DocBauer

To me, it sort of feels the Reds want to contend, but aren't ready to yet. This idea actually makes sense to me. The fact that Bauer only has one year of control is scary. But then again, it brings his cost down. For a team lacking prospect depth, not sure Blankenhorn as the 3rd piece gets it done, but maybe. I'd rather, somehow, add to the trade value and get at least a 1yr extension from Bauer.

This is my favorite plan thus far. (Much in keeping with my own thoughts). Not only is this a good plan, it is a very, very realistic one! It is sound and doesn't require a ton of moving parts that various trade scenarios offer up. As someone else stated, could be a little high on Wheeler, but all the financial parameters are in place. I think I might prefer a couple more $M and keep Castro at catcher. And I find myself torn on Hammels vs a return of Pineda, even with the suspension. But I'd be awfully happy and optimistic if this turned out to be reality.

There have been various comments made, some real and some perhaps tongue in cheek, about NOT choosing between Bumgarner and Wheeler and signing both. FACT, the Twins have the financial ability to do so, and still retain Odorizzi, without blowing up the rest of the team, or escalating the payroll above $150M. But even if the Twins make quality offers to both, and even if we are a talented team on the rise and both guys are very open about coming on board, it would still be very difficult to do so. And that's a reality we have to accept. Someone could make a crazy offer. Either could choose a matching offer in a place closer to home they prefer. We just don't know how it will play out. I say take your shot for both and see if you can pull it off. But land at least one...and I'm still torn on which one I'd prefer...keep Odorizzi, and then find the best 4th rotation piece you can.

Really like this post! Beyond the current mantra that the game has changed...it has...ERA is a useful measurement tool employed forever in the game. It is not be all or end all, and there are numerous additional measurements available today. But it is still a viable reference at our disposal, IMO. If Odorizzi simply had or learned to better economize his pitches and could be counted on for just a few more outs, his already impressive numbers would be that much better. He is not a 1-2, we know that. But he often pitches like he is for that 5+ IP. He is a valuable arm, more or less on hand, and needs to be retained. I'm happy if he is our #3, ecstatic if he could be our #4.

While I think we can all agree to disagree here and there, the fact is these changes affect every team. If there is any "loser" in these changes, it would be for a team that really likes to play the matchup game in later innings, possibly due to a weaker pen. The one rule change I really hate is the super small roster growth come September. Apparently, MLB is worried about the integrity of the game during the stretch run. As if a poor, 90-100 loss team would provide "worse" competition to a winning team challenging for a post season berth. Really?

If you really look at his career, beyond the numbers posted in the OP, you will a pretty solid first 2 full years in the league. That was followed by a pretty awful 1 1/2. Then, you get another another good/really good 1 1/2 years again, ending with a poor final half for 2019. You basically have 4 really solid years and 2 bad ones. Most of the arguments surrounding his "nibbling" was the bad 1 1/2 seasons and his decline the second half of 2019. Velocity is still there, we've seen it, though the question is can he maintain it? I understand the interest. And for his sake, I hope the reports of therapy working are true. But feeling good now is very different than being able to manage and keep up his strength for an entire season. Not so sure so many teams being "interested" aren't more about kicking tires and doing due diligence. While I have been a supporter of his, I am much more interested in adding a prime SP, re-signing Odorizzi, adding a 4th arm via trade, FA, or re-signing of Pineda, and then a smart flier to compete with the youngsters. I'd be OK if Gibson is sitting there come late January or early February and turns out to be that flier.

*Note: Duran is part of your trade proposal but then mentioned Alcala as being a chief part of the Escobar deal. Small typo. In theory, your proposal is sound. A few caveats/thought: 1] Rendon is a marvelous player. But assuming he is interested in joining the Twins...not saying he wouldn't be...$33M per for 8yrs just sounds kind of crazy to me. Will he really get that big of a deal? Are there enough teams out there that could actually afford that? Or would pay it? 2] I think you might be a couple $M short per year on Wheeler and Odorizzi. 3] Probably right on for Romo, wonder if you might have to bump Pomeranz just a little bit. 4] I'm OK with Chirinos on the 1yr deal. Agree with you at being fine with Castro for the same $6M. Not so sure i wouldn't prefer Castro for the LH bat and continuity. 5] Gordon may be near the end, but he had a nice bounce back 2019. Despite veteran status, I'd like to think the 1yr $2M would do it. But if the 35yo Gordon could replicate his '19, he'd be my primary OF and let Marwin continue to do what he does best. I'd be really happy with everything you have here, bumping the pitching contracts up a bit and knocking Rendon down 1yr and a couple $M per.

