Trov

I just wonder what Oakland is seeking. They still have two pitchers they are most likely trading. I think what they may be asking in return is based on when they think their timetable will be. Just looking at their prospect lists, they seem to light on OF prospects, but do they have much interest in what we have there? My guess is they really do not want much of our MLB or near MLB OF guys, and I am think the discussion will be for either Lewis or Martin and a pitching prospect. We clearly are looking to win now with current moves, do we give up that, or can we get Oakland to accept younger hitting prospects and one of our more ready pitching prospects?

If you are expecting any DH on this team to produce like Cruz did then you will be disappointed. As long as we can get some production from the DH I am good, I am not asking for Cruz number from last couple of years with both the power and the average. I am not sold on Sanchez, but I am willing to give him a shot with new place to play and new coaching staff in his ear, maybe that will help him. With hitting being a very mental game, sometimes just a change will do. We have plenty of bat first guys we can rotate in if Sanchez fails. Many struggled last year, but hopefully they took the offseason to work on those issues.

Was not on computer yesterday, but when I woke up and checked phone to see the deal I was shocked. I kept checking to see the Story deal happen, but I am much happier with this deal. Sure, odds are it is a 1 year deal unless Correa has down year or injury year. However, it gives us the best player in FA this year, something no one ever thought they would say about Twins. Also, who knows, maybe just maybe he will like it hear and fine with earning 35 mil for a couple more years before testing FA again. I doubt that as he wanted something better than what Seager earned. If both he and Buxton can stay healthy, there is little reason we should not make playoffs. I have doubt that Buxton will, but Correa did last year. I know many will say but we still need pitching, which maybe we do, or maybe even if we do not make a trade the young guys will get it done. With this signing, we basically traded Garver and Donaldson for Correa, for at least 1 year, and I am okay with that. I fully expect a trade with Oakland in coming days, just not sure who they will be giving up.

I bet if the Yankees thought they could get Correa for this kind of deal they would have done that and not traded with Twins.

Baseball is a very mental game, and maybe that was affecting Sanchez. Also, maybe being full time catcher so long started to wear on him too. Maybe getting some DH at bats will help him. However, his huge K rate is an issue. I did look up the home road split of Sanchez and was expecting a bigger split being Yankee Stadium is very hitter friendly overall. The way I see it, no way will he be worse than we expect, so if he can offer much of anything that is just a bonus.

I have not been an advocate for Story signing here, but if the deal is limited to 4 seasons, maybe with a 5th year option, I would be open to it. I mainly have argued that you will not get the offense he has produced over his career because of the splits. Will he be terrible on offense, most likely not, but you should not pay him like he is an elite offensive SS, when all signs show he is not elite away from Denver. Maybe he will adjust and do well. The writer uses LeMahieu as a recent example, but fails to point out that Yankee stadium is very hitter friendly, and other than last year, his home road was still very skewed to be good home numbers. I have been low on Story not just for the splits, but also he is nearing 30, coming off of elbow injury, which will both greatly lower his defense over the coming years. Many teams think he should not even stay at SS, rumors are most offers are for him moving positions. I am not saying Story does not and will not add some value, but I am concerned too long of a contract we will be looking to dump him in a year or two like we did Donaldson because of regression. If you knew his bat would be elite you can put up with regression in defense and still pay top dollar, but it is not expected he will hit to the overall numbers he has over his career. I never said the man would be subpar at the bat, but he is likely to hit at same level as Polonco did during his down offensive time at SS. My comments against Story has mainly been to tamper expectations of fans that looked at his overall numbers and think that is who would be coming to Twins, when he will not hit at that level, and will regress quickly on defense as well. Anything beyond 4 years Twins will regret by end of the deal.

From the moment the trade with Yankees happened, I said this is not the last move we see from Twins this year. They freed up money from Donaldson to hopefully sign a SS, most likely it looks like Story, who I have not been big on, but we need something. For the right price I am fine with Story but he has a ton of red flags over next few years. I also believe Twins will look to move Sanchez as well for possible pitching, not sure if that move is out there though. I have a feeling the FO have ideas of where Sanchez could go, despite making statements they are happy to have him. Of course if follow up moves fall through and we are left with hole at SS and Sanchez as catcher or at least backup, I would say this was a huge fail. Donaldson was fading quickly, and his calfs could go at any moment. I am looking forward to hearing how the Yankees clubhouse deals with Donaldson and Cole together, as they had huge beef on social media last year, with the sticky substance issues.

