chpettit19

Who's the more talented player today? Rooker. Have you watched the games? It's not even about his numbers in spring, it's about the ABs he's had. Rooker looks comfortable and locked in. Kirilloff looks to still be trying to find his rhythm, timing, and swing. And that article is arguing against service time manipulation being the reason for keeping him down. Nobody on this thread seems to be arguing that. We're straight up arguing that at this point in time Rooker looks to be the player who will give you the better chance to win Major League baseball games in April. Kirilloff can stay in FL or go to St Paul and continue to fine tune his swing. When he's got it locked in make a move to get him to Minneapolis. Maybe that's by April 8th for the home opener (no manipulation), maybe it's June 8th after he's had a bunch of AAA ABs for the Saints. You're arguing he should be up because he's going to be a better player. Today he is not the better player. If you had to have 1 guy take an AB to win a game right now Kirilloff would not be the choice over Rooker. Maybe his swing clicks today and this is all moot cuz he rips up spring training for the next week. But he shouldn't be on the opening day roster if they all keep putting up the ABs they are for the next week and you're trying to win as many games as possible in April.

Him being a Boras client ruled out an extension when he was putting up MVP numbers. You're dramatically overestimating the team/player relationship stuff. Pro athletes have a different view on this stuff than we do. Now you can be the Rockies and just have no idea what you're doing and treat your best player awfully, but simply not having Kirilloff on the opening day roster with his track record and this spring's performance is not going to ruin that relationship. The players aren't in contact with the front office constantly. They let their agents deal with them and see them in passing here and there. It's not like the relationship they have with the manager.

Buxton insurance is always needed. Be interesting to see what they do with Broxton not being on the 40 man and him probably wanting to get a shot in the bigs on another team if he can.

Nope, I'm not. You responded to a post saying he hasn't produced above A+ by saying that person must have missed his time in AA. I pointed out that he has, in fact, not produced above A+. You're crossing your fingers and suggesting he should start because he's ranked highly on prospect boards in an attempt to counter other's arguments that he hasn't produced and earned that spot above other players who have done more at higher levels. None of us are arguing that he doesn't have a brighter future than Rooker, Garlic, et al. We're arguing he shouldn't be on the opening day roster after looking lost at the plate more ABs than not this spring, having missed an entire season (hitting against the same pitchers for a year in St Paul isn't the same as playing a season, sorry), and having a .756 OPS in AA simply because he's Alex Kirilloff and he's a top prospect. He has done nothing to earn it beyond dominating A ball 3 years ago.

Hanging onto him isn't a bad idea for some extra insurance, but him dominating minor league pitchers in spring training this year shouldn't make us forget he turns 31 in May and has a career .209 BA in the bigs. Short term Bux insurance if Celestino isn't ready, but if the season comes down to Broxton playing 100 games in CF I'm not excited.

He said hasn't produced above A+. Which is true. Unless you think a .756 OPS in AA is something demanding of a promotion to the majors.

Kris Bryant would absolutely sign with Chicago at the end of the year if they offer him the best deal. Not to mention comparing the 2 situations is pretty off base. Kris Bryant had an OPS over 1.000 at AAA the season before he had his service time manipulated, not a canceled season coming off a .756 OPS in AA. And Kris Bryant hit over .400 and lead spring training in homers the year they kept him down for 2 weeks. Bryant is the most outlandish example of service time manipulation you can come up with so comparing him to a guy who hasn't even dominated AA seems to be the wrong route to take. And after the Cubs screwing him over he'd still sign there. The problem is the Cubs don't want to pay him so him and Boras will hit the market and take the money from somewhere else.

The idea of it burning a bridge, creating animosity and distrust, and reflecting poorly to the public is way overblown. It's the same story people were spinning when they didn't call Buxton up in September a few years back and he's talking extension with the team now. It happens all over the game on any number of teams every year and players still sign extensions with those teams. If they treat him well over the next 7 years and give him a market value offer he isn't going to turn it down and go somewhere else because he had to sit in St Paul for 3 or 4 weeks to start this season after looking uncompetitive in most of his ST ABs. The players know it's a business and it is still a business in 6 or 7 years when they hit free agency and they will make their decision based on a whole lot of factors. Service time manipulation is bad for the game, but doesn't have the "I'm leaving no matter what cuz you disrespected me!" affect that many fans claim it does. Especially if there's a legit reason for it like Rooker and Garlic looking much more prepared to start this year successfully (not talking numbers, talking how they look at the plate and how they're hitting the ball).

