IndianaTwin

Perhaps 181 innings at first base in the minors was enough to convince them that playing him there is not a good idea.

I also noticed recently that we've managed to make it this far with no IL stints for a catcher. Please let that continue. I think Camargo/Williams could be added with an asterisk. While an injury to just about anyone leads to a Larnach callup, thanks to the positional flexibility they've developed, it takes an injury specifically to a catcher to give Camargo or Williams a shot. The one exception to the Larnach callup could be Taylor. If he's hurt, I could see them going to Celestino.

He's not a Triple A player, but the status of Chris Paddack will play a role in who gets the extra pitcher spot. Similarly, if Jose Miranda were to regain health, he would be on this list. If it's assumed he won't be, he can be moved to the 60-day IL, freeing up a 40-man spot if needed. The last update I've read says that Paddack was expected to progress to live BP by the third week of August. Miranda's last update is listed as July 16. Is there update on either?

Ignore Polanco and Kepler for now and go with me here. Solano, Taylor and Gallo are free agents. In theory, they can be brought back, but I don't think any are likely, particularly not before decisions are made on Kepler and Polanco. If Solano only got $2M this year as a 35-year-old, he's going to be hard-pressed to get an MLB deal. I'd gladly take him on a minor league deal. Taylor may be a step above that. Vazquez and Jeffers occupy two roster spots and are the catcher. Correa is the starting SS. Buxton has a big contract and a no-trade contract. If he was guaranteed to be healthy, I'd list him in No. 4 with Correa. With their flexibility and manageable expectations, Farmer and Castro will be tendered contracts. That is six roster spots filled. Gordon has played so little this year that he's clearly a non-tender candidate, so I'm going to put him in the list below. So that's six "veterans" on the team -- Vazquez, Jeffers, Correa, Buxton, Farmer and Castro, though I think they would hope that Farmer and Castro are not playing every day. It's really three "starters" -- the catcher, Correa and Buxton (hopefully). Now look at this list of remaining names -- Julien, Wallner, Lewis, Kirilloff, Gordon, Miranda, Larnach and any prospect you would like to name (notably Martin and Lee). What do they have in common? At least two things. Talent. Less than a year of proven MLB experience. No way do the Twins start the season with only six veterans (only three as "full-time" starters, and one of those injury-prone) and that much inexperience. With any semblance of productivity the rest of the way, Kepler is back. Similarly, I think there's a good likelihood on Polanco, at least in part because he also has an affordable option for 2025 that could be exercised if he's productive next year. The alternative is to get a couple of free agents, but it's their approach to go with the devil you know over the one you don't.

Do you mean because it was a whole six days before the deadline? If so, then I guess we can’t count the July 22 trade of Cruz for Ryan as a deadline deal either.

From the OP: “The front office strangely stood pat at the deadline, passing up the opportunity to make even minor adjustments…” Also from the OP: “Dylan Floro made a welcome impact…”

Was it the right move at the time? Unequivocal “yes” in my mind, for a lot of the reasons listed above. “Was is worth it” is actually a different question, however. It’s also the standard “hindsight is 20/20” question. I think my answer on that one is also a “yes,” but it’s not as unequivocal. Many, perhaps even most, big free agent contracts don’t end up being “worth it” if you only count the on-field contribution over the years of the contract. It’s why a lot of us are concerned whenever they start talking big money with pitchers, in particular. But in the case of a guy like Mauer, they still had to do it.

Magic Number = 46.

Park Place?

DFA KEPLER!!!!!!! 🤪

From the OP: "They did nothing and accepted the failure of the Jorge Lopez trade with Baltimore, sending him to Miami for Dylan Floro in hopes a change of scenery could suit both players." Isn't "sending [Lopez] to Miami for Dylan Floro" a refuting of "They did nothing"? It may not have been the kind of needle-moving splash some clamoring for, but based on the extremely small sample size, it looks like it was an addition, even if just being by subtraction. And I take them at their word that the price was too high to pay for what actually ended up being available, so I'm fine with their not doing more. Stark had an interesting article in The Athletic, where a bunch of front office guys talked about the difficulty of doing anything this year.

I should have clarified that when I've liked Kasper in the past, it was when he was doing Cubs TV. I've not listened to him regularly on the radio side.

