DocBauer

They kept the 6 they needed to keep and I'm glad they didn't play games with Enlow' s status. Someone would have grabbed him and stashed him. I would have liked to keep Schulfer, Contreras and Gore. Schulfer has the velocity to be interesting but his numbers don't exactly jump out at this point. He might be selected, and from there, who knows. But it's pretty hard to add 7-8-9 guys to the 40 man at this point for almost anyone. I hope be doesn't get selected, or is returned. Contreras and Gore are interesting, but not especially young. And Gore is still new to the mound. I hope both stay with the Twins, but again, you only have so many spots available. Love the improvement by Palacios and I have some hope for him. But despite solid overall numbers, his bat was inconsistent. Not sure anyone takes a gamble on him right now. I just don't think Severino is ready for a big move yet. Doesn't mean someone not expected to contend couldn't stash either one of these guys, but they also have their own players and own rosters to protect and run through. As far as Cave goes, I'll repeat I was 50-50 if the Twins would keep him. He's an experienced and inexpensive 4th OF with 2 quality seasons before a bad 2020. (Not the only one who did). He hurt his back very early in 2021 and basically had a lost year. He has an option and be can also be cut with no $ repercussion. He's kept for depth. If someone gets claimed, sticks, and does well elsewhere it would be easy to claim the Twins blew it. But even at that, if Cave had been cut, which other prospect do you keep in his place? How could we be certain that THAT ONE was the RIGHT ONE to protect? All I'm saying is, you protect the best 40 you can with the knowledge, belief, and information you have. Some of it is guesswork, unfortunately. I don't know that I would have protected him. But based on his first 2 seasons and healthy again, yeah, I can see why they kept him for depth.

The OP is 100% correct by Cody. The DH spot doesn't have to be ONE GUY. It never has to have been unless you have a special player to fill that spot. Despite the offense needing some greater consistency, the power and the hitting seems to be there. Despite some poor seasons and injuries that mucked things up, and the loss of Cruz the last couple of months, the overall run production was good. I know potential trades could change the complexion of things, but reflect on what is on hand for the time being. Arraez needs to play daily as a 2B/3B/LF/DH option to set the table. Donaldson still needs a few half days off. Sano needs to play at 1B and DH. AK will play 1B and OF. Garver needs to be in the lineup as much as possible. That means some DH time, MAYBE some 1B time as well. Larnach is free to grab the LF job, spending some time in RF as well, if and when he grabs a permanent job. And then there is Miranda, the hottest prospect we've had in years. He needs to play! And while I wouldn't stick him at DH, he allows others to take a day there. DH is not an issue. Too many good bats/players to fill the daily 1-9 is a GOOD problem to have.

I feel sorry for Hamilton. The kid has been through so much. Not just his horrific injury, but just last season he was claimed and waived 2 or 3 times before being a Twin for 2021. For his sake, and I just don't see how we can spend the 40 man spot to protect him, I hope he goes unclaimed just so he can continue with ONE TEAM to keep progressing and get a shot.

Yes, but he has to be protected initially on the 40 man roster before being placed on the 60 day IL to create another roster opening, right? And if I'm right, when can he be transferred to the 60 day to allow for an open spot?

To me the first 6 are givens: Lewis, Miranda, Winder, Sands, Enlow and Vallimont. I don't WANT to protect Enlow as he's going to be out until June/July and hopefully get some quality IP at the end of the year. But someone WILL pick him, stash him, rehab him, and get him ready for 2023. I don't recall Valimont's control ever being as bad previously. He's probably destined for the pen, IMO, as a high velocity, K arm that we just can't afford to be selected and stashed on a bad team's roster for a year. I really want to keep Gore and I think he pitches for the Twins at some point in 2022. But can we afford the roster spot to protect him? Schulfer has been solid, but not great, thus far in his Twins career. But I also didn't realize he had that much velocity. I'd really hate to take the chance someone is going to stash him in their pen like what happened to Wells last year. Lastly, I'm really glad they re-signed Palacios. But I don't see room to keep him. Despite a good 2021 and the ability to suddenly hit, and hit with power, at an upper level, it was his 3rd go around at AA. Further, if you break down his months, his BA and other peripherals were inconsistent month to month. That works in the Twins favor. I just don't see him being selected, or at least not kept, by another team. There's no room to keep anyone else. And it's going to be hard to keep everyone I've already listed. But a dark horse, or at least someone I'm really, really hoping doesn't get picked? That would be Contreras. I don't think he will be picked, much less kept. But I think he has a chance to play in 2022 in some capacity. I don't think the hit tool is ready yet, but the defense is there and he's got some developing power.

