Major League Ready

Arraez does not have a bat that profiles in the OF. He is also quite poor defensively. Rooker had an OPS 150 pts higher last year and he cant be much worse than Arraez in the OF. Obviouly Rooker's sample size was small but its reasonable to expect a 100 point higher OPS from Rooker. Cave would also have a higher OPS and he is a much better defender than Arraez. Broxton would definitely provide better defense. He could potentially be platooned with Cave.

Chicago is only go to play 161 games?

You have completely changed the topic. If you want to discuss a specific move that might make us more formidable in the playoffs .... great! Whether Kirilloff has earned a spot having never played an inning at AAA and a modest showing at AA is a different topic. Whether forfeiting a years control for 3 weeks of an unproven player is a different topic. Whether 3 weeks of Kirilloff is essential to our success in a different topic.

Who here would opt to accept 3 weeks pay fresh out of college instead of an entire years pay 6 years post graduation when its fair to assume you will be more valuable? If this was considered in investment terms the return is 17X assuming you were not more valuable after 6 years experience. Your child may not understand this but people making asset management decisions better.

I see it differently. Boras is the reason extending is not a solution to the service time issue. The reasons it does not make sense to start the season with Kirilloff in LF are as stated earlier. I ask again, why is so important to have an unproven rookie in LF for 3 weeks? You said it yourself ... you are not worried about the future. That's really where we differ greatly. You are no different than many fans. Many only care about the present. That's fine as a fan. It's absolute incompetence as a GM. If I offered you 3 weeks pay no or an entire years pay six years from now when your productivity and therefore income is higher which would you take?

OK, it's not completely unprecedented but you are talking about an extreme rarity. Then there is the point Drivlikejehu makes which is a crucial point ... The player and his agent must be willing. Luis Robert and Alex Kirilloff are not the same. Additionally, these players are not equivalent cases. They both played at the AAA level and dominated. Also, Robert is an absolute elite athlete who plays a premium position. His defensive value was assured. Jiminez also played at AAA and dominated. He had a 996 OPS. Even if we ignore the likelihood Boras would never allow an extension at this point, these scenarios are most certainly not equivalent scenarios. Why is it so important that a guy who has still not proven himself above A ball be on the opening day roster? Is it really going to matter if the team waits for him to show 1 month of dominance above A+ ball?

Yes, Some do. This conversation however is specifically about trading 3 weeks now for a year of an experienced and hopefully accomplished guy in his prime. It's a fanatical position that is exceptionally short-sighted. This particular player has a very high ceiling but has not played an inning of AAA and his performance at AA was certainly not dominant. Electing to exchange a few weeks of an unproven player for a year of an experienced player in his prime is the antithesis of good critical thinking and leadership and this "theory" is not going to change in time. BTW ... We heard the same indignant remarks here about Berrios. Fans assuming to better understand when a player is ready than the staff and leadership working with him every day. Of course, he struggled at first. There was even some of this type of talk about Burdi.

I am sure you will. Fans are fanatical. It's not exactly logical for someone to ignore the fact that all of the people that have achieved the highest position in baseball have a different take. Therefore, it's not surprising you would not change your mind regardless of what facts are presented. Lots of fans actually believe they know how to run the team better than the people who have actual credentials.

Thanks for this. I am quite happy to be watching a team win 90-100 games. It was not long ago we were watching 90-100 losses. I am even more pleased that it would appear we are positioned to be good for a number of years. They spent $10M-15M more than I expected and I thought they spent it wisely. I guess the fans that don’t recognize revenue enables spending, you might wonder why they didn’t just go buy better players. I also don’t place great predictive value in 2020 results. A lot of very good players struggled. I would still want Christian Yehlich on my team in 2021. The Twins are returning most of the position players who contributed the most in 2019. Plus, they have added Donaldson and Simmons. Before anyone says what about Rosario … He was 11th in WAR among position players in 2019 and replacing him provided $10M in payroll. I guess it would be fair to say we added Simmons with the savings.

Apparently you have a superior understanding to all MLB GMs because they definitely follow the practice you suggest is incompetent. I guess we will see if Falvey agrees with you in a couple months.

It sounds like you want a backup to the backup on the 26 man roster. I don't think too many teams have 3 legit SSs on their major league roster. I think we are in better shape than most having an elite SS and a former all-star as his back-up along with 2 or 3 guys in the minors that could be brought up if we are plagued with injuries.

What about Broxton? Celestino is said to be ready defensively so they could use him if really needed. I also disagree that Kepler is not a suitable back up. He might not be quite as good as a pure CF but they are not going to get a back up with Kepler's bat. Assuming Buxton is not injured right out of the gate, they could use Kepler in CF while auditioning Kirilloff / Larnach / Rooker or use it to get ABs for Arraez. Kirilloff is not going to be here opening day. He has not proven to be ready and they have plenty of options. There is not a GM in this league (IMO) who would bring him up in this scenario. To lose a year in his prime for 3 weeks now would be short-sighted to the point of incompetence.

If Simmons gets injured they are not going to use one of the AAAA guys. Their 1st move would be to put Polanco back at SS and use Arraez or Blankenhorn at 2B.