I wonder if this was the plan when we traded with Texas, or after that got done Yankees came knocking. It seems like they could have done a three team trade, and maybe that was talked about but things just did not work out, so we had to go the path they did. NO way is the FO done with this deal. We get weaker at 3rd and catcher to just get a big contract out. It makes no sense as we still have hole at SS and go with a lessor 3rd baseman or unproven guy. I know Story is rumored, and read Twins have little plans to keep Sanchez, not sure if he will be released or they will try to trade him, but that leaves hole at backup catcher now too.

The second I saw this trade I said they are going hard after Story. Then I saw shortly after, that Twins are inquiring about Story. I wondered if the trade was planned when they traded with Texas, or after, Yankees came calling and Twins just went with it. Essentially, they traded Garver, Donaldson, and Rortvelt for Sanchez and Urschella. They saved some money on Donaldson to hopefully move on someone else. If they do not bring in Story, who I have been against for anything longer than 4 years, then I have no clue what team is doing.

I at first thought the lottery would not fix tanking, because rarely do you have a clear number 1 pick, once like every 10 years will you have a pick that is so clear number 1 people would really care if they got it. However, lowering picks if you routinely stay in the lottery may have the desired affect. The Kumar rule may not address his issue, but there was no rule in place that he would have to get contract at 75% slot value. I think it is a good rule for both sides. It will make all the teams get a chance to see the physical and they can decide to take the risk or not, and if they do the player gets a deal no matter what, if they want to take it. Sure it may lead to some guys dropping more than expected, but that is a risk the player will have to decide. If they do not share the info they will run risk of no offer at all, like Rocker got.

I wonder if the minor league camp that was going on will affect how a team was looking to go. Maybe a guy they were willing to trade for someone is no longer available. Maybe someone they were not looking to part ways with now is available. Maybe some of the non-roster invites have impressed enough they will not feel the need to bring in someone else. I was expecting signings and trades to happen very quickly as camps open in a couple days now. So far nothing that is disappointing to me.

Looking forward to the slew of trades and FA announced in the next 24 hours. I personally was surprised, it sounds like the actual players were less concerned about the issues than the heads of the union. I think the owners waited them out enough that the rank and file players that would see little from the changes in luxary tax line change did not want to risk missing too much time and money. Even more so when over the last decade jobs for 32 plus year old players are dropping quickly.

If it is like the minor league rule, assuming it is. If the time runs out the umpire issues a ball to the batter. Similar there was rules that made step offs limited per at bat when runner was on, and doing it too many times would result in a balk. To my knowledge there was no limit to hitters calling time, but that has always been up to umps if they want to grant it. I have seen times where batter steps out but no time is granted. I would bet the ump will be less likely to grant the closer the clock winds down.

I am never a fan of looking at MLB drafts on who we took versus who was taken some time after. It is even worse when you use large gaps, like top 5 to end of first round. The reason I say this is there are many things that go into a decision to draft someone, and without looking into all those reasons it is hard to really compare. That being said, I would agree the 2011 and 2014 drafts as good comparison type drafts. The reason I say that is the gap is not large, and the players played same positions, which meant the analysis of the team clearly was off. I actually remember the 2014 when Turner was talked as high as 5 for the Twins as well. Now, Mitchell and Story were not 100% comparison because Story was high school pick, and Mitchell was college, but as point out many were not high on Mitchell and questioned the pick at the time. I know for the 2014 draft a knock on Turner was he was not expected to stay at SS, which finally has happened him shifting but he has done very well for himself in the majors, while Gordon has barely played at this level, but similar to 2011, they are flipped flopped in high school versus college. Gordon was projected to be higher floor and stay at SS, but everyone was wrong on that. For 2010, it was clearly a miss, and I think I recall he was considered the same pick and we missed out on some top HS arms that panned out, at least a little in the comp round. But to compare a college pitcher to a HS OF, it is hard to compare. Yes, we could have, and if could do again should have drafted Yelish, however, we have no clue if he would have developed the same either. 2012, yes Seagar has higher WAR, but I would not say we got that one wrong, and no one was thinking Seagar was the number 1 pick in that draft, like Buxton was. If Buck could stay healthy he would have higher WAR than Seagar. 2013 comparing a guy that was top 5 rated to a guy that went comp round is just hard to say we should have taken the comp round guy. Sure, he has panned out well, and knowing what you know now most teams would have taken Judge over why they did, but it is not like everyone was saying Judge should go early, and we missed. 2015 we clearly blew that, but again Bueler was missed by many. There was 7 pitchers taken between Jay and Bueler, so again it was not like we were most likely between the two. That all being said, that was the old FO and they have been out and for good reason, they were missing more often than hitting. However, most GM's actually miss, very few will hit on most picks.