I appreciate your opinion as well as your frustration. But I'm going to have to disagree with your sentiment. While 2021 was a classic and utter failure, the plan in place was not a bad one. I mean, Colome is gone and should be gone. But he was quite good/effective from about early May on. (Too little too late I know). Happ just shouldn't have been that bad based on history, his 2020, and his first few starts last year. I don't know how anyone could have predicted Simmons bat to just suddenly turn to wet tissue paper when he had an OPS of like .750 or higher 4 if the previous 5 seasons. The Maeda and Odorizzi trades were excellent. The Cruz signing was outstanding. A healthy Donaldson earned his deal in 2021, and hopefully will in 2022 as well. In previous seasons, the FO found a number of bargains for the pen that met or exceeded any projections. Whether you actually agree with some of the players they have traded away, the returns on those trades look to have been solid with many of the returnees having reached MLB or are very close. System wise, they have completely revamped their entire approach and with good reports and what appear to be good results. While 2020 remains an outlier at this point due to it's unusual subtext, the drafts this FO has been responsible for appear to be at least solid if not good. We've already seen several coaches poached by other organizations from the Twins after being hired by, you guessed it, this current FO. Please understand, I'm speaking from MY perspective on how I see this FO to this point. I don't believe we can judge it by a season in which virtually EVERYTHING that could go wrong did go wrong. Nor can we, IMO, use any singular move or non-move judged as a "mistake" and use that to categorically dismiss the FO as incompetent. Now, a large number of mistakes can and will certainly add up. But absolutely no FO anywhere always makes the right moves or non-moves. You always hope they do the right thing much more often than they do the wrong thing. I'm disappointed and a little po'd by this announcement...with the previous caveat that we don't know everything and doubtfully ever will...because if there was ever a time to stretch your self imposed restrictions for length of a deal, this would have been the guy to do it for. The FO has an opportunity to make a lot of moves this offseason and here's hoping they have a good plan and enact it well. If they do, the window of opportunity may remain open and a lot of good faith lost will return. But despite some questions and frustrations, when I examine the entire content of what the leadership has done to this point, I'm still on board at this point.

I have little doubt there's more to this than the tired old mantra of "the Twins are cheap", but I'm sure we'll never know all the details/facts. It may be Berrios, after being traded, simply decided the $ was fair and he wanted the security for his family. Something may have changed within his family. So I'm not going to needlessly speculate or blame the Twins for anything at this point. To continue, the Twins are paying Donaldson more than $20M per. They lost out on but offered both Darvish and Wheeler more than $20M. So I don't think it's the money that is/was the overriding factor here. I think there's at least a good chance it was the length of the deal. And I can be disappointed without being angry. 6+ years is a very, very long time to guarantee a pitcher $20M+ per season. So I get it. That being said, Berrios is the best arm produced by the Twins in years. He's actually really good and has upside remaining. He's a tireless worker who is a bulldog competitor. And at only 27yo, he's the kind of arm young enough to deserve an extension that long. I don't think the Twins look very good here.

I'm interested in all 3 of the A's pitchers if the price is right. And I'm OK making a move for someone on a 1yr deal. But a "right price" is not a top 10 prospect unless the guy I'm getting back pushes me to the top. And that's not happening here. And I seriously doubt Oakland wants a 1 for 1 deal. They are going to want a 2 or 3 for 1 deal to deepen their system and provide more opportunities to strike it rich. Staying away from exact names as I don't know the A's system all that well, but I'd be OK with 2 or 3 from about the 12-15 spots in the Twins system on down. There's a lot of good ballplayers there. I could see the rehabbing Enlow as someone Beane might have as a primary target.