A very good blueprint and well thought out. Hits most of the same points I would look at. Really like the Pomeranz signing, though there are a couple other interesting lefty options as well. Might be a slight overpay for Betances, but who am I to argue. It's the trade for Iglesias I call in to question. I don't feel comfortable, given a choice, of turning LF over to Cave or Wade at this point, and feel the Twins are better served by keeping Rosario and Balazovic and think they have enough on hand along with your other 2 additions at this time.

You build your team a certain way based on what is available. The 2019 Twins were based on bombas and deservedly so. But baseball history has shown us multiple ways to build a club. I have argued in other threads about how analytics are changing the game, but eventually others will catch on, so then you have to be progressive enough to find the next thing. At some point, speed and defense will return again. But why can't the Twins be at the forefront? I will give Rocco a pass as a rookie manager with his Bomba squad. But as a smart and ex player turned manager,you have to realise what the SB can accomplish. There are enough good athletes at your disposal, beyond Buxton, that timing and technique could allow you to utilize another weapon. Maybe it requires a coaching change, I don't know. We don't have to be at the top of the list, but we sure shouldn't be at the bottom either.

From MLB Trade Rumors projections FWIW: Wheeler: 5yrs/ $100M Bumgarner: 4yrs/ $72M Odorizzi: 3yrs/ $51M Pineda: 2yrs/ $22M Allowing for small variation, couple dollars here, 1 additional year there, IMHO, these per year $ are just about what I've been thinking/projecting. I think Odorizzi is $2M high and Pineda $1-2M low, but again, I think this is very, very close. I agree going for both Wheeler and Bumgarner. You might even get both AND still keep Odorizzi. All 3 combined come in around $55M combined and give us one hell of a rotation. If I had to choose just one, I don't know that I could. I'm scared of Bumgarner's career IP, but his arm still seems to have life. Wheeler has better velocity and may even have a little higher ceiling than he's shown when you reflect on missing seasons and his 2019 results. Honestly torn 50/50 which one I'd pick if forced. Note: For giggles, the website has the Twins signing MadBum, Odorizzi and Will Smith for the pen on 3yrs/ $42M. They also toss in Howie Kendricks for 2yrs/ $12M to play 1B

Agreed. And that sounds almost exactly like the Darvish contract doesn't it? Extra year plus the opt out. Really, really puts FULL control in the hands of the pitcher.

Also not a fan of opt outs. You have a good thing going, you'd like to keep it going and not allow a fixture on your team from walking away and now you have a hole to fill all over again. Then again, if your milb system is healthy, you may have an option ready or about ready to help plug that hole. Futher, let's say you get Wheeler for 3 great seasons and he opts out looking for that one final big deal. Theoretically, someone else now gets stuck overpaying for his final years. Absolutely understand the negative impact and the FO mot cozying up to the idea. But I sure hope they re-consider because it really could be a useful tool.

I like the big buyout for a quality player from a team that needs to shed salary, gain prospects, etc. I just don't know that Price has enough left in the tank to be worth anything close to what he is due. Great minds think alike, lol, as I suggested a front loaded contract on another thread. I am also very much on favor of front loaded extensions. These are all great ideas as a way to maintain flexibility for the next few years. Something tells me they are smart enough to do these things.

With either 7 or 8 man pen, at least a couple guys should ha e at least one option left. That means plenty of room for Romero, Alcala, Smeltzer, etc, to make contributions. I think Smeltzer can be a key guy, whether #5 starter or middle man.

Not trying to open up the whole prospect trade arguement here, but just want to say if I were to make a list of "untouchables" in the system, it would be 4 guys: Lewis, Kirilloff, Graterol and Balazovic.

I hope you are right. I am very excited about his potential as well as Lewis's and Graterol's. I am hoping all 3 are with thr Twins and actively contribiting at some point, if not a chunk of the season.

Exactly! And a year from now, Cruz, Rosario, others could be gone via FA, trade, etc. As to your "going for it" comment, $70M would put the Twins at around $140M total. Still below the mean the past few seasons.

The very fact his last post game was NOT as a member of the Astros and was wearing a Boras corporation hat tells me a lot about him. (My opinion). He could absolutely decide he loved his time in Houston and would love to return. And he could absolutely decide the pull of playing in CA isn't as big of a deal as playing with a chance to win for a quality club. But I think $$$$ wins out.

Much deserved for both guys! A little surprised they got it right with Garver.

