IndianaTwin

As the saying goes, “You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but you can’t pick your friend’s nose.”

A question I’ve been wondering, and this seems as good of a place as any to ask it. Have the Twins themselves actually talked about Julien in the 1B mix? He seems to get a lot of traction there on TD for only having played 5 MLB and 23 MiLB games at the position. (I’m not arguing for or against, just wondering if I’ve missed something.)

One encouraging sign was to see an article that listed current injuries that could lead to 60-day IL stints and to see the Twins as one of seven teams with none listed.

This isn’t a statement that’s pro- or anti-Falvey, but one of a new owner’s first jobs is likely going to be to determine who will be leading the front office. If the new ownership comes on board at any point during the season, I would expect they would let the season play out, including using that time to evaluate their comfort level with Falvey, et. al. With that in mind, I don’t think many new owners would be inclined to hand out extensions until the future front office leadership is settled. (At least I hope a new owner doesn’t jump in so quickly as to get ahead of what the FO views as priorities. That sounds a little Cohenian.)

Who?

They got Hader too?!?!?! Or did you mean Doulombe and Trance? 😀

I’m with those who say we need to wait to see how one move affects another. That said, I have a hard time getting too wound up by rumors reported by the reporter who just told us they have around $5 million available when they’ve since spent about double that.

Apologies if this is a repeat from someone else's comments -- I scanned pretty quickly. Michael A Taylor (career 80 OPS+) was coming off a 90 OPS+ season as a 31-year-old when he came with an excellent defensive reputation. Harrison Bader (career 91 OPS+) is coming off an 86 OPS+ as a 30-year-old as he comes with an excellent defensive reputation. If there's reason to believe that Bader will do what Taylor did, it's a great fit for the roster.

Apologies for quoting myself, but assuming that Bader signed for more than $2 million, I rest my case in reference to the first paragraph.

And returned to throw five outings (counting playoffs) with no runs allowed. Not overly concerned with carryover.

I think we've seen multiple times over the years that media speculation on how much money is available isn't overly precise. "Some financial leeway, perhaps $5 million" seems above average in its imprecision. I think Coulombe is a good signing at $3M, and I'm not too concerned about that hampering other moves. If the right additional person comes along and the cost is perceived as a value at $4M, they will find a way.

Sorry -- smart aleck comment on my part referring to there being 15 teams in the league. Given that, I think they'll finish better than 16th. But yes, I think they can be very good. Last year I was optimistic because they had numbers, but they had key injuries and some guys didn't come through. This year I think they have better quality in their numbers, so hopefully that's paired with better health and continued development from people.

I'll predict they finish above No. 16 in the league.

Opening Day does come into play, however, in that the count for the 60 days doesn't begin until Opening Day. So while the Twins could put someone on the 60-day IL on February 20 or whatever, that player wouldn't be eligible to come off the IL until 60 days after March 27, so something like late May 26.

Not really -- there are only seven infielders on the 40-man. One will likely play a lot of OF and a couple others are likely to play a lot of IL. There are "infielders" listed among the outfielders, but one of them isn't actually very good in the infield, Last year, they had 11 different guys start games in the infield. I think they are more likely to add an infielder, particularly if he plays 1B, than to DFA one.

Are you sure Koskie didn't say -40°C?* *Yes. I've done the math.

Correct -- until pitchers and catchers report. MLB Trade Rumors had a nice article that included a list of 60-day IL candidates for teams in a week or two. It was a welcome change to see the Twins being one of the seven teams who didn't already have a guy down for a period of time. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2025/02/players-who-could-move-to-the-60-day-il-once-spring-training-begins.html

Too many relievers is not that difficult to resolve... Too good to send down: Duran, Jax, Sands, Alcala, Coulombe. No options remaining: Stewart, Tomkin, Henriquez, Castellano (Rule 5). That's nine. One will be hurt and goes on the IL. In the amazing scenario that one isn't, you either waive the one you think you can sneak through waivers (perhaps Tonkin with his $1M salary) or return Castellano. If Castellano has proved himself unworthy, you return him. At the second and following injuries, you start churning through those guys, who have all begun the year in St. Paul. Guys on the 40-man with options: Topa, Varland, Funderburk, Headrick and any others. And then after they are used up (or have proven themselves unworthy at St. Paul) and more IL moves are needed, you start churning through these guys, knowing they will require 40-man moves as well: Guys on minor league contracts: Blewett, et. al. If I've got anyone in the wrong category, move them, but the concept is the same. (That would have been a much shorter article.)

