Trov

I need to push back on the part about Joe blocking everything. He was good at throwing out runners, and he was decent to stabbing to balls in the dirt and getting in the glove, but he was actually not very good at "blocking" a ball. He would commonly even stand up putting is glove down to try and snag the ball and let it through his legs. They were not passed balls but he could have been better at blocking it. Now, he was still a great catcher overall and not trying to bash him, but many people thought he was better at blocking pitches than he really was.

To address the question posed in the title first. It very well may happen, but is not likely. Being Joe was the only AL catcher to ever do it, and only 2 in NL, both like 90 years ago, shows it is very unlikely. Is it possible, yes, someone like Joe could come along again, but doubtful. That being said, if you can get a good offensive catcher, even if not a batting title, but can produce above average on offense, then yes you pay those guys. Similar to an elite hitting SS, if they can be both an every day catcher, meaning they can defend the position at least at a passable level, and hit at an elite level, either by way of overall power, or average, you pay them big. I mean, why just relegate yourself to a fact that a catcher will be poor hitter, if you can get one that is not? Sure, the likes of Joe, Posey, Yadi, Piazza, Pudge(both of them), are not common. Piazza was not great defense wise, but he made up for it at the plate. This is what makes the likes of A.J. Pierzynski who was not amazing hitter, but at least about average compared to rest of league, which put him generally above average at his position. Catcher has always been a defense first position, and what you can get from offense is a bonus. As running was taken out of the game, generally from choice not elite catching defense, we do not see it as needed and worry more about offense. However, running is on a rise lately, and defense will be important again.

Personally, I would not go after any of them. I would not want to give up the prospects for Darvish or Musgrove, and the FA do move the needle enough for me. They are better than our 4th or 5th most likely, but unless they are better than our 1, I do not care too much.

Unless we can extend him, which I have no clue what that extension would look like, as there is no one to ever compare him to, I would not traded for a 1 year rental on him. It would cost way too much to get just 1 year from, and with only getting a pick back in return after he turns down the QO is not enough. I would love to have him and sign him long term but doubt we will.

Unless you going big, I would not understand going after starters. We have a good amount of solid 2 or 3 number guys. Assuming Maeda and Mahle will be healthy. Gray, Mahle, Maeda, Ryan all slot into that spot. Leaving 1 open spot in a 5 man rotation, that can be filled by Ober, SWR, Varland, Widner if needed. Of course injuries will happen and depth is needed, but I do not see the Twins going after a Bundy/Archer type guy this off-season. If they go after a starter it better be a spend big top end guy for a couple years. I could see them go after the level 2 type guys if they plan to make some trades of the glut we have. Depending on the years Degrom is looking for, I could see the Twins willing to give the 35 mil per, but only for like 2 to 3 years, with vesting options for anything after that. His injuries are huge concerns to be dropping that kind of cash on a single guy, but he would help if healthy most likely. Bassit to me is not an Ace, but a good number 2, which I would take but is he that much better than what we have now to spend huge when we could go after other positions is needed?