I agree that Maeda and Cruz are not likely to be as good as they were last year. What about the guys who are likely to be be more productive. Donaldson played very little and Buxton missed what was the equivalent to 1/3 of the season. Sano and Garver were beasts in 2019 but really struggled in the short season. Polanco had a wRC+ of 80. We should definitely expect better in 2021. .

I don’t think they want to fill the rotation with another average SP. We don’t know how last year went in terms of developing pitchers. We should have quite a few pitchers that are ready to be auditioned. Plus, any of the guys that are left have their own risks with short-term benefits. The organization is looking at how these decisions impact the next couple of years. Establishing one or two of our prospects this year would be huge for the next 2-3 years. We will need to replace Happ and Pineda. If just one of them is replaced by a pre-arb player, the payroll from Happ and Pineda could be reallocated to one higher profile pitcher that would be more impactful in post season play. We have a similar situation with Lewis. Let’s hope he kills it in the minors the first half and spends the second half of the season at the ML level. If he is successful, Simmons salary could also be reallocated. I have run the numbers for next year. Assuming Cruz is not back and payroll back to 2020 levels, we would have $53M available under this scenario. This includes arbitration estimates which could be a bit higher if Buxton and Berrios have big years. Part of this is as simple is these roster decisions were made based on what fit in the budget. However, the specific players and one year deals with Happ/Simmons had one eye on the future. That future is going to look great if a couple pitching prospects break through this year. So, I am firmly in the camp of giving innings to prospects instead of adding another back of the rotation vet.

They have Rooker / Cave and Arraez presently and Kirilloff / Larnach Broxton waiting in the wings. Kepler is perfectly capable of taking over CF short-term. If they need a CF for an extended period of time they would probably call up Celestino.

Shane Bieber is going to make a 10th of what Berrios is making. Pujlos will make $165M for the last 6 years to play at below replacement level. Chris Davis will make $92M for the last 4 years of his deal to be well below replacement level and there are many other examples. The system pays them as they become established just like any other profession. Some guys pay their dues and others get paid enormous amounts for sucking big-time.

Did you look at career splits or are you just making an assumption? Donaldson, Sano, and Buxton have a negligible difference against RHP. Cruz has been modestly better against LHP. Rooker actually had better numbers against RHP in AA & AAA. We should also not discount that Kirilloff will likely be with the ML club for most of the season. Garver is the one guy who quite a bit better against LHP but what LH catcher would you prefer to have that would be better than Garver against RHP? I think you are leaping to a generalized conclusion without considering the specific players.

7 Days

That sure looked like an absolute max effort delivery. I don't believe he could command pitches with that type of effort or sustain it over multiple innings. However, if he has an uptick in velo and an improved change-up there is reason for optimism.

I just don't understand why people complain about efficient use of payroll. The twins and teams like them have to be more efficient. It's not a theory. It's an absolute fact. Twenty-one of the last 25 World Series have been won by top 10 revenue teams. We should all be applauding any strategies that help overcome the significant advantage held by top revenue teams. Complain that we can't follow inefficient practices if you like but it makes no sense to complain that we don't follow inefficient practices.

As we all know, our area of need is pitching and its really hard to trade for pitching without giving up pitching prospects. Even Darvish cost the equivalent to Balazovic AND Durant plus a couple other prospects. I say "even" Darvish because he is already 34 and he has not been reliable especially in post season. We are not deep in front of the rotation guys but we finally have enough pitching in the pipeline to build a true contender. Of course, there is no guarantee with prospects, far from it. However, it's nice to be in a position where sustained success is a real possibility. It's a heck of a lot easier to fill out a roster in free agency or trade when those final pieces are position players as opposed to pitching. We should be set for OFers for several years to come and if Lewis realizes his potential our position players should not need all that much augmenting. It is so nice be realistically optimistic about having a solid decade of quality Twins teams to enjoy!

No, the salary would have not been problematic but it would have meant foregoing either Simmons or Cruz. The real cost was that they gave up the equivalent to Balazovic / Duran and Rortvedt. That's a big bight out of the future and I don't see Snell as the guy who gives us the edge in game 1. He was great in 2017 but he has not been dominant with the exception of one playoff game. You also missed my point. I asked for examples where this strategy where this has worked. KC would be the most obvious. However, they did not win it until after Shields was gone. The more important addition was a relative throw in (Davis). Also keep in mind that trading away Greinke was key in building that team. They managed to make their window really short. So, my point is that the strategy you suggest has very few success stories for teams with below average revenue. That's why this front office and others are not following your desired path.

Give us some examples of teams with below average revenue that traded away the kind of package necessary to land a "Castillo" and then made it to the WS. Give us examples of teams with below average revenue that landed the top free agent SP in free agency. I will save you the trouble. It's happened twice in the past 20+ years. The first was Mike Hamilton with Colorado. That was an unmitigated disaster. The other was Greinke to Arizona. That happened to be the year the Dbacks signed a TV contract that was a huge revenue boost. That move also proved to be quite ineffective. In other words, you are bent out of shape about things that virtually every GM of teams with similar revenue restrictions consider to be poor practices.

Another guy that will be really interesting to watch this year. He has reached the age and physically maturity where you hope he takes a step forward. It would make a difference if he was consistently in the mid 90s. How has his control developed? We have no idea if that has improved over the last year. A couple ticks on the radar gun as well as better control and he might have considerably better results.