Dman

I was never a fan of the Tyler Kinley signing for exactly this reason. If we had kept Chargios there would be more flexibility on the 25 man. Both are power pitchers with strike out stuff, granted Chargios does have an injury history so Kinley looks slightly better there but potentially clogging the roster is a larger issue. To be honest I am pleasantly surprised Kinley held his own in spring training. My guess is the front office will give him a chance to at least start the season with the team.

Yeah if this guy is for real it should set them up for a trade. They can't keep them all for long anyway. If the Rays really do like Kepler I wonder if he could headline a deal for Archer? Cave should have the arm for right and the speed to keep those raindrops honest. This needs to be a part of something bigger to make it worth collecting outfielders. FYI he was the Yanks 27th rated prospect per MLB. Not a bad get for a lottery ticket.

I am guessing it will take 2\30 or 2\25 with incentives to get one of them signed. They turned down the qualifying offer so will want at least that much for year one. They do have the option to stay on the market until the season starts and wait until some pitchers go down via injury if they have to. So they still have some leverage left. They both seem like risky bets but the Twins really kind of need to lay it all out there this year as they have a path to the playoffs if they get the starting pitching they desperately need. If they can get a two year deal done they should do it. The FO must have made decent money the past few years time to pony up now that we have a core in place. I am a little bummed that if we do bite the bullet and get one of the pitchers that the draft won't stack up quite as well for us but the farm is pretty stocked and they will still get some good players. They just won't have as much extra money to maneuver with.

I guess I never understood how negative the Arb process could be. It probably was good the Twins went through it since they hadn't done it in quite some time.

So bottom line you don't see tanking as having much affect but with more teams up against the luxury tax there is now an over supply issue because they simply cannot afford to take on more salary without incurring penalties?

Good info Thanks for that. I was wondering how teams tanking would work with revenue sharing. My thought not having numbers was that tanking teams wouldn't need revenue sharing if they were not going to spend the money.

That a was a well articulated article. I have been saying market forces are at work for a while now. As outlined above tanking along with the luxury tax has really changed the market more than I would have imagined. With less competition for FA's there becomes no reason for 6 or 7 year deals where teams know they will be paying for two or three unproductive years. Also with analytics as good as they are these days the FO can see the risk reward factor for older players is high and typically doesn't work well especially for teams with lower payrolls. I guess tanking is the only way to fight back for teams with smaller payrolls. I would also guess the whole salary structure is about to be changed. With little statistical leverage for agents to promote veteran salaries I think we will see changes to the salary structure for players in their prime years. Perhaps something like teams will still get three years of low salary but the arb years will either need to be shortened or their will be pressure for arb salaries to rise higher. Enjoy this CBA while you can as I feel tough changes are ahead.

No one is saying they can't rebuild but maybe they would need to forfeit their revenue sharing then. They aren't planning on using it why would they need it? The idea behind revenue sharing is to allow teams to be able to sign higher priced\better players to better compete with teams that have more revenue. If that is not what they are doing with the money and tanking is the way to go then why do they need that money? Sure if you believe the goal of revenue sharing is just to divide the money up then I guess they can spend it any way they want. But I would think that would be a tough sell for teams that do generate lots of revenue and have to share it. The idea of revenue sharing to me was a way for baseball to avoid using a cap. So maybe you are right owners and players don't really care where that money goes. Although this lawsuit appears to say otherwise. I believe the players union expected teams to spend that money on player salaries. Tanking has really changed the game and the supply and demand ratio. I think they have a point although all named teams appear to think it is BS. Time will tell who is right.

Yeah I was thinking he would be a good get for Tampa as well. I doubt they would give up much as they have a history of killing us in trades but maybe they would be willing to deal if things break they way they appear they will. I also think it is a good idea to wait as it is hard to predict who might go down in Spring training and there might be room for everyone yet. I always liked Kennys and wish he would have gotten more at bats to truly see what he can do. I think he can make it at this level just not sure if he will just be good or really good at some point.

I am not typically on anyone's side in these arguments but if that is the stated goal of revenue sharing then I think he actually has a point. To create a more level playing field to acquire players you are penalizing teams that would be willing to spend more on player salaries and giving money to teams that cannot generate the same level of revenue as those clubs to give them a greater chance to acquire said players. If a team decides to tank their season and not spend that money on player salaries then why should they get that money? Technically they are saying they don't need it to be competitive. I think there is an argument to made there.

While I agree that possibly none of these flame throwers might make it I fail to see how we are keeping our eyes on the "prize" when picking up a 27 year old ne're do well pitcher and sticking him on 25 man.

