Greggory Masterson

#1 may surprise you. Image courtesy of © Jesse Johnson-USA TODAY Sports Last Friday, the Twins finally bit the bullet and shipped Luis Arráez off to Miami in return for Pablo Lopez and two exciting prospects. It’s a sensible move, but the Twins will need to replace Arráez’s production on the field after his 3.2 fWAR 2022 season. Alex Kirilloff appears to be the heir apparent at first base, which was likely to be Arráez’s primary position in the field, with Joey Gallo, Kyle Farmer, Jose Miranda, and Edouard Julien in line to get time at the spot as well. The team shouldn’t struggle to fill the designated hitter spot, either, with the number of players that would benefit from half-days at DH. However, there is a role that Arráez filled with no clear replacement—leadoff hitter. It’s the biggest question right now about the Twins lineup, and Ted Schwerzler has already mentioned a couple of top candidates. But let’s crunch some numbers and see if any new cream rises to the top (of the lineup). There is some debate about how much having a stereotypical leadoff hitter matters to team performance, with some adamant that having someone at the top of the lineup who gets on base consistently leads to more runs. Others believe that the sequencing doesn’t necessarily matter and that the top players should hit as many times as possible over the course of the season, no matter the style. I’m not here to settle that argument, though it makes good reading from analysts wiser than myself. Instead, I want to look at the current roster to see which players fit the mold best. The common idea of a prototypical leadoff hitter is a player who gets on base, can run the bases, and, as Patrick Reusse asserts, sees a lot of pitches. There probably isn’t a player who checks all those boxes on the current squad. Luis probably didn’t either, given that his footspeed leaves a lot to be desired, although he is a good baserunner. I was interested, though, in seeing which players might be the best fit, based on those criteria. I looked at every hitter projected to make the team out of Spring Training based on Fangraph’s Roster Resource. I then compiled select stats from A) 2021-2022 and A) Steamer projections for each player. The players were ranked 1-13 based on their OBP, Fangraphs baserunning runs per 550 plate appearances, and average pitches per plate appearance (there aren’t projections for P/PA, so I used career averages for the projections). These three stats measure the player’s ability to get on base, run the bases, and see many pitches. Let’s see who fits the bill. Unsurprisingly, among the top four in both past performance and 2023 projections were the three players widely believed to be the Twins’ best hitters. The other may surprise some people. #4 Byron Buxton (4th Past, t-4th Projection) Past Rankings: 3rd OBP (.327), 1st BsR (7.5), 8th P/PA (3.84) 2023 Projections: 8th OBP (.304), 1st BsR (1.2), 8th P/PA (3.78) Buxton’s elite speed very much buoys his score on this exercise. As a free-swinger, he doesn’t see a lot of pitches, and his OBP is dependent on his average with his lack of walks. If he hits for an average over .300, as he did in 2021, he’ll be on base a good amount. The team will probably slot him in a more stereotypical power spot, given his ability to hit for extra bases. Nonetheless, he may get some run at the top of the order, as he has in past years. #3 Carlos Correa (3rd Past, 3rd Projection) Past Rankings: 1st OBP (.366), 8th BsR (-3.0), 2nd P/PA (4.08) 2023 Projections: 1st OBP (.351), 12th BsR (-0.9), 2nd P/PA (4.05) Almost the polar opposite of Buxton, Correa’s scores are weighed down by his lack of baserunning—the only player projected to lose more runs on the basepaths is Christian Vazquez. If it weren’t for those abysmal scores, he easily would have come out on top. He will, like Buxton, probably bat second or third, but it’s not unreasonable to think he may hit leadoff a bit, especially against lefties. #2 Jorge Polanco (2nd Past, t-1st Projection) Past Rankings: 2nd OBP (.332), 4th BsR (2.0), 4th P/PA (4.03) 2023 Projections: 2nd OBP (.332), t-4th BsR (0.0), 5th P/PA (3.97) Polanco is probably the best bet to serve as the leadoff man, and he barely missed the top spot in this exercise. He gets on base, runs well, and turns in good at-bats—so long as his ankle pain doesn’t cause him to pirouette out of the box on a swing. Leaning even further into the stereotype of a leadoff man, he’s also a middle infielder. He probably would have hit cleanup in a lineup with Arráez, but he’s a dependable option to plug in at the top of any order, given his balanced skillset and approach. #1 Joey Gallo (1st Past, t-1st Projection) Past Rankings: 5th OBP (.323), 3rd BsR (2.5), 1st P/PA (4.23) 2023 Projections: 6th OBP (.313), t-4th BsR (0.0), 1st P/PA (4.22) Oh no. The spreadsheets have gone too far. It doesn’t sound right, but by this definition of a leadoff hitter, Joey Gallo, of all people, is the top option. He leads players in pitches seen by a wide margin. He actually runs the bases well, even with his large frame. He gets on base at a good clip, too—the past performance metric includes his miserable play from the last season and a half. It sounds absurd, but we’re only three seasons removed from Rocco running out another unconventional leadoff hitter in Max Kepler . I wouldn’t be shocked to see at least a trial run of Gallo hitting leadoff in 2023. It seems in line with this front office. Don’t say I didn’t warn you. Speaking of Kepler, he tied Buxton in this exercise for fourth in the projections, and Trevor Larnach , of all players, landed in fifth in past performance. Another option not included is Edouard Julien, because he has no past performance, and Fangraphs only projects him for 26 plate appearances. Julien, though, gets on base as well as anyone, and if he hits at the Major League level, he’s undoubtedly a leadoff candidate. Admittedly, the three categories here probably shouldn’t be given equal weight, but it was still a fun exercise, and Gallo falls to third if the weight of OBP is doubled. Who do you want to see batting leadoff in 2023? View full article

