chpettit19

I don't see having Canterino make 18 starts until July before putting him in the pen as "burning" a year of development. I'd argue it's actually far more development than giving him nothing but pen innings. I didn't suggest debuting him at 28, I suggested debuting him this year in July. Shoot, maybe he struggles with the starting thing out of the gate and they switch him to the pen in May. I'm just saying that I start spring with him having the chance to work as a starter before banishing him to the pen. The Twins had 3 pitchers with at least 60 pen innings last year. How do you picture them using Canterino that gets him to 75 innings? If they put him in the pen in April his career as a starter is over. Which you guys seem to be ok with, and that's totally fine. Definitely don't think that's crazy. Just not what I would do. Why didn't they put Ober in the pen? He debuted at 25 with far less fanfare and prospect pedigree than Canterino and had thrown 100 innings twice in his life. Has he been wasted?

And? Would it not have been a better outcome to have him be our staff ace instead of closer? I don't know the details of his arm troubles either, or what the Drs were telling them about him. Is the worry that Canterino has another season ending injury by the end of April if you let him got 3, 4, or 5 innings on a normal buildup? Ober had injury problems his entire career before last year. Should he have been moved to the pen as well?

I mean 124.1 feels like a "technically he didn't get to 125," but that's fair. I don't know all the details of his injuries and what they believe caused them so I don't know how to determine how many he should go. Just curious as to why you had 75 innings as the target. I'd treat him like every other starter in spring and if he's showing no struggles at the end of it I'd have no problem letting him go 125 if that's what my medical people are telling me he can do. If he can make 18 starts the first half of the year working his way up to 5 innings a start he'd be on track to take a rotation spot in 2025 after having been a bullpen weapon for the 2nd half of 2024. He's more talented than Varland. I'd much rather have Canterino in my 2025 rotation with Varland in the pen than the other way around.

You don't think there's any value in having your most talented minor league pitcher throw 125 innings in 2024 to set him up for 175+ innings in 2025 as a frontline starter if he's still the dominant pitcher he was before his surgery? There's more value in him throwing 60 innings? Why would you not plant him in the AA rotation and see what he can do before automatically cutting his possible innings of contribution in half? Do you also have Prielipp earmarked for the pen already? He's going to be 24 before he pitches for the org again in any meaningful way and he's had less durability than Canterino.

His Dr reportedly cleared him for 125 innings this year. Do you think they won't actually let him do that, don't think he can do that, or don't think they should let him do that? If he can get to 125 this year I'd use him as a starter in the minors for the first half and then switch him to the big league pen if he's dominating as hoped.

If he's still with the Twins, no. Other teams are harder to predict. But I don't believe the Twins would be willing to pay him 20+ million in 2025. I'd lean towards no for most other teams as well, but there'd be a better chance on another team.

Do you believe every team has the same WAR projection for every player? Do you believe each team is willing to pay the same $/WAR on the market? What do the $/WAR look like for the projections from other systems and not just steamer? What is the actual $/WAR this offseason when you include guys like Garver who "took a discount?"

Canterino being up in April would be pretty shocking. I don't know what would have to happen in the spring to get them to turn him from a starter to a reliever in the first month of the season. I don't see that happening at all. I don't expect Martin on opening day, but being that he's likely pretty high on the current Buxton replacement list his chance probably comes sooner than later. Lee is tough to guess as he didn't really light AAA on fire, and they have multiple hopeful core pieces in place already, but he's also a hopeful core piece. I don't think they'll rush him, and if Polanco isn't moved I don't know that I would be super shocked if he doesn't debut until September. He's got probably the biggest variance of anticipated guys because he's so talented that he could come into spring and make it hard to send him to AAA at all or he could be a September call up. The rest of the guys are mostly just injury depth and I'd bet the Twins would be happier to not have to rely on them much at all in 2024. Unless everything clicks for Rodriguez and then he's a different story.

Flyball percentage is 3.1% higher than league average. Pop up percentage is 2.1% higher than league average. The worst hit types for batting average are flyballs and pop ups. Flyballs and pop ups also aren't effected by the shift so it wasn't driven highly by that either. So, no, it isn't luck, and I don't say this because I don't like Max. It's because he hits a lot of flyballs and pop ups. Like I said. There are probably a dozen articles written by both local and national baseball people on half a dozen different sites that have broken down Max Kepler. I believe Gleeman even has an article or 2 about it. Max Kepler's babip was not luck driven, it was bad contact driven.

He hit the ball harder. It's entirely possible that he sustains that, but the odds are not in his favor. There are plenty of examples of guys who have 1 year, or partial year, surges. They almost always come back to their career norms. And MLB teams almost always expect them to come back to their career norms. Was it luck? I don't know how to define luck when it comes to this, but I'd say probably not. Was just a really good hot streak. If it's sustainable you should be predicting Kepler is an MVP candidate in 2024, not a 2+ WAR player.