In 2019 the Twins had 4 relievers throw at least 50 innings and only 2 others throw over 30 innings. That vaunted Royals WS winning bullpen in 2015 only had 6 guys throw more than 30 innings, and 4 guys throw 60+. Bullpen depth is important, and there will be important innings thrown by guys outside your top guys, but in general you can rely on using your top half (top 4 in 8 man pen) in the vast majority of your high leverage innings. The Royals had 13 guys throw at least 10 innings in 2015. The Twins had 17 throw at least 10 in 2019. Both teams only had 3 relievers with a Leverage Index over 1.5. So they basically used 3 guys for their high leverage innings, had a 4th for the middle ground (usually firemen in the middle innings with runners on, like Duffey) and a whole bunch of dudes who pitched basically league average innings. So, yes, depth is incredibly important and you will have some games where a lesser bullpen piece is in a spot you'd prefer him not to be, but you can actually use the top half of your pen to handle almost all of your close/high leverage innings.

I agree his durability has value. And, again, I'm not saying the Twins should pay Buxton that money, but his healthy seasons put Buxton right there with Springer outside Springer's age 29 season in 2019 when he had 6.4 WAR. Buxton was healthy for most of 17 and had 5.0 WAR at age 23 to Springer's 5.0 at age 27 that year. Buxton was healthy most of 20 and had 2.1 WAR at age 26 to Springer's 2.2 at age 30. I responded to a comment asking who would say no to a 5 year 75 mil extension for Buxton happening right now. Buxton would say no. And he'd say it very quickly. If I'm the Twins I don't give him Springer money. If I'm Buxton and/or his agent I'm asking for Springer money. He's going to hit free agency before he turns 30. When healthy he puts up numbers comparable to Springer. They have no reason to do an extension on the cheap right now. I think we agree that a Buxton extension right now is very complicated and there's a wide range in what you can argue his worth is. Because of that if I'm the Twins I'm not giving him an extension unless he's willing to take a pretty sizable discount from what his healthy stats have said he's worth since 2017. But Buxton and his team can absolutely say he's worth Springer money based on his healthy stats and playout his arb years unless they get something close to it.

I think an Arraez extension right now comes down to what the team Drs say about his knees. Are they a chronic problem? Will they just continue to get worse as he gets older and puts more wear and tear on them? If so I think you have to let him go year to year, unfortunately. I love Arraez. I think he's incredibly underrated. If he's a .320+ hitter with 30+ doubles and a .380 OBP he's a very useful player. He also seems to be a gamer, and the anti-Rosario in that he doesn't seem to make boneheaded plays that hurt the team. Which goes a long way for the Twins being able to actually win a playoff game by not shooting themselves in the foot. With defensive shifting these days you can hide lesser defenders if you have better fielders in most spots. I mean Mike Moustakas has been playing 2B for years now and he's not exactly a rangy guy. If the team Drs think his knees are good to go I think there's a lot to be said for having a guy like him locked in and knowing you have a positionally flexible player who will battle each and every pitch and put up consistently good numbers. If you're extending him to be your superstar for the next 7 years you'll be disappointed, but winning teams have scrappy, winning players. Arraez is a good piece to have on a winning team.

I didn't say I'd pay Buxton that money, but it's where his camp is going to start. Buxton had that 9.0 WAR in 386 games, Springer got his 20.8 in 615. That's the challenge of Buxton. He is putting up Springer's WAR on a per game basis and has the ability to be that impactful, but can't stay on the field. That's what the article broke down in the good and bad sections. His positives are huge, but his negative is he gets paid to sit in the trainer's room. The comment I replied to was questioning 5 years and 75 mil for Buxton. He has no reason to accept that deal right now and can't imagine his agent would let him. He has 2 more years before hitting free agency and if he puts together 1 complete year of elite defense with the batted ball data he had the last 2 years he's getting at least what Springer got when he hits free agency 2 years younger than Springer did. So I stick by his agent hanging up on the Twins if that's what they bring, but the Twins hanging up on his agent if he asks for Springer money now. That's the challenge of a Buxton extension right now.

