chpettit19

I think it's more likely Sabato is DHing in 2024 than the Twins extending Sano. Don't see any reason to think he'll ever get his Ks under control and, even with the mammoth HRs, he won't be worth the price of extending him over paying Sabato, or Larnach/Rooker/Kiriloff/rotating DH, league minimum at the time. Think we'll see someone other than Donaldson at 3B by then, too. Cavaco maybe ready to make his debut at some point in 2024? Probably more likely that Polanco is seeing time there with Lewis at SS (think the Twins are determined to keep him there if it's at all possible as they have way more OF youngsters at this time). If I'm right about Sano and Lewis I think there's a chance Buxton is still roaming CF in 2024 as I think they'd prefer to extend him over Sano if Buxton shows any ability at all to stay healthy and play 130+ games a year. Jeffers, Kiriloff, Arraez, Larnach, Lewis, and Kepler all feel like guys the Twins have no interest in moving and will be the core of the lineup come 2024 with the rest being questionable to still be around and the team being more open to trading or replacing by 2024. I think they want Polanco to be first half of 2019 Polanco and lock him into a spot in the lineup, but just not sure they trust that to happen or that he'll be able to hold down any defensive spot by then. And don't think they'll want to pay the prices for Donaldson or Sano and Buxton is just a total wild card.

Does Semien demand a 2 year deal to avoid the avalanche of FA superstar SS next year? Does he take a discount to get that second year? He's an interesting player as he is the definition of a 1 year wonder, but that 1 year was incredible. I'd personally prefer Simmons as I trust his glove and contact bat over Semien ever reproducing his 2019 numbers, but for the right price I'd take a shot at Semien being a slight upgrade at SS and Polanco being a huge upgrade at utility IF over Marwan or Ehire. But like everything else about the Twins, it comes down to the $.

Yeah, not sure why them having been non-tendered separates them from other free agents. I'd love Archie Bradley and David Dahl. Dahl has 3 years of control left. If you think giving him extra rest can keep him on the field he's absolutely worth going after. Obviously the price has to be right for any free agent, but a blanket statement of not signing non-tendered players doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Carlos Rodon is an interesting piece to add as another lefty in the bullpen if they think a move to the pen and a tweak or 2 can keep him healthy and performing to expectations. Maikel Franco is intriguing as insurance for the oft injured Sano and Donaldson corner IF duo. Kyle Schwarber is worth talking to with the ceiling he has with the bat. Eddie Rosario at a reduced rate is something I think almost every team would be interested in. As far as non-tendered (or FAs in general) hitters go, I think a lot of that comes down to Cruz. If you're bringing him back you don't have the same flexibility to get guys ABs by cycling through the DH spot. If he's not retained signing one of the FA bats as insurance against the early struggles you'd predict for the kids makes a ton of sense. There weren't any great utility guys non-tendered so probably looking at other FAs or trades there. But overall there's no reason not to go after non-tenders the same way you'd go after any other FA. In fact, it may make more sense to go after the right ones who have more years of team control left and can be gotten on the cheap now.

Schwarber is not even close to the K machine Sano is. Not advocating to sign him, but to me it's more about him being LH than about the Ks. SO%: Career: Sano- 37% Schwarber- 28% Best Season: Sano- 35.5% Schwarber- 25.6% Worst Season: Sano- 43.9% Schwarber- 30.9% Schwarber may not be the best fit for the roster (LH hitting corner OF is something we have plenty of), but he is not a strikeout machine.