#1 Berrios: So much talent and so much potential. People forget how young he still is. Home grown, power arms with #1 potential are rare. #2 Sano: People also forget how young he is as well. While we can debate endlessly, and have, as to his defensive merits at 3B, or how long he can stay there, his bat PLAYS! #3 Buxton: Healthy all of last season, I'd have him #2. Does he bet on himself still being the next Mays, Griffey Jr or Trout? Or does he view career/life in a more pragmatic fashion and realize he may be better off with guaranteed money on a still good deal vs looking/hoping for some mega contract? #4 Rogers: Guy is fantastic and might even get better. But with control for a few more years, I'd hold off until at least next season. There is just no need to rush. #5 Rosario: I am a HUGE Rosario fan. I also agree some of the defensive numbers and opinions don't accurately reflect his full ability. I also object that his production is somehow easily replaceable. Production is production. The one thing that has held him back, slightly, is a couple of injuries that slowed him a bit. I really want him around. But let's be honest, unless moved, Kiriloff, Larnach, Rooker and Raley are all 4 really, really interesting bats that could be ready over the next year plus. Just don't think I'd extend him at this point. But I sure wouldn't be disappointed if they did.

I don't believe the debate is whether or not you trade Kirilloff, Lewis, or any prospect. In the grand scheme of things, virtually any prospect can and would be traded in the right deal. Especially if you can trade from depth. The conversation is about him appearing in 2020 for the Twins. His 2019 season was a bit disappointing to be sure. Injuries obviously played a part in that. But he didn't exactly flail, and he finished strong. Prospects. ALL prospects, are about potential and ability. He appears to have the ability to be a quality and fairly patient hitter with real power potential. He could absolutely be a stalwart in either corner OF spot or 1B, or all three. I would not be surprised to see him open 2020 in AA and then move up to AAA, possibly quickly. A lot depends on how he looks in ST. I object to the idea he should be moved quickly if he's not clearly scheduled to be a starting piece in 2021. I just think that is short-sighted. "Well, we decided he wasn't ready to set the world on fire as a 22yo so we got rid of him", for example. If he takes, and there is an injury opportunity or other, I dont believe the FO would hesitate to bring him up. And if everyone is healthy and there is no need to push him up, I've read comments about late 2020, maybe August or September. I'm OK with that, to get him ready for 2021. But playing devil's advocate, what if he has a really nice year and the Twins OF is healthy and productive? Do you add him to the 40 man and bring him up? Or do you bring him to ST for 2021, and save a 40 man spot until you make a final decision? Not due to service time, just to keep a 40 man spot open. Personally, I think he has a very nice 2020 and is in line at some point later in the year for a promotion. But it really depends if the OF is healthy, productive and we are in the playoffs. If we are, it simply may not be his time yet.

I am sick of bizarre and frankly wrong and ticky tac penalties in football. What really kills me is the refs in the NFL almost seem worse than the ones on college. I understand reffing or umpiring in any sport is a tough gig. And I'm in favor or quick, decisive replay to get things right. But they can't be quick, nor do they even get a lot of replays right! I understand some calls will always require some interpretation of a rule. I accept judgement is part of the process. But no even standard is the problem, and at some point, you have to let the players actually play and see what happens. In baseball, while there seems to be a lack of standards from one ump to another, or even during a game for bad umps, at least there isn't a replay and debate every few plays. Pitchers and hitters all benefit from bad calls, or no calls. Don't misunderstand, I WANT the home plate umpire to call it right, or at least consistent. But IMO opinion, rules and criteria are not enforced. I get different hitters have different parameters physically, so the strike zone itself will change, at least on the vertical plane. In other words, Altuve will have a smaller strike zone than Judge on a vertical plane. Regardless, the criteria is written down in the rule book for the top and bottom of that zone. Further, you have a standard 17" wide plate that marks the horizontal plane. A hard breaking pitch can move a ton, but can the umpires really not see it crossing the plate in or out??? Unlike the NFL, MLB umpires are professional and not part time. I've always felt there was a lack of education and standards and legitimate grading system in place. If you can't perform your job consistently, then you shouldn't be doing that job! If and when the robot ump can be tweaked to be faster in it's call, and logorhyms can be enhanced for an accepted and true "norm", I could be in favor of the change. From reading comments from batters and pitchers both, it appears they generally agree the computer interpreted zone is not fully accurate. Makes me wonder, again, is it possible a certain percentage of the ball must pass through the zone "window" to be called a strike. I'd like to think technology could allow for that in the future. Until then, MLB needs to hold human umpires to a harder grading criteria for accuracy as it is spelled out.

