bird

Mack and Bechtold, to name a couple of catcher conversions still playing. Others will know for sure, but was Caleb Hamilton a conversion to catcher too. He just debuted with the big club as an injury replacement.

I strongly disagree with an assertion that Gordon is either so invaluable that the FO would entertain a DFA of him, or that his trade value has "bottomed out". I think the opposite is closer to the truth. I mean, think about this: Cave was a slightly below league-average 4th OF last year (yes, I realize he's a favorite whipping boy). This year, we've had THREE 4th OF's emerge who are all at least arguably above league average in Celestino, Gordon, and Garlick. Let's assume for a moment these things: 1) the FO has confidence that Buxton, Kepler, Larnach, and Kiriloff will all be 100+ OPS guys and adequate OF starters; 2) the FO thinks Lewis can become a high-octane version of Whit Merrifield, and become that player immediately. If that's the case, then one, or even two, of Garlick, Gordon, and Celestino is immediately a surplus asset, eligible to be dangled at the deadline, hopefully IMO for low minors talent. If I'm calling the shots, I'm seeking a stupid overpay for one of these players. And if I'm wildly enthusiastic about Austin Martin or Will Holland emerging in a hurry as the next Nick Gordon? I take my chances and fetch a tasty return for two of these guys IF the opportunity arises. Because you'd still have one of them, plus Lewis, and if the injury bug hits, a short period with Cave or Contreras is tolerable. Afterthought: Arraez can fumble around in LF for a game or two as well, and maybe Miranda if a slew of injuries happens.

I get all that, and have no argument about that at all. But I DO challenge the idea that others have made that Lewis is incapable of getting his previous skills up to snuff in a matter of a month or so, and even improving from there, and that therefore he needs more AAA development time. Even though he missed a ton of time, we have to remember that he's been taking his glove out to the SS position almost every day since he was, like, three. Plus, his athleticism is exceptional. Very very exceptional. Add to that what we hear about his considerable brainpower and "character".

Fangraphs describes the Twins as having "loads of catching depth" and lists six prospects among the honorable mentions, meaning not regarded highly enough to be among what they consider to be our top 40 prospects. That feels like good news to me. Three of those six prospects are mentioned in today's report: Alex Isola, Jeferson Morales, and Jair Camargo. Ironically perhaps, AAA C/1B and Hitter of the Day Caleb Hamilton didn't make FG's list. Loads of catching depth indeed.

I've been guilty of being overly optimistic about pitching prospects in the past. I've come to realize that it's so much more a numbers game with pitchers because of the injury risks and the unpredictability regarding development. It's the sheer numbers of real prospects in the system, many on the cusp, that I find encouraging. I tend to look at things relative to other things, in this case, the other teams in the AL Central. Here's what I found: 2022 Fangraphs says the Twins have 7 pitching prospects with a fair value (FV) of at least 45 (plus non-pitchers Miranda, Martin, and Lewis). Three of those are on the big club now (Winder, Ryan, Duran). Additionally, lower value guys Sands and Moran are up. The other four are in AAA or AA (Canterino, SWR, Henriquez, Balazovic). Overall, there are a total of 16 pitching prospects on the list with FV's under 45, so there's impressive depth. That's 23 names. So keep that 7 number in your head. Here are the number of pitching prospects at 45 or better FV in the other systems: CLE 3 DET 4 (all AA and lower) CWS 0 (actually, CWS only has one prospect ranked as high as 45+, a 3B) KCR The 2022 summary isn't published yet, but based on 2021, it will come in at 3-4. Conclusion: Having 7 really promising prospects, three of which are already huge contributors on the big club, is a potentially significant advantage over the division rivals, especially in light of and every day lineup as strong as ours.

