball"; while letting him [Ortiz] walk. Last I checked Ortiz is in the HOF and the Twins still honor and listen to Tom Kelly every spring. Billy Gardner and Ray Miller put together a club that worked, and Kelly led a 85-77 team that got hot into the World Series. 85-77 wouldn't get you into the post season anymore. Last season Oakland finished 86-76, finished third in the West. So, they went with the big guy with upside. Fans that watched Cron could have said which was going to be more consistent, but no doubt who had possibly better upside. Just no one on the Twins could harness his talent.

I hope everyone can see and understand why I complained all offseason about the extension of Buxton. I was happy that didn't stop them from making other moves as I feel it would have in seasons past. But that doesn't take away from the fact that the Buxton extension was bad money. He will NEVER complete a 'full' season. He made it seven games... He will end up nursing this injury all season long.

... we're in trouble!

Unfortunately, I think you are 100% correct. ?

Are you suggesting that the Twins get a different person to play CF? Because you can't possibly think a guy who averages just 70 games played per year, over his seven year career (this includes his ONE year of 140) will play the majority of the season?

Just Mr. Reality. I would LOVE to see him play a full season, but what from his past shows that will ever happen?

LOL, he will be spelling Buxton for about 100+ games per season!?

I feel, unless the Twins go out and get someone different, we will see A LOT of Celestino in CF. Buxton can not and will not ever stay healthy enough to play fulltime. If these two stay on the Twins going forward, I see Celestino being the "starting" CF'er based on number of games played; by a BIG margin!

Well, start planning the parade route folks. Once again, the Twins brass are all over rebuilding our rotation! First, Dylan Bundy and NOW Brandon Lawson! I just can't believe we were able to land these two huge fish! I take back everything I have said against them.... wait, no I don't.

Nothing they have done since coming to the Twins should make anyone excited. When we make it to the postseason, we show we don't belong there by getting booted in the first series, usually by the Yankees. The issues this team has with pitching, is not new, it's been here as long as they have! But yet again, I'd like to point out while other clubs were scrambling to make deals before the lockout, the Twins centered all of their attention on Buxton. A player who sees the field only 30-35% of the time, and was still under contract. This front office is incompetent. Like Buxton, they are with the Twins because no other team would put up with them.

I know it made no sense to hold on to Buxton for '22 if he didn't wish to re-sign, but his motivation to sign with the Twins was stoked when he saw he had no value to other teams when he was shopped at the deadline. Your original statement of wanting the Twins to spend money, then me being upset when the Twins do spend money, was the source of my comment with the others that signed during FA. I understand the breakdown of yearly money wasn't similar for all of them, but that would have been a better show of spending appropriate money to fill actual needs for the team. CF is/was not a glaring hole on this team, but pitching is, and still is. Your reply mentioned Scherzer and Gray, which we (I) knew that Scherzer was never coming here no matter the money, but there were others on that list, too. Robbie Ray $115m/9yrs = 12.8m/yr Steve Matz $44m/4yrs = 11m/yr Although in the 20's there was still Syndergaard (who the Twins were linked to several times for trade) and Stroman. But instead we shored up our rotation by giving Dylan Bundy $5m/1yr!? Bundy's career line is: 46W/57L, 4.72ERA, 758K's/770IP - So, he is a career losing pitcher with an ERA over 4.5 and less than 1K per inning pitched. If the Twins feel Bundy is worth $5m per season, then why could they not stretch for some of the others mentioned here, who are far more proven assets? So again, I am not mad when the team spends money, as long as that money makes sense. I felt Donaldson was a bold move, and the former MVP could still put up numbers while filling a hole at 3B and DH. But I don't believe another team would have given Buxton $100m plus incentives, and his camp knew that, too. And that is why he agreed to the offer from the Twins. He was not giving us a 'hometown discount', he took the money he knew no one else was going to offer him. That's bad money on the part of the Twins and smart business on the part of Buxton.