An examination of the Twins roster in Derek Falvey's seventh year reveals four fundamental philosophies the organization has embraced. Today we look at how the organization has filled holes in their roster. Image courtesy of © Bill Streicher-USA TODAY Sports The core Falvey Philosophy is to fill out most of the Twins roster from their young core, but it is rare to see a team that manages to fill all areas of the roster with products of its own farm system, and the Twins are no different. The club generally does an adequate job of identifying areas of need and making moves to fill them--though the mileage on the moves may vary. Matthew Trueblood had a great piece on this, so I won't repeat his ideas in terms of the philosophy of said moves, but here are some examples. Coming off of a year in 2016 during which the catcher position was manned by Kurt Suzuki (on an expiring contract), Juan Centeno, and John Ryan Murphy with no imminent replacements, they signed Jason Castro to a three-year deal. The deal largely paid off, as Castro manned the backstop position serviceably and was a fixture in the lineup for three years. The club made a similar move ahead of the 2023 season signing Christian Vázquez, given their absence of a catcher not named Ryan Jeffers and no clear options in the high minors. We’ll see how it works a second time around. Heading into 2019, the club was in clear need of a third baseman with Miguel Sanó slated to miss the beginning of the season, at minimum. This led to the signing of Marwin Gonzalez, and given his positional flexibility, they were willing to go to two years to bring him in and find a role for him after Sanó’s return. In 2018, seeing a void in the bullpen both for that year and the future, the team sprung for Proven Closer™ Addison Reed, among others. The Reed signing is tied for the second-longest contract given to a pitcher in the Falvey-Levine era, and it went quite poorly, with Reed throwing 54 mediocre innings before his arm fell off, after which he never threw another Major League inning. The Reed signing may have played a part in the group's hesitancy to sign a pitcher of any kind long-term, because the only other pitcher signed for multiple years that they signed was Michael Pineda, twice. The first Pineda deal featured one rehab year in 2018 before paying him a full salary in 2019. He re-signed before the 2020 on something of a sweetheart deal due to his apparent appreciation of the team and his PED suspension. In both instances, the team had long-term holes in the rotation, so bringing in Big Mike filled a clear need at a reasonable price. They have shown some willingness to take risks on these veteran fill-ins, hoping either for bounce-back years or healthy seasons from oft-injured players, such as in the most recent signing of Joey Gallo or 2022’s signing of Chris Archer. This risk is often associated with their tendency to let the market play out. With fewer teams with which to compete, they can sign the remaining players at lower prices, which is how they managed to sign Josh Donaldson and Carlos Correa, twice.. Those remaining players are often still available for one reason or another. Perhaps the greatest risk was taken on Correa in 2022, though he is the best signing in the team’s history. If he were to have suffered catastrophic injury in 2022, the club would likely need to pay him $70MM over the following two years. Still, it was a risk that they were willing to take to effectively employ a top-3 shortstop as a placeholder for Royce Lewis . Do you have a favorite veteran signing for the Twins over the last 7 years? View full article

An examination of the Twins roster in Derek Falvey's seventh year reveals four fundamental philosophies the organization has embraced. Today we look at the organization's focus on their minor leagues. Image courtesy of John Bonnes, Twins Daily The Twins have a specific goal toward which all of their decisions are ordered: sustained success. Although it is more difficult to say to a fanbase that has seen an 0-18 playoff streak reaching nearly 20 years, the best way to win a World Series is to make the playoffs as many times as possible. Octobers are weird, and anything can happen. The Twins' strategy for reaching sustained success has become apparent. It can be summarized by a few precepts: develop a constructive core of young talent, fill remaining holes with veterans, and avoid long-term commitments that are not cost-controlled. Those guiding principles placed them in the position to sign Carlos Correa to a six-year, $200 million deal this month, perhaps the biggest breaking of their own rules, though not entirely out of character. I've combed through every transaction that the team has made since the 2016-2017 offseason, the first year that Derek Falvey and Thad Levine took over baseball operations, and I'd like to discuss some of them. Let’s start with the young core. Name a team that does not rely on amateur acquisitions, minor-league trades, and player development to provide the bedrock of its roster, and I will show you a front office not long for this world. (The jury is still out on the Mets, so hold on to that thought.) This thinking can go too far, such as in the pervasive attitude in the Terry Ryan regime that spending money on free agents was for poorly-run organizations, though those instances are few and far between. Nonetheless, this Twins front office has shown a commitment to developing talent and constructing the roster around homegrown products. As can be seen below, most of the players on the current roster were either drafted by the organization or traded for as prospects. I've color-coded the table with red being pitchers, blue being catchers, green being infielders, and yellow being outfielders. With the exceptions of Jordan Balazovic, Alex Kirilloff, Jose Miranda, Nick Gordon, Jorge Polanco, Max Kepler, and Byron Buxton, every member of this team has been acquired by the current regime. Balazovic, Kiriloff, and Miranda did not reach Class-A until 2018, and Gordon was in Class-A prior to the 2017 season, so their development has largely been a product of the regime. The other three have signed extensions. Of particular note is the amount of red (pitchers) in the "draft" and "MiLB trade" columns. The team has had six seasons to build up a harem of young pitchers, and it may be a make or break year in 2023 with so many homegrown hurlers in the majors or high minors. Regardless of the rest of the moves this offseason, the team will live or die based on the talent developed from within. Seeing this breakdown, is there anything that stands out to you? View full article

I checked about 130 Baseball Reference pages. I wasn’t about to check everyone who might be traded too

