Cris E

Perhaps you worded that poorly, but they are clearly going to be paying Ohtani what is in his contract, full stop. The way they calculate deferred payments when measuring payroll may change, but he's getting the money promised on the schedule agreed to.

Those two months of Vasquez improvement last summer were not some random hot streak. He got out of whack early and took advantage of a road trip through Phoenix in June to visit his own guys to get an adjustment. Also this: Perhaps the new hitting guy will be amenable to bringing the outside guys, or at least checking out the film to see what changes they made during that tune-up. But there could be something fixable with Christian that would allow 2025 to be more in-line with his pre-2023 numbers.

Vasquez, Johan Duran for Dylan Cease and some good young talent. SD needs a starting catcher and some salary room and this let's them cash in their one big chip to get back someone huge without wrecking the payroll any further. Vasquez, young arms (Raya? Morris? ) and Paddack to Cubs for OF Suzuki. Suzuki has no role in the Cubs outfield this summer, makes $18m through 2026, and the team has need at catcher. If we send enough talent we can make this work.

It's a rough time to buy in. The revenues are falling and there's going to be a war between owners to figure out a new revenue sharing plan that'll buy a peace like the one we've seen since the 1994 shutdown. The new CBA has to be agreed to after the 2026 season and I don;t think anyone expects it to go well. Hunter might be up for those types of interviews in the shadow of a lockout, but I can't see the "nice guys" wanting to sign on for that sort of duty on their own dime.

If they think they have enough for the rotation (Lopez Ryan Ober SWR Festa plus Zebby and other callow youth) they can consider Paddack and Varland for the bullpen. Considering how that went last year, maybe they keep Paddack for the rotation and let Festa marinate in St Paul. Anyway my point is I think Varland is finally headed to the pen in 25. But that does not address the very real need for a lefty out there. Theilbar feels done, Funderburk was bad, and while that might have been due to injury there's no indication he's ready to step in like Caleb used to. Some of you may feel the plan is to make some giant splash, but honestly I'm prepared to watch them wait for the market to collapse as the cable money vacuum sucks the air out of the winter. They might be able to grab a surprising number of decent guys at cut rates as a bunch of teams have to make choices. No idea who, but I will bet that no one on the Top 50 list gets signed in MIN.

An article like this isn't going to help matters. It's just making him into our own Steve Bartman, a man haunted by his mistakes and vilified by his fellow fans. The best thing we can do is allow him room to sit with his shame and, perhaps, grow into a fanhood he can be proud of.

Lots of things can affect BABIP, so there's no one profile for a high or low guy. But Wallner does two things that raise it and another that might raise it. First, he hits the ball hard so the defense doesn't get many easy plays. It's either caught or not, and guys that lack a half step won't be reaching some of those shots. Second, he runs well. He's a big guy, but he gets down the line quickly and that also puts pressure on the defense. And finally he strikes out a lot, which reduces the number of balls In Play. I'm not sure this directly makes things easier or harder, but because of the first two it might work in his favor. Anyway, I said last winter that Wallner was not a slam dunk stud for 2024 and could be a big candidate for a sophomore slump. I'm not entirely right or wrong on that, but the song remains the same for him this winter: he needs to work on contact, work on his platoon deficiencies, and stay quick. Because as a big guy heading towards 30 he could turn into a Jim Rice shaped GDP machine quickly. EDIT: This sounds harsh, but I like Wallner. He's a better player than his strikeouts and blah avg might indicate because he gets hit by pitches A LOT. Like 16 last season alone. It's crazy, but it's an extra way he gets on and contributes.

Lopez was escaping with zeros. If he gave up two or three or five runs on a handful of pitches I'd have yanked him too.

I don't second guess managers much, but you gotta see when a guy doesn't have it and make a change. The pen was pretty fresh and Alcala was throwing underhand. Wear this one Rocco.

He hasn't hit the breaking stuff well, he hasn't been 100% healthy for a lot of his career, and he's in an organization with some swift moving OF talent that's putting pressure on him. Some of this is bad luck, some is bad timing and the parts that are left is what he's got to work with to fashion a career in MN. But that's OK. Rooker ran out of runway here and still managed to put some stuff together in OAK and the same sort of path lies before Larnach. If he can stay back on the breaking stuff, if he can stay strong and on the field, if his glove can justify his time on the grass, then he might be the one who can claim a spot and chase Kepler out of MN. But this is the last chance he has in this organization to do that. His work is cut out for him: he's hit before and he might again and it's time to step up. Good luck Trevor, we could sure use you if you figure it out.