I have said all along, there is no guarantee that paying big for a pitcher in FA will equal post season success. First, if you pay huge for one pitcher, then you put all your eggs into that one basket, so to speak. If they have a bad start and lose you can call your post season basically over, because you were counting on that one win and hoping the second or third guy to get lucky. Yes, some teams have won that way, Giants in the past have done it, but other teams have failed with that approach too, like the Twins. Not that we paid big for a single guy, but look at Santana in his prime with us, His only post season games, he was 1-2 in starts the team wining 2 of the 5 games he started. He was the best in the game over that time basically, but we did not get it done with him. Look at Verlander, Scherzer, and Kershaw, 3 HOF pitchers. Scherzer has been the only one of the 3 with a lot of post season success over his career. His post season numbers worse than his career numbers, which is not super surprising, but take a look at this year, he was dominate all year, only to have 2 bad starts out of 3 this year. His team won the first start with a walk off come from behind HR in 9th, and they just lost the WS game he started. In games he has started team is 18-15 with a huge run in 2017 winning 4 of 5 games started. Scherzer, who overall has had some great games in post season, outside of 2019, where his team won all 5 games he started, his teams record is 4-13, so if you include the one great year it is 9-13. His bullpen time is about equal good and bad. Kershaw has been a big mix as well. In games he started the team is 18-15, which is not bad, but he has never had a dominate run in any post season. My point is, even with the HOF guys, having amazing regular seasons, there is no saying they will dominate in the playoffs. Personally, I would rather have depth in the rotation with 4 above average guys, than one single huge guy and fill in the rest. Yes, if we can go out an pay for a guy that will be great, it will help, but very few high paid guys go out and live up to their contracts if you look at the percentage of big deals to pitchers over the years. It is a huge gamble to pay big for a FA starter.

To me, Joe Ryan is the fix it before it is broken kind of approach. He has dominated on his fastball his whole career. All the 'experts' say, he will not dominate with his fastball at the MLB level so he needs to get better secondary pitches. So he works on his secondary pitches, only to be dominated by his secondary pitches, and dominate with his fastball. Hmmm, something seems odd here. We say he cannot dominate with his fastball in the MLB level, despite he has done exactly that. It is his secondary pitches that have not done well. I get that for most guys, you need to mix it up because if not they will tee off the fastball and lay off anything else, but it seems to me the approach against Joe has been the other way round for now. I hate the plan of predict failure so fix it before it happens, only to have it happen when you try to fix it, then point to I told you so. His fastball is not overpowering, but hard to barrel up, so why not throw it more and more, until teams start to sit on it, then mix in the off speed? Hell, I think first time through rotation, he should almost throw it every pitch, unless teams start hitting it hard. Then if they start to attack the first fastball and actually hit it hard, then look to throw some off-speed out of the zone, not waste pitches per se, but make sure not in a good place to hit. Pitching is all about keeping guys off balance for most part, but if you have a pitch they cannot hit well, why not throw it mainly until the hitters adjust? Why adjust to their expected adjustments? For example, for years Buxton was known to chase sliders off the plate. He would get one after another, and more and more on 2 strikes. He would chase over and over, but then some times a pitcher would get cute and throw him a fastball, only to see it get crushed. He never showed he would lay off the pitch, nor that he would square it up, unless it got hung, so why throw anything else? Until the hitter shows they will actually hit a pitch, why make it easy for them? Let Joe throw the fastball, then worry about him when teams actually hit it. I remember when pitchers started pitching up the zone, and everyone said they need to not do that or they will get crushed, now many experts point out that pitching up in the zone is very effective it is the top of the zone. I am not saying he does not need to work on the off-speed pitches, mainly for that time there is the adjustment. But until that time comes, stop telling him he needs to throw more off-speed to be effective, when that appears to be a main reason he has not been.

The regression is normally based on teams getting tape and scouting hitters, and the hitters failing to make adjustments. Similar pitchers surprising hitters with a particular pitch, then hitters learning how to hit it, or leave it. Baddoo is still young and could continue to develop, but Wade just is who he is a fringe MLB guy. Diaz too could adjust, but think Littell is also just a fringe guy.

I though Arraez metrics were not good at first base, did they improve that much? I know in the past offense played a huge roll, but I thought now they actually looked at the metrics.

I disagree with the argument that we should have cut Bundy and Archer and run out Varland and SWR or others sooner. We already went through several SP going on IL. Paddock, Ober, Winder, all had long stints on IL, Gray had a few, Ryan had one. Archer ended on it. Had we dumped Bundy and Archer early on, and SWR, who was on IL in minors for a month, or Varland landed on IL, then we maybe would have had to add even younger guys to 40 man. Then when we need to cut down after the 60 day IL guys we could look to lose some of the younger guys to waivers. That is something to keep in mind as well.

