DocBauer

I haven't watched much of Littell, so it wouldn't be very fair for me to comment on his potential, despite reports or milb numbers. But what I did see was a guy who just looked nervous, rushed, and wasn't ready yet. I remember one game where he was brought in from the pen with the bases loaded and lost the game. I want to say he walked in the winning run, but not sure i remember correctly. Hopefully he can embrace his 2018 experience and learn from it and build on it.

Right now, today, I'd rather have Pressly and Escobar, and have them extended. I really liked/like both of them and feel we'd be better off with both of them. But I also get the realities of building the entire organization, the depth, and offers that were too good to pass up. And the more I read about the returns, the more I like them. Depth is awesome for building, and for competition. But at some point, that depth also means opportunity for trades. I hope this FO will take advantage of that going forward. What impresses me about this list is how many really nice looking young ballplayers are in the honorable mention area, or not mentioned even there. Between what is on the roster now, and what will be arriving over this season and next, I admit to being pretty excited.

I really liked him hitting in the 3 spot where Molitor had him. But with the way the team is constructed currently, he sure seems the natural choice for leadoff.

I get that. There are absolutely certain words that are used and over-used to the point where they not only become monotonous but grating. As a person with a writing background and large vocabulary, I can find it equally frustrating. Just the other day I used the word "shirk" and nobody I worked with knew the word . Maddening! According to the Oxford English Dictionary, there are literally over 228,000 words in the English language, whether they be full, normal entries, obsolete words or words that are derivative in nature. Do over used words happen randomly? Or is a happenstance of culture? Meh, it is what it is. At some point, these annoying words will begin to fade from normal, daily verbiage and will literally be replaced by other random words that probably mean the same thing. Until then, meh, so much more to worry about like the cost of a pound or hamburger or who closes for the Twins in 2019. **: you knew it was coming, right?

Nick, a well thought out article and I generally agree with everything you outlined. I do believe in the theory of more accurately figuring out this team, as well as seeing what the new staff can do with it. With that understood, I don't even have an issue with a certain degree of payroll rollback for 2019, especially if it allows for future moves. Where I DO have an issue is missed opportunity to augment this roster, just as it is, to help this team win. And I don't imply a single $20M signing to do so. With such an obvious need for a reliable and proven pen arm, with so many available and the costs being so reasonable, they have missed opportunity. With a number of solid bat, versatile players available for infield depth and protection for Sano, they have done nothing. Perez may seem like a fall guy. But it goes beyond that. With young pitching that NEEDS opportunity and experience, and with other holes left un-filled, this particular move, along with a couple "non-moves" has me very frustrated. Maybe lightening strikes and I will be forced to gladly eat my words. But the $3.5M for Perez could have been used much more effectively on a couple final pieces while still keeping the 2019 payroll down.

Brad Boxberger anyone? Don't know a lot about him, to be honest, but MLB listed him as one of 7 FA who could be a steals. Numbers look good.

Been reading, reflecting, mulling and stewing since this announcement and my initial post. I'm about the most frustrated and angry as I have ever been as a Twins fan at this moment! I actually like most of the moves made this off season, even if most aren't major needle movers. Most have been smart additions. And if the team feels it's prudent to shave at least some payroll while truly figuring out the "core" and then move forward, OK. I dont like that approach, I'd rather add a top RP and another versatile player with a solid bat to give us something, someone, other than ONLY Adrianza for the infield, but I could at least understand that tactic. This is $3.5M spent on a very poor SP who's only positive claims are that he was once highly ranked 7-8yrs ago and twice has thrown more than 180IP in a ML season. As poorly as he pitched, almost any starter on the 40 man could replace him for the minimum. A RP? He has 11 mediocre IP from the pen and should be considered behind Moya and Vasquez both at this point. It's not the 40 man spot, or the $3.5M that bothers me. It just seems to a WASTE of a 40 man spot and $3.5M that could have been applied to a more trusted RP or solid infielder. So now we are that much closer to our supposed budget cap, taking opportunities from guys who need and deserve opportunity, for a 28yo LH who strikes out 5K per with a 4.63 career ERA coming off his worst season ever. How does this fit any sort of plan? I hope I am forced to eat my words. I hope I end up looking foolish for being so worked up. But this move just leaves me confused and angry. And now, with apologies, I will step down off my cranky man soap box and go hide in my cave until the first sign of Spring.

Is "meh" a "meh" enough response? Or should I slap my forehead, kick the dirt and say !@#$?