I have long advocated that a floor and cap would fix issues, as they get based on actual revenue and there is a true sharing. The info of the revenues get shared with players to set the numbers. Many of the issues is lack of transparency. My current union contract talks have that same issue. Management claims they cannot meet the demands because of lack of money, but will not show the books as to why that is the case. This leads to mistrust. I agree with the fact that if the players cared about all the players they would care more about a floor. If you expand the tax level all that will happen is the top few players will get a little more money. The teams that spend no where close to that number will not suddenly start spending more. Also, most teams could sign a guy to 20 mil or more, or raise what they are paying their players a little more and not pass the level. The tax level is not what is keeping teams from signing a vet for a few more million a season. The problem is the players have always said no cap ever, and will never budge on that. They do not want to limit what they can get paid, but they stupidly agreed to the tax level. Which is basically a soft cap that most teams will not pass, they do not want to throw away dead money. Really what should help all players is that money from the tax and the revenue that is shared with smaller market teams needs to be spent on players, that is the biggest issue. The smaller market teams take the shared money, but then still claim poverty.

I would hope that would not count, at least it will not in my mind.

There has always been a few pitchers that work quickly, one that always comes to mind for me is Mark Buehrle. He would get the ball, the sign and throw in just a few seconds. He was a good pitcher overall. Even when guys were on base he took little time between pitches and his games were very short. Personally, I am all for the pitch clock because I feel it has got crazy out of hand with how long some guys take. It will also lead to a new cat and mouse game when runners are on. As it will also have limited step offs and throw over. If it is like the minor league rule, you could only have 2 throws over or step offs, unless the runner took off before the pitch was thrown. I think there was a gray area of what was considered running going, meaning the runner could not just walk way off the base after 2 throws over. It will lead to more running game maybe but more trying to catch a guy too with pitch outs after 2 throws over. I do think the game needs to speed up, as it has dragged on. I always enjoy being able to do other things and not miss much going on, but at the same time I do not like 3.5 to 4 hour games every night. I think it will take time for the pitchers to adjust to it, but once they do there will not be much of an issue, and we will just accept it as part of the game now. I get that baseball has never had a clock of any kind, and that is part of the great part of the game, but at some point you need to not just let the game drag on forever. The game will continue to lose younger fans who want action. If this will make action happen I am all for it.

I fully agree he is not likely to be a starter, but can fill a decent ben roll. First, I remember when 93 was considered fast, not a determent to a pitcher as too slow. My how times have changed, and I am not that old. Radke averaged 89 on his fastball and got the job done just fine. Second, the speed is not super important if the breaking pitch is that good you throw it more often and just use the fastball to change up things sometimes. As long as you can spot corners.

MLB teams have exploited international kids for years. Yes, some kids get huge sums of money, but most of the time that money is taken by corrupt people if the kid does not get out of the country. These kids are brought to baseball academies owned by teams where the kids are taught basic English and baseball. They do not learn anything of real educational value. For the lucky few that emerge and get signed even for just 6 figure deals do hit the jackpot, but most of the kids never get signed or sign for only 5 figures move to US and get used in the minor leagues because it is either do that, or manual labor in their home country because they passed up all possible education because they had athletic promise. Is it a better life than if they went to school, I cannot answer that. However, MLB has tried to put the spin on their academies as some great thing they are doing for the country, but the money they spend there does not get spread around it stays with very few people. Sure, without them some of these kids would never get found and never make it to MLB earning millions to help give back to their country if they want to. However, there is a very dark side of these as well. I hope with the international draft there will be less of this, but most likely not.