Will this AFL for Martin jump him back up prospect lists? Will we try to trade him to a team that thinks he will be a breakout star, or do we keep him in hopes he will be with team next year? Personally, I am a fan of him, despite his lower power, as long as he is not a negative defense guy I think he will be a good lead off guy for years.

I think they will ask around about him, but will not sell him off for the cheap. He adds some value to the team to stay with them and maybe trade in the season for a team that has an injury or someone struggles.

I agree they should not go after a different SS, and if they plan to spend big on anyone it should be CC. However, I would not want any contract longer than 5 years, and I doubt that gets it done for him. I think minimum he will be seeking 8 years, and most likely will get that, but I think he is seeking 10 years. I am worried after 4 or 5 years he will drop off a bit, I could be wrong, but history shows most SS stop playing there in early 30's. His offense is above average for SS, but not for 3b, and if he drops off on that side of ball too, then he will be just a huge overpaid guy.

I think the article hit it perfectly, it depends on the player and the situation. For example, if say Brooks Lee makes team next season, or some other young player around age 21 to 23, that you have high expectations on, then signing a deal into their age 30 to 32 seasons makes sense. However, if they do not break into league until 24 to 26, there is little need to buy out FA years, and little incentive for player to want to do that too. Some times these contracts can backfire for the player or team. Both have risk. There have been a few guys signed to these types of deals when they are rookies that do not pan out for teams. Jon Singleton may be the most famous of these. He signed a 10 million deal with Houston before he ever played a major league game. He played less than a full MLB season, provided negative value and was cut. The deal had it panned out would have been a 5 year 35 mil deal, but he did get 10. Now this is not the type of contract we are really talking about, paying more in non arb years to have cost controlled arb years and maybe a year of FA. Being his 5 year deal would not have even got him through arb years. Basically, Houston threw away 10 mil in hopes of not having to pay more than 35mil over 5 year if the player was a superstar. Pretty big gamble for Houston, great call by player to sign that deal, considering he would not have earned much until year 3 anyways, and unless he was a mega star would not have even earned the 10 in year 4. Teams and players are looking to do these earlier deals to control costs and there is nothing wrong with it. But I do not think every player should be treated this way but with select players.

Last year I said no way would we sign a top SS, then we shocked everyone, but it took a crazy offseason, with a lockout to help that happen. Now, will a team give the top SS what they are seeking, or will they need to agree to less seasons. I think Twins would be willing to offer higher per year but would max out at 4 to 5 years, which I support that fully. Any of the top 3 should still be good for 3 to 5 years, but beyond that they will become a huge risk of being vastly overpaid. A high payroll team can afford that, but mid-market or small cannot afford to have 30 mil of bad money on the books. Personally, I think Lewis can fill in, provided he can stay healthy, but if we can bring CC back on a 5 year deal I am all in for that. He is seeking 8 to 10 though and I am not sold on him for 8 years or more.

History has shown small changes to relief pitchers can make huge pay offs for at least a season. Pagan has stuff, and if the team can get a small adjustment to get that to pay off, go for it. The guy we traded for, Lopez, had no success as a starter for most part. He went into pen and had a great year last year, until we traded for him. I am not saying slot Pagan back into closer role at all, but do not just DFA him. Let him come to camp, work on anything new, and see from there.

We should dump Garlick. He is a one trick pony that cannot seem to stay healthy enough to be all that reliable for that. I mean when you are on the team to hit just left handed pitching, you need to do that at such a high level to warrant taking up a roster spot on both 40 man and 26 man to justify it. I mean, how much of a difference does his very few at-bats against LF pitching does he make over the full season versus just about anyone else? I doubt it is that big of a difference to say he needs to stay. There is a reason he was available for us to begin with.