Staying healthy these days seems like some sort of magic trick. Did anyone see the "On This Day" earlier this week describing Jack Morris' April 7 no hitter in 1984? Not sure what the pitch count was, but 8K and 6 BB might not fit modern usage patterns for opening day starts. Can you even imagine the reaction to such a start these days?

The only problem I have with this piece is that the various boxes are not new. They've been on-screen for about 23 years and have gotten better over time, so why is it only a problem now? Is it because we can perhaps do better? Then let's do that: adjust the zones to match batters, share that common definition and require official broadcasters to follow it or take it off the screen. It might take a year or two to get the technical kinks out, but it shouldn't be that hard. Our standards are so high these days that it's beginning to reduce the joy in the game. An occasional poor performance by a rookie umpire should kind of be expected, yet this one's being vilified like he's some sort of Eric Gregg, who essentially gave away a World Series game while the world watched (without the K Zone.) I personally would like the human element to remain in the game, but honestly there are so many guys throwing so hard today that I think an automated zone is the best way to ensure fairness and repeatability. And even if it isn't perfect right out of the box where a Jose Altuve might always have to defend a larger strike zone than an Aaron Judge, he might enjoy the consistency on the corners. Youngsters are already there, waiting for the calls to even out. I would like to see the step taken.

There were only a couple teams out there that had any interest in Polanco, so the trade partner options were limited. Seattle was the best fit, needing exactly what Polanco offered, but you can measure how resistant they were to parting with ready starting pitching by the quality of prospects they sent instead. So they built the best trade possible, and in the end to balance the trade with Seattle they had to take salary back or send money over. If they knew Descalfani wouldn't pitch they probably would have asked for something else on the back end. But no matter what they weren't getting anyone that Varland wasn't going to beat out. (Descalfani has had an ERA+ of 61 and 87 the past two years while in Varland's first two years he reached 104 and 94.) No one knows what they were thinking when they spoke to the press, except that you always put the best face possible on a trade. Fans want to hear we're building for 2024 so that's what we tell them. If Descalfani actually showed up healthy and effective then jackpot, but the Giants dumped him when they needed pitching, the Mariners had no place for him in their rotation and the Twins saw him as a potential #5. If you think they traded Polanco for a #5 and you're mad about it I guess I understand, but I also think you're wrong to discount everything else they got via the Polanco dump.

Way to skip Jullien and farmer, but OK, let's talk about Lee. Lee has hit .237 in 38 games above AA, and beyond that he's got platoon splits to work on. (If you prefer more sophisticated stats go look at the full spread, but he's not ready by any measure.) If Correa goes down for a few months is Lee ready to be the SS into the playoffs? Of course not, he's not ready now so we have to wait. OK, now we dump Farmer to save money so your single reliable middle infielder behind both Correa and Jullien is Castro. And then you want to reduce the playing time of three or four better hitters (Correa, Lewis and Jullien for openers) to wedge Polanco in? Polanco has had what, 2-3 healthy seasons in his career, none since 2021, and yet somehow he's ready to step up and play in LF (for the first time in his life) then 1B (for the first time in his life) then shift back to 3b (where he is not good) for a game a week and then if he's still standing maybe be the platoon partner for Jullien? And the only cost to achieving this state is not adding a bullpen arm plus a lotto ticket stating pitcher plus not freeing any money to get a CF backup or backup 1B. You prefer Polanco to the five guys we could afford after this trade?

1. I could not agree less. Moving Polanco for the best package they could get was the goal. Descalfani was a throw in. Most folks who are not disappointed fans agree on this. 2. Well that's nonsensical, you can't just ignore the fruits of the trade. They had a choice of Polanco or Topa, two prospects, and Descalfani plus money to sign two other players. Five guys vs one for a small increase in payroll.