When were they going to lose Buxton? He was still under contract, not going anywhere. This was an extension. That point was further made clear when no team was willing to pay the Twins asking price for him at the trade deadline. Which means no other team holds the same view of Buxton, as the Twins do. Maybe all that changes if he can find his way to the field for the next seven years, and I do not mean as a DH! I hope it is a good signing going forward. Truly, as a Twins fan, I want this to be the truth! But this team made a business decision on an employees 'potential'. And that employee has made no point of showing the team he can be available for them, when he is needed. I have an issue with the Twins halting all other club progress to extend a guy, I feel, should not have been the #1 priority at that time. Could that same $100m been better used to lure: Scherzer ($130m), Ray ($115m), Stroman ($71m), Gray ($56m), Matz ($44m) or Syndergaard ($21m)? All were signed while we were negotiating with Buxton. Now because of that decision, we are forced to settle for the crumbs left behind by the more pro-active and business savvy teams. I have enjoyed our back and forth and seeing view points. I hope you know I am not attempting to diminish your viewpoint, in any way? I really do like having a good back and forth with a person who obviously has the passion and knowledge to state their point. Thank you. You have my total respect, Mr. Andrew Mahlke!

I am "negative" toward bad decisions. As a fan who attends games, has to pay premium money to the cable company in order for the 'privilege' to watch them on TV, I have earned the right to criticize what I feel is dumb decisions. Unfortunately, there are too many fans that blindly accept what the teams in this town do, and say 'well, we're a small market team' or 'we have to take it because we are a fly over state.' Stand up and demand more for what you are paying your good money for. I am 45 years old and have been a fan my entire life, have never jumped off the bandwagon, nor will I ever do so. You will always see me in the stands donning my Twins gear and cheering on the hometown boys. But, on that same note, I will also call them out on what I feel are dumb decisions. And, they are just that. My opinions; albeit are educated opinions are just that, my opinions. However, I have never formed an opinion on anything without looking at the issue, first. The Twins franchise is a business, and we the fans support that business with our dollars. That gives us a vested interest in the decisions they make. As a business, I feel poor or flat out dumb decisions should be called out. If I had an employee that can not show up to work, especially when I (the business) needs him, I would not give him a raise just because when he is here he shows "potential" to be good at his job. Meanwhile, I have to employ several other employees to do his job while he is gone. What business would do that? No, I would go and pay top dollar for an employee that will come into my business and do that job well, and be there when I need him the most. Baseball calls it durability, the business world calls it dependability. You read my comments and think me a negative person, actually I am just someone who is not going to put up with BS status quo in life, anymore. I demand effort from myself, those around me, and those I support with my money. I am not negative, I just call things like I see them. And I see a FO that spent the limited amount of FA time the MLB had getting a contract done with a person, who was currently under contract and not going anywhere. Meanwhile, the FA market caught them 'off guard' by how fast it sped up in the wake of the lockout. They missed out on potentially bringing in pieces, because they had to re-sign a guy that is never here when they need him. I would fire my executives if they neglected to see the market, which is their job to monitor, was passing them by. I am not criticizing them for spending the money, I am questioning the logic in spending the money on a guy who is never here, and allowing themselves to be blind to the rest of the league while doing so. FA's were gobbled up quickly that could have helped the Twins, now. The FO stated "the market sped up faster than we thought". That is poor business, no matter what field you are in, or play on.

THANK YOU! I was beginning to think I was the only person that sees Buxton for what he is. Why are we anointing him a 'generational' player when he cannot stay on the team? The argument 'When he is healthy, he is the best!' Okay, WHEN is he healthy? And shouldn't that play into his overall expectation? We now have to sign a 4th OF'er to be a starter. He will have to play 100+ EVERY year to cover our $100mm man! What about: Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Rick Ankiel or Ray Fosse? All were 'generational' players that could not stay healthy enough to reach their potential. The difference, none of their teams gave them $100mm contract to play less than 100 games per season. The closest would have been Kerry Wood's 3yr $32mm deal. You could even add Bo Jackson to this list, too. Over an 8 year, injury riddled career, Jackson still averaged more games played (86.75) per season than Buxton (70.4). He earned just $6.8mm for his entire baseball career. In todays money, that would be $15,289,142.

What about being "caught off guard" by how quickly the FA market went past them? Should that be held against them?

Sounds like with a 9.1 WAR, the Twins should be undefeated each time Buxton plays! He doesn't put up many more games than that per season. But, at least he will be cashing full season paychecks... good for him.