Please stop telling me how I value Kepler. I've agreed multiple times that Max Kepler is likely a 2.4 WAR player in 2024. What I don't agree with is your beliefs on him being a likely QO candidate or that corner outfielders who get the vast majority of their WAR from defense get paid the same as corner outfielders with big bats. I've provided you with examples of that, but you choose to focus on a player who is the complete opposite of Kepler in terms of driving his WAR value. Teoscar is a terrible defender who crushes the baseball. Comparing him to Kepler is a bad comparison. It's why I provided you a more accurate comp of Jason Heyward that you choose to ignore. Heyward is a far better comp and he got 1 year and 9 million. Just taking WAR and saying "1 WAR costs X amount" is an inaccurate description of how MLB teams actually function. Kevin Kiermaier (up the middle player so his defense is actually more important) was a heavily defensive driven WAR player with 3.9 WAR and he signed a 1 year, $10.5 million deal. Teams don't pay for defense, especially in corner spots. They pay for offense. We're just going to have to agree to disagree here.

You're preaching to the choir, my friend, but that doesn't change the fact that the Pohlads would not "suck up $8M." Especially for Kenta Maeda. They had their publicly subsidized stadium rocking like it's never rocked before and then announced a payroll cut within a month. While I think they should eat $8M without thinking twice after the playoff success they finally had, I wouldn't do it for Kenta Maeda. Way better ways to spend 20 mil than on 1 year of Kenta Maeda.

I absolutely think he could be a 2.4 WAR player. But 2.4 WAR players, especially those who have most of their WAR from their defense in a corner outfield spot, don't get QOs. I listed out all the position players who've gotten a QO under the new CBA. 2 of them were coming off years with less than 3.9 WAR. Pederson was one and accepted his QO only to have a horrible season, and the other was Rizzo who signed an extension with the Yankees instead of taking the QO. QOs simply aren't handed out very often, and they aren't handed to guys like Kepler. The Twins would be zigging hard while the rest of the league zags if they gave a 2.4 WAR Kepler a QO. 4 WAR Kepler? That'd be a different story. But he has a long ways to go to be a 4 WAR player. Yes, I understand he had a low BABIP. It's been studied and reported on by many people in the baseball industry. He had that bad BABIP because he was really good at hitting lazy flyballs. That isn't bad luck. That's just not being a very good hitter. I'd BABIP about .000000001 in the majors (broken bat dribbler for my only hit because the head of the bat nearly takes out the nearest fielder) but that doesn't make me unlucky. Low BABIP doesn't automatically equal bad luck. Sometimes it just equals bad hitting.

They have them already, actually. They have video screens that show the pitcher going through his windup and "throwing" a pitch that comes from a machine. The machine can be set to specific pitcher's spin and velo or to just different pitch types. Can have it throw all breaking balls or add in fastballs or whatever they want. It's pretty cool stuff.

I think he would've signed that QO before it hit the table in front of him. Why wouldn't he? He'd get 83% of the money he got on the Detroit deal and be able to hit the market again next season. Do you think the Pohlads would "suck it up" and eat an extra 8 mil when they're choosing to cut payroll after having just won their first playoff game in 2 decades? So they would've had to cut that money somewhere else. Likely Polanco or Kepler for prospect return. Do you think the team is better with Maeda on a significant overpay or Polanco on a significant underpay? Overpaying by 66% is a terrible plan. Especially for a guy who isn't that good. If they were willing to sign Maeda for 20 mil they would've been better off signing Gray for 25. Eduardo Rodriguez only got 20 a year. Giolito was under 20. Wacha for 16 is lightyears better than Maeda for 20. Lugo for 15 would've been better. Flaherty for 1, 14 would be better than a QO to Maeda. Overpaying by nearly doubling a player's actual value is never a good strategy. Unless you're playing with Monopoly money like the Dodgers.

Kenta Maeda is getting 24 million for 2 years, but you think it'd have been smart for the team currently cutting payroll to pay him 20.325 million for 1 year?

Teams don't pay for corner outfield defense. This is a discussion about whether or not Kepler would be likely to receive a qualifying offer or get a similar contract to Teoscar Hernandez. There is absolutely room for arguments that Kepler's defense being the main driver of his value hurts his value. Do you have a bunch of examples of QOs or $23.5 mil, 1 year deals being handed to guys who specialize in corner outfield defense? Because I have a whole bunch for corner outfield guys who are terrible defensively, but can absolute mash a baseball. Including Teoscar Hernandez.