I doubt they will, unless no team offers him what he is seeking like Correa, and wants a "pillow" deal too. Personally, I think he was dumb for turning down the deal he did, even with the year he put up. He is one year older now, and maybe added a little bit of money to his deal, but I doubt he gets the payday he thinks he is worth. I am not saying he is not one of the best offensive guys in the game, and coming off of one of the best seasons ever. However, he is on the wrong side of 30, and many players show great regression. This is also, by far, the best year of career, with 2017, coming in second. If fans are expecting him to put up these numbers for the next 5 plus years, they will be disappointed. Will he still put up decent numbers for next 3 seasons, and still put up some 20 plus HR seasons into his later 30's, most likely. Will he be an MVP guy for next 3 to 8 years, doubtful. I would not want Twins to go after Judge if it meant more than a 4 year deal, and I am sure it will.

If they do make it, if they are asking Rogers to close out games they should just give up. He has blown a large percentage of his save chances with them, not that he has had a ton, but he has blown 3 and converted 3, not a good percentage 50%.

The biggest issue with him is the 40 man crunch coming up. As it sits even after you remove the FA and assuming we opt out of Sano, we have 42 guys on our 40 man roster right now, plus the few guys that will need to be added to save from rule 5 draft. That will need to be a factor. He is an average player, maybe slightly above, but in a perfect line up is he in the top of it? I would say no. His defense is inflated by the eye test. He looks like he makes great plays, which at times he did, but he missed a lot of plays too that were not errors but others could have made. Not only do we have Miranda, but depending on what we decide to do with FA and SS we have possibly Lewis to slide over, Arraez, not sure Gordon has the arm to play third but sure he could fill in if needed. I am not saying dump him, but I am far from the bring him back for sure stance. It will be a hard decision. Depending on how team feels about Lee it is possible he could come up, they have been very aggressive with him so far.

Did anyone really expect he would opt in? Baring an injury that was going to carry into next year, no way was he going to opt in. The question will be, what will others offer. We were able to sign him because he was not getting offers he expected, for whatever reason. Maybe, he was getting good offers but he was seeking better. Will he continue to hold out hoping for record deal, that may not be there? My biggest concern for him long term is I do not know how well he will age. Right now, and for the next 3 to 5 seasons he will be one of the best SS, maybe not the best, but up there. However, as he ages and most likely needs to move off SS, will his bat transition to 3b, the normal transition, or will he be a below value player then? Could the Twins spend to sign him to a deal he wants, sure. However, they need to assess the risk of those end of contract years, and are you willing to risk having an overpaid player that will need to play because of his pay, but may not be helping us win. If you think you can win a ship over that time of peak years, or you think he will age well, then do it. If not, then move on to plan B.

In terms of the FO, I will agree they did not go out and try to nab a starter like Rondon, or Thor, although we do not know if they sent out feelers and were rejected, we just assume based on reports we never showed interest, but we really do not know how contract talks with those players happened. That being said, Thor was nothing amazing. Many of the other free agent staters in our expected price range did not do anything too amazing. Yes, there was better guys out there, in hindsight, than Bundy and Archer, but we do not know if they would have been as good on the Twins as the team they were on. Rondon was the biggest miss if we could have signed, assuming he would have came here. Outside of that we did not have any huge swings and misses in my opinion. Keep in mind Archer and Bundy were only meant for 1 year deals, and many others got 2 to 3 year deals. In terms of planning for pen, if you look at the top 8 signed pen guys, all but 1 of which was to multi year deals, most did on par with some of our guys. Pen pitchers are hard to predict, just like how everyone was upset with Rogers being traded, he had a terrible year. Yes, who we got was not helpful this year, but Rogers after his first month and half has just been terrible overall. Had we kept him, would you say we should have expected that? In terms of the trades we made to fix the issues, well part was we had injuries to expected guys like Acala, Colome, and Stashak who were all hoping to contribute over the year, but all missed the full year. So yea, we needed to trade away some prospects, but as the 40 man roster crunch was going to lead to some trimming of possible prosects too this is a natural way. The top guy we traded was Steer, at least as of right now, some young pitchers that may pan out down the road, but Steer was the closest to help us. He had an below average debut this year, and was like 4th on our depth chart of infield prospects behind, Lewis, Lee, Martin, and possible Julien. With Gordon emerging as another viable MLB guy, Steer was very dispensable, and would have been traded this offseason most likely anyways.

