IndianaTwin

.00559 x 59 = about 0.33 wins to date, or roughly 1 win for the year. 🤣

I don't know. DeSclafani is still hurt, so we have that excuse available... 🤣 Given that they've played at 90 or 91-win pace to date, if the current roster stayed healthy, I'll take my chances with it.

March 28 (Opening Day) March 30 April 8 April 9 April 13 April 16 April 22 April 29 May 3 May 18 June 3 While it's a fun exercise, it's pretty easy to overthink this. Opening pitch tomorrow evening, in their 60th game of the year, will come with their 11th different combination of position players on the roster. I think all but one of the moves, the April 16 activation of Larnach for Wallner, involved a player either being put on the IL or activated from it. To go from May 3 to June 3 without a position player being put on the IL is quite unusual. If (pick your favorite least favorite) veteran gets too many at bats in the next month because no one got hurt and none of the optionable players have sucked, all in all that will be a good problem to have.

Wallner, Miranda, Martin, Larnach and Kirilloff have all gotten one.

Sure, the Twins should consider trading for Mason Miller. But I don't think they should consider it after they hear what the asking price is likely to be.

Yikes. Not sure where I came up with that. Corrected.

I'll offer slight nuances, but I think we're pretty close to agreement. I'm fine with not counting Julien as one of the every day players. He was the borderline guy for me. I didn't list Polanco, for two reasons. The primary reason is that I forgot him. But the secondary one is that I always sensed him as more likely to be traded than Kepler, which is why he was easy to forget. Differences being: a) Kepler is better defensively; b) he had done so well in the second half; and c) they were at least closer to have a replacement for Polanco with Julien than they were with Kepler. Replacing Kepler meant they had to have two of Wallner, Larnach and Kirilloff succeed, rather than just one, since they were also counting on one of these to be a key player in the LF mix. I agree that a key moment was picking up Farmer's option (or more accurately, tendering him, right?). Even more than signifying a platoon-heavy approach, however, I think it signified that they were going to again prioritize position flexibility and depth and that they were going to use veterans to do that. (That last sentence is my thesis. The rest of this is my interpretation on it played out. Quoting you, it's just a guess of course but I think I'm close to right. The nice thing is that we're close enough to each other that we can both be right. 😀) I think the Farmer tendering also sealed the deal on Polanco being the one traded. In a flexibility model, Farmer brings more to the Julien pairing than Polanco does, since Farmer can also be the backup at SS and 3B. In theory, Polanco can back up at SS, but they didn't use him there at all last year. And while many have focused on the amount they did spend on Farmer, it's worth noting that he's several million less than Polanco. As I think about their commitment to depth and flexibility, I've begun to think of the position players as I do the starters. A year ago, we saw the wisdom in pursuing enough bodies to have the Ober start in AAA, assuming someone would get hurt. This year, that was the thought process on getting DeSclafini. Regretfully, he got hurt immediately and No. 6 (Varland) became No. 5. Turns out he didn't pitch well and No. 7 (SWR) became No. 5. I assume they were talking with other options, but payroll limitations and availability left them settling with figuring out a way to get DeSclafini. I think they are doing the same thing offensively, targeting to have some number of guys that they would see as potential big leaguers on Day 1, knowing there will be injuries. I think the number is somewhere around 16. So with that in mind, after tendering Farmer... Catchers: Vazquez and Jeffers. 2B/SS/3B: Farmer, Polanco, Julien, Correa, Lewis, Miranda. 1B: Kirilloff CF: Buxton LF/RF: Kepler, Wallner, Larnach. Util: Castro, Gordon. Having 16 typically has you being able to cover injuries, but you have to have some optionable guys in case everyone is healthy. This list has them at 15. However, as noted above, with the Farmer tendering, Polanco is repetition. Similarly, Gordon is essentially repetition in a Castro-like role. With him having been a non-factor last year, I think that they viewed him as No. 16, an insurance clause, preferring to trade him for some other asset, but not wanting to do so early. However, the Nos. 14-16 guys have to have options, in case the top 13 are healthy. Gordon doesn't have an option, so once other pieces are in place (and seemingly healthy), he's expendable for essentially any asset available. Thus a trade that doesn't happen until Feb. 11. What that does is slide Martin into the No. 16. For all practical purposes, he's Gordon WITH an option. That gives us: Catchers: Vazquez and Jeffers. 2B/SS/3B: Farmer, Julien, Correa, Lewis, Miranda. 1B: Kirilloff CF: Buxton LF/RF: Kepler, Wallner, Larnach. Util: Castro, Martin (16). On paper (or on screen), that's a full roster with Martin as the No. 14, but that means having Wallner, Larnach, Kirilloff and Miranda all on the roster. With the time Miranda missed last year and the hiccups Larnach and Kirilloff had a year ago, I don't think they want to allocate that much roster space to rookies. It also means that they have to count on people like Lee (not on the 40-man), Severino and Rodriguez as high as No. 15, a spot that is GOING to get used before they want to use any of those three. (Aside: I get that there are those on TD who say, "Let the kids play." I'm more, "Let the kids play their way in." Opportunities will arise, even if they aren't as fast as some hope. My concern is what happens when you are "letting the kids play" and injuries happen. In my mind, a contender can't go into the season with the inexperience of Martin and Severino at Nos. 14 and 15. You can go into the season with experience at the level of Miranda and Larnach, each of whom has had some level of success and a decent upside, in the Nos. 14 and 15 spots. So to get Martin to No. 16, Miranda to No. 15 and Larnach to No. 14 (my sense of how they saw them), you need two more bodies. When you look at the gaps and handedness, the logical places to add are a) someone to play first, at least sharing the role with Kirilloff and potentially playing more; and b) another option in CF, given Buxton's injury history. With the handedness of this collection, they needed to be able to hit righty, with being a switch hitter a bonus. I assume they were talking to guys like Michael A. Taylor throughout the winter, but they have also demonstrated a commitment to stay below the value they have put on a player. Taylor was never willing to take that amount. Eventually they had to settle for the trade that brought in Margot. Similarly, I assume they were talking to other 1B options, but Santana was the best they felt they could afford. It's not a perfect roster, but I think it's a solid one given the parameters they were working. I'll keep taking my chances with it.