I hate to say it, but his name rhymes with Bemilio Bagán

On December 10th, it was announced that a few Twins had changed their jersey numbers. Trevor Larnach from 13 to 9, Emilio Pagán from 12 to 15, Kyle Farmer from 17 to 12, Bailey Ober from 16 to 17, and Griffin Jax 65 to 22. This is nothing out of the ordinary; a few players each offseason on any team will request a number change for one reason or another. However, this time, something peculiar happened shortly thereafter. Joey Gallo was signed less than a week later, and he claimed the 13 number, his number in Texas and New York, which had conveniently been vacated by Larnach. Is this a coincidence? My money is on no; it's incredibly meaningful. I did exactly what you have come to expect from old Gregg--I've scoured the list of remaining MLB free agents to see what this might mean for the rest of the offseason, and it leaves more questions than answers. Here are my findings: #9 (Taken by Trevor Larnach) The only remaining free agent who wears 9 is Dee Strange-Gordon, Nick Gordon's half-brother. Might there be a rift between Larnach and Gordon now that he's preventing his big brother playing for Minnesota? Probably. It's a good thing that Correa is back to try to help keep the locker room intact. Between this and fighting over left field playing time, things could get ugly. #12 (Vacated by Emilio Pagán; Taken by Kyle Farmer) Farmer really stepped on Pagán's toes here. It looks like Emilio may have been trying to open the door for Rougned Odor to don a Twins jersey, which makes sense given his history of sucker-punching opponents who homers off his pitchers. Having Odor at second base would definitely help keep Pagán's homerun numbers in check. Watch for a rift between these two teammates as well. #15 (Taken by Emilio Pagán) It's been a rough 24 hours in Twins territory with the last two #15 free agents signing elsewhere in Raimel Tapia and Brian Anderson. When will the team finally pull the trigger on the guys they really want? #16 (Vacated by Bailey Ober) This was the spot that showed the most promise, though with Trey Mancini coming off the board this week, the remaining pool is thin in Cesar Hernandez and Travis Jankowski. I would bet that the Twins were more in on Mancini than suggested, given that they clearly forced Ober to change numbers to attract him. #17 (Taken by Bailey Ober) Ober apparently looked Chris Archer in the eyes and said "This town ain't big enough for two five-and-dives" and took his number, preventing his return. Go get 'em, Bailey! #22 (Taken by Griffin Jax) Learned men like me know that there was no shot of the Twins getting Andrew McCutchen with this stunt pulled. Think of the team, Griffin! This also rains on Jeremy Nygaard's hopes to bring back Miguel Sanó. Surely the big man wouldn't come back if he couldn't get his number back from a relief pitcher. To make matters worse, this also eliminates Robinson Canó from contention. Sure, he switched his number for Roger Clemens in New York, but Jax is no Rocket; he's Air Force, not Space Force. This also removes Luis Torrens as an option. Sad day for those of you with Luis Torrens on your offseason bingo card. #65 (Vacated by Griffin Jax) There isn't even a potential free agent with Griffin's old number. So selfish.

Kepler, in a vacuum, is the platonic ideal for a fourth outfielder on a playoff team. Great defense in the corners, hypothetically solid enough defense in center to fill in for weeks at a time. Can even fill in at first in a pinch. A league average hitter with 20-30 HR pop, can always be comfortable with him hitting 6-8. And like you said, a good baserunner. In practice, it's not really a fit with the Twins given that he's left handed and pretty vocal about not liking to play center. Above all that, it's unclear that he would take an assignment like that. Who knows though.

The unprompted explanation about why he doesn’t have a smartphone in the middle of discussing the trade is tremendous

You know what, you’re right, that is a FA board. They only discussed the draft in the book. When I googled it I thought “this seems small for a draft board, dang it Hollywood.” it’s a tough decision, but Freight Train’s discerning eye at the plate is just too good to pass up.

