jdgoin

That’s exactly their approach, and the game in general. Which is why I feel offense sucks. He’s probably not the issue. Most hitting coaches aren’t. It’s the crappy lineups because nobody can hit.

I don't know David Popkins. I do know hitting coaches are usually the easiest to blame for a crappy lineup. This is offensive baseball in the 2020's. Elevated pull-side approach.

@Greggory Mastersonnice work putting this all together. Just a few clarifications. To be eligible for an MLB active roster, a player must be on that team’s expanded 40-man roster. This isn’t necessarily true. A player may be “Selected” to the Active Roster while not being on the 40-man, as long as a team can make room on the 40-man with a corresponding move. That selected player can then be immediately be removed from the Active Roster without being a member of the greater 40-man roster. You usually see a situation like this when a team Selects a player who is out of option to the 26-man roster. In order to remove them from the 26-man roster a Club then designates that player for assignment and asks Outright Waivers on them to free up that spot. The only time a player needs to be on the 40-man roster to be recalled to the 26-man Active Roster is in the case of the 27th man for a doubleheader. If a player is sent to the minors while also on the team’s 40-man roster, they need to have option years remaining. If the player has no option years remaining, they must be exposed to waivers to be sent down. When a player is exposed to waivers, any team willing to pay their salary can acquire their services without the player or their original team’s ability to stop the move. The claiming team must activate this player on their 26-man roster if the players is out of options. They are not able to send them to the Minor Leagues without first removing them from their 26-man roster via the waiver process. There are some nuances to these rules to be aware of. First, if a player is in the minor leagues but is not on the 40-man roster, the team is not using one of his options. However, if he is called up to the major league team, and thus added to the 40-man roster, the team can only send him back down by exposing him to waivers. This is similar to the first comment above. A player may be “Selected” to the Active Roster really at any time. If that player has Options remaining he may be Optioned as long as the Club has an open space, or can create an open space on its 40-man roster. So somebody like Dobnak could be selected to the 26-man roster and then be optioned back. This is also why sometimes a team may select a certain veteran player before a prospect. They can create a spot to get the player on the 40-man and 26-man roster (say move a player to the 60-day IL - Celestino this season), and then DFA the player they selected because they are not as concerned about losing that players to waivers. A team can request an additional option year in particular circumstances, such as long-term injury to a minor leaguer on their 40-man. A team does not need to request the 4th option year. It is automatically granted during the offseason as long as that player meets the criteria Gregory mentioned. This happens more with foreign-born players. The rules for this are complicated and involve a certain amount of active days during the Minor League season. Gilberto Celestino had one option remaining in 2022 and was demoted mid-season. However, he was recalled within days after an injury to an active roster player, and because his demotion was so short, he did not use an option year. It needs to be over 20 days. An optional assignment is charged at the end of the season assuming the player spent more than 20 days on optional assignment during that season. It does not need to be 20 consecutive days. It could be two 10-day stints or some combination to be 20 days or greater. MLB Players who can Refuse Demotion As discussed, these players have enough service time to refuse to demotion. Yes, that means Emilio Pagán will not be sent to St. Paul, no matter how hard you try. Byron Buxton, Carlos Correa, Joey Gallo, Sonny Gray, Max Kepler, Kenta Maeda, Tyler Mahle, Emilio Pagán, Jorge Polanco, Donovan Solano, Michael A. Taylor, Christian Vázquez If the team and Pagan felt it would be mutually beneficial for him to spend some time in the Minor Leagues, Pagan could consent to an optional assignment. A player with 5 or more years of service may not be optioned without first getting their consent like a player with less than 5 years of MLS. We had to do this with Jason Marquis a number of years ago. He missed a significant amount time in Spring Training due to a family emergency and was not ready for Opening Day. Because he was not injured we could not place him on the IL and send him on rehab assignment. We had to get him to agree to be optioned to make a start or two before recalling him. He was not charged with an optional assignment because his time was less than 20 days. 40-Man Players in their Last Option Year These players have used an option this year, and it’s their last. Come 2024, they will have no options remaining. Jordan Balazovic MLB Players with One Option Remaining These players are currently on the active roster (or injured list) and can still be sent down this year. However, if they are, they will have no options in 2024. The team could be a little more hesitant to use that final year than they would otherwise. Willi Castro, Gilberto Celestino, Jhoan Duran, Kyle Farmer, Kyle Garlick, Alex Kirilloff, Caleb Thielbar If any of these players are optioned during the 2023 season for less than a total of 20 days they will not be charged with an option and would still have an option remaining in 2024.

