gunnarthor

Oh, sure. But a big help can just come from not being bad. Duffey and Berrios combined for 40 starts and a -3.3 WAR. If those 40 starts can somehow turn into just 2 WAR, that's a 5 WAR increase. In any event, I've said multiple times that the Twins offensive core is pretty good, although another bat would be fun. The pitching staff also has potential but I'm not sure Molitor is the right manager to get to that potential.

Well, that's sorta true. I'm really curious to see if the new FO puts its foot down and gets Duffey into the bullpen and May into the rotation. But Milone, Meyer, Dean, Nolasco and Albers are gone, so that's at least 45 starts (25%) that will be taken by new arms. If Duffey is moved to the pen, that's another 26 starts that will be by someone else. We all loved De Leon but Berrios was a better regarded prospect and is younger, so we should expect him to be good at some time. Santiago and Santana and Gibson will probably be locks for the rotation early. They amassed only 4.6 WAR total in 66 starts last year (about 33%). I have no idea how they'll do but all three have had ML success fairly recently. With improved pitch framing and OF defense they should be better than that as a group - both in starts and WAR.

Why are we punting on 2017 and 2018? How does Sano and Buxton leaving us after 2021 make us better? Shouldn't we trade them too so we can get a group of prospects that is perfectly aligned at some random point in the future?

Hildenberger will be 26 next year, has thrown 38 innings - all as a reliever - above A ball. And he's never made a professional start. He's not being blocked by these signings. Baxendale is also 26. While he has made starts above A ball, he hasn't been good at them. He was moved to the bullpen where he's looked a bit better. He's not being blocked by these signings. The Twins ST non-rosters invitees include Reed, Slegers and Wimmers who are all better bullpen options than Baxendale and Hildenberger.

Not sure your numbers are right. The Twins aren't going to sign him at a 1/20 deal. They'd get him at something like 1/10 or 1/12 and half that would be paid by the receiving team in a trade (unless the Twins eat salary to get a better prospect). There are a lot of reasons to not do the deal but payroll isn't one of them.

I'd bet on bounceback actually. He'll hit enough to be worth a second round return at the deadline. I don't think that's particularly risky. That said, I do think there is some logic in keeping all three picks in the first 38 (or whatever) because maybe the Twins could get something like the #3 college pitcher at 1 and get a two more top 15 players to drop. I like that idea, too. But I'm not going to complain either way. I'm more optimistic about this team than most. I think they have the core of a very good offense but could use a big improvement at 1b/DH which could be internal (bounceback season from Mauer, break out from Park) or external (Bautista).

I don't think many people view Stewart as a potential headliner. Most scouting reports still list him as a backend arm. De Leon is clearly the better pitcher.

There's nothing wrong with either signing but it's unlikely either will play in the majors this year. There's not a lot of pitching out there. The best FA pitcher left is probably Hammel. That shouldn't excite anyone. So the Twins are really in a wait and see mode.

Isn't that close to what mlbtraderumors was saying? I swear I read that somewhere (the list exchange of names).

Well, the injuries to Mauer (and a lesser extent) Cuddyer didn't help.

Well, my guess is that both sides agreed that De Leon was in the trade but both had a list of players that could go with him and the names didn't match. Both sides figured the other side would budge. That seems like the simplest answer.

Well pretty much every professional reporter who reported on the Dodger Twins discussions established that Alvarez was not being offered. Outside of Dave, no one suggested it. So it's unlikely they turned that down.

I salute your dedication to this.

Yeah, I don't disagree but WAR isn't an ideal stat in the first place so I'm not really overly concerned with going with 4 WAR (and the margin of error in WAR might make it moot). I'm a big hall guy so there's a lot of ways I would consider a season a "HOF season" but I just used WAR for Raines b/c his supporters tend to think very highly of that stat. My problem with Raines is that his high level of play basically ended in 1987 and after that he went from HOF caliber player to just solid player. I think he needs more HOF seasons. It is of course a moot point since he'll get elected this year but I think that's a victory for compiling over seasons.