This blog is written under the assumption that MLB teams with a robust amateur scouting system working hand-in-hand with a competent player development system will draft players better than a random guess or Keith Law's prospect rankings. You have been warned. In the first year of the MLB Draft Lottery, your Minnesota Twins were the greatest beneficiaries of the new system, moving from Pick 13 to Pick 5. Although draft order in MLB does not matter nearly as much as in other major sports, even the most cynical of observers can recognize the value of having the fifth choice in the draft over the thirteenth. Many times, the first handful of picks is somewhat predetermined, give or take. There are some years, like in 2010 in which there is a consensus #1 overall pick (Bryce Harper). However, in other years, such as 2022, there are a cluster of players who could reasonably be viewed as the best player in the draft (Jackson Holliday, Druw Jones, Termarr Johnson, Elijah Green, Brooks Lee) before a wide gap and the rest of the top 10. In years like that, teams in the top 5 can reasonably be assured that they will have a pick from the cream of the crop. Even the #5 pick can rest easy knowing that they will be able to draft an instant top 50 prospect. However, the MLB Draft is not nearly so clean. In 2022, the Twins had the good fortune of three teams ahead of them drafting players outside of that group in pitchers Kumar Rocker, Jacob Berry, and Cade Horton. Some may say, "See! They didn't need a top 5 pick to get a top 5 player!" Alternatively, imagine a scenario in which the Twins had the 9th pick. I'm personally not confident that Lee would have fallen another spot to land with the Twins. There are exceptions to this line of thinking. Perhaps the Twins were deadset on picking another prospect because of their scouting, convinced that they had found a player overlooked by other teams. The Rangers clearly believed this to be the case with Kumar Rocker, who was projected to be a late first round pick or early second rounder. Not willing to wait for their second round pick to come around and lose their chance with Rocker, Texas drafted him #3 overall. More dramatically, in 2020, the Red Sox used the #17 pick on infielder Nick Yorke, who was projected to be a 4th round pick. When you know, you know, I guess. Even in those situations, there is still value in having a higher pick (beyond preventing a similarly delusional team skipping over you to grab your diamond in the rough). The MLB Draft is set up with monetary values assigned to each pick. The total value of a team's picks determines the maximum amount of money the team can spend on signing bonuses each year, which is important because players (other than college seniors) can return to school if they are not satisfied with the amount of their bonus. Moving up from 13 to 5 allows the Twins an additional 2 million dollars in bonus money. In 2020, the Red Sox signed Yorke for almost one million dollars under what the pick was worth, and that leftover money went to other players' signing bonuses (Blaze Jordan signed with Boston for over one million more than his pick was worth that same year). The differences between signing bonus pools is most significant at the top of the draft order, but even those picking later in the draft can have a couple thousand dollars more than they would have had they selected one pick later every round. All of the information covered really seems like it benefits those at the top of each round disproportionally, which is true. However, those at the end of the round also see practical benefits to even being one pick higher. Each team has a big board (see the picture above of Oakland's big board in Moneyball), on which they order the players in the draft from 1 to 1,500. In the old days, each player was represented by a magnet. Today, the magic of technology likely enables the board to be completely computer-based, saving someone the trouble of peeling and moving magnets around every time Joe Blow moves from #796 to #781. Sometimes the order is clear:0aAmong the players remaining, the Bloomington Whalers may prefer Giuseppe Giordano to Jimbo Griffin. This is especially true when Giuseppe is ranked #67 on the board, and Jimbo is the next highest ranked at #94. Perhaps the Whalers are higher on Guiseppe than the rest of the league and are happy to take him in the 6th round, no questions asked. Teams often have wildly different preferences after the first few rounds, which is why every scouting director and GM is so happy that their own version of Guiseppe "fell" to them in the 6th. You will never, ever, encounter a decisionmaker who laments the fact that all of their top 25 players were picked before the 25th pick. It's never happened. Ever. However, sometimes the selection is not so easy. Say that the Whalers are in the 4th round, with a couple of picks before their own. On their board, #45 Stevie Templeton and #46 Freight Train Figueroa are still undrafted. At this point, there's some disagreement over who is the better prospect, and the room is split. Discussion ensues. Two spot before their pick, Figueroa is drafted. Problem solved; Templeton will be their pick. Except that Templeton was then taken, the pick right before the Whalers. Pandemonium. Given that it's the 6th round, the Whalers have 60 seconds to call in their pick. They had not planned for this, and they need to act fast. They default instead to pick #68 on their board: Warts Murphey, because he was the next highest ranked player. Had the Whalers had a pick one earlier, they would have had Figueroa. Alas, they settle for Murphey as the decision is forced on them. Rumor has it a similar situation happened to the Twins within the last 10 years with one of their top draft picks, and it's had a marked effect on the big league team. Although this example does not apply to every round of the draft, each team probably faces the top guy on their board being drafted the pick before their own at least once. Although it may not be of much consequence to the thirteen fans watching the draft at home, it certainly matters to the decisionmakers. Getting access to a tier of players that the team didn't initially expect, additional bonus money, and a lower likelihood of the team getting sniped all amount to legitimate effects on draft day, so even one higher draft pick matters. But please don't tank. Tanking is for losers.