Of all the above, Brach would be my choice. The numbers are there, as is the experience...including saving some games...yet he's young enough at 33 to have a few good years left. (Longer deal, extension, etc). I'd be interested more than I am in Norris if his second half mystery fade could be figured out. If it is fatigue,he could still be valuable as a 1 IP closer or set up option. There is value in that, but it shortens your pen. Tyler Clippard may be as good or better than any of the above list. On a 3 yr downturn, is Greg Holland going to have to settle for a milb invite? If so, why not us? 1a] Brach 1b] Clippers 3] Buchholz: at 34 and multiple time missed due to injury, would he consider a move to the pen to prolong his career and hopefully avoid the DL with more appearances but fewer IP?

Posted this elsewhere: 2010: $97.5M payroll ranking 10th 2011: $112.7M payroll ranking 9th 2017: $94.2M payroll ranking 23rd 2018: $129.5M payroll ranking 16th. Twice in the past several years ownership has had the Twins in the top 10 of payroll when they had a team they felt had a chance. After 2017 they jumped from 23rd to 16th, just behind the mean, believing they might have something. The 2010-2011 numbers are not ancient history. Nor is a recent $36M jump. No excuses for not spending if opportunity is there. If reported revenues are close to correct, and the 52% rule is in place, then the Twins CAN afford $130M payroll. And I see no reason why a bump to a $150M would skew numbers badly for "going for it". But "opportunity" is the catch word. Spending just to spend is not smart. Spending wisely is the key. No excuses offered. But it's also easy to cherry pick low spending years. Context is warranted, and years of top 10 payroll and large spikes must also be weighed and considered. Just offering a different perspective.

Liked your post and agree with you. But a couple caveats, if I may. Even as thjngs stand today, with the arms being brought in, an no knowing exactly how Rocco will utilize his/make his roster, I'm not sure Magill is guaranteed anything. I saw some very bad performances from Magill last season. We all did. But I also saw a mid 90's FB and a wicked slider, all in his first extended tour of ML duty. At times I found myself fascinated what he might do with greater consistency. I am neither a fan or believer, but with a year of experience, could Johnson unlock greater consistency to lower the BB and HR numbers that seemed to come in bunches? Talk about Jekyl and Hyde! I'm only saying, I'm intrigued.

PO'd by the loss of Allen when he made so much sense. I get RP are a bit of a turbulent breed except for the truly elite. And even they stumble at times. Maybe signing Allen would have turned out to be a bad investment, even for only a year. Honestly, who else is out there at this point to bring in?

Also wanted to condense this post, but could not. Too many good points. Pete Ricketts, CEO/Owner of the Cubs was asked about a general lack of activity with the Cubs this current off season. In general brief, he stated a couple moves the team has made but felt their roster was pretty much set, they had averaged 90+ wins the last few seasons, were already amongst the highest payroll teams in MLB, were looking for better season's from guys who had disappointing season's, and looking at their roster, where would you actually find a better player to bring in? Now, some of that is hyperbole, of course. You could ALWAYS find someone better for a certain spot, etc. And not only will the Twins probably never be able to equal the payroll of the Cubs, but some of his points could apply to our Twins. Just as you referenced the Cubs, the Astros, etc. There needs to be a central core to any team, including our beloved Twins. Coming off a fun, competitive 2017 season, ownership produced a record payroll for 2018 that simply didn't work out. As I stated earlier, they were 16th in payroll, about $10M short of the mean, but a huge jump from 2017. We will never be able to compete with certain major markets for a $200M payroll. But could we be in the upper half/third as we have been before? I believe so. But to spend for the sake of spending doesn't always work. We found that out in 2018, despite being heralded as a team that made a lot of moves that seemed smart. FWIW, the team just above us in 2018 payroll was the Indians. If you made a list of everything that went right for the Twins in 2018, and a list of everything that went wrong, I think you'd find the "wrong" side wins hands down. That doesn't mean be depressed and blow things up. It means what they have done: a new manager and staff, working with the talent on hand and getting them better, making some smart moves for 2019 and letting them play out. My gut reaction is ownership and the FO are optimistic about what is on hand and want to develop this core and then move forward with a big trade or FA signing. The last thing they want is for Sano, Buxton, Kepler, etc, to wash out and begin again. That doesn't excuse them from building depth of talent overall. But you also have to play the cards you have in hand. With Rocco in charge, and his new staff, and a new season, they are looking to build that core and know the hand they have. But this kind of game has 25 cards in your hand, and a reserve deck available. You can discard appropriately. Nothing wrong with adding another couple nice aces or face cards to your hand.