🤣🤣🤣

Sounds similar to a backup SL. Hitter thinks it’s a SL but it doesn’t do what it “should” do. Perkins always told me it was the most effective pitch he had, even if it was an accident.

What I find interesting is neither the Rays or Brewers are not on any of those lists on the more extreme ends. My guess here is the Rays try to maximize matchups and each of those clubs focus on squeezing every bit of what a pitcher is good at rather than remake them. In the Lopez and Pagan cases it doesn't seem like it was a pitch quality issue. The issues run deeper.

Thank you @SethStohs for taking the time to remember “Cliffy” on here. He was mentor of mine. He was a kind and generous person, with a mischievous grin and chuckle. Wicked smart. I mean REALLY smart. As we are fond of saying in the baseball world, Mike was a “good human”. He will be missed by many. But mostly by his wife, kids, and grandchildren.

It’s been that way for awhile now. There is SO much that goes into overhauling a player though. It really ends up being a quantity thing. You identify the qualities you want to target and try to fix all of them and hope one works out every once in awhile. The structure around the, pitchers is most important. You need a fixer or fixers. In the MiL and the ML. I think orgs overlook that. That was always my first question. Who is go8ng to fix them? Then the player has to have the aptitude for change. Not all of them do. These cases should be supplemental and right now it feels like MIN is almost trying to build a pen this way. Good guys can get better, but fringe guys aren’t usually becoming real guys.

These are the type of changes that makes scouting more difficult now. You think you have a guy pegged and he spends an off-season overhauling his mechanics or swing and comes back a totally different dude. Sometimes there are signs. Thielbar always had a high spin CB, but altering his release point to give it more vertical activity, coupled with throwing it firmer gives him a new weapon.

But also in this case Hef was in NY by now.

I would believe that. Hef is smart. He had an easy way about him. ML experience. You could tell from the first interview he had ceiling if he stayed with it. He had just retired a few months earlier. I wanted to hire him in Arizona when the Mets hired him.

I am trying to understand what you mean by stats don’t tell the whole story in this case?

Nice work @Parker Hageman. There is a lot to unpack here. I'll start with the changing of Lopez. The Lopez & Pressly situations while similar, seem to be very different as well. As I recall, HOU never asked Press to change the shape of either of his breaking pitches. They wanted him to throw his CB more often & with confidence. Your analysis of Lopez it seems like they tried to change his SI & CH to pair up "more efficiently" & alter his release point to do so. For a reliever in season, one of those is difficult, let alone all three. MIN has also lost their "Fixer" when Wes Johnson left. This has always been my biggest thing when someone wants to acquire a pitcher based on pitch data. Who do we/they have who can fix it? It's a hard mental adjustment for a guy.

Yes, I'm guessing the Twins were hoping if they could come close enough in money that the sales pitch they gave during the 2022 season would mean something even if the money was a little less. I don't know if they could have gone higher or not. But I'm pretty sure Boras either told all teams involved or a select few what offers he had in hand and gave them a certain amount of time to beat them. The Giants chose to do that and make sure nobody else was close. The Giants had to make a decision as well. They could have increased their offer slightly and risk not signing Correa. Or do nothing and call Boras' bluff. None of us know what the offers were as of say, Sunday night. For all we know the Giants offered 10 years and $295 million at first and came back with the winning offer.

