chpettit19

I think the bigger hurdle with Coulombe making it over Sands opening day is there wasn't a 40-man spot for him. They'd have to DFA someone (assuming Castro is taking the 1 open spot already) to get Coulombe on the roster. Which is why I think the Coulombe over Pagan argument is better. Take Pagan off the 40-man and put Coulombe on.

I'd much rather have Coulombe than Pagan on the major league roster. I really hope Pagan is good and proves the FO right, but I really don't see it and don't understand their obsession with him.

I have no problem with you, or anyone, being critical. They deserve it. I'm critical of them on certain things. But, like you said, facts matter. Bring all the criticism, but bring the facts with it. ☺️

I'm not sure what you're expecting as far as "self-criticism" is concerned. Do you see a lot of other FOs coming out and saying they were terrible? Has anyone over in Chicago come out and had big, public "self-criticism" remarks after their failed season last year? That's just not really something people do. Making changes in plans, strategies, and rosters is the closest I think we should expect to get to "self-criticism." And, for what it's worth, I've actually heard Levine be pretty critical of the FO during season ticket holder events. I don't think the strategy going into last year was for all those short starts the entire season. Gray, Ryan, and Paddack were getting 6 and 7 inning starts in April. That doesn't look like a "short start" strategy to me. Archer's body just never built up to being able to go longer. Bundy simply was what he was. They also started the year with Winder in a long relief role before he got hurt. As far as the strategy of being able to survive with the Bundy, Archer, Shoemaker, Happ types of the world, I don't even know how they thought that was possible to start. I'm certainly glad they've moved on from that. Even if their reasoning was they were expecting young arms to come up and take spots, it was still a terrible plan to start the seasons with those 4 guys. Just gross. I like what they've done this year much better. As for Archer specifically, I'd argue the reason any of his stats look even reasonably ok is because of how they managed him. There's some flaws in just looking back at box scores and saying "hey, Archer didn't give up any runs through 4 so they should've let him start the 5th." A large part of winning games in MLB is avoiding blowup innings. It's why 3 run homers are so sought after. The Twins were looking at way more than just the hits and runs on the board after 4. They were tracking spin rates, velo, extension, time between pitches, strike %, and all sorts of things pitch to pitch during his starts. Seeing all those numbers decline as he works through the 3rd and 4th makes it pretty hard to put him back out there for the 5th as the lineup turns over and he's looking at the best hitters on the other team coming up next as his arm is clearly starting to wear out. Not saying they nailed their decisions every time, or even most of the time, but there's a lot more to these decisions than can be gleamed from looking back on old box scores.

Welcome to Twins Daily! I will note that many of us who speak on Bundy and Archer's short starts have done research and drawn our own conclusions on facts. Like the facts of Archer's performance in the 5th inning last year. He went into the 5th in 40% of his starts last year and had an ERA over 11 in the 5th. Gave up an OPS against over .850. He was terrible when they let him try to do it so they limited how often they let him do it.

Nothing too surprising even if some of it is disappointing. Ober is definitely one of their 13 most talented pitchers, but he's not stretched out, and a 6 man rotation to start the year doesn't seem ideal. Sands doesn't look at all like he's one of their 13 best pitchers, but it's not surprising that they weren't looking to DFA anyone before the season to get Hoffman, or anyone else, in the long man role. My guess would be that Sands is pitching for not only his 26-man spot in April, but his 40-man. Castro had a solid spring and is drastically more versatile than Garlick, who appeared to be his main competition for the 13th hitter spot. He seems like a pretty ideal fit in that role as he can play just about anywhere defensively, and can provide some speed off the bench. Julien has to be frustrated, but I get not wanting him sitting on the bench in Minneapolis over getting everyday PAs in St Paul. If there was a starting spot for him I think it'd be a different story. But Larnach in LF and Gordon at 2B mixed with Buxton at DH would push Julien to the bench, and that's not a great role for him big picture. So, it's not all as ideal as possible, but all makes sense.

FYI, Bundy signed a minor league deal with the Mets today.

I like Moran a lot. He could be either a late inning weapon, or a multi-inning weapon. Or both, I guess. But he's also the perfect example of relievers being hard to predict. If he's on, he's lights out. If he's not, he's a disaster waiting to happen. With that changeup he doesn't need pin point control. Get some early fastballs over for strikes and then let that change eat. A pitch like that should give him a chance for a really nice career. I'm excited to see how he does this year. Could make the pen really good if he's good Moran most of the time.

No coaching? If they put effort into fixing his swing? Cruz is the only one who cared about Sano? Ineffective leadership? Twins dropped the ball? What evidence do you have of any of this? The Twins are a professional baseball organization. They gave Sano tens of millions of dollars. You don't think they were willing to provide him any help he may have wanted? They just gave him millions of dollars and tossed him aside to figure it out on his own? Come on now. This isn't little league. The major league coaches don't take guys into the cages and force swing changes. Miguel Sano is a 29 year old man. He made his own choices about whether or not he wanted to "fix his swing." Carlos Correa is one of the 20 best baseball players on the planet and he was in the cage all last year working with Popkins to adjust his swing. But that's because he asked for it. If Sano wanted help from coaches on his swing, approach, physical conditioning, whatever they would've provided it. They gave him individualized plans for every offseason. They would've provided any help he wanted. And very well may have put in tons of work with him. If players don't improve the things we want them to it's because they either didn't want/seek help, or physically weren't capable of fixing it. There is no professional player that a team is simply not willing to help, or not putting effort in to help. I can't comprehend the idea that the Twins paid Sano over $30 million, but weren't willing, or trying to, help him perform.

I think they've actually debunked this. The newspaper never sponsored the event, or had any official tie to it. It was known as the "World's Championship Series" early on, and eventually shortened to "World Series" over the years. It really was named for the idea of being the baseball champions of the world.