At the beginning of the offseason, Nick Nelson laid out the concept of the Sonny Gray Threshold™, the idea that the Twins need to sign a pitcher better than Sonny Gray to make a worthwhile difference on next year's team, moving everyone in the rotation down a peg. I'm of the opinion that the threshold could be considerably lower than Sonny Gray, but the Twins have yet to even do that. Mind you, if you just read that last sentence and, in your head, it said "I don't want the Twins to sign a good pitcher" please do not run down to the comments to start sentences with "JA Happ, Matt Shoemaker, Homer Bailey, Dylan Bundy, Chris Archer." If you do, I will light myself on fire. I, instead, am of the opinion that the Twins have a serviceable pitching rotation, in theory, that could use one more reinforcement that does not need to be a potential 1 or 2 starter. A mid-rotation starter would be just fine, though I would not say no to someone at the top of the rotation. At minimum, though, I would like to see a guy who can be plugged in in the Kenta Maeda-Bailey Ober area. With the Rangers' signing of Nate Eovaldi, there are no more free agents seen as above the Sonny Gray Threshold, even if you squint. Unless the Twins swing a trade for pitcher a la Pablo Lopez, the ship has sailed. However, the Twins also lost out on pitchers in the Noah Syndergaard-Andrew Heaney-Jameson Taillon area as well. Although that type of pitcher is not exciting, it does benefit the roster as currently constructed The Starting 5 This Christmas, I was eating dinner with my great-uncle Oscar, who was lamenting the modern pitching rotation. "Back in my day, we only needed 2 pitchers. Bloomington had Seven Radishes Niederreiter and Slappy LeFleu. After Radishes died of scurvy, Bloomington brought in Georgie O'Sullivan. Back when MEN were MEN, that's all we needed." I, a learned and worldly man, gave him a heart attack when I said the Twins should start 2023 with a six-man rotation. Why would I suggest such heresy? I actually love this starting rotation. Its ceiling is as high as any Twins rotation ever has been. It does not have an elite arm at the top of the rotation, but there are no clear weak spots. Joe Ryan has been impressive early in his career and profiles as a solid, mid-rotation starter. Both Sonny Gray and Tyler Mahle have the potential to be borderline #1 starters. Kenta Maeda finished second in Cy Young voting during the abbreviated 2020 season, and was a good starter for the Dodgers prior to that. Bailey Ober has shown flashes in his limited work as a high-strikeout, low walk hurler, and I am very high on him, no pun intended, if he stays healthy. And therein lies the issue--if he stays healthy. It applies to more than just Ober. Gray has started 28 games just twice in his 10-year career. Mahle's entire 2022 second half amounted to seven starts due to indiscriminate shoulder pain. Maeda is coming off of Tommy John surgery, and did not look particularly good a season and a half ago when he last pitched. Ober has never thrown more than 109 innings due to a number of injuries. It is easy to see any member of this rotation needing a trip to the IL within the first month of the season. The Cavalry Admittedly, the Twins are in a better place in terms of starting pitching depth than they have been in recent years. Josh Winder and Cole Sands both spent significant time in the bigs during 2022, though to limited success. Upper-level pitching prospects Louie Varland, Simeon Woods-Richardson, and Ronny Henriquez all seem ready to make the jump and are not terrible options if needed. Although it should not be counted on, Jordan Balazovic may bounce back after an injury-riddled year, Chris Paddack may be ready to rejoin the club in August or September, and Randy Dobnak may also be around to make spot starts if needed. None of those reserve options are particularly appetizing, though, especially if starts are needed in May. Should Mahle's shoulder flare up (or any other number of maladies befall a member of the rotation) during Spring Training, Varland or Winder would probably break camp in the starting rotation. A midseason call-up would be more palatable for a couple of pitchers with a combined 16 Major League starts. So, Six? Yes, six. Those with long memories will recall April 7th, 2022, when the Minnesota Twins acquired a sixth starter via trade in the form of Paddack, then opened the year with six in the rotation. My proposal is simply that they do that again. The chances are high that within the month, one of the starting pitchers will land himself on the IL, solving the problem and reducing the rotation to the standard five. If there are no early shutdowns, the Twins will face a problem rarely seen in MLB: too many pitchers. This problem is one that they would surely tolerate. It also gives the team the flexibility to cut ties or reassign players when needed. For example, should Maeda's new elbow struggle to support a starter's workload, he may become a bullpen arm, though I would monitor that situation carefully. Maeda has made it very clear that he is opposed to working out of the bullpen, and his salary is tied to the number of innings he throws. Building off of that thought, one of the biggest reasons that the Chris Archer signing in 2022 was such a misstep was because of the lack of viable internal options. Signing a former ace to an incentive-laden deal is a terrific strategy, in theory. If he pitches well and regains his form, you'll be happy to pay his incentives. If he struggles, you have little sunk cost preventing you from cutting him loose. However, if the rotation is bogged down with injuries, like it was in 2022, and the team does not have competent minor leaguers in the wings, the team will find it hard to cut ties with a relatively healthy veteran to turn to, say, Devin Smeltzer and Chi Chi González. This season presents an opportunity that past seasons have not, in that regard. Of course, this is all incumbent on the team being able to manage a seven-man bullpen, which is another ordeal all together. For the sake of argument, let's pretend everything is hunky-dory. Current Options Given that all of the true Big Arms™ have been plucked up by now and even notable higher-upside flyer candidates are falling off the board--between beginning this post and now, even Corey Kluber has been signed--the pickings are slim in free agency. Instead, the options appear to be in the Zack Greinke-Michael Wacha range, though even Greinke seems like a longshot. Just under that lie Johnny Cueto or Wade Miley. If the Twins front office sees any of those arms as being in the 1 - 2 WAR range around $10MM, I say go for it, though no one would be excited by a Johnny Cueto signing (despite his 3.5 bWAR season in 2022). That comes with the caveat that said pitcher performs more like 2020 Rich Hill or 2019 Michael Pineda than 2021 Matt Shoemaker or 2020 Homer Bailey. The front office has more hits than misses at this level, but hopefully the current depth would allow them to shed the sixth starter if needed. Okay, now you can run down to the comments to say "Happ Shoemaker Bailey Archer Bundy." This would all look like a much better idea, had the brass jumped on Carlos Rodón or Eovaldi, or even Mike Clevinger or Matthew Boyd. They have had months to acquire one additional even marginally competent pitcher, but that has yet to happen, though I will hold judgement until the end of the offseason. Still, the threshold didn't need to be Sonny Gray, but they haven't even eclipsed Josiah Gray. _________________________________________________________________ If you've read this far, you might be interested in the "highlight" tape that I put together for the 2022 Twins bullpen last week (language warning): https://youtu.be/OD_5kc8IiHY If you liked that, here's also the Miguel Sanó Experience: https://youtu.be/OD_5kc8IiHY And a more serious farewell video for Miguel: https://youtu.be/rI-yYQ1IsQo

I appreciate it, Bonnes. It’s an idea I’ve been wrestling with for years now, and I know there’s no good answer. I really just wanted to get it down on paper.