A few points. First, Raines peak (83-87) was better than most of these guys but that becomes a question of what do you want in your HOF? If you just want a 5 year peak than guys like Raines, Mauer, Utley, Hernandez are HOFers. I think you should have more. I used 4 WAR because I think 4 WAR is a good shorthand for a HOF season (considering Rainers supporters like WAR). Torii Hunter was an excellent player. He played 17 seasons, has over 2400 hits, 9600 AB, 110 OPS+. Damn good career. In those 17 seasons he topped 3 WAR 12 times but only topped 4 WAR 4 times. So I think 4 WAR is a nice dividing line for a HOF season. Others may differ. But I don't like the compiler argument - Raines has X WAR so he's a HOFer. I think the argument should be a player had X number of HOF seasons. How to you count a HOF season? Lots of ways but 4 WAR is a good shorthand. Raines had 6 HOF seasons. Now, those six, by WAR, were very high level HOF seasons so if you want to give him extra credit, fine. Neither of us has a vote. But his peak isn't that unusual. Dawson and Raines peaks, by WAR were actually pretty close. Dawson has a lead over a 10 year period and they are tied for 12 year period (both got 57 WAR in 12 years). Raines was slightly better at the end, and didn't have the cliff that Dawson did. But considering the inaccuracies of WAR, the two are essentially tied after 10000 PA with Dawson having a slightly better peak and more HOF (4 WAR seasons) in fewer seasons. McGriff had 7 seasons, he was traded in 93 but I was wrong with Radke, he and Raines both had 6 seasons of 4+ WAR (although that accounts for 50% of Radke's career). At the end of the day, Raines is getting into the HOF because of his run from 83-87. After 87, he only had one more season where he finished in the top 10 in OBP. His offensive decline was hidden by playing in the offensive explosion of the 90s. For five years he played like an absolute HOFer but a lot of players have done that. (And, in fairness to him, the strike cost him a lot in 81 where he may have had another HOF season and I might be overly valuing his decline years and not recognizing the really strong years). I don't dislike Raines in the HOF - the 80s have been ignored a lot and not enough players from that era are in but I wouldn't vote for him.

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/vader.jpg

Or it's probably more or a realization that the Twins offensive core is, more or less, set and that fixing the pitching staff isn't a quick fix. They'll need some players to improve, they need to find fair trades, they need to improve the defense and the catcher and the bullpen. As for Molitor, I still think this is his last year and Levine hires a good manager when Molitor's contract runs out. Molitor is still here because of ownership.

I remember thinking he'd break out last year and we'd all be really excited about him but it was Blankenhorn who did while Cabbage struggled. Really hope he puts it together.

Raines has really had a heck of an internet push that others probably should have had. Raines argument is the old compiler argument but instead of wins we're using WAR without context of # of seasons it took to amass it. Andre Dawson, who people tried to keep out, had a better peak. Raines had fewer 4 WAR seasons (while playing in more seasons) than, among others Jack Morris, Dawson, McGriff, Brad Radke, Bernie Williams, Kenny Lofton, Ian Kinsler ...

From the fangraphs chat last night Dr Evil: While the Twins may not have a huge # of options for Dozier beyond the Dodgers, should they hold out for a significant 2nd piece beyond Deleon? 9:13 Paul Swydan: Yes, absolutely. The Dodgers are bluffing. They’re not starting Kike Hernandez at second all year. anonymous: Does Joe Panik + the tire fire that is the Giants top-of-farm prospects get them anywhere close to Dozier? LA and SF like to try to snipe each other on stuff like this 9:53 Paul Swydan: I don’t see why the Giants would want to trade Panik-plus for Dozier unless they’re convinced that Panik will not be healthy long-term.

As I see it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the Twins biggest defensive problems last year were (in some order) Sano in RF, Grossman, Danny Santana and Suzuki. This year it looks like the Twins have one player who can be really good defensively and a bunch of players in the average to below average but no obvious disasters like last year. This year, our OF should be Rosario/Buxton/Kepler. Buxton probably grades out as a very good fielder and the other two might be average. Combined, that's probably a good outfield? In the IF, Sano is a liability at third but not nearly as bad as he was in RF while Polanco, Dozier and Mauer are all around average but none are really good or really bad? Castro is supposed to be an upgrade over Suzuki.

My understanding was that the Twins were more than willing to bring Hunter back at nearly the same salary. Playing time was the issue and when he realized that he wasn't a fulltime player anymore, he retired. Teams have been paying for unmeasurable things - fan appeal, veteran leadership, catch framing - for years. I don't see why we have to have the constant "Hunter helped/didn't help" every off season. Let's focus on the things that matter like how Mauer's contract is an albatross dragging this team down to the bottom of the standings until he starts catching again.

Well most reports indicate that the Dodgers were lowballing the Twins - see Steve Adams comments at mlbtraderumors, for example. We don't know what the final offer was but it was very likely De Leon and junk (in some variation). In any event, I'm glad it's dead. I didn't think we could get fair value for Dozier and would rather he stay here and watch the young players develop.

Some people like Hunter, some don't. I love nearly everything about the guy, actually. Those that don't like him tend to dismiss things they can't measure - on the field, anyway.

The Twins still have a second pick in the comp A round. I'm OK either way, but a strong offense would be fun and adding a big FA would be new.