2I think Nick's OP is spot on that the FO hasn't exactly blown their various moves. In fact, this OP shows they have indeed made some real quality moves. By no means have they all worked out, especially last year to be sure, but they haven't "blown" all their moves. Really enjoying the opinions of lastonepicked and chpettit19. And I agree with just about every point each has made. And I will state that in MY opinion, a re-tool vs a re-build, is absolutely about the players acquired via trade last year, but ALSO includes spending $ available to add to the pitching staff. The question remains as to HOW they add to that staff. And this comes back to the OP and FO history. My blueprint was a re-sign of Pineda which is pretty much a status-quo and not really looking outside of the organization. Despite addressing the front 2 spots in the rotation via FA, I've maintained my belief that one of those spots is at least 50/50 to be occupied by a trade option. And this goes back to the OP and the trades for Maeda and Odorizzi. Repeating myself again, can they pull a rabbit out of the hat a 3rd time? By that I mean it cost them a low A SS with some potential and a high quality BP arm that had SP potential. With a deep system and a variety of teams looking to re-build and shed payroll, can they yet again find a quality SP via trade without breaking up the ML roster core? Some argue, rightfully so, that said core hasn't produced a true playoff run yet. I can't disagree. But I'd argue that core provided a pair of winning seasons and a SHOT in the playoffs. So do we deplete the OF or C position to add to the rotation? To be more direct, who replaces Kepler's defense and inconsistent but solid offense if traded? And how much better are we losing Garver or Jeffers if they are included in a deal, which many opinions state we should do, trading from depth. Trading from depth is what you SHOULD do. But Larnach, Celestino, Wallner, Martin, Rotvedt and even Jeffers may be a half season to a full season away from being ready to be every day contributors. And we have ARMS that are pushing at AAA and AA to be ready at some point in 2022. I am NOT opposed to some smart trades. And the FO has made a couple smart ones. But shouldn't they just be smart with a couple FA additions to re-tool for 2022 and build on what they have coming up?

Agreed. His AA numbers look good overall. But there was a lot of up and down BA wise, though his production was solid. He's still got a lot to prove with the bat. You can't build a resume just hitting mistakes. But he's young enough still to improve. And I'm glad to have him on board if the glove is still there.

Appreciate the hard work done here, but as stated, the incentives here are realistic based on what is in place. I honestly don't recall if it was ever reported what the initial guaranteed AAV. But it was in the double digit category for sure. The issue was the incentives, obviously not reported, that was the issue. They either weren't enough, OR, were too hard to achieve. That's lead to speculation that the best option is to offer $15-17M AAV and have GP or PA or AB be the benchmark for incentives. As far as I know, incentives/bonuses can also be in play for All Star appearances, Gold Gloves, MVP, etc. He could earn anywhere from $25-30M. For a player of Buxton's ability and potential, he could easily achieve those kind of $ value IF he's just on the field. IF he's healthy enough to earn his incentives, NOBODY, including the Twins and their ownership, would object to paying that kind of money because he's paving the way to an MVP season and the team should be following him toward a playoff type season.

I'm disappointed if you are correct. I don't know what future he has, and his loss shouldn't hurt the system in any dramatic way. And he really seems destined for a repeat of AA again to begin 2022, but I think he has a shot as a useful 4th OF with defense and speed.

Thanks! Guess I missed that somewhere. Don't know how he is going to turn out, but I'm glad to keep him. We're short of young SS who can field and may actually be able to hit a little at the top of the system. I say that with all due respect to Lewis and Martin as I'm not certain if Martin can/will stick at SS and Royce is coming off his injury.

For the record, I'd really like Palacios and Whitefield back. Neither appears to be a top prospect, but both are worth keeping around. Palacios finally learned to hit and found some power. Whitefield has the defense and speed to be an interesting bench piece down the road. Wonder if Telis likes the organization enough to come back, or, is he looking for a better opportunity to maybe get actual ML time?

Wallner has certainly been impressive and I would expect he's starting day 1 for Wichita next year. The one bad performance doesn't diminish what Laweryson has done thus far. I think we have a guy to keep a serious eye on for 2022. Still unsure about all 3 LH's but there is obviously there based on their K numbers last year and the ability to get additional K numbers in the AFL. Jury is out, but I'm still intrigued. A little disappointed in Helman. As a good athlete with speed, budding power and positional flexibility, I thought he might build off of his 2021. SSS I know, but doesn't feel like he's taking advantage at this point and taking that next step.