MLB Trade Rumors is reporting it as $3M. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2025/02/twins-to-sign-danny-coulombe.html

I think that once the signing is official (which is usually when the physical has been completed), they have to add him immediately and make the corresponding move, Someone will correct me if I'm wrong. I've wondered too if there are sometimes gentleperson's agreements. For example, the Twins don't have any (known) 60-day IL potentials, but the Dodgers do. They also have an early report date of Feb. 11 because of games in Japan. I wondered whether they might hold off on making the Yates signing official, so they could move someone to the 60-day and keep Brasier.

At this point, one of the key considerations (if you are indeed interested in keeping everyone on the roster) is who you can most likely sneak through waivers. At this point, it seems a little more likely to me to be a pitcher, just because they have 22 on the roster and only 18 position players. If the hope is start Rodriguez and the two extra catchers in the minors, that only leaves 15 players for 13 spots, which is very thin in terms of IL coverage. If it's a position player, I think it's most likely Camargo. The question is whether someone else would grab him under the premise that one can never have too many catchers around, particularly in spring training. So to look at the pitchers. Canterino hasn't pitched in two years, but I could see someone taking a flyer on him. I'll predict the 28-year-old Funderburk.

1) The IL will take care of issues. 2) If No. 1 doesn't apply, that's a good problem.

As an addition to my previous post, it's so much fun to keep coming up with new ways to talk about how bad the White Sox were.

For the record, Kansas City was 12-1 against Chicago and Detroit 10-3, so it's not like the Twins gained much on them by beating up on Chicago. Two of the wins over Detroit came on the last two days of the season, when Detroit is setting itself up for the playoffs and Chicago had something to play for in avoiding loss No. 122. And one could argue that Cleveland wasn't really that good, because they lost five times to one of the the worst teams in major league history. Every team in the league besides Tampa Bay, Oakland and Los Angeles improved their record because they played the White Sox multiple times. (And all but Atlanta, Colorado, St. Louis and Washington in the National League. I'm actually surprised that Chicago won seven series over the course of the year.)

I'll combine a response. I read the statement as saying that they can go about $5M above where they are now. I agree with Tony & Rodney that there is fluidity. Budgets in an organization of this size in an industry with this level of volatility will ALWAYS have some wiggle room. You're always looking for value. It's an extreme example, but when Correa became available at what was perceived as a bargain, they went for it. I joked about the Polar Bear above, but if his agent called and said that he was available for some ridiculously low number, they would find a way to make it work. Then, add the wiggle room that may have been added if arb-eligible guys did indeed come in lower than expected and we're starting to generate a few bucks. I also agree with Tony & Rodney's read on how Falvey may be thinking about the current roster. I'm not sure if this is what you were saying, but you seem to be suggesting that Falvey seems to have a lot of confidence in the current roster. If so, that's my read as well. (And I agree with that, though they haven't asked me). I'll nuance my agreement with Tony & Rodney's next statement in saying that when I looked this afternoon, I didn't also see anybody that I like better than the parallel person already on the roster. There were a handful that I could see as additions (i.e., depth) to the mix, however. Without digging too deep, Bader is one that comes to mind as an MAT-type addition from a few years ago that could be helpful. There are a few relievers that could be a worthy additional arm to add to the mix. I think (and hope) they won't spend $5M just to spend it, but if they find a guy that they can pay $5M and reasonably hope to get $8M in value, go for it. Finally, at this point, I think any trades are most likely to be talent-for-talent at the major league level (and reasonably cost-neutral), trading from an area that feels a little deeper to bolster another area that seems a little shallow. Arraez for Lopez would be the prime example from the past. Because Paddack has been one of the easy targets, I'll use him as the current example. If they truly believe in their rookie starting pitchers, I could see them trading Paddack for some team's similarly priced (or even slightly higher priced) RH batting outfielder.