And not to say that I anticipated this, but I missed the first couple innings for a high school graduation party. They didn’t serve Blizzards, but it was an ice cream sundae bar. M&Ms and peanuts with chocolate syrup, all on a brownie and ice cream, for the record.

Couldn’t have asked for much more. Seven innings from Lopez, six runs from the offense and buying a day of needed rest for the top of the bullpen.

Cole Sands coming in with a 6-1 lead. What could go wrong, right?

The team has now hit for the cycle.

Have you been including the period in “rocco.baldelli@twinsbaseball.com”? It’s easy to miss in his email signature.

What? Were his parents ballet dancers or something?

Because the Astros went to a righty? Do you think that with a righty warming in the bullpen, Rocco didn’t know Houston is going to change pitchers if he brings in Margot? You may or may not like his choice, but I think it was pretty clear that Rocco knew he was choosing Margot against the righty over Julien against the lefty.

Sleep is overrated when brisket is involved. 🤣

I had the same thought.

Joaquin Andujar? Though I always thought it was spelled, “Youneverknow.” EDIT to add: I did have it before you gave the answer. I use the quote regularly. I think I remember it from a “They Said It” in Sports Illustrated. That was an awesome feature.

Perkins. I did find a preseason article saying Gladden would be doing fewer games.

For those that lean on the radio broadcast, does it seem that Dazzle is off “on assignment” more often? I’m not complaining, mind you.

Do or don’t do.

We’ve had a few sets where we’ve had perspectives — you’ve liked them and I didn’t or vice versa. This is one we agree on. The overall look is a little bland, but you’re right, it’s a clean look. It feels lacking to not have positions on the front, but I liked the back with the factoids accompanying the stats. I also liked the Record Breakers. After a number of years of not collecting much, this was a set I went after. I’m sure it was prompted by the World Series in ’87, but my brother-in-law started buying packs and cases. My nieces would have been 8 and 6, so they would sort for him. In response, I started buying them as well. I couldn’t really afford it, since we were broke college students, me having just graduated and Mrs. IT with one year to go, but I was making big money at my $11 per hour job, so I felt like there was money to burn. Another uniqueness of this year is that they made school pocket folders with the design of some of the cards. I don’t remember that happening with other sets. I had (and maybe still have) a couple of Puckett folders.

One of the more disappointing parks for me. I was really looking forward to it and thought the possibilities were great with the train and the uniqueness of the hill, etc. When I got there it seemed like they had tried to stick every gimmick into it. It felt a bit like a Hollywood movie where they give everybody big belt buckles, cowboy hats and spurs, exaggerating everything for effect. Except they weren’t trying for effect.

The BBQ, however, is legit.

I don't think I'm disagreeing, but part of the challenge is in the question of what you're going to do in the off-season loading up. Going into the offseason, you essentially had six guys who were considered to be every day players (barring injury): Catcher, Julien, Correa, Lewis, Buxton and Kepler. Four (but really five, since the Catcher is shared between two guys) of those are right handed, two left-handed. Then, you had three guys (Kirilloff, Larnach and Wallner, all left-handed) that you were generally planning to have in one or two roster spots. The remaining spots went to Farmer and Castillo, who were already on the roster, but were non-tender options, and Santana and Margot, who were added. Barring trades, you weren't weren't going to change the first group of players. Two of the last quarter are switch hitters, so that helps the situation when trying to maximizing platoon splits. What are you going to do with the remaining spots? Are you suggesting they should have pursued lefties for Farmer and Margot's spots? The constant chatter we heard all offseason was that we've got too many left-handed hitters. The easy solution is to say, "Trade some of those lefties for righties," but that's easier said than done. Maybe I am disagreeing, but I don't think the issue is that they chased the wrong side of the platoon -- the issue is that the guys who are most underperforming (Vazquez, Farmer and Margot) happen to all be right-handed.