Ted, we agree on Stroman and Gray and I have the 2 of them heading my 2022 rotation. I do have Gray for a higher $AAV but happy to drop down to $10M from $12-14M. We differ on the #3 option, however. While Mahle is a fine young arm, your proposal trades away a couple young arms that might be as good and ready as early as this season. And you do so for only 2yrs of control. Not a bad idea, but why not Cobb or Pineda on a 1yr or 1+1 deal to solidify the rotation and provide opportunity for the young arms nearly ready? I like the Holland idea as a cheap flier with rebound upside. But there are 3 or 4 arms I like and feel safer about for another few $M and I think I'd go that route to better secure the back end of the pen. Baez would be awesome. I'd love it! But it means keeping the bullpen add and 3rd SP at low cost and that's where I'm going to disagree with Baez coming on board. I think Stoman should sign for $18-20M. But it's going to take $22-23M IMO to get it done. And Gray has been good enough, is young enough, and still has some upside I think he's going to be $12-14M. I hope I'm wrong, but that's how I see it playing out. That's why I look at a filler SS that is a solid player and a better addition to the pen. Even then, the payroll is pushing for the extra 10% that I'm calling for with butts in the seats, 2020 behind us, and the FO saying they intend to be competitive. $140M-ish payroll is well within the financial parameters the Twins have spent in recent years, and fits comments made by the FO that they are looking at keeping payroll within recent parameters. And the only long term $ they are committing is to a couple quality rotation arms. Those two commitments should in no way handicap the near future. I just don't see a fit for Baez, or any other top FA SS, unless A] The Twins bump payroll to $150M, OR B] The Twins can actually, successfully, lower obligated payroll with a move of Donaldson and maybe Sano. Then, you MIGHT have room to add a top SS FA. Even then, it might take some combination of BOTH A AND B to get it done. I think the offense, and offensive potential is good to great.. I think the defense has a chance to be pretty solid as well. I think the team can compete as long as the staff is SOLID and the pen is SOLID. Neither has to be GREAT. But both have to be SOLID. Wish there was an easy/smart/lucky way for the rotation to be re-tooled and the pen have at least ONE solid addition and still leave room for one of those top FA SS. I just don't see it.

I actually like Bundy as a bounceback #3 rotation option. I almost put him in my blueprint. He was quality just a year ago, and was considered quality with upside when LA acquired him. Doesn't sound sexy but could be good as well as inexpensive. And I almost put Martinez on my blueprint as a bullpen option. It would seem the best way to re-establish him and get the most out of him.

My eye test has been seeing Arraez as a solid 3B despite some bad plays here and there. There is nothing great about him defensively anywhere, but I've always believed he's solid wherever he plays. This rating seems to support my eye test. So 3B and 2B are just fine with what we have on hand. Kirilloff should solidify 1B as the primary there while seeing some time in the OF. I've maintained I'd be fine with Simmons back at SS if I knew he'd be the OPS producer he was the previous 4-5 years. Otherwise, I think a change has to be made. But there are SS options out there that are solid gloves that have decent bats who could replace him. Really, other than 1B, the only spot to really improve defensively...can't believe I'm saying that after the first 2 months of 2021....is LF. And until someone steps up and really grabs that spot, it's going to be a mash-up if multiple players and the defense might be questionable at times. For now, I'm OK with whatever platoon makes sense there for improved offense and average-ish defense.

