IndianaTwin

Exactly. Negotiation doesn’t have to be adversarial. In fact, it’s much better if you can keep it from being so. Hopefully you have a good enough relationship with someone to be able to say, “Jake, we can’t go 2/$36M, but we’d really like to have you this coming year. We also agree with our ace consultant AMJGT that we don’t want to let you go for nothing. With where we are as a franchise, we think we can do 2/$26M. Is your preference to have the 2/$26M or would you rather take the $18M we’re willing to give you on a one-year deal and take your chances on having a good enough year to be able get $10M in 2021? And if you decide to go with neither, we understand, and we’ll give you a good reference because you’ve done a great job for us.”

Like in some past months, it felt good to look at the list and try to decide who I'd vote for, and then realize that I was just looking at the honorable mentions. You can't really give up a 40-man spot to do it, but De Aza is the kind of guy it would be nice to reward with a few days of service time and a few at bats to give him a chance to show people if he's struck lightning in a bottle as a 36-year-old.

Cool -- I was thinking of these questions yesterday and considered starting a thread. Here's my thoughts... Pineda: I don't consider myself a prospect junkie, but go back and read up on him. He was once BA's No. 16 prospect, he finished fifth in ROY and was an all-star as a rookie. As effective as he's been this year, he's still coming back from TJS. Folks are wanting to pick up an ace in the mode of Berrios or better and then have been complaining that Berrios hasn't been pitching as well as Pineda. I think Pineda is as good or better as Berrios. Yes, I offer a QO and try to negotiate to something like 2/$30 with an option, or even 3/$42. As noted, many QOs are declined, in which we get the pick. Odo: He didn't have quite the profile as Big Mike coming up, but has been incredibly durable. There can't be many guys who have had more than 188 starts in the past six years. I offer him pretty much the same as Mike, but maybe $1-$2 million less per year given that he's a year older and doesn't have quite the upside. Again, if he declines, we get the pick. Gibson: This is a tough one, and a lot may depend on whether he can get back this year and whether he gets the clean bill of health. Assuming those are good, I say, "Kyle, with your UC and your age, we can't give you a QO. But we're going to give you the opportunity to get QO money. For your service and generally solid year despite the health issues, we'll offer you a slight bump to $10M, with innings incentives that will get you to $18M at 200 IP." And perhaps even include some option possibilities. Perez: And I pick up Perez's option. But what about Brusdar and friends? First, even with those offers, I doubt you'll get the whole gang back together. But if they do, so what? The Twins have been incredibly lucky with health this year. Going into tonight, they have needed only seven (count 'em, 7) starts from outside of those five guys, and two of those were 26th-man starts. The odds of that happening again are very slim. One of these guys will get hurt and open a spot. And even if they don't, and Brusdar kicks down the door, remember that he still hasn't gone past 102 innings, so he's likely to be on some sort of innings limit. If he spends a month or two in Rochester going about 80 pitches per start, that's not necessarily a bad thing. And if Perez (and to an extent Gibson) don't stay healthy and effective, they aren't huge contracts to eat (think Addison Reedish). Or, they try turning them into bullpen assets before showing them the door. [Or even trade options, if they are suffering from an embarrassment of riches. (I'd be glad to be so embarrassed, by the way.)] As comparison, look at the Dodgers. They've gotten 24+ starts so far from Buehler, Maeda, Ryu, and Kershaw, plus 13 from Stripling and 10 from Hill. Now at the end of the season, they're looking for a spot for Urias, so they are transitioning him into the rotation shuffling Maeda to the bullpen (where he got a 4-inning save for my fantasy team last night, but I digress). We don't have Dodger money, but the model works. We also don't have money wrapped up in a Kershaw contract.

Frankly, even going just 2-4 against them means that they still have to make up four games in the loss column in the other 18 (Cle) or 19 (Min) games. Not impossible by any means, but still a tough task.

You missed one. Priority 1 is always "Beat the White Sox." With their loss last evening, we have now clinched at least a tie. A Twins win tonight or a Sox loss will mathematically eliminate them. Then we can move to your list, which I think otherwise is right on target.

Yes, let's silence Cleveland! I think you mean "moot." It's a common confusion -- you mute the television; irrelevant things are moot.

Harper, Hildenberger, Romero are all relievers. I suspect on or more will be up Tuesday after Rochester is done. They can’t deplete the roster too much with two games left.

Also, the Twins are 20 wins ahead of where they were through 133 games last year.