I wanted to condense this down for space saving sake, but couldn't do so. All wonderful and salient points. And while I agree with you and "liked" your post, I have to offer a couple counterpoints, just to be fair. For the sake or simple argument, and round numbers, let's say your favorite team, the Twins in this case, have a payroll in year X of $100M but could have spent $110M. In theory, that would be a profit/excess of an additional $10M that you would argue could be carried over to the next year. However: A] That $10M may be spent on improvements for the Ft Myers complex, which they continue to do. Or partially spent on mutually agreed upon improvements at various milb facilities, which they have also done. Or used to further develop facilities throughout Central American academies and other locations, etc, ditto. Or even improvements to Target Field on their own dime, which again, they have done. B] Said carry over of the proposed $10M to next season seems like a good idea to add another quality player or two via trade or via FA. But then there are normal team controlled raises, and arbitration and escalators for a contract in place. Then we look at extensions for a top young player or two, not to mention someone you really want to keep who is entering his potential FA season. I am no kind of financial expert. And I don't excuse any company, much less my favorite ballclub, for putting out an inferior product for the sake of cheap profits at my expense. Just saying a "rollover" may not be as easy to define.

Agreed 100% on a great last paragraph. At the end of the day, life is just too complicated and busy for me to know all the various ins and outs of various collective agreements. But even being a different sport, and one with a smaller roster, wouldn't baseball be better off if they could mkre closely resemble the NFL model? MLB, partially due to the union as well, may never have anything resembling a true salary cap, though threshold penalties do provide at least a soft cap, but wouldn't certain minimums help? Again, I don't even pretend to know how all the mega million numbers work, but wouldn't the sport also be a lot healthier, and help the sport maintain, if not grow, if there was a more equal distribution of revenue amongst the entire league? Like all sports, the NFL is cyclical. But with a more even minimum and maximum floor, smart coaching and player choices/development truly make the difference for teams who flounder, teams who rebound quickly, and teams who have sustained success.

Ted, I enjoy all of your various posts and opinions. And this is no exception. Personally, I don't believe the team is done yet. And I don't mean a couple fliers and AAA depth. FA or trade, I'm still expecting a BP addition we all agree is needed. I still look at the overall roster and see only Adrianza, who I actually like, and nobody else. I am half expecting, and half hoping, there is an addition there as well. I am NOT expecting a SP signjng6or trade to take place. I truly believe the team is looking at internal opportunity for their starting staff, as well as movements forward from Sano, Buxton, Kepler, etc, to see that the "core" is truly in place to further augment the team as a whole. That being said, there is NOTHING WRONG with building your team for success and depth, hence my belief/hope that there are a couple more move yet to take place. But in regard to payroll itself, and let me state I am neither admonishing nor defending ownership, I think perspective is lost at times in regard to said payroll on a year to year basis. There have been a lot of numbers and opinions tossed out as of late, especially in the Cody Allen thread. And I almost posted the following there, but it seems more appropriate here. In 2010, the Twins had a payroll of $97.5M which ranked 10th in all of MLB. The mean was $84.4M. They won 94 games and appeared hopeful for 2011. In 2011, the Twins payroll jumped to $112.7M, ranking 9th in all MLB. The mean that season was $87M. In 2017 the Twins were 23rd in payroll at $94.3M, well below the mean of $131.7M. In 2018, coming off a competitive season and a WC appearance, the Twins boosted payroll all the way up to $129.6M, good for 16th place, but below the mean of $136.6M. This is NOT an argument that ownership does, or does not spend enough, or too little. Merely an attempt to show balance. I don't think any of us truly know the revenue streams of the Twins or any team for that matter. Final numbers right or wrong, always seem to be as guarded as the Colonel's or Coke's secret recipes. The Minnesota market is not near the bottom half, but their have been various reports over the years that actual revenue, (radio and TV deals and the such), place the Twins lower than their market size. Again, we just don't know all the finite number details. What we HAVE seen, is that in the past several years, even with 2 very different FO in charge, when it has appears the team bad a chance to compete, ownership has been willing to step up payroll to build and augment the roster to do so. We can argue all day about what they COULD spend, of course. But I think various opinions about ownership not caring, or being cheap, needs to be tempered with what has actually taken place.

Unless there truly is something amiss physically, this is a no-brainer that most of has have been clamoring to happen for weeks now. All but the truly elite relievers, and often them as well, have a down season from time to time. It's the nature of the game and being human. Unless told otherwise, he is healthy and only 30 in a roster category in which many guys perform strongly until mid to even late 30's. I would take the 1 yr deal but don't like it. (Especially for $14M). This is the perfect time in invest in a 2-3yr deal, or some sort of 2+ option. There is need, opportunity, fit and familiarity on both sides. If this doesn't get done, then something really strange is going on.