Woah woah woah, I never had credibility to begin with

Go ahead, give me your hokey analytics about "Joey Gallo only hits .200," "There are now 5 lefty corner outfielders on this team," and "Joey Gallo has the highest K rate of all time." Well guess what nerds, I care about the stallion in the Italian, not what his "box score" may look like. Jokes aside, although not a world-moving acquisition, I think that it makes some sense, though it broke at an unfortunate time--two days after Correa signed with San Francisco and one day after Carlos Rodón signed with New York. Certainly, if the Twins' biggest signing this offseason is Joey Gallo, fans have reason to be upset. I do follow the offseason move-to-move and react to each move, but I am not one to put the label OFFSEASON FAILED on a team until the season begins and the Opening Day roster is finalized. First, though, let's cover the negatives. Gallo had a horrendous season last year, with a slash line of .160/.280/.357. If he performs like that again in 2023, he will likely be out of the league. He strikes out way too much and has a laughably low batting average, and that can only be expected to continue without an approach change. Players' bat-to-ball skills do not improve with age, and Gallo will enter 2023 as a 29-year-old. Furthermore, Gallo enters a crowded space of left-handed corner outfielders alongside Max Kepler, Alex Kirilloff, Trevor Larnach, Nick Gordon, and Matt Wallner. Of all the player types the Twins could have pursued, they got a guy who plays at their arguably deepest position. With those strikes against him, why don't I mind the signing? There are a few reasons: The corner depth is hypothetical Yes, there is a glut of corner outfield depth on this roster, and they are all lefties (with the exception of Gilberto Celestino, who is a corner guy in name only, given his poor stick). However, let's go through those options. Even before the Gallo signing, Kepler was going to be moved. Even if he didn't already have one foot out the door, it's debatable that Kepler would be better than Gallo. Both have high floors, given their defensive ability, but Kepler, outside of 2019, has not shown the chops to be anything better than a league average hitter. Gallo, on the other hand, has shown the ability to hit at an all-star level as recently as 2021. After Kepler, the top two guys are Kirilloff and Larnach, neither of which have proven much of anything between 2021 and 2022. Both have shown flashes of potential to be high-level hitters, and I still believe in them, but both have also been bogged down by significant injuries. Gordon was on the shortlist to be DFAed during the 2022 season prior to his development as a top hitter in the depleted Twins lineup in 2022, but his performance was bolstered by a high BAPIP and he is more suited as a utility player than an everyday left fielder or the strong side of a platoon. Wallner impressed last season at both AA and AAA and had a solid run after his late season callup, but that's all the major league experience that he has. Between the four of them, they have 1,584 MLB plate appearances combined, the equivalent of about three seasons as an everyday player. If the Twins started the season without Kepler or another corner outfield acquisition, they would start with Kirilloff in left and Larnach in right, and if either of them got injured, which is likely given their history, Gordon would be pushed into an everyday role, and Wallner would probably be up as a fourth outfielder. I think that they can all ball, but that's a thin group to enter the season with. I do believe that there is another righty bat coming the Twins way (Jurickson Profar is the guy I want to see now), and I can be convinced that it's not the end of the world for either Larnach or Kirilloff to start the season in AAA, given that neither is a sure thing. Joey Gallo can reasonably become Joey Gallo again In terms of buy-low hitters, Gallo probably has the highest ceiling outside of Cody Bellinger and his 17.5MM contract with a 12MM mutant option for 2024. When Gallo is playing at the form he's capable of, he can get on-base 35% of the time despite his astronomical strikeout rate and low batting average because of his astronomical walk rate (13% for his career). He can bop 30+ homers, with two 40 home run seasons to his name. He can play Gold Glove defense in right field. Obviously, there's a lot of ifs in this conversation, but it's better to take a shot at a guy like Gallo than to fill a spot with a low-ceiling Trey Mancini, AJ Pollack, or Adam Frazier type of player for the same money. If you're going to give out a one-year contract to a veteran, give it to someone who is one year removed from an All Star season and is still under 30. If the Twins and Gallo are fortunate and he makes good on his prove-it deal, he will likely be up for a big payday prior to the 2024 season. The Twins would love to watch him go. It would mean that he turned in a good year for the team, helping them contend for an AL Central title. However, there is an added bonus that only schmucks like me care about. Because he performed poorly in his final arbitration year (and was traded in-season), he did not receive a qualifying offer and is eligible for one in 2024. If he puts up a Gallo-esque season with a 125 OPS+, 35 homers, and great right field defense, he would likely decline the offer, giving the Twins an extra draft pick for 2024. I for one would like to see that happen. Positional flexibility Gallo is a great right fielder, due to his solid range and great arm. He also has experience at all three outfield positions, first base, and third base. I don't see Gallo ever returning to the hot corner. gallo.mp4 However, we all know that the Twins love themselves some position flexibility. The only alignment that would make sense to put Gallo at first base would be three of Byron Buxton, Gordon, Larnach, and Celestino being in the game alongside Gallo, as they would likely prefer Kirilloff and Wallner at first over him. Still, the option is there. More importantly is his ability to fill in in centerfield. He has not played there much since 2019, partially due to the personnel of the teams he was on. He didn't look bad in his work in center, though it has been 4 years since he had significant time out there. That being said, he would provide an extra layer of security for centerfield, which is important given Buxton's injury history. Is he a long-term replacement candidate if Buxton misses extended time with injury? Probably not, but I would bet that he will end up playing more centerfield this year than Max Kepler, another top defensive right fielder with the ability to play center, did last year (9 innings across 3 games). I wrote about the importance of having a third centerfielder and keeping Celestino down in AAA for the sake of the team and the player a couple weeks ago. Gallo fits the bill there. It's only 11 million for one year The cat was out of the bag by the time Gallo signed: the Twins do not plan on devoting 25MM+ to any one player this offseason. With 50MM to spend to reach last year's payroll, it's not a terrible use of 11MM. If he hits .160 through May and Wallner is killing it at AAA, I don't think the Twins will sweat the lost pay. He can easily be cut at that level. All of this is incumbent on him hitting at least .200, but that's a given.