This I'm sure sounds like heresy to some, but I for one would say both Rodon and Gausman were solid passes, as was Stroman. From a business standpoint AND even from a baseball standpoint, one who accepts the concept that there is an acceptable value/$ quotient that exempts a front office for passing on a player is likely to agree that passing on Gausman at $110M/$21M each and every year for 5 years, and passing on Rodon at $44M/$22M each of two years may have been prudent, especially Gausman. Why? Mainly because they most likely would have delayed any contributions from Ryan, Ober, Winder, Sands, and perhaps a couple others later in the season (Henriquez, Canterino, Balazovic?) with not as many extra wins as people might think. So, $43M in 2022 for Rodon and Gausman, perhaps resulting in an extra win or two in 2022 over, say, Ryan and Ober, who cost less than $2M, and perhaps most significantly, made making an aggressive play for Correa viable from a business AND baseball baseball standpoint. I expect one of Bundy or Archer to implode, BTW. But, like last year with Ryan and Ober, I also expect one or two starters from the minors to step up like they did.

Well, if it's any consolation, Chief, you can rest assured you've outlived all 50 of them.

I once dated a girl who pretty much knew everything about Ted Bundy that a person could possibly know. I did not have a second date, and even considered transferring schools.

Let's assume (I know, it's a weak assumption) that they start the year with a rotation of Gray, Bundy, Ryan, Ober, and an acquisition, and that Rogers, Duffy, Alcala, Thielbar, Cotton, and Smith are 6 of perhaps 8 BP guys. On paper, we all know that this group isn't going to inspire a lot of confidence among us rubes. I think we tend to remember the guys who disappoint (Thorpe, Smeltzer types) and we tend to forget the guys who surprise us (the Duffy, Ober, Rogers, and Ryan types). I'm not going to guess which prospects will be viewed as better-equipped to build up innings as starters and which prospects might benefit the team and themselves by getting mostly low-leverage experience as #7-8 guys in the pen. The idea of inserting Duran into the mix like Alcala was has appeal. It'll be fun to see what the field people do, given the reality that almost all of the starting prospects are likely to be subjected to innings limits. What gives me the most hope are the sheer numbers of both injury-replacement starting options and bullpen candidates. I think of Chi Chi, Winder, Balazovic, Duran,Strotman, Sands, and possibly before season end, SWR and Vallimont as possibilities. And if middling prospects like Ober and Ryan are successful, we should have hope that a couple more from this group could come in and have similar immediate success. The number of BP candidates, guys who are likely ready to roll if they're good enough, is impressive. Moran, Cano, Jax, Thorpe, Dobnak, Henriquez, and even Stashak and Smeltzer. We really only need a couple-three of these guys to step up. So personally, I'm not in agreement with the argument that we absolutely HAVE to add from the outside to have a very good year, but yes, I see the point that better, proven options is desirable. I'm just not going to panic if it doesn't happen. I believe this FO and its baseball people know what they're doing.

Last year, I spent 15 minutes and scanned the 40-man rosters of every team to count the number of former Twins out there on other teams. The number? 36. That's not a typo. And what struck me was that about 20 MLB teams had at least one former Twin. I don't think there were a half dozen of those players that you would have added to the Twin's 26-man at the expense of removing the player we had at the same position, pitchers included. And there probably were not more than 10 guys that you would have jettisoned someone on the 40-man to make room for them. What did I conclude from that? Well, almost nothing, other than that there sure are a lot of Harpers, Magills, and Granites floating around out there.

Position players are a safer bet than pitchers given similar perceived ceilings. This is due to the increased injury risk, of course, but also because the performance volatility, year to year, is higher for pitchers. Don't ignore the reality that frontline starters can be acquired via trade, and they can be developed. I don't know the statistics, but my specualation is we could look at two groups: the first being a random sample of 1st round pitchers, and second, a group of the top current pitchers of the same quantity. I'd bet that the number of failures among the draftees would be about the same as the number of successful pitchers in the second group selected in the 3rd round or later. So, once again, we have a bunch of pitchers among our top ten prospects about which we're excited. (Note that none of them are 1st round draft choices). And once again, we'll probably see a higher failure or "disappointment" rate among the pitchers than the position players. So yeah, Mike, I think there's merit in selecting the position player. You once suggested Gausman might be a better bet than Buxton, and despite the incredibly bad misfortune endured by Buxton, no one would make that trade, right?