But Descalfani is here to offset the Polanco salary in that deal. SEA needed a payroll dump to even things up or we don't make the deal at all. He can't be separated from that deal. I guess the choices were to send money to SEA to take Polanco or take back an oft-injured pitcher who might contribute at some point, so they took the player. Farmer is here as the backup middle infielder behind Correa, a man whose health is so fragile that it cost him $100m in discounts the last time he went out for a contract. We don't have a proven MLB SS in the org that can fill in for Correa long-term, and it's certainly a role that Polanco cannot fill. (Castro can play a few games there but he's not a real SS. Lee is both hurt and unproven.) You say you don't care why, but the money was really what mattered. The measure was not how it improved the 2024 team, the measure was lowering the 2024 payroll. Your premise was wrong so your judgement was wrong. They felt they had to trade one of the large contracts, which meant Polanco, Kepler or Vasquez. No one wanted Vasquez, so the choice was either the healthy OF (where we didn't have any depth: Buxton without a CF backup, young Wallner, young ineffective Larnach) or the frequently injured 2B where we have a traffic problem (Julien, Farmer, Lee) so they went with moving Polanco. They probably started out wanting what you wanted, but they had to dump salary more than they had to have another starter and few teams wanted Polanco at all.

It may be all that matters to a fan, but sometimes management has other goals imposed on them. Just because you want to avoid the issue doesn't mean Falvey had that option. A deal had to be made to reduce the resources invested in the team. so it was going to be nearly impossible to improve the team this winter. There's a good chance that in this trade they might have improved the organization in the long run even if the 2024 team didn't get better. But one real goal met here was cutting payroll, and that had to happen.

Yes. But I also believe several other things. First of all I don't take every word spoken by front office guys to be literal gospel truth. I do believe they looked hard for starters that would move the needle, but they didn't find a deal that worked. But I also think they are always looking for more pitching in every deal, on the waiver wire and between the couch cushions. When they find a Stewart or a Jay Jackson they pick him up. There are several new faces in the bullpen that show the constant prowling for arms, and I expect that they might do more deal during the year if the injuries don't clear up. I also contend that they would have traded for someone had there been better options available to them. I think they have proved they will trade for starters, and trade big, but what I think this year shows is that there was a huge premium placed on controllable starters and the price was just too high. You'll notice that despite every team looking for starters, only a few changed teams. Luzardo and the rest are still Marlins, the guys Seattle liked are still in place, PIT resigned Keller, and in fact almost all of the starting pitchers who did change teams were medical risks (Sale, Ray) or on the verge of huge contracts (Burnes) or both (Glasnow). The number of teams that had controllable starting pitching in excess was very small, and once the Twins worked through the list they were done. You can call that a failure, but wildly overpaying is a worse failure in my mind. And honestly I think they weren't too freaked out by going with the guys they had. Varland as a #5 is a luxury. And SWR came to camp looking better than he had in a couple years, and Festa and Headrick look close, and Dobnak can be an old guy to call on to take a beating in the Kuechel role if that's what you need. (Dallas gave up at least 1 R per inning in 3 of 6 starts and 5 of 10 appearances, 25 ER in 37 IP, the bar is not high.) Perhaps when there wasn't a front of rotation guy available then there wasn't much value in picking up too many more #5 guys when you already have a bunch of 27 year olds to sort through. So yes, if your standards only extend to the Opening Day roster and you treat pre-season goals as some sort of blood oath then yes, they failed. But I don't think it's the huge deal folks are making it out to be. It might be that their focus on the bullpen was correct given that the bullpen is in the weeds already and that's after they shored it up with Topa rather than signing more starters. This article contended that Descalfani wasn't signed as a starter, merely taken on as a small part of a larger trade. You seem to think he was meant as some sort of cornerstone player but wasn't. I can't see that at all, but he's done and they'll go with who they have. Have a good season.

@USAFChief If there's no market to trade Polo for a good starting pitcher then the rest is not filler, it's what is available. Bullpen arms and prospects have value and when that's all that's on the shelves and you have to trade then you get the best deal possible. Polanco was great for MN, but the market for $10.5m oft-injured 2B with declining range is not good. In this trade they filled other needs and stacked some financial shenanigans with a flyer on a SP at the back end to balance the money. To repeat: Descalfani has not been good since he signed that large contract after 2021. The Giants' rotation was in tatters when they moved him, the Mariners had him penciled in for long relief and then he came here with no expectation of anything more than fighting for a #5 spot. He's just another bit of rag picking, not a hopeful, future-looking acquisition like Paddack or Mahle.