@Parker Hageman Nice question! Do teams "miss" players when they are targeting one or do they conduct due diligence and make an informed decision on who to target, keep multiple conversations going, etc? Of course they miss out on players by targeting someone. Just by definition they missed out on Turner, Bogaerts, etc. because their main SS priority was Correa. They were willing/wanted to get Correa and would let the others sign first if they didn't have an answer. I guess a team could make the same or similar offer to those 3 players and give the agents 48 hours to respond and whomever responds first gets the deal. Not sure that would be received to well by the agents. If you're asking did they miss out on an impact starter by waiting on Correa, then they chose to miss out on the starter. But the reverse would have been true as well. If they would have targeted a SP at the top end and had to wait they would have missed on Correa as well. There is always a tradeoff. Even the Yankees missed out on a starter because they went after Judge. So maybe they missed on DeGrom and settled for Rodon. Just like if you were thinking of doing a marathon you might need to think about giving up Coors Light during training. There is a tradeoff. Teams have their pref lists for FA and potential FA ongoing. That helps make decisions in future seasons as well by studying the quality/depth of positions available this offseason, next offseason, and going forward. The real work on the current FA class probably started right after the Trade Deadline. Personnel departments will begin to rank them by position, then maybe by all position players, pitchers (SP & RP separate), and then combine everyone together. Using this offseason as an example, let's say the Twins had no clear SS frontrunner. They would take Correa, Turner, or Bogaerts. But they really wanted Rodon and their second SP candidate fell behind all the SS in their rankings. They may go after Rodon while keeping dialogue going with the SS class and be happy with whichever SS they signed. Does that make sense? You use your projections and internal rankings on all ML players so you can quickly see how each player affects your roster, your payroll, etc. Doesn't matter if they're FA or currently in an organization. I would say most teams do not have the payroll availability to sign two guys like Correa and DeGrom, so you have to make decisions. Adding $60+ million in salary probably strains most teams. In today's game, teams are talking with each other all the time. You're keeping track of who might be available via trade. During FA you have all sorts of conversations going on with multiple agents or agencies. I would say every teams at least checks in on just about every free agent to get a lay of the land. Maybe something pops up that wasn't on their radar. Teams do a lot of due diligence nowadays.

The cynicism is extra thick today. ??

As usual, you make a very articulate and valid point.

I’m not debating the approach. That’s a separate discussion. I just was trying to give some potential insight on how it went down based off experience and possibly what their thought process may have been. I don’t have any info other than what I’ve observed and been through.

From inside an MLB organization, deep sea fishing looks a bit different. Image courtesy of © Matt Krohn-USA TODAY Sports I've been listening and reading reactions from media, fans, this blog, etc. since FA opened. I'm pretty sure the front office went home pissed, bummed out, confused, and with all sorts of mixed emotions when Carlos Correa signed with the San Francisco Giants. It's deflating when an agent calls to say their client is going to go in another direction. I know this is the job we/they have signed up for, so it comes with criticism. You put a lot of time, effort, and emotions into something and must have it play out the way you want. It's even more exhausting when your job is evaluated every which way by outsiders, and you truly are doing what you think is best. You're not trying to be cheap or make it look like you're just putting in effort for show. You honestly are trying the best you can, given your circumstances. For fans and media, the armchair quarterback stuff is fun. I get it. Did the Twins get played in this Correa saga? Were they played? A little by Correa's actions throughout 2022, but Derek and Thad are smart. They have dealt with Boras plenty. They know his playbook. They took a shot with the initial contract and tried to make the best of it. They knew it was a one-year deal unless Correa had a TERRIBLE year in 2022. They wanted to sell him and his family on the area, the culture, and the ballpark and show him what he could have. A season-long recruiting visit, so to speak. Before NIL, that stuff used to work in college. It can work in capped leagues where you must find advantages outside player salaries. You take care of the players' families. You upgrade the travel accommodations, nutrition, etc. -- things that don't count against a salary cap. It's a little more challenging in baseball. Those two knew the risks they assumed when entering this contract. Plenty of comments claim the Twins should have known that 10 years for $285 would not get it done. A couple of points here: Minnesota knew they would not be the highest bidder in the end. They were hoping to keep it close enough to stay in the race. Like many businesses, they hoped the relationship between the manager, club, ownership, and player meant something. Also, having been involved in player negotiations for many years, Boras took his best offers to San Francisco Giants and whoever else and told them you had 24 to 72 hours to match or beat it. San Francisco chose to be the highest bidder, for better or worse. Only time will tell. The Twins didn't get beat because ownership is cheap. They aren't cheap - they are disciplined. And I realize that makes fans upset. Some fans want the emotional owner who will do "whatever it takes." Were they aggressive enough while having Correa? Phil Mackey had a little rant on YouTube yesterday saying the Twins should have been more aggressive in other areas, particularly pitching, for the one season they knew they had Correa. At first, I thought Phil was correct. But I thought about it more. You can argue with the results, but they were aggressive in acquiring starting pitching. They traded for the three of them for the 2022 season. If you want to debate the individual pitchers, I can understand that. Or, if you're going to argue trading for injured pitchers because they cost less, you can do that, too. The results were mixed from poor, to below average, to solid. But they were aggressive. We have yet to learn who else they tried to acquire via trade. We know the end results. When players hire Boras in a situation as Correa did, they hire him to be a fixer. Here's how: In that first contract, he works on finding the best fit so the player can reestablish his value. Boras calls it a "pillow contract." Then he usually searches for the most significant deal he can find, either by Average Annual Value (AAV) or by total guaranteed money. Sometimes a big-time Boras free agent takes a little less to go where they want to go, but not often. That's the inherent risk of chasing "big fish," particularly chasing Boras clients. If you plan contingencies, you can avoid getting stuck holding the bag at the end. The Twins planned contingencies. It does not mean they will work out, but it's been reported they've met with Swanson and Rodon already. We don't know what options C, D, and E are. The focus on Correa Aaron Gleeman wrote a fantastic article on The Athletic, laying it all out there. You should read it if you still need to. There are a lot of areas to fix on the Major League roster for 2023. They still need a shortstop. They need pitching. They need offense. They need pitching. (Yes, I know I listed it already). There are ways to work the roster without Correa and still improve it. It's still only December. Jack Goin served in various roles in Baseball Operations with the Minnesota Twins from 2003-2017, including Director of Baseball Research and Director of Pro Scouting. He most recently served as a Pro Scout and Player Personnel Analyst with the Arizona Diamondbacks from 2018-2021 View full article