No question that Lewis brings uncertainty both at SS and to a much lesser extent, with his hitting skill development (he has the hit tool). But let's not forget that he was regarded by many experts to be in the same category as all four of the stud pitchers, Greene, Gore, McKay, and Wright, with Wright thought to be the surest thing among the pitchers. You wanted Gore, not Greene back then. You may end up having guessed right. Fangraphs gives Gore and Lewis a 60FV, and Hunter will surely get an upgrade from his 50 FV soon. But remember, many draft analysts thought Brendan McKay was a better bet than Greene or Gore-it was that close of a call, I argued at the time that the chances were very very good that at least one, and quite possibly two of those four pitchers would end up better than Lewis. The problem? Guessing which one. The jury hasn't reach a verdict yet. Greene poses injury risk that could derail his career permanently. Gore is struggling with command of both his breaking pitches and is no longer universally regarded as a surefire ace. Kyle Wright and Brendan McKay have negative WAR so far. Wright has been shipped back to the minors after 6 pathetic innings in 2021. So yes, with the luxury of new information, one can argue that Greene has a higher ceiling than Lewis, but the opposite argument has equal merit IMO. Wouldn't it be interesting to hear an honest take from the FO? I think your Enlow take is possibly slightly flawed, because, even though they maybe ended up not needing to, they easily could have been out of room to pull off the Enlow signing had they spent $7M instead of $6M by taking Gore, McKay, or Greene. None of those guys was exactly enamored with the prospect of being a Twin, and maybe their agents would have been encouraged to take a harder line, who knows. Again, it's my guess that at least one of those three will be a better player than Lewis. Your guess was once Gore, and now it's Greene, both excellent guesses, but guesses just the same, which I think was at the heart of the Twin's rationale for drafting Lewis, probably still the surest bet. Again, currently, Fangraphs has Lewis and Gore at 60FV, Greene at 50FV, and McKay down to 40+ with five pitchers in the loaded TBR system ranked higher. Bottom line: it's not all that baffling that Lewis and Martin are viewed as prospect equals and ahead of Balazovich, Duran, SWR, or anyone else.

Yes, that's the general rule of thumb. The exception might be when a replacement is better than the player being traded, with plenty of backup support. I'm not 100% certain that this is the case, but Kirilloff could in fact be an upgrade over Sano by the deadline. Dealing Polanco carries greater risk. In any case, if I were GM and this criteria was met, I'd STILL only make a trade if there was an overpay in place.

I'd phrase it differently: the Twins made a quality deision, and it remains to be seen if the results match up.

I think you're right about this. Is it too much to dream that Sano and/or Polanco come back strong and are traded for serious prospect capital at the deadline? That's my aspiration were I the GM.

I really think you're on to something here, Nash. We have three teams in the division that have now had the benefit of selecting elite prospects for a number of years. KC, CWS, and DET have zero excuse for NOT being much better. Early draft choices are underrated IMO. Also underrated: financial capacity. So, for example, Luis Robert fits CWS's budget, but not the budget of the other teams in the division. Not to be a Debbie Downer, but my gut is telling me that what I'm watching is not encouraging for Twins fans. I'll spare y'all the dozen or so indicators I think I'm seeing.

Short answer, for me, is yes. Why? Because, despite their shortcomings and inexperience, in tandem, they are possibly an upgrade over Rosario. Secondly, Kirilloff, I believe, is the real deal, and Larnach and Celestino may be too. This sets the club up to convert surplus assets (Rooker? Cave? Garlick? Wade... oops nevermind) into future assets while simultaneously upgrading a position mid-season, and importantly, a position that was NOT compromised when Rosario was allowed to walk. I tend to think the concerns about either/both Buxton/Kepler having a bad season should at least be balanced against an equally reasonable idea of either/both taking another step, or at least holding their own. Regardless of this, I'm thinking the depth of AAA and AA prospects has adequately been calculated in the FO's assessment of it all.