Buxton. And probably very quickly. George Springer just got 6 150 and that has to be closer to the starting point of what Buxton is looking for.

I guess I assumed people knew talent wasn't spread evenly across the teams and I was using top 2 hitter as with 30 teams the 60 best hitters would make the 2 best hitters on every team since wRC+ is a stat that compares players against the league that creates an "average" point to compare the talent across the league as a whole. If you go with guys with at least 200 PAs (not even halfway to qualifying for a batting title, fyi) he was #3 in 2017, #2 in 2018, #9 in 2019, and #2 in 2020. We can pick all kind of points to change his standings as we want. But none of that changes the fact that he has been above average (not average like the comment I responded to suggested) 3 of the last 4 years (I'll count 103 as basically average). I said he wasn't anything to write home about, but to suggest Kirilloff has to just not "completely suck" to replace him is completely inaccurate. So I'll stick with expecting a rookie to come in and put up those numbers like it's nothing is a lofty expectation. Kirolloff has had a wonderful minor league career and looks like the real deal, but the post I replied to suggests its basically a foregone conclusion that Kirilloff can easily replace Eddie both offensively and defensively. That isn't an accurate assessment. He may be able to do it, and I wouldn't be overly surprised, but it shouldn't be assumed. Eddie was no MVP candidate, and I've even argued on these threads that he's overrated by many Twins fans, but he's also not easily replaced by Kirilloff just not "completely sucking."

Not sure where you're getting your stats, but Eddie's wRC+ over the last 4 years are 117,114,103, and 110. I mean I guess those are close to 100, but context needs to be used and 115 puts you in the top 60ish hitters in baseball. So top 2 best hitters on a team. He was 74th in the league in wRC+ last year at 110 (88 in 2019, 66 in 2018, 51 in 2017). Certainly nothing to write home about, but he's absolutely a heart of the order bat for a major league team and pretty clearly a top 75 hitter in baseball. Rookies absolutely step in and put up impressive numbers, and Kirilloff looks to have every chance to come up and put up some very good numbers, but to expect any rookie to step in and immediately be a top 75 hitter in baseball is a pretty lofty expectation.

It's been 16 ABs so lets not read too far into his quiet bat. But Broxton isn't on the 40 man so there's very little chance he makes the team.

It's certainly a good debate and wouldn't tell anyone they're crazy for picking Jeffers. I think Arraez has a legitimate chance of hitting .320+ for many years with his incredible ability to barrel balls (8th in baseball in 2019, 5th in 2020, for sweet spot % for hitters with at least 100 ABs) and his eye at the plate. If he were hitting .320 without the doubles it'd be one thing, but if he hits 35+ doubles a year I think you have to look at him differently. BA is definitely not the stat it used to be, but there's still something to be said for being able to hit .300. Game 7, bottom 9, tying run on 3rd would you rather have a Sano type low BA, high HR, high K guy or an Arraez high BA, low HR, low K guy? I'd trust Arraez there more than I'd trust Sano. Jeffers definitely has the edge on defense until robo-umps, no doubt. It'll be interesting to see how the league shifts in what they expect out of catchers once we get automated strike zones. I'd expect to see better hitters behind the plate at that point. But that's a different debate for a different day. No problem with you wanting Jeffers over Arraez. I think it's basically a toss up. I'm an Arraez believer and think he's an underrated part of this lineup. Lack of HR power reduces your margin for error as a player in this org, but if he's hitting doubles all over the park I think he's a very valuable player. Part of me would like to see him in Coors or Detroit with those huge outfields and see how close to .400 he could get. Just wish he could run a little better.