I'd absolutely love that. I'd trade the Twins for an actual world league in a heartbeat.

I don't have nearly enough personal knowledge of pro athlete contract insurance to speak on it. I just know it's been reported by a bunch of people with way better connections than me that it's fully covered and the Mets won't lose a dime. Wouldn't put it past the insurance company to try not to pay, though. They're definitely good at that!

I'm not sure I follow the idea that MLB owners will be against the WBC in the future. They created it. It's an MLB product. The owners are making a ton of money off it. It's written into the CBA to ensure they continue making money on it. As the article noted, the Mets don't lose a dime from the Diaz injury because insurance covers his contract. Maybe they could lose some postseason revenue if they don't make it cuz of him, but if losing your closer really blows up your season your team probably wasn't that great to start. Plus the revenue Cohen got from the WBC probably makes up for a decent chunk of postseason revenue losses. Most of the owners are in this to make money. The WBC makes them money. Not sure why people think they'll be against it ever.

Simultaneously some of the best and worst RandBalls material yet. Feels way too real and makes me sad, but was also so well done. Kudos.

Totally fair. But you'd also expect a much better game on the field at the Twins game than the As game. It's all supply and demand. The Twins appear to be trying to spend money to make money by having a better product on the field. The As strategy is to spend as little as possible while making as much as possible through revenue sharing while not really investing in having a good product. I want to know what they have on Billy Beane to get him to stay with that organization all these years. But none of that is here nor there. I don't believe the Pohlads are losing money on the Twins overall. I would expect to pay more for good seats to a Twins game than I would to an As game. Prices are getting much higher than I'd like, but that's true of most things in life these days. The concessions are much more annoying to me than ticket prices.

I choose not to sit in the upper deck either, but that doesn't mean those tickets aren't available. Games are getting much more expensive and it's absolutely harder for a family to go to a game for a decent price. But we can't refuse to buy the cheap tickets and then claim the Twins payroll is too high because the tickets we do choose to buy are more expensive. There are $15 seats available. If money spent is your #1 decision making driver you can go to a Twins game for $5 more than you could go to an As game. Pointing at the payroll and saying it's driving significantly higher prices is ignoring the facts. Tickets to a Monday May game in Cleveland also start at $15. You can get a ticket to see the Guardians for the same price you get a ticket to see the Twins. Their payrolls aren't even close to each other. The narrative those other posters were pushing simply isn't true.

Payrolls aren't driving ticket prices. The Oakland As host the Diamondbacks Monday May 15th. Their available ticket prices for that game range from $10-$365. The Twins host the Giants Monday May 22nd. Their available ticket prices for that game range from $15-$116. The key numbers there being the 10 and 15. It costs $5 more for the cheapest ticket at Target field and the Twins payroll is $100 million more than the As.

Dang, I thought people were going to think I was high on the Royals!

Twins- 87 wins Guardians- 85 wins White Sox- 83 wins Royals- 72 wins Tigers 65 wins

Are you suggesting Mahle might be next for being "toast?" Feels awfully extreme.

He was also traded because Ober has topped 100 innings once in his professional career. The recent results show he's nowhere near throwing 80+ pitches in a start. I'd say that's at least a decent reason for why he doesn't break camp as the fifth, let alone fourth, starter. Ober has looked great in very short stints this spring. He's too talented for AAA. But we can't act like he's shown any ability to simply be plugged into a rotation and be counted on to provide consistent innings. We were all mad about the short starts last year wearing down the pen so I'm not sure why we'd want them to put a guy out there that we known can't go deep into a game yet. Ober as a piggyback on Maeda early? Now that's a different story. But handing Ober a spot in the rotation when you can't expect him to go more than 4 innings in a start early doesn't seem like a great option to me.

If it makes anyone feel better about a possible slow start, the Twins were the only team in the AL Central over .500 on April 30th and May 31st last year. Cleveland didn't get to .500 until June 8th last year. They won 8 out of 10 and briefly took over first at that time. So, yes, the games all count the same, but any talk of bad April and Mays ending a season is overstated. And don't forget the well documented Braves team in 2021 roaring back after a brutal April through July. They didn't reach .500 until August 5th. A good start is definitely better than a bad start. But bad starts can be overcome. Bad finishes can't be. Just ask the 2021 Mets or 2022 Twins.

I don't believe he's injured. But he was at the WBC so he wasn't with the team if you're questioning him not pitching for the Twins in a while.

This is provably false. He didn't manage that way with either Ryan or Gray last year. Didn't even do it with Paddack in his handful of starts. He did it with Bundy and Archer. Before injuries to Gray, and Covid wiping Ryan out, they were both going 6 or 7 innings regularly. The 3rd time through the order stuff was for bad pitchers. Unfortunately the Twins had way too many starts from bad pitchers last year. Rocco didn't take good, healthy pitchers out because they were coming around the order the 3rd time.

I wouldn't be surprised by Castro being their 13th hitter. His ability to play everywhere is something they'll love. And he's still young, with an option left. The option is important if they're expecting Kirilloff and/or Polanco back within 10-15 days of opening day. Garlick or White being added means they're fine possibly losing them in April. If you're ok losing a player in April he probably shouldn't be on your opening day roster. Hoffman probably comes down to their Ober decision. But is also tied to the position player situation somewhat. They only have 1 40-man spot open. I doubt they want to DFA anyone before the season after carrying them all offseason. But maybe. Maybe they are considering putting Celestino on the 60-day? It all gets a little more complicated if they're trying to add 2 of these guys. But if they decide to carry Ober in some role on the opening day roster there's no spot for Hoffman, or any other pitcher outside the 13 we've been expecting all offseason.