chpettit19

From Merriam-Webster: Terry Francona found Bauer could be a problem in the clubhouse. As in, in the past he figured out that Bauer was a problem in the clubhouse. From Cambridge Dictionary: When Bauer was younger he could disrupt a clubhouse. As in, in the past he disrupted a clubhouse. Want me to keep going? There's more dictionaries out there that will show the exact same thing. Francona was speaking after Bauer had been traded and was referring to what he'd already done. He could no longer disrupt the Cleveland clubhouse because he was no longer in it because they found he COULD disrupt it when he DID disrupt it so they traded him for being a problem in the clubhouse. And with the trainers. And with reporters. And with the coaching staff.

Hey now. Let's be fair. It was Francona that pulled him, not Roberts. Give credit to Bauer for being willing to show up maybe the best manager in baseball for the last 20 years.

We clearly just disagree. And I couldn't disagree more. And, again, it's not even about Bauer. The MLBPA throw absolutely everything they have at every appeal. And Bauer had his own lawyers and representatives involved. The idea that the ruling by the arbitrator was simply because of PR is wrong. There's far more to it than that. And Bauer would be suing MLB and the MLBPA if he felt this wasn't neutral. His lawyers would have a whole stack of evidence that'd blow MLB up if what you're suggesting were true.

Yes, "Is Bauer Worth It?" based on what he brings to the table as a person. And then it goes on to list a whole bunch of reasons why we should have no thought that he's going to change who he is, and how he acts, since he hasn't done it in 15 years in the spotlight. You're misunderstanding the use of the word "could" in that sentence. He wasn't using "could" in the "it's possible" sense, but instead in the "past tense of can" sense. They didn't trade him because they thought it might be possible at some hypothetical future time he might be a problem. They traded him because he already was a problem. "Many Dodgers wanted him back?" How many is many? Clearly not enough that the FO cared since they DFA'd him. If the leaders of the Dodgers clubhouse were clamoring for him to be back you don't think he'd be back? The top of the Dodgers organization flew to Phoenix at the end of last week and met with Bauer to give him a shot to show he deserved a 2nd chance. He clearly didn't impress them since he's no longer a part of their organization. Actually, all the reports coming out of that meeting is that Bauer showed no remorse, didn't apologize for anything, and made no attempt to show he was willing to change in anyway. Or, as you questioned in your first post, he showed no signs that the Dodgers would have any ability to get him to "tone it down." If the Dodgers and their top end franchise couldn't "convince him that it'd be in his own best interest to tone it down" why would we think the Twins could? Edited to add: There's also reports that the Dodgers tried to trade him while eating his contract, but no teams would make that move.

I understand what you're trying to cover here. And I'm saying you're so far off about the MLBPA that it's hard to fathom. The MLBPA has fought for plenty of players who have had just as poor public situations as Bauer. And, if they thought he wasn't treated fairly by the system in place, they would've fought for Bauer. The idea that MLB would suspend him for more games than they felt necessary for PR reasons is totally accurate. But the idea that the MLBPA cares at all about that is wholly, and truly incorrect. Even if you think they don't like Bauer and wouldn't want to fight for him, they care about themselves, and won't give MLB an inch, let alone the mile they got here. Even if the MLBPA wouldn't care if they'd banned Bauer for life, they'd still care about the precedent being set and what it means in their ability to take action in the future. It's not really even about Bauer. The MLBPA won't ever let something go through the neutral arbitration process that they don't feel was neutral. Never. No matter who the player is, or what the public feels about them. Because if they let it happen once they're doomed. The MLBPA felt this arbitrator is neutral, and made a neutral decision based on the testimony they witnessed.

Man, if the MLBPA can't even get a truly neutral arbitrator who isn't afraid of backlash so will rule as they see fit, and not just do what the league wants, they're in trouble. Especially since, in this case, the arbitrator would've just been giving Bauer some money since they couldn't take back the 194 games he already sat out. Definitely didn't need to take away a bunch of his 2023 money to make up for the pay he received before he was officially suspended. If you think the MLBPA doesn't fight tooth and nail for their players, and would hesitate to help Bauer if they felt this ruling wasn't truly neutral, I can't help you. Either the MLBPA doesn't support Bauer either (which would be an indictment of him in and of itself), or they felt this ruling was neutral, and the arbitrator himself is neutral. They love taking every opportunity they get to go after the league when they think they're overstepping. Allowing a player to be suspended for over 162 games, and set that precedent, isn't something the MLBPA would take lightly.

I don't know that it hurt anyone's feelings. And I don't see it's connection to bat flips, or even bashing water coolers. He showed up his manager in the middle of the field. I chuckled when he did it, but it's very different to show up your manager on the pitcher's mound than it is to be upset with yourself for performing poorly and smashing a water cooler after you get pulled. There's a reason he's left behind a legacy of not being liked in every clubhouse he's ever been in. Bauer even seemed to agree since he was actually willing to apologize for that throw. Apologized to his whole team after that one.