The great American poet Chester Bennington once said "I tried so hard and got so far, but in the end, it doesn't even matter." Every time that a notable (read: league-average) player signs with a team other than Minnesota, we hear the same complaints: "Typical Twins, always in the mix but never get it done." Why is it that almost every time a guy signs, it's not with the Twins? Well, we can start with there being 29 other teams, so surely the club can't sign every player they're interested in. However, it's not reasonable to expect the Twins to sign 1 in every 30 free agents, either. That's far too low. So where is the line? How many misses is too many misses? For an elite player, almost every team would be interested in their services, for the right price. Oakland and Pittsburgh aren't going to be writing a $360,000,000 check for Arson Judge anytime soon, though. Some teams also wouldn't be in the mix for a specific player at their price because they have someone else at that position that isn't worth replacing for the money involved. Then there's the matter of more, let's just say, role players. Guys that no one is salivating for, but teams are interested in their services nonetheless to fill roster gaps, if they have room. Take Michael Brantley, for example. The Angels would have money to sign him, but as an almost DH-only player at this point in his career, the Angels wouldn't be interested in him displacing Ohtani. So let's take a situation where the Twins are hypothetically in on Dansby Swanson. He was tied to Chicago, Boston, LA, Atlanta, St. Louis, San Francisco, and Minnesota over the offseason. So with Minnesota being one of seven teams, all things being equal, the Twins had a 14% chance to sign him. If the Twins were tied to seven Dansby Swanson-like players (one of seven in the mix) this offseason, would you be satisfied if they signed one of them? What about someone like Josh Bell? Almost any team has a spot in some regard for a switch-hitting slugger. Obviously, we can throw out teams that would be unlikely to pay anyone 16.5MM right now like Oakland, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, or Kansas City, or a team like Houston post-Abreu signing and the White Sox that doesn't need that type of player at current. Still, we're down to something like 18 teams that would be interested, at the right price. Should we be happy with the Twins getting 6% of those types of free agents, 1 of every 18? Probably not, especially if we only want to consider players the Twins made a real run at. Building off of that, how much should the context of the Twins being a mid-to-small market team affect your expectations? Given that they're competing in this case with five big-market teams and the Cardinals, one would assume that they would be less likely to put up the money, based on budgetary reasons. So should you expect to see the team snag fewer than the average? I don't actually have an answer for this question. I'm mostly just thinking out loud. Obviously, there shouldn't be an expectation that the team signs all of the guys they pursue, or even most of them. But there has to be a line somewhere. It may be lower than emotion might tell you, but it also may be higher than logic might tell you.

Thank you, Jack

I'm begging you. I'm tried of deleting this. I have fat thumbs and hit enter accidentally As a sidenote, is there a delete function somewhere?

Schrödinger's Correa

Off the top of my head, I know there are some recent studies on home field advantage related to the type of stadium (domed, retractable, open-air) because players struggle to track the ball in with unfamiliar backdrops (Dome Doubles anyone?) and difficulties in communication on field, but I haven't come across anything that has to do with road life. That's definitely an interesting avenue of research!

I appreciate it! One of the biggest issues (beyond there being few studies that both directly measure psychological factors and compare them to game statistics) is that the literature is so scattered. There's a ton of one-and-done studies that are never followed up on and just sit on an island in terms of focus. There's a good deal of focus on roles (informal roles, role ambiguity, role conflict), but so many other topics have sol little. The size of baseball teams also makes it more difficult than sports like volleyball or basketball.