They had a tough culture to work in under the previous GM. They have now run off a good GM after 2 years and winning a World Series. External candidates for that job (if there are any) are definitely going to pause before entering that atmosphere. Having a good working environment and winning aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s tough to retain talent in a poor environment. You can only overcome dysfunction for so long.

You're probably correct Nick. There hasn't been a front-loaded $300M contract, especially with opt outs that I remember. My point was there are front-loaded contracts with opt outs at lesser dollar amounts and fewer years that would provide a framework, no matter the total dollar figure. Nolan Arenado, Eric Hosmer, J.D. Martinez, Chris Sale all have front-loaded contract with opt outs. Player opt outs are also used liberally in the NBA. By "structured this way" I meant a long-term contract where the money is front-loaded and includes opt out clause or two. I wasn't trying to be vague or generalize.

Gerrit Cole and I believe Trevor Story have this clause, or similar, in their contracts. If Cole opts out the Yankees have the option to resign him for 1 year at $36 million. In Story's case he can opt out and Red Sox can add another year onto his deal. But I do like your idea, it puts some risk back on the player.

Please stop using the term creative to describe to describe these types of acquisitions. There have been plenty of contracts structured this way.

I don't understand the fan's need to hear from the owner more than once or twice per year. What are you expecting them to say publicly? It's not like they're going to tell you something you don't know or some insider info that hasn't been released yet. If they do that's BS to the people who work for them. Owners that negotiate with Boras or block trades when they've been agreed upon create poor cultures. It doesn't tell me they want to win more when they do that. But it does make me think a bunch of other stuff. There is a reason people want to copy Tampa's culture, Stu Sternberg trusts his baseball people. They've made good decisions mostly. Would they make better decisions with more money? Who knows? Maybe they wouldn't be as creative or forced to make certain choices with a larger payroll. Driving change should be the responsibility of the people who work in the business each and every day. Maybe an owner should ask questions, encourage, and create a culture that values innovation. But most owners aren't around daily to push it forward. I guess my point is saying the Twins need different ownership or need to "open their wallets" is misguided. The Pohlads take owning the Minnesota Twins very seriously.