Arraez has a career OPS of .819 to Jeffers .791. OPS+ goes to Arraez 121 to 118. That's with more than 400 extra PAs to establish a more consistent baseline. No argument that Jeffers will hit more HR, but the narrative that Arraez is a slap singles hitter and brings a low OPS is incorrect. He will likely never be a huge HR threat or anything, but his 162 game pace for doubles is 38 (league leaders are typically low to mid 40s for the season). That is a more than respectable number while hitting .320+ and walking more than he strikes out. I don't know that I'd bet Arraez ends with a better career OPS than Jeffers, but I think it'll be pretty similar and as the robo-umps are introduced to the game Jeffers loses a lot of defensive value as pitch framing is no longer a thing. No problem with anyone preferring Jeffers over Arraez, but I think you undersell Arraez a little by suggesting its a foregone conclusion that Jeffers will beat him in OPS/OPS+.

I think a combination of set years of control from day of signing or drafting and additional spots of protection could be interesting. As the league streamlines the minor league systems maybe make the protection of the 40 man roster be a 52 man roster. That covers your ML and AAA team. So you have to be ready to have your best prospects in AAA after a set number of years after acquisition. 16-18 year old signees/draftees get 10 years total control, protected on 52 man after 5 years 19 or 20 year old signees/draftees get 8 years total control, protected on 52 man after 4 years 21+ year old signees/draftees get 7 years total control, protected on 52 man after 3 years So you're hitting free agency at 26-28 years old, but have to be protected and there's no reason not to have them in the bigs if they're ready since you're gaining no extra years of control, but able to do the up and down dance between the majors and minors at 21 to 24ish years old. Don't necessarily have to have your guys in AAA if they're on the 52 man roster, but felt like a good number as it covers 2 roster sizes. Years and roster size may need tweaking, but that's my general idea.

Who is easily moved back to SS with Arraez moving to second. So, yes, you can shuffle lineups when an injury happens. Like the Phillies would move Segura back to short if Gregorius goes down. But the Phillies can't replace Segura at 2B with someone with a legit chance to be in the running for a batting title. The Twins have a better ability to handle an injury to their starting SS than almost every team in MLB. It is unreasonable to expect them to be able to replace Simmons, Polanco, and Lewis with another MLB starting quality SS. No team has that ability. None. Not a single one. Why would any starting quality SS sign on to be the 4th (or 3rd if you don't count Lewis as being ready yet) SS in line in any organization?

Dodgers currently list Zach McKinstry as their 3rd string SS. Gavin Lux is no longer a SS if that was your thought. Yankees currently list Thairo Estrada as their 3rd string SS. They don't even want their 1st string SS playing SS if they could help it. Mets currently list Jonathan Villar as their 3rd string SS. They traded away their top 2 guys to get Lindor. Villar is a utility guy. Their 2nd string SS is Luis Guillorme. The Astros don't even list a backup let alone a 3rd string SS. The Blue Jays list Joe Panik as their 3rd string SS. The Red Sox list Yairo Munoz as their 3rd string SS. The Phillies list Scott Kingery as their 3rd string SS. CJ Chatham 4th. Those are the players you're considering "first-division" short stops? Cuz that's what was asked of you. There isn't anyone in there you'd want starting for a playoff team. If Simmons goes down for more than 15 days Polanco slides back to short and Arraez slides back in to every day 2B innings. I'm completely fine with that. Now if there's more injuries beyond that things get shaky. Is Gordon ready? Can Lin, Riddle, or Romine handle everyday duties for a month? I don't want to find out, but those guys aren't drastically worse than any other 3rd string SS. I think you drastically overestimate what other teams are capable of doing if their #1 SS goes down for more than a 15 day stint. There's very few teams that can replace them with a former all star and slide a batting title hopeful into the lineup everyday. Multiple SS injuries hurt any team a great deal. The Twins had a luxury many don't by having a near major league ready top SS prospect. I mean none of the teams you listed even have near MLB ready, big time SS prospects beyond Downs in Boston. Unless you think Martin is stepping in for the Blue Jays in his first professional season and helping them to the playoffs. Maybe you could've argued for the Rays if you think Brujan is able to play SS and he'd be 3rd behind Adames and Franco. Think that's your best argument here.