Also, many of the trades made the past two years were done as a direct response to the horrible lessons of 2022. Since that year Falvey et al always include a lot of "floor" guys on the roster to match up with any place we might be counting on the young or infirm to perform. Margot is here as Buxton's caddy. Santana is here in case Kirrilloff didn't step up this year. Descalfani was here in case Louie and SWR and Festa fell down. Farmer was resigned in case Correa breaks. They are still hoping Martin can be a big league CF, that Lee can step into an MLB infield job soon, that Lewis stays healthy and AK hits and Larnach figures things out and Wallner doesn't regress too badly, but they put in a floor beneath the kids in case good things don't happen. Margot is not here as a DH, though he played a game there. Santana and Kirilloff will swap around a lot as things settle out. Descalfani only got included on the roster because of the options situation, not because he was expected to hold the job. Looked at through the lens of larger roster philosophy rather than simplistic rotissarie games these usually make sense and you can tell when they reached for A Guy and when they were trying for something else. Mahle was A Guy and it didn't work. DeScalfani was not and the payroll is doing what they expected even if the pitching is not.

Seattle was trying to cut salary too, so we had to take DeScalfani as a throw-in to balance the money. The Mariners took on 10.5 and sent back 12 + 1.25 + $4m cash from SFG and $4m cash of their own. The net was them paying $2m plus a couple prospects for a guy to be a big part of their offense. Falvey did not act alone, and Seattle's position has to be counted as well. Viewed that way it really looks like no one in any of the three organizations Decsalfani's been with in the past two months believed he was a viable MLB starter because of his terrible health record, and now they are each paying a third of his salary to balance various trades over the winter.

The Twins have a lot of guys coming along that are going to require raises in the next year or two: Ryan, Ober, Duran, Lewis, Jeffers, Jax maybe, It's fun when your young roster has success, but the day comes quickly when they have to be paid, and some of these guys are going to be expensive.

They were utterly different animals than Montgomery. There is no one that would confuse very late-career guys like that with a guy who just posted a 138 ERA+ and is riding a string of four years not missing a start. He's available not because of his borderline value, but because he's too valuable and no one wants to pay him. I'd take a Montgomery signing right now. Just give him a bunch of minor league innings in FL or St Paul until he's strong and then let him fine tune in the majors. We have an easy division again this year so if he could right himself by June there'd be plenty of time to crawl out of any hole his early starts might put us in. Alas, I would not expect the money thing to work out so this is just killing time until Opening Day.

PIneda was signed while recovering from TJ surgery and then threw 282 innings of sub-4.00 ERA ball in 53 starts for the Twins in 2019-21. That was the exact same type of deal that Paddack was signed to and you're just going to have to wait a few months to see how it turns out. Sonny Grey was on the DL three separate times in 2021 and then we picked him up and babied him through 2022 and he still hit the DL four times. You can't just hand-wave that away just because it wasn't a twelve month elbow recovery. You want to pretend he was healthy or something because he was inconvenient to your argument, but that's no good: Grey threw only 135 and 119 innings in 2021 and 2022. The 50 innings he missed each of those years had to be covered by someone significantly worse than him. Injuries are not binary: Grey was both good and unavailable those years and we felt having as much of him as possible was better than a worse healthy guy. Meanwhile Mahle had a sore arm that might have been nothing or might have been Pineda, It turned out to be a Pineda elbow, but they didn't re-sign him through the TJ process for some reason, which I feel was a mistake. If you are buying despite the risks then you accept the injuries and stay the course with the truly talented guys until they prove they really can't stay healthy. I think Mahle is going to be pretty good and we should have easily been there at 2/$22m. I think we agree that not all injuries are created equal, but I (and I think the Twins front office) believe elbows are pretty simple these days, so if you can get a deal on the recovery years then those guys can be solid investments. We took a flyer on Grey and it worked. We took on Maeda and it worked half way. We tried Mahle and bailed before it worked and we'll have to see how he turns out in Texas to know the final truth. Descalfani has never had a solid healthy stretch and was passed around several times last season because no one expected him to perform. We added him to the bottom of the list in case he was OK, not as a building block. Paddack was Pineda and could be very good. I'm not sure who you think we should have picked up last winter, but right now we have the makings of a very good staff. Some were injury dice rolls and some were pickups and others were home grown, but I think mixing in some injured guys has been fruitful for us enough of the time for it to remain a viable strategy. It seems we disagree.

I wonder if he just said he'd cover the debts without knowing how bad things were. Saying "Sure, I can cover you" is easy when you have $40m in your wallet and this guy is probably in for what, $15k? $50k? That would explain why he was issued so much credit on an interpreter's salary. I'm sure the payment schedule will come out and this point will be illuminated eventually.