Well not having to cover player salaries would be a boost to the bottom line I'd think. The Twins can help cover the 20 mil, and I'm sure that's a large part of any negotiations happening. A bad AAA team is still better baseball than any team the Saints have ever run out there. People go now without it being a Twins affiliate and with it being less skilled baseball. I'd think there's a reason teams pay the 20 mil to become affiliated. If being independent like the Saints is the better move why would any team sign on to be affiliated? I can name you 2 dozen minor league affiliates and own merchandise from a half dozen. None of which are Twins affiliates. Being linked to MLB gives you further reach and I'd assume increases merchandise and ad revenue. Not crazy drastically, and maybe not even enough to take on the risk of the Twins kicking you to the curb in 5 years, but I don't think there's any question that not having to pay your players and adding even a little merchandise and ad revenue would be good for any team's bottom line. Just don't get why any team would sign up for it if it's a worse business decision than being independent.

They should certainly be worried about MLB and what moves they may make to control things, but why do you feel $20 mil is too much? I'd assume there's a path to significant revenue increases by being affiliated and having a more national brand while playing in front of larger road crowds and getting Twins fans who don't currently care about the Saints more interested.

I would be shocked if the Mets aren't a major player this winter. They have the bones of a solid team and the new owner will want to make a statement by surrounding those guys with a few splash signings. I'm not predicting the Twins will follow this strategy, but it is one the front office should present to the Pohlads and see if they can sneak a few extra dollars out of them for a big swing this season. The Reds would be another team who desperately wants to be a threat in the playoffs and could look at bringing in a few 1 year guys. The Twins have a playoff caliber core and need to win a playoff game soon. Even the Pohlads understand that. They could definitely lean on the local government and get some assurances that there will be fans in the stands in 2021. If they know they'll have 50% capacity allowed they have to assume they'll fill that capacity every game as fans crave the chance to get back out to games and back to "normal." I'm not suggesting they go out and spend 200 mil on payroll, but if there's ever a year worth taking a risk this is it. They have young players almost ready or ready for the show that they believe in but don't want to rely on completely. They need bridge veterans on 1 year deals to provide insurance and allow for some growing pains. With the market depressed things are lining up perfectly to snag some guys they normally couldn't get on 1 year deals. Nothing in their history suggests the Twins will take a financial risk, but if there was ever a year to do it this is it and I hope Falvine is pushing for something like this.

This offseason has the potential to be the most unique of our lifetime. CBA coming to an end after the 2021 season and the unknown of a pandemic. Can't imagine we'll ever see this kind of combination of variables ever again. Teams willing to keep their payrolls close to what they would've been in a normal year and risk taking losses financially next year have huge advantages. Mid-market teams like the Twins could build big-market rosters for 2021 if they are willing to take the risk on attendance numbers. Meeting with local government and getting a feel for the attendance rules you may be facing in 2021 is vital. With no in-person games last year teams have to expect a jump in typical attendance if fans are allowed back with no numbers restrictions in 2021. If the Twins have inside info and feel comfortable with the fact that fans will be back in 2021 (I'd guess there'll be some number of fans as I just don't see our society being willing to follow lockdowns for an entire year beyond what they have) I think $125 mil for a budget is not only reasonable, but perhaps even low. If the Twins see this as a chance to take advantage of a crazy situation and go after guys who'd typically be out of their price range on 1 year deals as players hope the market gets back to normal after 2021 they could make some drastic improvements. There are going to be plenty of teams who cut payroll pretty aggressively and the Twins are in position to take advantage. Easy for me to say since it isn't my money, but loading up on 1 year deals for players who were hoping for massive long term deals would be my strategy going in. Cruz, Ozuna, Bauer, Kluber, Morton, Archer, LeMahieu, Hernandez, Wong, Didi, Turner, Brantley, Pederson, Springer, Tanaka, Stroman, Odo, Walker, Lester, Hendriks, Colome, Hand, Alvarez, etc. There's a bunch of guys out there and they won't all get the long(ish) term deals they were expecting going into 2020. Some because of the financial "struggles" of the league in 2020 and some because of down years. I'd let them all know we'll pay normal market rate on a 1 year deal and see what combination of guys I can bring in to fill out my roster.