I will agree with the Miranda take, he showed he could be a bat, but still has much room to grow. If you take out his first few weeks it looks even better, but he is not a superstar yet. In terms of the Gray take, I would say he can be a 1 or 2 on a winning team, but it requires a good pen as well, something we were not great with this year. Gordon I have to fully disagree with the requirement of your number 5 picks having to be stars. First, just looking at his draft, the number 1 and number 2 drafted guys never even made the majors, and the number 6 has done basically nothing. The number 1 pick was by Houston who had back to back number 1 picks that did nothing for them and they still doing just fine. I will agree it does not help when your high first round picks are not all-stars, but they are not required to be for team success. In terms of Gordon himself, he finally was given a real shot at this level, and he produced above replacement level. He really only was given a full chance later in the year. He has only played 70 full games out of the 130 he has played. He started about 100. So he was still not given a full run all season, but still put up a 1.6 WAR, if he was given a full season of playing full games, provided he had similar numbers, he would be around a 3 WAR I would guess, that is not too bad, is it elite no, but it is better than many. Sure, he may not do that over a full year and maybe he did well based on his use, but I expect if he is given a real shot over the next 4 to 5 years he will be good to great. Will he carry the team, doubtful, but I would be more than willing to see him hitting in the bottom half the lineup regularly. Ryan, I think it will come down to how much more he develops at the MLB level. I am hopeful a full spring training where he can work with coaches to really develop a second pitch should help him. If he can develop a second pitch he will be just fine. I agree with Wallner, lets wait and see on him. Sure he has done fine in minors and had a nice little story so far, but I am not counting on him to help much next year, as he will strike out a ton, and once more tape is on him, he will need to adjust quickly.

I agree with the assertion that the core is what led to the downfall. Buck going down as usual, Polonco going down was big, but it did let Gordon show his stuff on everyday basis. Arraez has been ehh, but I wonder if that is more so based on just wearing down, he has played career high in games this year and wonder if his body is just not used to it. Kepler is who he is. His season numbers are on par with his career numbers, except for a little less power, which may be of concern. That being said, I am not ready to move on from Arraez at all. Polonco if we can find a taker I would be willing to move on from him, as we have plenty of possible fill ins. Kepler, I would not dump him but similar I would be willing to move on from him, and if we do not, drop him to bottom third of line up.

One thing people need to remember, is he was a high prospect for a reason. That does not mean he will have success, but many gave up on Nick Gordon in the organization. Many fans wanted him cut or traded coming into the year. They were calling him a bust. He is now 26 and his numbers are very similar a Jose Miranda, who people are all over saying he is amazing, he is 24. Aside from a few more HR for Miranda the numbers are nearly the same. That being said, Martin had a down year, Gordon would have several down years. We talked for years Gordon needed to add to power, and kept repeating levels. Now, Gordon had reasons he never built up the muscle to add to the power, until now, but point is, still a little early for some to give up on Martin. Will he be a superstar, maybe maybe not, but he is 24, and next season will be a big season for him to see where he falls in the pecking order, but since he came back from his wrist injury he is back to what he was doing last year. Hopefully he can an minimum develop some power, but look at Arraez, he was an OBP guy, with little power, but he develop some this year as well. Hopefully AFL, and normal spring training will help Martin develop and can push his way into the lineup. He will have his work cut out, being Lewis should be back, Gordon has shown value, Miranda has shown value, and Lee may have leapfrogged him. However, if he can play CF on defense and can get on base at high clip he will have value when Buck gets hurt next year.