IndianaTwin

Also to be fair, Berrios' combined WAR for Toronto in the 1.5 seasons left on the contract was 0.9. The value he has provided to the Jays has primarily come in the time since he signed an extension, which by most accounts was unlikely to happen in Minnesota. So if you compare Berrios' 0.9 WAR to the 4.2 of SWR (so far) and whatever they get from Martin, the Twins definitely improved themselves with the trade. Additionally, the trade freed up money to use in the 21-22 offseason. There's no way to trace whether that was the money that paid for Urshela (good), Bundy (bad) or even a chunk of Correa (very good on that one-year contract), but it did give them additional flexibility that winter. Which also highlights that no trade can be completely dissected in isolation. Every trade has a context and a carryover to other decisions.

One of the things about regression to the mean is that it works both ways. It may be difficult (though certainly impossible) for Ryan to repeat generating 4.5 bWAR, for example, but it seems quite reasonable to expect more than 2.1 for Lopez and more than 1.1 for Ober if they are still on the roster. Between the three, it seems reasonable to think they will total more than 7.7 if they are still around. I actually think it could be a pretty attractive job. Expectations are not going to be high, but the potential is there to greatly exceed expectations. It seems like there are some similarities to the offseasons following 2016 and 2018.

"Pipeline" is like "Ace" in that each person has their own definition. Arguing about whether the team has achieved "Pipeline" status is about as helpful as arguing whether Lopez or Ryan is an "Ace."

"Since moving to Minnesota in 1961, only the Yankees, Astros, Cardinals, and Giants have accumulated more fWAR from primary center fielders than the Twins." When one considers that Mantle and Mays racked up some of that fWAR, that's not too shabby company.

So how do you really feel about Cabrera, Old Crow? 😀

With today's outing by SWR, the six starters went 36 innings and gave up just three runs over the last time through the rotation.

I'm impressed with a .912 OPS in the minors, including an .853 in AAA this year, where he was 4.3 years younger than average. He didn't have the plate appearances to qualify, but had he, that would have placed him 16th in the 20-team league.

To Rocco’s point about the starting pitching being good this trip, so far this week, it’s 3 ER in 30 innings by the five starters. Me likey.

I’m in the “it might take a little more” club, but another thing to consider is that he only needs 8.8 more bWAR to pass Hrbek and 13.3 to pass Oliva. Another four years like this one and he’s pushing Puckett. It’s not at all inconceivable to imagine a 25 hanging on the wall.

And speaking of bonuses, the second homer was a great way to celebrate his 533rd plate appearance, pocketing him an extra $500k in incentives.

Concur. Both would sign for more as non-tendered free agents than they will get through the arbitration process. If I’m another team interested in either, I call the FO and say, “If you are even thinking of non-tendering Lewis/Ober, don’t. Instead, tender him and trade him to us. We will give you Player X.”

The team has only had 59 games since the ASB. He actually has 10 HR and 12 SB in the span, which is 27 HR/33 SB pace. (He's played in 57 of those 59, by the way.) (Oops, Stringer Bell had already alluded to the ASB being on the late side. His average is also .254 since the break, essentially his career average of .257.)

Yeah, it was worth it, because then we didn't get subjected to a "Pablo Lopez Is Injured, But He Should Have Worked Harder to Come Back This Season" article. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Of bigger note for Buxton than reaching 500 plate appearances is reaching 502, which earns him a $500k bonus. Finishing the game with 504, he needs just 29 more to have the next $500k kick in at 533.

Speaking of the perception business, don't look now, but Outman has three homers in the last week-plus. If he does that for another 10 games, that should make for interesting TD fodder over the winter. 😀

Actually, my comment was supposed to be a joke based on your writing style in the post I quoted (which I liked, by the way), but I realized that in some ways it was actually a legitimate question, since though you referenced him, you didn't actually analyze him. I'm think you're generally on target on where he's been, particularly in your summary statement. When a guy's been DFAed a couple times, fan perception is that they can't be any good. And I wonder if the Clemens name both helps and hinders in fan perception. Some fans probably say, "He's Roger's kid. He might be pretty good so let's give him another chance." And others are saying, "He's the son of a dirtbag -- I hope he fails." Rooker is referenced above. I have to imagine fans on Athletics Daily took a while to warm up to him. I'm not suggesting that's what Clemens is going to be, but the similarity is there in terms of finally getting a chance.

I'm curious your thoughts on Kody Clemens relative to the rest of the roster...

