PatPfund

Love the name factor, but... ummm... ...it's been 7 years since he had a good and healthy season. He hasn't been in camp with less than 2 weeks to Opening Day, so how stretched out could he be by then? Doesn't that really make him depth behind someone like Winder, at least until he can throw 4-5 innings. Upside is he'll cost less than JA Happ (who is still available!!!!), and probably pitch better than Matty Shoe. Guess I'd stretch him out in St Paul, and try him when one of the many 'if's on the staff doesn't work. So, yea!? (Just kidding with the faux Happ excitement; don't freak out people! Well unless the Twins sign Happ again...)

Buxton (when healthy) is the only solid outfielder on the roster, so there are no roadblocks, only speed bumps in the way of any prospects. The ONLY (non-salary) reason Kepler is considered a second lineup lock, is because he can play defense, and no prospect has hit well enough to force the issue. And three years ago Max destroyed juiced balls before the shift destroyed him. If Larnach continues to hit in Spring Training, he should be the fourth outfielder right away (along with Kirilloff, Buxton, and Kepler), and if Alex and Trevor hit better than Max, they both should play more, and Kepler can be the defensive replacement. If they don't hit... Well, this team has too many giant question-mark-hitters on the roster already to succeed with low-.200s/dozen-HR performances from the corner outfielders.

Some of this has been said, but I'd go Buxton, Arraez, Correa, Polanco. Buxton gives the electric start, Arraez the patience to let Buxton steal and the OBP to add another runner, Correa the ability to knock them all in, and Polanco is the only batter left in the lineup that is scary enough to force pitchers to throw strikes to Correa. (Maybe Sano decides to start playing this year before the Twins are mired in last place, maybe Kirrilloff and/or Larnach hit enough to be scary, maybe Urshela gets back to that point, But Max, Jeffers, and Sanchez need to start low and hit their way into any discussion of the top (half) of the order. Miranda starts the year playing every day in St Paul, and so does Rooker until he can either hit or field at the MLB level. And OMG Rocco, enough of the Sano/Sanchez inning-killing back-to-back combo!)

Sure, I'd love a better arm, and sure, the Twins are paying for not doing things before the lockout. But... if Oakland's prices are too high (which they might be at this point), I'm fine with waiting for more realistic pricing. (Patience growing from my overall view of the team as competitive for an expanded playoff spot, but unlikely to go further even with a new frontline arm. Sano and Sanchez on the same roster is awful unless one or both of them recaptures rookie glory, and the outfield is a landmine of questions/weakness. Can Buxton stay healthy for the first time ever? Can Max be good with unjuiced baseballs and shifting? Can Rooker or Larnach be big hitters? Answer no to any of those, and OF keeps this team non-elite.) The expanded roster makes this an easy call. Even if you get a Montas or Manaea, I'd give Winder a turn or two in the first 5, then send him down with an experience to help him learn. Everything you said is right, but the learning curve needs to progress; dude is 25 (I think), so if it permanently breaks him, he probably isn't MLB material. Ever. And Dman is dead-on; better to find out now if you have something, than to lose him to Rule 5, and then find out he is really good by facing him in another uniform.

Love the rule, and love that it is put in right away (as in the 10th inning). After 9 innings (and probably 3+ hours) there should be relatively sure/short resolution. Best "traditional" way to deal with it in the regular season would be to just call it a tie (kudos PDX Twin!). I get some people don't see the problem, but I'm a lifelong player and fan of the game, and here is the problem I have with baseball games running long. There isn't anything materially different with the game today, so you can make a strong argument that the exact same amount of action happens today, except it is diluted across an extra hour of play. You can also make an even stronger argument that the modern game's "Three Outcomes" mean there is less intrinsic action (less defensive plays, fewer steals, fewer bunts, less small ball) spread across a longer game span. Plus I'm not alone (the Greatest Game's popularity is nose-diving), and loss of interest is a straight-forward product of the strategies lengthening the game. Batters are all Mike Hargroves now; stepping out on every pitch, playing with gloves or their bats, or their zen exercises with the sole purpose of getting in the pitchers' heads (and scattering their concentration). Pitchers, to combat this, step off the mound, work on their spikes, play with the rosin bag, step back on, practice finger cryptology with the catcher, step off, get mentally ready. All to get in the batter's head; scatter their concentration. Both strategies work. Not only on the opponents, but also on the fans.

The problem with a rotational DH comes when you only have 6-7 good hitters (Arraez, Polanco, Buxton, Correa, Kiriloff, Urshela, ?) on your team. Any of them work on rest days. If Jeffers starts to hit again, you could add him (same for Max if he'd ever realize 'pull the ball harder' isn't an answer to the shift, but I'm pretty faded on that happening). Sanchez and Sano in the same lineup sounds awful; I'd rather see one or both traded with a prospect for a starter. Rooker/Larnach got extended runs last year and got worse; they need to pick it up soon, or Miranda/Celestino will have their roster spots by mid-May. This only becomes a 'good problem to have' if the Twins develop more sticks (Miranda or Lewis come up, or Celestino/Larnach/Rooker figure it out, or Sanchez/Sano figure out how to hit over .210). Until then it is more of which option smells the least on a particular day.

Part of me is with you. I'm 63, started playing around 5, and still play some vintage base ball (1860 rules; two words; no gloves). Love the game! But a larger part of me disagrees. Baseball may not have a clock, but it does have finite structures (three outs per side; nine innings), and the modern game is a bloated mess that adds an hour-plus to the same action (or less with the three outcomes approach) that used to take 2-2.5 hours. No extra thought, just an extra hour of watching batters adjust gloves, and watching pitchers/catchers go through five forms of cryptology to call a fastball. Mike Hargrove used to be the 'human rain delay', now MLB is a league of Hargroves. Fixing the game isn't dangerous or new; the 1860 rules I play don't have called balls or strikes, or even require the umpire to rule players out unless asked. All of those changes, and more like wearing gloves, allowing professionals, pitching overhand, changing pitching positions, then mounds and their height, etc were all added to make the game more exciting and watchable. And I'm not alone in thinking there are deep problems. One of the reasons I like Twins Daily is I can actually get baseball coverage in a media space where major outlets are turning away from the game. (Seriously; baseball ended its strike, and the Twins made wild moves this weekend, and most of the radio/newpaper talk is about Kirk Cousins, minor FA adds to the Purple, and a team that doesn't play for 5 months.) So bring on a pitching clock, put that dude on 2b in extra innings, and let's get the game moving again. (But don't ban shifts; bat/bunt them into oblivion. Part of my problem with the modern game is that it is also stupid, but that is another rant...)

Ha! Started clicking in off facebook notices, then started visiting the site, then registered a few days ago, then realized how much I appreciated the regular articles (especially in a void of local press/radio baseball talk). So this morning I thought I'd look to see if there was a way to pay in, and there was this article. Thanks for the good work!