I think the point of this article is that Bauer won't tone it down. He's never toned it down. He's never showed any sign of even considering toning it down. If him toning it down needs to happen for you, or any fan, or the FO, or ownership, to be comfortable bringing him in then he's not an option. He's been disliked by a large chunk of his clubhouse going back to his time at UCLA. That's over a decade of not toning it down. He's still on social media acting like a jackass. There's no evidence he's ever provided during his 15 years in the public view that suggests he'd ever even consider toning it down. This is who he is.

Who are you referring to? Cuz it can't be the Twins FO. Neither of their leaders went to ivy league schools. Falvey went to Trinity College (that's in the New England Small College Athletic Conference). And Levine went to Haverford College (that's a lovely DIII school in the Centennial Conference). As of 2020, almost half of the league's top baseball execs were ivy leaguers, though. Maybe the problem is the Twins didn't hire ivy leaguers who follow analytics like they're playing stratomatic in their basement. You know, guys like Theo Epstein (he went to Yale and is widely considered one of the best GMs/Baseball presidents of the last 2 decades where he implemented a ton of analytics in his departments which lead to multiple World Series titles).

He's been "under the gun" for years, and hasn't changed 1 bit. He is who he is, and openly rejects the idea that he needs to change in any way, shape, or form. He wasn't liked on his college team, and wore out his welcome on numerous professional teams. Including the team that is now paying him tens of millions of dollars to go away because his teammates didn't want him back. If the Dodger's players don't want him in their clubhouse, why would another team think their players will? He got off twitter for about a month after the most recent incident became public, but he's been back on there acting like his same old self for quite a while now. He will never be a "good/quiet teammate." It's just not who he is. So if that's something you think the team should be willing to "cut bait quickly" over then the team just shouldn't bring him in at all.

That sounds about right!

I haven't bashed them for letting him get away, but have bashed them for not knowing 285 wasn't enough to get him and missing on other guys while waiting for a deal they should know wasn't good enough. Them blindly, yes, blindly, falling into a 2nd Correa deal wouldn't change my mind on that, and I'd absolutely not change my tune on the offseason to this point or apologize. If he ends up here, it's not because the Twins were so smart to know that the Giants and Mets would both pass on deals significantly better than theirs. They simply would've lucked into it and that's not worthy of praise.

I'd also very much like a deal along these lines. I'd be willing to do the 10/285 if he were willing to put in language about the ankle in there that takes the Twins off the hook if it explodes in 4 years, or whatever, but I'd much prefer something along the lines of what you're suggesting.

That's one heck of an assumption. You don't think players have money managers, or agents, smart enough to point out the difference in cost of living or taxes between NY and Minneapolis? You don't think the MLBPA is smart enough to figure out that the taxes are different in different states and provide their members with information on how that all works? I'd be willing to bet a whole lot of money that Carlos Correa is well aware of what amount of money he'd actually see from the 12/315 and 10/285 offers based on taxes, cost of living, agent fees, union fees, etc. I bet he's also well aware of how much more he can make in NY on promotional deals outside of his contract. Most players absolutely do look at those things, and pay a whole team of people to make sure they are making the decision they want to make.

Welcome to Twins Daily!

Would I replace Pagan with Reyes? 100%. If I'm remembering correctly, Reyes missed all of last year with a shoulder problem, and isn't expected to be ready by opening day. May or June return time I think. Since I'd cut Pagan today without thinking twice I'd certainly take a chance on a guy with his kind of upside on a cheap deal and put him on the 60-day to start the season and see what he can do in building himself up for the first 2 months of the season. Duran and Reyes throwing fireballs at the end of games would be quite nice. That being said, I'd rather sign someone like Fulmer who has a higher chance of success, and is available to start the year. I'd replace Pagan with Fulmer immediately (and I'm annoyed it hasn't happened yet). "Perfect" scenario for pen arms? Get rid of Pagan. Sign Fulmer. Sign Reyes when you put Canterino on the 60-day, and then put Reyes on the 60-day and see if there's someone else you can sign late as well.

The international signing period starts in just over a week. Already reports that they have deals in place for 2 guys, and with over $6 million to spend they'll certainly sign more than 2. There's your "few low level lottery tickets," and they didn't even have to trade anyone!