I'd be interested in Hamels or Teheran as possible 4th starter options, or perhaps even as #5 guys if Pineda is brought back, reserving Dobnak, Smeltzer, Thorpe and Graterol as almost uncommon depth to begin the season, and #5 options early with Pineda finishing out his suspension. And having too much pitching really doesn't exist. But at some poin't, you also have to trust your youngsters and provide them opportunity.

Just finished read in an article about this in the latest Baseball America. I'd encourage anyone and everyone to read it if possible. No way to know if the writer has a bias and only selected quotes/opinions that fit his article...I'd like to think that was not the case...but the consensus amongst both hitters and pitchers was they not only didn't like the loss of the human element, not just umpires but catchers as well. There was a general feeling that the strike zone was actually expanded beyond the normal as the ball clipping even a fraction of the zone was called a strike, even on some pitches that hit the dirt. Steve touched on this in great detail. And while some felt the side to side of the zone may have been expanded, it wasn't entirely inaccurate, in their opinion. In fact, a few hitters felt it gave them an advantage. But those interviewed felt the horizontal plane for calls was not accurate/realistic. Again, Steve's comments touched on this. There was also disparaging comments from both hitters and pitchers in regard to the 4 second delay. I am sure everyone would simply adapt to the change. I'm sure tweaks could take place for more immediacy in the call, as well as plane adjustments for greater accuracy. I see no reason why a computer program couldn't also be adjusted so that a certain percentage of a ball must pass through the zone vs a tiny fraction. But until those adjustments could be made, I'm not in favor of the robot ump and it appears the players are not either.

I believe the years in the OP are incorrect, unless time has simply blurred my memory. Should be approximately $130M in 2018 coming off the WC '17 season and a downward move to $114 for 2019. Correct? Regardless, the numbers remain the same. IMHO, the FO/ownership ponied up that $130M coming off the '17 season with some smart moves that simply didn't work out due to many factors. They took a step back in payroll for 2019, but took major steps forward in everything from a new manager and staff to tweaks in the milb system, to even smarter signings, promotions, etc. Publicly, they stated they were looking for the team to take a step forward in certain areas to open their competitive window, and even used Sano and Buxton as examples. They stated they would show additional aggressiveness if they felt the move forward and improvement took place. Well, it did and has. They have now, publicly, stated they are looking to add difference makers, especially in regard to pitching, to move this team forward. While I think it is foolish to simply come up with an arbitrary number and just say "this is where they should be in 2020", I think it's very fair to expect a raise in payroll going in to next season. Why do I say it's foolish to pick an arbitrary number? Very simply, despite taking a step back in payroll last season, even while making additions to the team, the biggest reason for improvement was health and the progress of the core talent on hand. Even if $130M is a mythical target to hit, there is still vast amount of payroll to keep this team intact, as well as add pitching. Let's assume for a moment that Odorizzi is indeed back, which most expect to be the case whether via the QO or a longer term deal. Let us also assume Pineda is back, which would logical based on production/results and both parties trumpeting they'd be interested. Of course, there are a few other possibilities to replace Pineda, but financially they'd be comparable. While 1B and backup catcher not to mention the possible addition of a RP need to be looked at, the Twins would still have almost $40M to still work with just to match the 2019 payroll. While I am NOT saying the Twins won't/shouldn't make a run at Cole and/or Strasburg, let us just assume that their is no interest to join the Twins, or that the terms just become too crazy for the Twins to top. But what about someone like Wheeler, comparable age, quality stuff, but a step down from those two in results thus far, is brought on board. You are essentially replacing Perez and Gibson with Wheeler and a combination of Dobnak/Smeltzer/Thorpe/Graterol. I think I'd call that improvement, especially at the top. And there is still $ left over to address other needs, and/or take a smaller deal on a veteran for the 5th spot as well, deepening your options and SP depth. All while still hovering around the $114M mark of 2019. But at this point, why wouldn't they at least target that $130M number from 2018? And I feel they will. Now you sign Wheeler, maybe sign that additional SP for depth, add another viable BP piece, keep Cron, and maybe even entice Castro back and still sit around that $130M area you were at just a season ago. I believe the team will be setting their payroll somewhere around the $130M mark and will go up to $140M if the moves make sense. I believe they will target that area as it makes real sense, and still allows them flexibility for a couple more extensions without surpassing the ML mean of about $150M. This makes an even better team in 2020 with additions, while keeping the core in place, allows for extensions, and still keeps the overall budget fluid for the next few seasons.