Kepler wasn't even close to the most unlucky hitter in all of baseball. He was just really bad at making quality contact. I don't believe a .780 OPS Kepler would get a QO. I don't think a 2.4 WAR Kepler would get a QO. Actually, I looked up the OPS and WAR totals for QO eligible position players the last 2 years (I did this before and it may have been in a discussion with you) and now I'm back to the thought that there's almost no chance Kepler gets the QO next year. 2023: Offered: Chapman- .755 OPS, 4.4 bWAR (rejected, still unsigned) Bellinger- .881 OPS, 4.4 bWAR (rejected, still unsigned) Not offered: Brantley- .724 OPS, 0.1 bWAR (retired) Kiermaier- .741 OPS, 3.9 bWAR (1 year, 10.5 mil) Merrifield- .700 OPS, 0.7 bWAR (still unsigned) Hoskins- Hurt (still unsigned) Teoscar- .741 OPS, 2.1 bWAR (1 year, 23.5 mil with 8.5 mil deferred) Soler- .853 OPS, 1.8 bWAR (still unsigned) Garver- .870 OPS, 2.1 bWAR (2 years, 24 mil) Duvall- .834 OPS, 1.6 bWAR (still unsigned) 2022: Offered: Pederson- .874 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (accepted) Swanson- .776 OPS, 5.7 bWAR (7 years, 177 mil) Contreras- .815 OPS, 3.9 bWAR (5 years, 87.5 mil) Turner- .809 OPS, 4.9 bWAR (11 years, 300 mil) Bogaerts- .833 OPS, 5.9 bWAR (11 years, 280 mil) Nimmo- .800 OPS, 5.1 bWAR (8 years, 162 mil) Rizzo- .817 OPS, 2.3 bWAR (2 years, 40 mil) Judge- 1.111 OPS, 10.6 bWAR (9 years, 360 mil) Not offered: Brantley- .785 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (1 year, 12 mil) Haniger- .736 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (3 years, 43.5 mil) Martinez- .790 OPS, 1.1 bWAR (1 year, 10 mil) Kepler is clearly much closer to the guys in the "not offered" sections in both of those lists.

Over the past two seasons Jorge Polanco has posted 4.8 bWAR in 184 games while Josh Rojas has posted 3.7 bWAR in 230 games, including 0.8 bWAR in 46 games with the Mariners. So no matter which WAR you'd like to use Polanco is clearly the superior player. Injuries did keep his fWAR total lower, though. You were claiming Caballero was also a reason they would have no interest in Polanco up until he was traded a couple days ago. They couldn't trade the lesser Rojas for something else in order to improve their team by taking the clearly superior player to help them improve their chances after missing the playoffs for the 21st time in the last 22 seasons last year? Their payroll is really so they tight they couldn't take on the extra 7 mil? Dang, that's a bummer for M's fans. But we've had enough back and forth on this topic and clearly don't see it the same way. Obviously the chances are Polanco doesn't end up in Seattle because the odds of any individual player ending up on any team is miniscule. But we'll just have to agree to disagree that Seattle wouldn't be interested in him, or be able to find room for him because of Josh Rojas.

Ok? But your statement was that the Mariners are looking to improve their OPS+. You also pointed out that Rojas is clearly their worst hitter. You provided a projection for that. Polanco has a projection in the same system and his projection is 18 pts higher than Rojas. Your argument seems to then be that Rojas' defense is so much better than Polanco's that it makes up for the 18 pts of wRC+. I question that assessment when it comes to your stance that Polanco clearly wouldn't be an upgrade to the Mariner's current infield.

Not at all what I'm suggesting. I'm asking for a real life example of how they could spend it to improve the team while no longer having Correa. If you take Correa out of the SS spot and put Lee there (or whatever league minimum guy you want) where are you spending that money? You want more pitching? Who? Jordan Montgomery? As I stated earlier, I don't see a dramatic difference in the team with Montgomery in the rotation and Lee at SS compared to Varland in the rotation and Correa at SS. And at that point you're still paying 1 player 30 mil of a 120 mil payroll, so how is that any different? Are you not looking to just add 1 stud to the rotation? Who are the 2 15 mil a year guys you're adding and who's coming off the roster? 3 10 mil guys? Same question, who are they and who's coming off? You guys are just saying "Correa makes too much of the payroll and his money could be used elsewhere" without providing any real examples of how that can be done. Show me a clearly better roster that takes Correa out and spends the money elsewhere.

And I said that if he hits the way he did in 2023 then it's a different situation than 2021 and 2022. You're far more confident that Kepler will produce to his 2023 numbers than I am. But I've stated multiple times that if he does hit to those levels he'll be a QO possibility if the Twins are willing to pay him 20 mil should he accept it. The question is absolutely whether or not he can hit like he did in 2023. We'll see.

And what are the hitting projections tied to that 2.4 WAR? Are they like last year's or 2020-2022? Is there a trend there?

But your statement was that they're looking to improve their OPS+. Isn't that only a hitting stat? How good is Rojas' defense in order to make up for 18 pts of wRC+ in the projections you quoted? (sorry, I edited this after originally posting so if you respond before hand this sentence was added)

Jason Heyward is probably the better comp here. Much closer to the same kind of player. Defense first corner outfielder with wildly fluctuating offensive outputs. He got 1 year, 9 mil this offseason. But he's older than Kepler so there's a little difference there. But he also put up an .813 OPS in 124 games last year. Good for a 117 OPS+. Compared to .816 and 121 for Kepler. Kepler's lowest of lows wasn't as bad as Heyward's, but their peaks have been about the same. Heyward is probably the comp, and if Kepler's offense dips back down again he's going to be much closer to 1 year, 9 mil than a QO.