Not even necessarily that we think we'll see it, just that we can't be too confident we won't. I'm with you on him looking like he knew what he was doing and looked very comfortable. The real test for him (and Rooker) will be this season as they see what major league pitchers can do to holes in your swing and how hard life can get. I think they'll both come in prepared and put in the work, but wouldn't want to rely on them for repeats of their above expectation debuts. Think the Twins will find a nice balance of low cost veterans and reliance on young guys this year. Hopefully all the youngsters make the low cost veterans expendable, but we'll see.

With the 26th roster spot it's a little more tenable to carry 3 catchers and would make previous year's data on teams carrying 3 catchers not all that relevant. It makes most sense for teams with 2 primary catchers who have relatively significant platoon splits. If you have a righty and a lefty you can then pinch hit late in games to give you the platoon advantage and still have a catcher on the bench in case of injury replacement late. It is still challenging to get that 3rd guy regular ABs, though, even with the extra roster spot. Think it is a team to team situation depending on the skill set makeup, and strategy, of your roster. Useful for sub-happy teams like the Twins. Less useful for "here's my 9 best" teams who use bench guys as more strict backups.

His 62 plate appearances is what makes us think he needs "grooming time." He did quite well in his first taste of the bigs, no doubt. Above and beyond expectations for sure. To expect him to do that for 120+ games now that the league has tape on him would be poor team management. Going into next year with him and Garver you have to feel pretty good about the catcher position, but Jeffers is not a finished product and shouldn't be viewed as guaranteed .270 and 15-20 bombs. The league is going to adjust to him and this year will be the toughest he's ever had as a ball player as he gets to test his ability to adjust to the adjustments. A close to even split between Garver and Jeffers is a real good place to start with a 2021 plan. A little insurance behind them is a great addition to the plan.

It's not just you, I see a lot of talk on these boards about letting Cruz walk. If your argument is that you think he's done that's one thing, but if your expectation is that his production can be easily replaced I just don't get it. He was 4th in WRC+ in 2019 and 8th in 2020. In all of baseball. In his pre-Twins time he was 20th in 2018, 10th in 2017, and 10th in 2016. In. All. Of. Baseball. He's been the 4th best hitter in all of baseball since 2016. Where do people think they're getting the production to replace that? I know the league is full of youngsters putting on a show and it's fun to dream on the 3 top guys we have ready, or near ready, for the show. But to expect them to replace the 4th best hitter in baseball is a real bold strategy. Nelson Cruz has a WRC+ of 148 from 2016-2020 (148,146,133,163,164 individual years) There have been 12 rookies to beat 148 WRC+ Since 2016: Ke'Bryan Hayes 2020- 24 games- 195 WRC+ Yordan Alvarez 2019- 87 games- 178 WRC+ Randy Arozarena 2020- 23 games- 176 WRC+ Aaron Judge 2017- 155 games- 174 WRC+ Gary Sanchez 2016- 53 games- 170 WRC+ Matt Olson 2017- 59 games- 164 WRC+ Rhys Hoskins 2017- 50 games- 158 WRC+ Ryan O'Hearn 2018- 44 games- 153 WRC+ Bobby Dalbec 2020- 23 games- 152 WRC+ Shohei Ohtani 2018- 114 games- 151 WRC+ Willi Castro 2020- 36 games- 151 WRC+ Fernando Tatis Jr 2019- 84 games- 150 WRC+ That's 12 players in 5 years. So basically 2 guys a year come up and hit the way Cruz does. Many of which (8) played fewer than 60 games in that season. If they think his slump at the end of the year was a sign of him declining then you move on, but if it was his nagging hip injury and he's going to be close to his usual self next year there is no logical argument to be made that his bat is easily replaced. Now that doesn't mean you write him a blank check, or that one of the rookies doesn't come up and go nuts and put up crazy numbers. But it does mean they need to look very closely at bringing him back for a reasonable price and letting the young guys prove they can at least come close to replacing the boomstick.