I don't know exactly what the FO see's and I really can only follow box scores and second hand reports to get my information. So I don't get to see the whole or big picture. That being said I still have my opinion. I agree that when they need roster space they seem to have weeded out guys that are older, injury prone and with fewer options. I get that it makes sense to some degree but to me that doesn't make losing them any easier. Bard seemed to be coming around and all indications were he had good stuff. It was tough to lose him but thing is we could only keep so many relievers on the 40 man so risks needed to be taken. Same with Burdi, who given how Atlanta viewed him was a long shot to recover and stay healthy. Clearing space is necessary. I get it and I was fundamentally OK with those moves until the Rule V draft and the Kinley selection. I get that Kinley appeared to have found himself but given how smitten the FO was with Haley last year and how that turned out I didn't like the pick. Also tying up a 25 man spot with the risk involved quite frankly seemed reckless to me. My thinking is they are going to tie themselves to someone who cannot be moved up and down to AAA who has had literally no success in the upper levels and they are getting rid of relievers in the system who have had decent success in the upper levels but may be running out of time? The risk reward factor never sat well with me. Then they try and sneak Chargios through and fail. That is the one that finally set me off. I think if he can stay healthy he is a difference maker in any bullpen. He has an option left for this year and they could move him up and down if needed. A much better situation than the Kinley situation and IMO just as good an arm with a more proven track record. Personally I think they failed on that one. Kinley did pitch extremely well his first shot in spring training so maybe I get to eat some crow this year but if he falters and they have to let him go and Chargios goes on to a great career then I am not going to be afraid to say I told you so. Every decision is a gamble and I get that but I personally think they are going to lose this one. If Kinley makes it through the year with decent numbers I will take my helping of crow. If not I reserve the right to throw crow at the FO.

I agree with nytwinsfan. Love your lists because they are very different and they include the international players at a much earlier level than most prospect evaluaters. you had Graterol on your lists long before I saw him on others. Not sure that I agree with all your takes but odds are you know much more about these players than I do. Thanks for sharing the list!

I really like your article but I still don't know what to think of the acquisitions. A part of me is happy that the FO is doing something but also dumbfounded and scared that they might be wasting precious time with the window of talent they have. I hope they are the smartest men in the room so to speak and make these moves work out. The thing is it feels like a crap shoot to some degree. If they do turn both of those pitchers around I will be one happy Twins fan but if this is sort of the same thing we always get by grabbing out of the bargain bin I will be extremely disappointed.

They are hoping he rebounds? He might and I mean might as unlikely start the season OK but he has been very injury prone. Doesn't feel like a good match. I loved it when he pitched against the Twins. Always knew the batters would have a good day. Hopefully the front office knows something I don't.

I like that you have international players in your lists. No one else seems to give them much thought. I am a box score watcher and Nunez caught my eye early in the season and late in the season. the DSL had some real talent this year and GSL did as well. I am happy to see you put some of these guys on lists. Thank you!

I will silently eat my plate of crow if the Twins get him. The signs just don't look promising to me. FWIW I hope I am wrong.

Yeah if the Twins are balking at moving up to 150 to get him I gotta believe Chicago is willing to outbid teams at this point. They are in the middle of their window as well so if want another ring or two they need to solidify their rotation. Looks like the price is set and the Twins would likely need to go much higher than the competition to get him. I just don't see it happening.

I've got to believe the Cubs essentially have him already. The announcement is just a formality. I don't see why the Cubs would want or need Giminez except to pair him with Darvish.

Hmmm I am surprised by those numbers. I thought most teams\pitchers would be closer to 20 seconds than that. I assume 20 must be a reasonable amount time as that is the number they tested with. I just thought there were already a majority of pitchers that were at or around 20 seconds I guess that assumption was way off then.

How close are the averages though? Like I said I didn't hear of any issues in minor league ball.

I agree I don't think the pitch clock will be much of an issue. I don't remember there being any issues with them in the minors. If someone can bring up problems they had that would be nice to know but I don't remember any. Commercials are the biggest time challenge but those won't change because revenue is too important to owners and ultimately players as their salaries depend on revenue. At any rate I am for some changes. If they don't work well then fine roll them back but all indications seem to point to these changes not impacting much and hopefully they get players more focused on keeping the game moving.

He certainly seems to have the right mind set to be successful. I really liked the scouting report on Bechtold. I thought that the Twins got good value in picking Bechtold and Del Le Tora at 5 and 6. I am hoping they prove they can make it.

I was surprised that since he was offered a three year deal that the Twins didn't offer an option for the third year. Guy must believe in himself and will test the market again after two years.

I'll be following just about everyone in Cedar Rapids. There is an abundance of talent at that level. I am most interested in Javier, Kirillof and Lewis. All have very high upside and full season ball should tell us a lot how quickly they can move through the system.