As the stove continues to get hotter and hotter and the Carlos Correa decision seems to be moments away, the value of his clubhouse presence is brought up as a hedge against skill regression with age. Even if he isn't able to play at an above average level, at least they'll have him in the clubhouse. But what do we actually know about the concept of "clubhouse presence" when it comes to measurable effects? Sure, it's a fun idea to throw out to express a hypothetical value, but what does it actually mean? Get ready for an ol' Gregg deep dive. I'm going to be looking into a few findings from the field of psychology to explore what clubhouse presence is and what there is to be gained from someone like Correa. As a caveat, this type of research is still in its infancy--no more than perhaps 20 years old. Few psychologists, even sport psychologists, dive into team processes from a social perspective. Beyond that, meaningful data on the highest performing athletes (i.e., MLB teams) is nearly impossible to measure directly, given that most researchers off the street don't have the opportunity to walk up to pro athletes and start asking them questions about mental factors. With that out of the way, here are three findings I think might be worth digging into. References for these studies will be listed at the bottom of this blog, and links will be available to the studies if I can find publicly-available versions. If you have access to a research database through a university or something similar, you might be able to locate those behind a paywall. Informal Roles Teams have formal roles like first baseman, middle reliever, and leadoff hitter that are related to performing on the field, but they also have informal roles that are more about interpersonal actions. About 10 years ago, a group of scientists led by Cassandra Cope of Laurentian University performed a content analysis of Sports Illustrated articles to identify potential informal roles on a team, then they got input from about 100 athletes to narrow down the list. The list they came up with had archetypes like verbal leader, sparkplug, cancer, and comedian. Since that time, researchers have been trying to understand what meaning those labels might have. In 2020, a study was published by a team from Wilfrid Laurier University led by Jeemin Kim that looked into outcomes of having certain players on teams. Although they did not get game data for performance, they did survey 16 college athletics teams, one of which was a baseball team. They found some interesting results, such as teams with more cancers (I won't name names as an example, but you know), distracters, and malingerers (i.e., dragging out injuries) tended to be rated as less cohesive. Teams with comedians and enforcers (i.e., dudes who will protect their teammates) being on a team was associated with more cohesion. Most pertinent to this conversation was the interesting finding that there was an inverted-U shaped relationship between verbal leaders and satisfaction with how the team attacks its goals (winning). Too few leaders was bad, and too many was even worse. The sweet spot seemed to be around 10-15% of the team being seen as a leader. In MLB terms, that would be 2-4 players per team. Correa clearly fills that role, and this is a team that is not known for having many verbal leaders. Byron Buxton fills more of a nonverbal leadership role, leading more through example. Sonny Gray comes to mind as a verbal leader, but the list runs out quickly. There are clearly not too many verbal leaders on this team, so Correa fits nicely in this regard. An approximation of this relationship: Knowledge Use This second finding came from researchers Jamal Shamsie of Michigan State and Michael Mannor of Notre Dame. In their 2013 paper, they analyzed MLB teams from 1985-2001. For these kinds of studies, there are some assumptions that need to be made, given that the researchers didn't personally survey any of the players on these teams. On the bright side, though, they can attach their findings to performance data. In their paper, they look into tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is knowledge that cannot be easily taught, through things like having conversations or sitting in a class. Tacit knowledge often comes from experience and is difficult to communicate. To represent this type of knowledge, the researchers rated teams based on things like years of managing for the skipper, tenure of managers and players with their current teams, number of lineup changes, and number of games played in recent years. In total they used eight markers for tacit knowledge and all of them were associated with team winning percentage. Carlos Correa brings one big piece of tacit knowledge studied in this paper that most of the Twins lack: playoff experience, which was positively associated with winning percentage in this study. Although it's difficult to have someone say "This is how you win in the playoffs," the mere fact that he has such an extensive history playing in October would provide the Twins with something that few remaining free agents have to the same degree that Correa does. Faultlines Okay, this one is really fun. It might not relate super strongly to Correa, but this is one of my favorite papers ever. Faultlines within teams refer to dormant things that can fracture a team but are only seen during conflict. Often, they can be similarities between team members that can cause some to take one side in a conflict and some to take the other side. When there are several similarities between members, the fraction can be even more dramatic and likely. In a 2016 paper written by a team of researchers led by Katerina Bezrukova of Santa Clara, MLB teams were analyzed based on faultlines. The factors they highlighted were age, race, and nation of origin. This example took me a while to figure out, and it's not perfect, but it should help in understanding what I'm talking about. Imagine that baseball is a team with only four players. On the left we have Team 1: Miguel Sano, Royce Lewis, Jake Cave, and Jose Miranda. On the right we have Team 2: Joe Smith, Caleb Thielbar, Gilberto Celestino, and Jhoan Duran. Both teams have two White guys and two [Black or Latino, respectively] guys, two older guys and two younger guys, and two guys born in the USA and two guys born in [broadly the Caribbean or the DR, respectively]. However, as can be seen below, the arrangement of faultlines varies greatly (the dotted line is to represent similarity--I only have 2 dimensions). Please do not read this as me assuming the quality of relationships on last year's team. I picked these players soley based on how I could arrange them for the example. Given that each player on the left side shares one similarity with each other player, it would be more difficult to fracture that team than the team on the right side. Anyway, there's a very complicated formula used to calculate fau, or the strength of faultlines within a team. In their study, the team looked at every MLB team between 2004 and 2008. Not only did they find that teams with stronger faultlines tended to have poorer records, but player groups tended to perform better as a whole when the faultines between those subgroups were weak. Player groups used here were starting batters, bench batters, starting rotation, and bullpen. As a veteran Latino player, Correa can relate to both veteran players and players from Latin American countries. Other than Jorge Polanco and Jorge Lopez, none of the Latino players projected to play for the squad next year have reached their late 20s, but there are several players from the USA who are in their late 20s. Having the type of players who can bridge gaps is important. ________________________________________ There are a lot of fun findings that I don't have the room to go into in these three papers (I say as I wrap up a 1,500 word blog), and I encourage you to check them out, if you're into that thing. There is evidence out there that the interpersonal side of team construction does make a difference, but we still have a long way to go. If people end up enjoying this deep dive, I have other research I'd love to share. Cope, C. J., Eys, M. A., Beauchamp, M. R., Schinke, R. J., & Bosselut, G. (2011). Informal roles on sport teams. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 9(1), 19-30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233355503_Informal_roles_on_sport_teams/link/00b7d526fcd315e5b4000000/download Kim, J., Godfrey, M., & Eys, M. (2020). The antecedents and outcomes of informal roles in interdependent sport teams. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 9(3), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000179 Shamsie, J., & Mannor, M. J. (2013). Looking inside the dream team: Probing into the contributions of tacit knowledge as an organizational resource. Organization Science, 24(2), 513-529. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/pdf/10.1287/orsc.1120.0741?casa_token=8-aXs_42nYoAAAAA:GLmBckoRaDqxm44T9vSTbsqFu7wZtgLn8uOTjUvEDHi52Ghl3pDWjUX-kOl-iFiaE0Y3MrWFTS0 Bezrukova, K., Spell, C. S., Caldwell, D., & Burger, J. M. (2016). A multilevel perspective on faultlines: Differentiating the effects between group-and organizational-level faultlines. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(1), 86. https://www.scu.edu/media/college-of-arts-and-sciences/psychology/documents/Bezrukova-et-al-JAP-2015.pdf

Hey, I really appreciate it. I get long-winded, and I’m still working on being able to get my points across concisely to write better blogs. I hope to improve on it. I like the directions you listed here. There’s really so many ways to accomplish this goal and I’ll be disappointed if it doesn’t happen.

Missed '64 Allison and Oliva as an oversight. I started in 1964 because that was the first year Oliva won a batting title, and I'm a good-for-nuthin' cherry picker.