Just playing devil's advocate, the proposed package is a lot to give up for 2yrs. IF the QO remains, the Twins could have him for 3yrs. And that's intriguing to say the least! And I'm not saying he couldn't be re-signed, but if he keeps his proposed trajectory, that re-sign could be tough. That being said, I could jump on this idea with the 3yr window opportunity if it was Larnach, (who I really hate to give up), and ONE of Lewis/Martin with Canterino and maybe a low A sweetener tossed in. And I'm looking at both sides here, what the Twins are willing to give up and what the Reds want/need. Were I the Reds...not knowing their system but hearing it's not all that great...i think I'd be focused on Martin/Larnach, Canterino, and a Sands/Varland type of return for my re-build. I get 3 Twins prospects that are all probably top 15, at least top 20, coming in to 2022. The Twins MIGHT even throw in someone like Vallimont, borderline 40 man roster protect, but should fit in with them and their 40 man who could still be a ML SP, but who also has huge upside as a bullpen piece. Anyway you slice it, the Twins give up a ton and the Reds get some very nice high upside pieces. It's the only 2yrs guaranteed that bothers me. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather re-sign Pineda, or equivalent, another quality FA arm...debatable as to who for sure....and make a lesser deal with the A's for one of their available arms and add a quality arm or two to the pen and keep the majority of my system intact for another season. I feel doing that, as long as I don't just make "settling" choices, I have a team that can really compete. And I have so many good young players that are just so close to playing and pitching for the good nucleus I have in place that I'd just rather not make a move for ONE GUY at 2yrs right now.

I never fully bought in to the Twins having an outstanding hitting tandem at catcher for 2021 simply because Jeffers was promoted rather quickly and had a wonderful, tantalizing, but very SSS for 2020. I expected regression and some struggles simply because of that SSS. If we want to use an extremely rough projection, 50 grit sandpaper type of rough, we could compare 2020 and 2021 and figure out some medium that he can't hit .273 but he's also better than .199 so he's a .240-ish hitter with power and great defense. That's a quality and long career player who might even make a couple All Star teams. But he's almost a clone of Garver. A bat first draftee who hits in college, hits in the minors, shows power, and vastly improves his defense. IMO, he just needs a little time to learn, adapt, and make adjustments. IMO, though the Twins have needs on the hill, they need to keep both Garver and Jeffers. I believe moving either at this point weakens a potential and envious position on the team. And I don't like weakening the team at a crucial spot when there are other means to add. I am very encouraged by what I've seen from Rortvedt defensively. And while not a great hitter, he's made some solid progress with the bat in his time up the milb ladder. But like Celestino, he was pressed in to ML time too early. And I'm very pleased tbat he seemed to learn and adjust and take that to St Paul to finish the season strong. I think he's got a future. But his immediate 2022 future should be at AAA sharing time with another, solid AAAA veteran type to hone his skills. I think Jeffers is going to be quite good. And there's room for him to start a lot of games with Garver also spending a little time at DH. But you need to keep both right now, with Rortvedt and player "X" at St Paul.

Pretty much agree with the above from tony&rodney, but am ambivalent about the entire age structure. I still feel FA should be centered around service time, with the caveat that any manipulation of said ST should be done away with. A player reaching the majors could/should be a FA around 27-28yo. But I have a hard time with a player reaching full time status at age 25-27 becoming a FA after just 2-3yrs. What BOTH sides need to understand and accept is what is best for the growth of the game. For the owners it meets a more equitable split of revenue amongst all teams, similar to the NBA and NFL, for a better, more competitive product on the field. (Which can lead to even greater profits and better TV deals to greater fan interest from EVERY market). The players have to accept some sort of ceiling cap...hard or with some caveats...but with a fair FLOOR that forces teams to spend more and maintain better competition league wide. The high end players may end up losing a few $M, but the middle and lower tier pkayers would see an INCREASE in their paydays. Shouldn't the union be focused on the growth of their sport in the public eye and be focused on ALL players, and not just the top 20%? THAT is my #1 problem with the player's union. I'd love 15 minutes in a locked room with both sides to verbally slap them across the face to examine reality, remind them of their mutual stubbornness and short-sightedness, and reflect on the immense growth and popularity of the NFL and direct them sternly to adopt a similar thought process. I dislike the arbitration process very much. I'm not sure an algorithm makes that much sense as the very nature of the arbitration process is each side using their own versions of such to argue their side. (I doubt either side would accept a unified algorithm as each would find arguement how it is skewed in some manner). But what I've never understood is the CONDITIONS of arbitration when it comes to baseball. This is not a court of law. (Even then simple logic tells me their is room for compromise). As long as their is going to be arbitration, I would like to see the arbitrator involved have the power to force a middle ground settlement between the two parties. Perhaps their could be a parameter set where they can only do so if each side is a $1M or less apart. Or perhaps something along the lines of an increase or decrease of the "winning" party than can not exceed 25%, for example. Fortunately, even over the terms of different FO's, the Twins have seldom gone to arbitration, usually settling on their own, and have seldom had bitter disagreements. But I've never found it healthy to have both sides bicker and argue about who deserves what. While these are BIG TIME financial negotiotions that I want no part of and am certainly not qualified to be part of, it's always amazed me how reporters and we simple, intelligent fans can see the simple groundwork for the good of the game and all involved and the various powers in play seem to have a blind eye.