Every prospect is a bust possibility until they establish themselves in the bigs. No doubt. Just saying that his inability to stick at short shouldn't be a huge concern. The bigger concern is definitely whether or not he figures out how to be a consistent hitter. Him taking over CF for Buxton isn't a huge failure and I think it's pretty universally accepted that he could step in and be a plus defender in CF today. Twins are definitely short on SS prospects, though. So ideally he can stick there, but if he hits I don't think we need to be too concerned about him moving positions.

Alex Bregman was drafted #2 overall as a SS and moved to 3B. Should the Astros have traded him as a prospect? Brendan Rodgers was drafted #3 as a SS and the Rockies aren't convinced he can stay there. Gleyber Torres was signed as a SS and hasn't proven he can stick there (been much better as a 2B). Ozzie Albies was signed as a SS and had to move to 2B. Gavin Lux was drafted as a SS and had to move to 2B. Carter Kieboom was drafted as a SS and had to move to 3B. Trea Turner had to move to CF for a while as he figured out SS and still isn't great at SS now. Manny Machado was drafted as a SS and had to move to 3B. Even got a second shot at SS and moved back to 3B. Which one of those guys would you say their team should have traded as a prospect because they were drafted in the 1st round or signed for big money, but couldn't stick at SS? Brendan Rodgers is the only questionable one, but that's because he's struggled to hit at the ML level in a SSS. Otherwise I think you'd be happy with any of those "failed" SS.

A lot of mention of Kirilloff starting a playoff game proving he should be the opening day LFer. Seem to be completely ignoring the fact that there were multiple injuries on that team that lead to him getting the call. If Buxton were healthy Kirilloff never comes over from St Paul. If Rooker is healthy, and still hitting, Kirilloff never comes over from St Paul. People make it sound like Kirilloff got the start over a number of current players and thus the team thought he was better. He started over Cave so you can make that argument there, but he didn't start over Buxton, Rooker, or Arraez. Buxton doesn't matter in this conversation, but Rooker and Arraez do. Shoot, even Marwan would've started over him if Donaldson was healthy. As for the new CBA changing service time rules (I really hope it does), there is no way the league gives them a change in those rules but doesn't demand current players be grandfathered in. They aren't simply going to give up those cost controlled years. In fact, agents of big time prospects who are probably a year or 2 away are probably crossing their fingers they don't get called up this year so they aren't stuck in the old system. As fans we always want the best players we can get on our team for every game every year. As players and coaches they are always looking to win as many games as possible every year, but even Rocco looks to the future somewhat by giving guys as much rest as he does. But as FO personnel they need to keep an eye on the future. If you think a prospect is a utility guy/backup you call them up when you need them with no concern to service time. If you think they're a league average everyday guy you call them up without much concern to service time. If you think they're a top 100 MLB player with superstar upside that can hit in the heart of a championship order you have to be concerned with service time. Even the Dodgers and Yankees play these games. It's annoying, and as fans we shouldn't like it. But it's smart and the way good teams run their organizations.

Would be interesting to see what taking corner OF out of the data set requirements does. There's already talk of him taking over at 1B for Sano, let alone his being able to DH as he ages. Would also be interesting to see the number of players who fit the criteria before their age 29 season. What's the drop off? Are there fifty 28 year old lefty hitting corner OFers OPS+ing 115+ and it drops to a handful at 29, or is it going from 10 guys to 4? And how much is the drop in their OPS+? Are the 28 year olds who fall to under 115 OPS+ at 29 typically 117 OPS+ players who drop to 114, or are we talking guys going from 140 to 100? Lots of questions need to be looked at in that data set. I want the best players on the field for the Twins as often as possible, but it would be irresponsible team building to not sacrifice a few weeks this year for his entire age 29 season. Even if he's declining then, as you seem to suggest he will be, you still ensure he spends his entire prime with the team and let him walk once you suggest he is simply league average-ish, or worse. MMMordabito also brought up the fact of Boras being his agent. There is no extending Boras clients before they reach free agency. So, unless you think he'll change his representation before he hits free agency, thinking Boras will suddenly do something he has refused to do with any of his other clients seems like bad team management as well. The Tatis comparison just doesn't hold up there. So, while I agree it'd be ideal to have him up on opening day if he's the best player available, none of the arguments made here sway me on sacrificing his age 29 season for 18 days, or whatever it is, of his 2021 season.