Unless you are the orthopedist Arraez has seen, you can't attest to his knee's won't get better, or not. As for stats trending in the wrong direction; Villar can only hit HR's, and if he doesn't hit one, he doesn't get on base: '19 = .274/.339/.453 '20 = .232/.301/.292 '21 = .249/.322/.416 He may be more durable as he has played vast majority of the past three seasons, but he is not a pure hitter. Josh Harrison: '19 = .175/.218/.263 '20 = .278/.352/.418 '21 = .279/.341/.400 Better than Villar, but still no where near what you call the wrong way trending stats of .294/.357/.376... plus, his stats could only trend up (.179 AVG?) Matt Duffy Stats are a lot better than the others you mentioned, but still have never had a season that shows he a as pure a hitter as Arraez. With his three best seasons: '15 = .295/.334/.428 '18 = .294/.361/.366 '21 = .287/.357/.381 Still nothing that jumps off the page and I had to pick and choose what seasons to add for him; as the others are not good at all. Maybe we could give him a long term deal and keeping with the trend of every three years, hope for good things in '24, '27 and '30 (he'd only be 39 at that point). Arraez is on the team, now. He is under contract and will not cost the team the contracts it would take to get any of the guys you listed. Why are we going to pay more money for a guy to come in and put up lower stats (except maybe HR's) if we have a guy on the roster, right now, that can do the job and do it well? We already threw bad money [my opinion] at Buxton and now need to find another guy who can play 100+ games per season at CF. We don't need to jettison Arraez in order to bring in a higher priced, older guy that needs to prove something. That is poor management of a team.... on second thought, that is exactly what the Twins will do. I stand corrected. Please disregard everything I said.

The team can call it what they like. The fact is, they were SO hyper focused on ensuring they signed a long term deal with a player that cannot and will not stay on the field (and was currently still under contract) they missed out on any chance of brining in any viable FA talent. By their own admission they were "caught off-guard" by how fast the FA market sped up in the midst of the lockout. THAT IS THIER JOB! They are supposed to know what the market is going to do, that is why they have the jobs they have. They missed out on potential players; then they should be replaced by people who know what they are doing. Again, Buxton was under contract and not going anywhere. They should have focused on the guys needing to come in here. Again, I don't care what the Twins call it, but they need to conduct big changes in the franchise as they are getting passed by, quickly! Other teams, even small markets, were conducting moves... we gave a ten year deal to a guy that can only manage to be on the field 30-40% of the time. Perfect, glad that deal got done. I was worried he'd hobble away.

Are you watching the same player? Arraez stats are; '19 = Batted .334 4HR, 1 3B and 20 2B in 92 games of fill in work '20 = Batted .321 although no HR's had 9 2B in 32 games of a 60 game season. '21 = Batted .294 2HR, 6 3B and 17 2B in 121 games! Maybe not a ton of power, but he gets on base. He doesn't have a starting position, but that is because the team won't give him one. Remember, he is a true 2B and stuck behind Polanco. Can I remind everyone that during the same timespan, Buxton played in games of: 87, 39 and 61 (187) compared to Arraez playing 245 games! Buxton is supposed to be our starting CF'er with Arraeaz, a utility man, bouncing around giving people breaks. Buxton just got paid and we are talking about Arraez not being worth keeping...?

Can't agree more! I have numerous posts on this site stating that I was not and am not in favor of the deal given to Buxton. But, with the deal done, we absolutely need to find a backup. But the "backup" will need to be someone who can effortlessly play the spot, and do so for approximately 100 games per season. With those numbers, it's not a backup we are looking for, as that is Buxton's role. We need a starter that will be happy to sit on the bench for the 40-70 games per season Buxton is actually healthy. If you want true "insurance" as the article calls for; the team had better call Lloyd's of London. I hear they are pretty good insuring delicate, high priced items.

The Twins should pray that he becomes the caliber of player as his comparison, Scott Baker. Baker was a solid pitcher for a team that needed it, never dominate, but solid.

And with his injury history, he will fit in nicely as a the CF partner, Buxton. I just hope they can coordinate their cycles, I mean injuries. ?

I don't think this is just a question of a 'backup' for Buxton. We need to have someone for about 100 games per season, that's a starter! If we are not looking at handing it to Celestino, then we need to grab a veteran off FA like; Gardner (38) but still has something to offer, and at 38 better not demand a huge contract. Pillar or Hamilton have been solid defensive options in the past and Hamilton still has wheels. I hope a fraction of what Sconnie says comes true, that in the end of his career, Buxton averages 148 games per season. But, he has done NOTHING to show he is trending that way. We need someone who will be prepared to step in and play the rest of the season after about 30-60 games.