Hmmm.... Dobnak went 53 pitches today. Logical to "send down" to Rochester in order to bring Brusdar up before Aug. 31, thus making the latter eligible for the playoffs? Do I have that right? ("Send down" is in quotes since I wouldn't bother to buy a ticket, since he can come back Sunday when rosters expand.) (If so, let's make the Brusdar debut on Sunday, since I'm seven rows behind the Twins dugout in Detroit that day.)

Now that you mention it, I used to do that all the time. With Nerf balls.

Is it just me, or is the baseball in the picture above actually getting dented in? That seems to accurately represent Twins hitters this year!

So you’re saying the Tigers lineup is essentially this? 1. Nick Punto 2. Nick Punto 3. Nick Punto 4. Nick Punto 5. Nick Punto 6. Nick Punto 7. Nick Punto 8. Nick Punto 9. Nick Punto Does that mean they get to use ghost runners if they get someone on base?

1973 Braves — Dave Johnson (43), Darrell Evans (41), Hank Aaron (40)

Must be a Texas thing. Carl Lewis is from Houston, I believe. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3kU9XwcOIfI

No-hitter, yes, but not a perfect game. The runners would have to get on somehow. A perfect game requires no walks or errors, not just pitching to 27 hitters. A walk and a double play doesn't count.

The bigger concern in my mind, at least based on what the radio guys discussed tonight, is not that Cave swung but that Cave apparently missed a take sign. Dude -- if you're worried about playing time, missing signs ain't going to help you.

Yeah, well I’m picking by the end of the fourth inning tomorrow!

Note also that we’ve reached the point where there are only 25 more games until rosters expand and Smeltzer can stay up, even if they keep both Perez and Pineda in the rotation.

Assuming Pineda’s IL stint is short and just precautionary, no, Pineda doesn’t come out of the rotation. Ten of his last 14 starts were quality starts, and three of the remainder were three runs in 5 innings or more. He’s six outs from having 13 of 14 QS. He has a 3.48 ERA in that stretch and nearly a 5:1 k/bb rate. Perez would probably be the odd man out if they do want to keep Smeltzer and no one is hurt. If Smeltzer throws well in his next start, I actually predict an IL stint for Perez once Pineda is back.

Any team can come off Greinke's no-trade list at the right price for an extension. I'm not sure I'm interested in that price.

If that was indeed the case, that might have also contributed to his enthusiastic response this weekend. Perhaps internally he was saying, "I made the wrong choice last winter, but now I get a chance for a do-over."

I'm not a big fan of trying to declare a winner on trades as if it's a zero-sum game. I think the best trades are the ones that help both teams. Contextually, I think the trade could well help the Twins this year (i.e., Romo does well this year), and I hope it does. Contextually, the trade could well help the Marlins down the road (i.e., Diaz becomes a good player), and I hope it does. When you approach trade negotiations with the genuine intent of helping the other team as well as helping yourself, you increase the likelihood of finding a willing partner when you call them back next time.

Romo being able to spend the off day with teammates will also be a benefit. I’m guessing he’ll be eating with and sharing a row on the plane with either Johnson, Garver, or Castro, for example.

I loved his quotes in this article. If this is anywhere close to genuine, that's exactly the kind of attitude I want on the team. So if he wants to come and meet the new teammates, a thousand bucks for a round-trip ticket and a taxi is well worth paying. https://www.mlb.com/twins/news/sergio-romo-joins-twins-for-finale-vs-white-sox

(Stringer Bell, this isn't a response directly to you. I was just starting to type something like the following when yours popped up and yours is similar to what a number of others have expressed.) Yet, Romo is 17 of 18 in save opportunities this year and Rogers is 15 of 20. Romo also has more experience as a closer over his career. Rocco has also shown a willingness to use his best reliever in high leverage situations. Romo is also a righty, which many teams seem to prefer as the closer. All that to say, I won't be surprised if Romo slides in to something closer to the traditional closer role, with Rogers slipping back to the guy who gets used in the high-leverage situation. Not saying I agree or disagree with that approach, just saying it could well happen. (And frankly, that's a debate for only three more games, because there will be someone else on board by Thursday to change the conversation. Over the last two years, Falvey and Levine have made more than an average number of July trades. There's no reason to think that won't happen again.) (Frankly, part 2: To some extent, this is a typical Falvey/Levine trade. They haven't made "big splash moves," but rather "nudge the needle" moves. Last year it was "get rid of impending free agents." This one is a "get rid of 40-man question marks" move.)