I'm encouraged by Laweryson and thinking he will make a Gross, Gibson-Long type of upward trajectory move in 2022. Not sure what to make of or what to expect from Funderburk and Featherstone. Neither is pitching great, SSS of course, but the K's keep coming so there is SOMETHING there to work with and be encouraged about. Great to see Wallner wasn't hurt badly and had a solid week with a great finish. Echo Roger's comment about Sisk, who we know so little about. Bechtold and Helman, as of now, are clearly utility types with some potential value, including some pop and speed in Newman's case. I don't knkw how they figure in 2022 or further, but I like that they, like their teammates, are getting some extra time to build for next year and hopefully use this experience to "springboard".

With all due respect to an amazing career, no on Kershaw. He's outstanding when on the field, but it's looking less and less like he can be counted on. I appreciate the Buxton reference, but disagree and find the correlation somewhat disingenuous. Sorry Ted. A healthy Buxton contributes daily vs every 5 days, with the injury proviso. I've raised the Verlander option a couple times in various threads and never got a bite. The Morris idea is apropos. And I agree Houston made the QO because they believe he's going to be at least solid. And I believe he would only cost the Twins their 3rd overall selection in 2022, if I'm not mistaken. And we all know the ML draft is a crap shoot at best. And supposedly, Verlander wants more than a 1yr deal. Or at least, there are rumors to the such, FWIW. Who can blame him. Hell, he might be 100% and pitch good to outstanding for another 3-4yrs. It's happened before, but not often. If he's game for a 1yr with the Twins, especially if they trade or sign for a quality #2 rotation piece, I could see some interest. There is a lot to like with the nucleus of the Twins with a few tweaks and he as the front end of the rotation. But despite him wanting more than a 1yr deal, I see him staying put and proving himself for a 2yr extension or similar after 2022.

Not debating your opinion or stepping on your post, just want to keep things real is all. Blackburn was a mid to end of the rotation starter, but a prospect, not a FA. Pineda has actually been very solid when he's been out there. Yes, there was the suspension issue and a couple injuries, but he's been a quality mid rotation option...sometimes flashing....when he's been out there. While not a true #1, the Santana signing turned out just fine until his finger injury blew up. Hughes found a different level after coming to the Twins and pitched about as close as you can towards being considered an ACE. He never should have received an immediate re-structure after that one year. But we can't forget to remember how good he was before his shoulder suddenly went out. Just...perspective and remembrance is all I'm saying.

In my 2022 prospectus I had the Twins signjng at $14M as the #2 SP. Maybe I'm buying in to hype, but I'm very intrigued by him. While not a STUD by any definition, he's been a solid mid rotation starter. Hes at the perfect age, IMO, where experience/knowledge really sets in. And with a change of scenery, a different voice, (Johnson), and a change in his mix I see the potential for a step up. The velocity is there and so are the K's. If his curve and change really do provide solid chase numbers, I see something that can be unlocked yet. Think Ray last year with Toronto, though I'm certainly not saying he has THAT high of a ceiling. But I think there's something there. That's why I said $14M per and get it done. (His salary also makes him potentially attractive as a trade option down the road if a couple young guys really step up). But if projections really have him at $8-10M per....which I think might be low...then I'd jump at the chance for $12M per at 3-4yrs every day and twice on Sunday. I don't think looking at Gray is targeting low at all. I believe, first and foremost, the Twins commit to someone like Stroman for $20-22M for someone to lead the staff. But after that, IMO, Gray is a perfect "buy at lower value" still with some upside, that could pay off nicely. And I think that's the kind of pitcher they should be targeting. I think he's a logical step up from Pineda, who I have for about $8M as the #3 in the rotation.