First, both sides are to blame, as both did not reach an agreement. The players could have chose the owners offer, and the owners could have chose the players offer, but neither did. To say it is all the owners fault, in my mind, is just not accurate. I will agree the owners are not opening their books to prove what they actually make. That is a huge issue. Do not claim you barely make money, but refuse to actually prove it. That being said, the owners should not be expected to lose money owning a team, just because they could afford to. Fans need to remember that there are 30 teams and they have different interest too. Even the players have different interests. There are large market owners, that would love to not have the luxary tax or have it higher like the players want. However, there are small market owners that despite winning with little payroll still never get many fans in seats. Then there are the teams in the middle. Each has what they would like to see. Personally, I would like to see as much parity in the sport as you can get, and I would love to see top players staying with their teams, no matter where they come from. I hated the early 2000's where most of the top guys went to either Yankees or Red Sox, with a few going to other teams. Now, I cannot see the owners books, but I believe that some of the smaller market teams cannot sign some of the free agents and be a profitable business, without getting revenue sharing. I could be wrong, and most likely they could spend more. The players are claiming they only care about making the game more competitive, but their proposals, outside of a draft lottery, which in baseball is a really who cares because rarely does the number 1 pick end up being the best player in the draft anyways, just does not make sense for competitive balance. The players want to raise the tax level and lower the penalty for breaking it. Well, very few teams any given year are within 20 mil of the number, meaning it is not what is stopping a team from signing some, but other factors. What those factors are, I cannot say. Lifting the tax number and lowering the penalty will just put the top few market teams back into looking to sign each top star and being able to outbid the lower tier teams. The players are concerned about service time manipulation, which they should be, but decreasing years to FA, combined with higher tax line, will just make teams hold guys in minors even longer. Teams tank or not be competitive for a couple of reasons. One, they lack the current talent in their system to compete against other teams, so they keep their top prospects down to have longer team control when they do have enough talent to compete, and they do not want to waste money and years of service on losing seasons. Two, more revenue sharing, international signing money, and more draft picks, getting the comp balance picks that they can use or trade. Both sides are to blame for this, I would argue the owners more so, and I do not blame the players for their stance. That being said, the players could accept what is offered, not saying they should. Regardless of how this shakes out, I just hope it does not go back to the top market teams signing every major FA again, with a splash here or there from other teams. What the players should really demand is not that the tax line goes up, but that the revenue sharing from it, has to be spent on players. Meaning every dollar that goes to other teams from revenue sharing must go to signing players. Not sure owners would go for it, but it gets you closer to what players want, better contracts across the board, not just bigger for the top few. It would help keep teams more competitive.

I expected this. I know some where hoping after Monday that something would happen, but I had little hope. I expect this to min drag into May. The owners are not loosing much, if anything by losing April games. The owners are hoping the players will cave when they lose those game checks. The owners are trying to bully the players into taking what is offered. I saw this coming all along. The owners truly hold all the power. Most of them make their money from other businesses and owning MLB team is just for fun, and to make some more money, but not only way they get money. Most of the players this is their only way of making money. Some will have some extra incomes but most will only be making it from game checks. I have blamed both sides for this mostly. It really goes back years. I have found the players ask to not be good for baseball overall, but I also find the owners are greedy and hiding what they really make to back up their claim that they make very little. I wish the two sides would have agreed to a revenue share in 2020 to build some level of trust and make the owners open the books to the players. However, the players have always said no cap, which now has backfired against them, because without a cap there is no floor. The players claim owners have more they can spend, but without a floor there is no reason they have to. The players could have fixed this issue years ago by agreeing to a cap and floor. However, the owners now are being rich bullies that are trying to force an agreement on the players. The owners have lied to the fans and the players all along, as their actions have shown. Personally, at this point I would support a full missed season. Let the owner decide if losing all money from MLB is worth it. The players need to stand strong and force the owners to see what it is like. I feel for all the day to day employees though that will be out jobs because of all of this.

What this whole thing shows is that both sides could have done this weeks ago if they really wanted to. They both played the game of chicken and finally say okay lets be real and see if we can work out a deal that we had months to do but work it out in a few hours. Really just annoying, but I know how it all works, just annoying.

Today will determine if we have a long lockout. The MLB deadline that the players do not agree to will cause even more division for a return to play. Remember 2020, when we had a huge divide of how to pay in a return to play? They never reached an agreement really and the pro rated pay was just done. I can see it now, the owners will say we will not pay you for games we cancelled, and the players will say you cancelled them you locked us out. The owners would say, well you would have struck, and the players will say you never know. The players will demand some level of back pay for missed games to return, the owners will not want to agree to it. I know they need a deadline, but this will just add another issue that the two sides will be far apart on.

I know we did not have anything to do with it, but why did Martin change his swing last year? Did he do it after the lack of power, or did Toronto ask him to do it going into the year? I hate when a guy who may not be ideal swing, but has results, is asked to change it up. They are asking a guy who has done the same thing thousands of times making muscle memory to just change it up expecting better results. I am of the approach is if the swing got you to the level you are, until it no longer is working do not change it up. Sometimes a odd swing, or motion, or whatever is what works for them. Would you want everyone to do it, most likely not. We did this with Buck for so many years. We told him his way will not work, so we kept messing with him, which was not working and causing him to want to go back to what got him drafted, but then struggled there. To my understanding he basically has gone back to his old ways and doing just fine with it. Just because something is not textbook, does not mean it does not work.

I would not endorse a trade for an "ace" at this point. We have a lot of arms that need to see what they got. Many people claim we will not do well this season because we have no proven pitchers, but until they get a chance to prove themselves we will never know. Also, I see little point to bring in a guy we will most likely just look to send out again either next off-season or at trade deadline this or next year. Unless you believe Duran will not be MLB level guy then I would be open to trade, but if team believes he will be an MLB guy, I keep what we got right now.