Yeah, I think all of this, plus the reality that he's a liability in the field, not just a little worse than, say, Garlick. My guess is that Cave and Garlick are viewed by the FO as half-season 2021 placeholders for Kirilloff and/or Larnach/Celestino. Rooker is probably mostly regarded as an injury replacement for Cruz in 2021, maybe his permanent replacement beyond this year if he can cut down a little on the K's.

The injury plague continues for this organization. One top prospect after another, delayed or derailed it seems. Snakebit much? Must be horribly frustrating for Lewis, and for others instrumental in his development as well.

I just glanced at FanGraphs and see Lewis ranked at #23, so they clearly still like him a lot. Gore looks like he's going to be terrific too. But I would imagine Falvey's amateur scouts feel pretty good that their collective recommendation that the FO pass on Hunter Greene, Brendan McKay (both though by a majority of experts to be a better choice than Lewis) looks sound. Kyle Wright appears to be a solid major leagur player, but the "right" #5 overall selection. And given the higher injury risk associated with pitchers, I wonder if the Twins would trade Lewis for Gore straight up. Probably, but not without much consideration. BTW, FG has both Greene and McKay ranked just outside of its top 100.

This is what I think I'm seeing: the CWS has more talented starters than we do. They have an everyday lineup that, talent-wise, is our equal or better, with the exception of perhaps a slight edge to the Twins defensively. The CWS bullpen depth is comparable. But the REAL advantage they have is that they're performing, game in and game out, at a very high level, and with a palpable energy. They're simply the better team, IMO. Exactly what I feared coming into the season.

That was easily the most painful game to watch for me in two years. My main issue with this lineup has been the paucity of "tough out" guys, which is why Arraez was such a breath of fresh air last year. I hope Falvey has a longer-term goal of building an everyday lineup that has smart OBP guys interspersed. The failure of one batter after another to even make contact in RISP situations drives me nuts. It's OK for Cruz to be Cruz, just give me two more Arraez types in the lineup each night instead of the Caves and the Rosarios one after another. Another reason this was a hard game to see given away: if I was given the decision and was offered one win in the next three games to walk away, I'd take it, no hesitation at all. Hope I'm wrong of course.

Not sure which one is the bigger hot dog...

Lots of really astute observations here. My own theory is that, going forward, they are going to need to continue to be aggressive traders of redundant major league talent for the promising prospects from other systems. They no longer can claim any sort of substantial superiority when it comes to scouting and talent evaluation, although they may still have better relationships and connections in the DR and may still have a work culture that drives them to find a Dobnak and resurrect a Thielbar. Any advantage in the area of cutting edge development technology, innovation and expertise is likely somewhat short-lived or narrowed. And MLB success quickly allows others to catch up because of favorable draft order and larger bonus pools. In my view, that leaves two primary ways to create separation. The best way, IMO, is to take advantage of other team's perceived immediate needs for MLB talent, where prospects offer a considerable future value discount compared to a current value for your expendable player. The second way is related, which is to keep enough dry powder ("financial flexibility") to take advantage of FA talent opportunities and cost squeezes. I agree with others that, today, we're behind our ALC rivals when it comes to top notch pitching talent. If I were the GM at the 2020 trade deadline, I would have solicited conversations about Rosario, May, Clippard, Romo, and Cave, and taken a prospect deal IF an overpay was available for any of them. I'd be an aggressive seller of MLB surplus 7/24/365. In short, the three pillars should all be significantly above average and then exploited to further improve things: MLB talent, prospect talent, and available cash. I think the Twins are in pretty good shape in all regards, with the talent pipeline at the lower end of the preferred range for my liking.

Personally, I'd like to see them go with a six man rotation and let them cruise through for now. What's the risk in doing that? Over the winter, I was hoping for two in the Taillon/Wood/Bundy category as opposed to the Hill/Bailey moves. But mainly, I was relieved to see that Falvey and gang were not counting on Dobnak, Thorpe, or Smeltzer to take the fifth spot from the get-go. This team is in good shape for the short season, but once agin, I'm bracing for disappointment in the playoffs. Hope they surprise me.