This is a wondering question, not a doubting question -- what have you read that suggests the Twins actively tried to trade Ryan? What I read at the time was more like, "The Red Sox saw that the Twins were trading guys, including some that were cost-controlled, so they did their due diligence and reached out about Ryan, but balked at the Twins asking price." Here's the AI-generated summary: "The Twins sold a significant portion of their roster, which led to widespread rumors, and the Red Sox were reportedly interested in Ryan, but ultimately a deal did not materialize because the Twins didn't want to trade their ace and the Red Sox were unwilling to part with a major league player like Jarren Duran." It's hard not to be cynical, but I didn't hear it as the Twins actively shopping Ryan. But if the Red Sox were willing to give a good young major leaguer (and presumably more) in a significant overpay, the Twins would have listened. I didn't read anything that suggested the Twins initiated conversation with teams on Ryan. Did I miss stuff? (To me the 2026-directed action they took at the deadline was inaction on trading any starting pitchers or position players (other than Correa to free up money) that didn't include expiring contracts.)

When's the "The Exciting Side of Byron Buxton's MVP-Caliber Season" article coming? Can we not rejoice in something going well without finding every way possible to beat people down?

Yes, Puckett moved to right field. In mid-1993, after Shane Mack had been on board for a season and a half. Let Jenkins come on board somewhere in 2026. If he shows he’s the real deal and better than Buxton in CF by some time in 2027, then sure, make the change Until then, play Buxton in CF.

Hopefully they don’t have to give him the extra year or two so they have enough left in case Pete Alonso opts out.

I’m not sure this is the most helpful way to think of it. Rather, it’s a process. 1. Current 40-man has 39 players. 2. Add in guys on the 60-day IL. Turns out the only ones are Roden and Vazquez, who are already counted in that 39. 3. Subtract free agents. That’s Vazquez and Cabrera. Now we’re at 37. 4. Consider the guys who have to be added to the 40-man or risk losing in the Rule 5 draft. For purpose of this exercise, let’s say there are eight, giving us 45 to consider. Then you note the guys with guaranteed contracts. That’s Buxton and Lopez. At that point there’s a ranking of everyone else from 3 to 45 and you weigh them against the following criteria: 1. Are we picking up Topa’s option? 2. Are we tendering offers to the arbitration-eligible players? Larnach, Clemens, Lewis, Jeffers, Misiewicz, Sands, Tonkin, Ryan and Ober. 3. What are the chances of someone getting picked up in the Rule 5? 4. Do they have options left? 5. Positional fit? 6. Likelihood of future contribution. For purposes of this argument, let’s say we are keeping eight of the guys in Nos. 1 and 2 and there are five you consider likely to get picked in the Rule 5, so you need to add them. Effectively these are Nos. 3 through 15 and everybody else is 16 through 45, so you have to drop five of them. If you dropped two from group 1 and 2, your total list is down to 43, so you have to drop three more. That’s a long way of saying that the question is where do these guys rank within the 16-43. I’m going to assume that there are a couple of the Rule 5 eligible guys at the bottom, but it’s hard for me to think that Miranda isn’t among the bottom three. If it’s him and two of the minor leaguers, that’s your current 40-man roster. You don’t HAVE to drop anyone else at this point, unless you want to be kind and give them more opportunity to sign elsewhere. After you do that, you’ll constantly be weighing whether an available free agent (including other teams’ non-tenders) and trade acquisition is better than your current No. 40, dropping that guy and adding the new guy to your ranking. For me, it’s a pretty low bar to add people at the bottom of the list and knock someone off. I’ve already named what I think of Miranda, but of the others, I consider Julien the most vulnerable to be dropped first, followed by Outman, I think SWR is high enough on the list that he doesn’t need to be worried. I would guess that some of the other minor leaguers are joining a Julien as vulnerable. I could see Clemens being one of the two from groups 1 and 2 that didn’t get tendered, but the question/timing is different on him than it is on the other four. I think there additional rule nuances on the decision-making process, but that’s the general process as I understand it.

There's a very high correlation between pitcher suckitude and a quick hook on Rocco's part. This year, starters have been lousy and the Twins are the among the lowest teams in IP/Start, though using Openers as often as they have also brings down the average. In 2023 the starters were good and the Twins were third highest in IP/Start. Three of their pitchers were among the top 50 in the majors in IP/Start.

Yes, the Star Tribune article is behind payroll, but it seems that if there's anything particular helpful here, it's Ryan refuting the notion that Gray didn't want to be here. The perceptions of Gray not wanting to be here seem to primarily be based on a quote or two from a highly competitive athlete, in the immediate aftermath of a highly competitive game, when he said he wanted to compete more. Frustration that he expressed through his body language (and even through his words) was likely addressed primarily at himself. After all, when have we ever heard such an athlete say, "Yeah, I sure am glad that the manager took me out, because I don't think I could have gotten the next batter"? I want athletes to have the desire to compete and feel confidence in their ability to do the job. Can we please bury this perception about Gray not wanting to be here alongside the perception that Rocco takes his starters out quicker than other teams?

I don't think the subjective component carries as much weight as it once did (Less "He was a leader on a team that came out of nowhere."), but I can't imagine it still doesn't come into play. Voters won't admit this, but I wonder if they will also have a subtle mindset of wanting to help him get the bonus to spite the ownership.