I mean I'm willing to trade anyone if the price is right. Is the trade for a young, proven front end starter, or up the middle star, with at least 4 years of control? Sure. Is it for someone they'd need to extend in the next year or two and we know they won't pay market rate so wouldn't extend them? No. I also don't see them as all that redundant. Lee has the hands and arm to be a spare SS (I think he lacks the range to be an ideal everyday guy) until he gets to his late 20s, and I like the idea of having that extra insurance. Miranda can play both corners. And I don't see them going with a fulltime DH anytime in the near future so that gives them another spot to rotate through. I think they both have a really high likelihood of being .280 and 20 HRs type hitters and I want as many of those guys in the lineup as I can get. I don't see much of any redundancies on the infield for the Twins. And, honestly, don't really see it in the OF either. I think Kepler and Polanco are on their last legs, and Kepler may not even be on the roster come March. Gallo is a 1 year guy. Buxton is the only veteran locked up long-term. Don't trust Arraez's knees and he's a no power 1B/DH against righties only (I hate typing that cuz he's my favorite current Twin). Larnach, Kirilloff, Miranda, Lewis, Lee, Julien, Gordon, Buxton, Jeffers, Arraez, Vazquez, Wallner are 12 guys I see being here even in 2024. Maybe Polanco is the 13th position player for that year. Celestino is a AAAA guy to me. Hopefully Martin keeps the momentum from the AFL going and then he'd be the 13th guy. Or, more likely, at least 1 of those 12 doesn't succeed as we hope, and maybe Martin replaces them. Or we know there's always a need for a 14th guy to be ready in AAA cuz of Buxton's health. We can hope Rodriguez flies through the system, but I'm not betting on that (and he's an OFer so not blocked by Miranda or Lee in your question). There's always other guys who pop up seemingly out of nowhere (Steer and Julien types), but I'm not betting on that either. The rest of their prospects are either not even in the system yet (#5 pick this year) or years away (Miller, Urbina, etc.). I don't see any trades that really take this team to the next level. It's either morgaging the future with Lee, Lewis, Miranda types, or not bringing back top end talent for Kepler, Arraez, or Polanco types. It's why I'm so frustrated that they sat out free agency waiting on Correa. They have a solid floor built between veterans and the current prospect wave. What they needed was some high end talent added to supplement them. At this point I think they are who they are. And either the new prospect wave stays healthy and produces or they fail and it's time to blow it up and plan for the next wave in 3 years (and if that's the case I hope its a new FO doing the rebuild). All my thoughts on these position players is echoed for the pitchers. The current wave is here and they passed on all the top end pitchers. Bring in a Fulmer type, but otherwise it's time to sink or swim with the kids. They don't have enough depth to send a bunch away for an arm, and they don't have the big ticket prospects to get a truly front of the rotation arm anyways. Through a lot of their own doing, and some bad luck with health, they're in a spot without many options. Bad year for them to cut payroll, but here we are.

Agree Varland and SWR are the most likely starters, although it looks like Ted went with guys who hadn't debuted yet, and not just guys with rookie eligibility. Not sure why Martin, who's not on the 40-man, would be more likely than Julien, who is on the 40-man, to debut. Only versatility he provides beyond Julien is OF, but there's already 9 outfielders on the 40-man so I wouldn't expect him to get a shot over any of them. Lee is in AA already. He does anything like he did at the end of the year last year for the first 3 months of this season and there's no reason he couldn't, or shouldn't, debut halfway through 2023.

So your stance is to trade them now because they aren't good enough to get a qualifying offer, but you think another team would be willing to give up something of worth for them? Kind of seems a bit contradictory. You don't think either of them are as good, or better, than Eovaldi or Perez? Or Tyler Anderson? Don't think Sonny Gray's numbers compare to Chris Bassitt's? I'd argue (and pretty easily) that they're every bit as "elite" as those 4 guys who all received QOs after last season. I'd go compare those 4 pitchers to the guys you "never wasted a second thinking about" because they wouldn't be worth it.

I was a little surprised that Tigers were able to get him through outrights and sign him to that minor league deal. Expected him to be one of those guys who gets bounced around to half a dozen teams until there's finally nobody left to claim him. Probably had to do with the timing of Rule V roster decisions. I hope he's successful there. Seems like a good kid and gamer. Not sure he had a lot of use left with the Twins, though.

Got ya. Misread what you were getting at. Not the first time and won't be the last for me doing that. My criteria for what is and what isn't acceptable this year is a little different than yours, but I certainly don't blame anyone for demanding a playoff win out of these guys. It's definitely time to start seeing some real success around these parts.

One shift idea I've seen thrown around is teams being willing to risk putting their LFer somewhere on the right side of the OF against guys like Gallo. That would be one bold move. Would continue to make it very hard for him to pull the ball for singles, but risk him getting lots of bases if he is able to hit one into LF. I'd like to see some team try this and see the adventure of 3B, SS, CF all racing into LF to try to get to the ball before the hitter scores.

I think the idea that he could be signed for $8 million a year shoots down the idea that he's worth investing in over the guys they already have on staff. 42 year old Rich Hill just got $8 million. Corey Kluber got 10. If he's struggling to even get 8 it shows that the league doesn't think his 2022 performance is at all sustainable and he's likely the below replacement level player he'd been for years before that. He got 3 in 2020, 3 in 2021, and 7 in 2022. If he can't get to 8 after a career year he's not worth it.

FYI, they're both eligible for qualifying offers and the Twins would almost certainly extend one to each of them. In which case the Twins would be in line to receive picks immediately following the 1st round in the 2024 draft depending on a few things. So they would still be getting something for losing those 2. Picks in the top 35 of the draft are pretty valuable.