Agree with the pen addition. Not as concerned with an infielder that hits LH or switches, just an option for depth and versatility. What happens if someone goes down or just stinks? I like Adrianza, just not as an extended option. There ARE infield options out there, even on the cheap, to provide depth, versatility, a bat and some production, even if their last name is not Gonzalez. And while I would LOVE the FO to just GO FOR IT with Marwin, there are other interesting options. Biggest bite is, I hate an 8 man pen and a short bench, but think we are headed that way. Hope I am wrong. I think your LHSP is Mejia and Gonsalves and Thorpe coming up.

I think a healthy Castro helps this team in a variety of ways. But I am not convinced he starts. Garver showed defensive improvement and offers quality offense. He's also a part of the future.

I have to echo this! A few weeks back. Falvey was on local radio with Judd in the TC and the question/comment posed to him was the potential of a 10-12 game swing upward in 2019 if a few things broke right. Falvey agreed, of course. But the central point of the question was how much went wrong in 2018. No need to re-hash all of that. But I am in agreement with that assessment, and Brock here. I also agree with a "trickle down" effect in the pen if you add one more quality arm. To me, the obvious choice is Allen. You create depth, and you gain experience. Now Reed, who finished well, does not have to be the closer. Nor does May. Nor does anyone else from Parker on down. You are building depth. Good guys, a deep bullpen, is what you want. Not relying on just a few arms, or using them in obvious loss situations as Molitor did too often. (As if hoping for a comeback win). And the season is long and you need depth. Give me what we have, add one more veteran guy like Allen, and this bullpen, talent, depth, numbers, etc, I feel SO MUCH BETTER. Everything that went wrong last season, 23/24+ 1 run losses, and a better pen to reverse that horrible number...yea...I see a potential 90ish win team.

Ash and Nick pretty much answered, but my take is simple. If the guy rebounds and looks surprisingly good, you've added another solid option for the rotation and you've added depth, depth to the pen where Mejia and Romero could both help. If said guy doesn't flash, he goes to Rochester to continue to work while off the 40 man. He can still be released or opt out. If, at whatever point, said signee looks good, there is the option to trade him, or anyone else, to bring in another asset or two. All you are doing is bringing in a flier to see if you get lucky and build depth and possibilities.

Barring a trade for an absolute, top of the rotation arm...which is not going to happen at this point...I am 100% all in on who we have, auditioning the kids for now and 2020, etc. But why on earth would you turn down a veteran arm on a MILB deal with no guarantees and no 40 man spot just to see if you get lucky?

Right with you there on Thorpe. Everything from his early performance to post injury/illness performance and pure stuff tells me he is for real. But if his debut stinks, do we proclaim he was over-hyped? Remember, Gibson had a bad debut. Then he had 2 really solid seasons on bad teams. Then he really found himself after a season and a half. Berrios really struggled on his initiation to MLB and now looks like a true #1-2 with time. Gonsalves has done nothing but adapt and produce at every level. He even adapted and produced his last few "primary starts" in 2018. He is long, lanky, LH, and has struggled with repeated delivery at times. He has also shown adaptability and pitchability at every level. So a so-so ROOKIE appearance at the ML level has convinced some he doesn't have the stuff to make it? My goodness, can't we just let time, experience and new pitching coach Johnson just work through some things before we just say he can't make it? Ridiculous to dismiss Gonsalves at this point after a brief so-so debu6 simply because he doesn't have some singular dominating pitch. Tweaks and experience along with opportunity, it's not hard to see Gonsalves, Thorpe and Berrios as part of the 2020 staff along with Romero and Mejia, even though a pen option remains.

Very salient points all the way around! My only disagreement is your comment on 2-3yrs before he steps to the forefront. He has learned and made adjustments at every level he has been at. Yes, there have been hiccups, and the BB for a time last season was alarming. But what did he do yet again? He made adjustments and found himself. I often find it amusing when a pitching prospect reaches the ML level, like Berrios as an example, and struggles initially, and some claim he's automatically a bust of some sort. I think Gonsalves will be up in 2019, will improve, and could be a fixture by 2020. That being said, I honestly think Thorpe is an even better option. Here's hoping both are part of the 2020 roation.

As stated, just no way to predict his defense definitively at this point, in A+ and only 19. All the tools seem to be there. I agree with the "unorthodox" look. He just looks "longer" than a typical SS and his throwing motion looks a little more over the top. It also appears he is graceful, but needing a little more polish in his footwork. Nothing here to indicate he can't and won't continue to improve and smooth things out.