I struggle with the notion that they have "underperformed." With tonight's win, they are on pace for 84 wins and in first place. Given the nature of their remaining schedule and that the offense has started to show some semblance of life, I could easily see them ending up a bit better that. It would be really hard to get to 90 wins, because that requires going 32-18 the rest of the way, but I could easily see 28-22 with their schedule. That's essentially playing 90-win pace the rest of the year, but it only gets them to 86 because most of the year has been played. But let's stay with the 84-win notion. At the beginning of the season, I heard three general takes from people: "They suck. They won't win more than 75." To this group, isn't 84 wins an over-performance? "I think they'll be a little over .500, and that could be good enough to win the Central." Um, they're a little over .500, and that seems like it well may be good enough to win the Central. That's pretty much the definition of playing at the expected. "I think they'll be above .500, and if things go right, they could push 90 wins." Well, they are above .500. I suppose one could claim "underperformance," because things didn't go right enough to be looking at 90 wins, but that was an "if." It seems to me that they are meeting this expressed level of performance. (I have a separate issue with the idea that everything that doesn't come out the way we want requires "blame" to be put on someone. There's variability. Sometimes things just happen. But that's another discussion.)

Nice article. During the radio interview tonight, Mauer talked about getting the phone call from Rod Carew, who has been designated as the guy who gets the honor of letting selectees know. It led me to a question -- when Carew is no longer able to do so, who will that honor be passed to? Oliva seems the obvious choice if it was to happen soon, but his own health/age may make that unlikely or a short tenure. Beyond that, the main three that come to mind are Blyleven, helped significantly by his tenure as a broadcaster. Hrbek because of his folk hero status, and Mauer. If he chooses to take on the senior statesman-type role, he could be doing that for a long time.

Agree on Coulombe. I think his lack of having an option played a big part in letting him go. I was one who chimed in a couple times on wanting to re-sign Fulmer. He's started to come around, but he's really struggled for much of the year. He had a 7.36 ERA at the end of May and lost his closer job. Had he been re-signed, I suspect he'd have been getting the TD abuse Pagan did.

Random comments... Agree on the cheap MLB app being a great deal. Also have chosen not to go with the TV app because of the temptation to spend too much time watching and doing nothing else. I do try to multitask with the radio, but could do better. The entertainment of many Game Threads suck me in, but I can sometimes sorta triple-task with radio, TD GT and another item. I don't listen to many of the others, but I definitely consider Hughes' recent honor at the HOF to be deserved. Because of my son, I listen to him with some regularly. Coomer is growing on me as an analyst, but they still don't have the magic for me that the Hughes/Santo team had. It's relatively easy for me to hear Hughes' mentorship of Provus when Provus describes the uniforms. The main time I listen to other broadcasters is during the 4th-6th inning of Twins games. 😃 I've really liked Kasper in the past, but I can't bring myself to listen to the Sox. Though I've only listened to him a few times, I've enjoyed hearing Wagner regularly being affirmed. He graduated from the next high school over and got his start doing high school games at the behest of a guy I know well. Edit to add: 8. I've heard really good things about Jackson, but I'm finding it hard to give him a chance. I think his first gig was as Hawk Harrelson's color guy, and he was really bad. In retrospect, I'm not sure how much of that was his inexperience and how much was being stuck with Hawk. Hawk was not only bad himself, but he did not have the ability to bring the best out of his partner. Conversely, that's part of why I like their current TV guy, Jason Benetti, so much. I didn't care for Steve Stone when he was paired with Hawk, but Benetti sets him up so well to bring his insights to the game that it makes me now like Stone quite a bit.

Good comments, throughout. Thanks for a good conversation.

In honor of Mr. Mauer, I suggest we go with a straight-up milkshake tonight rather than the customary Blizzard.

And the Magic Number enters the 40s. EDIT/PARTIAL NINJA: Implied by Chief's post above.

My assumption as well, though I didn't watch the entirety, so maybe there is something that got picked up on a mic.

Indeed. With Balazovic and Moran not having pitched in five days, they seem like easy choices.

Thielbar, as discussed in last night's Game Thread. (Thielbar joins Michael Tonkin, Liam Hendricks, Kyle Gibson and Ryan Pressley as the five guys on current MLB rosters who pitched with Mauer as their catcher.)

So Anderson and Ramirez got in a fight? That reminds me that I that yesterday was the 30th anniversary of Robin Ventura, um, making a poor decision regarding Nolan Ryan. (I'm not quite sure why it's age-restricted. I didn't catch any inappropriate language.)

That's what I heard too.

BLIZZARDS!!!!!