I think the next 2 years will tell us if this FO is making strides on the pitching development side of things. All of the Cleveland big name draft and develop pitchers were developed while Falvey was there running their pitching development program. The Twins are at the point where guys he's had a say in developing are reaching the majors. I don't particularly care how, or when, a prospect got into the Twins' system. I just care about how they develop them and whether or not they can turn them into legitimate major league arms. If Balazovic, Duran, Enlow, Canterino, Colina, Sands, Chalmers, Vallimont, Winder, etc. start showing up in varying roles and succeeding to varying degrees (hopefully a couple succeed at top levels) I will feel comfortable that the FO is recognizing, acquiring, and developing pitching talent. If they all show up and flop or don't show up at all I will be quite concerned. Falvine has had 3 years to set up their pitching program and now is when we need to start seeing the results. The arrivals in 2021 and 2022 (lost minor league season gives them a little extra time in my mind, otherwise 2021 was the year I was looking at for real results) will be the real test.

The interesting part of this is that the Twins would also tell you sacrificing an out at any time, on purpose, is not a way to win games. No out is measly when you're hitting. Big innings is the best way to win games. So on a very basic level it is a bit of a contradiction. That's where it really shows how detailed the Twins, Dodgers, Astros, Rays, etc. are in trying to get any fractional advantage in run scoring and run prevention. The difference is the "guaranteed" run scoring to get an out vs improving your chances to score a run by sacrificing an out on offense. The idea of "guaranteed runs" is also why HRs are the most desirable offensive result. On the surface that seems super obvious (and it is), but there are dozens and dozens of comments on this site of Twins fans being real upset with the perceived "HR or Bust!" approach of the lineup. They've completely failed to be successful in the postseason with that approach and it's lead fans to become frustrated and claim the approach has to change. But the teams winning in the playoffs have the same approach. HRs are guaranteed runs. They're not an improved chance at a run (like base hits, doubles, bunting, stealing, sacrificing, etc.), they are runs. The analytics era has changed the game and I'm in the boat that feels the game isn't quite the same, and, frankly, not quite as enjoyable to watch, with all the Ks and shifting (I've worked in baseball analytics and acknowledge my hypocrisy in adding to the changes to the game while saying they've made it slightly less enjoyable to watch). Teams are looking for even the slightest advantage in saving runs and scoring runs. The casual fan's brain would explode if they got a peak behind the curtain at the incredible amount of information these teams are collecting and algorithms they are running. Rocco catches a lot of heat for his in game "decisions," and rightfully so. He makes a lot of money to take the heat. Many of those "decisions" were made pre-game by spreadsheets and I think the Twins need to better balance pre-game and in-game decision making, but they are all made in an effort to sneak out miniscule percentage points of advantage over opponents. The most glaringly obvious spreadsheet data points are guaranteed runs and outs. HRs are guaranteed. The rest can just get close. That's when the algorithms really kick in (runner speed, arm strength of fielders, K rate of hitter, K rate of pitcher, speed of hitter, etc. etc. etc.) and baseball becomes more about the 4400ish outs you get, or need to get, during a season and not about the 1 you're worried about in the moment. Fans are worried about that 1 play in that 1 game. FO are worried about all the games of all the seasons. They know they're not going to get all the 1 play in 1 game situations right, but if they can get more right than they get wrong they're that much closer to winning.

Will be interesting to see how free agency goes this year. This could be one of those times that the big market teams have a crazy advantage over the smaller markets. The Dodgers just signed Mookie to a gigantic contract in the middle of this season and the Mets sold for 2.3ish billion. The MLBPA will not go quietly if all the teams try to depress salaries, but the "cheaper" teams, with owners who care about nothing but the bottom line, may not be taking big swings in free agency after a down year in profit. Teams willing to spend close to normal may have an advantage in snagging FA this winter. Another question is going to be the location of teams and what their local governments are doing for limiting fans. I believe Florida is already open and allowing teams to pack stadiums to full capacity right now and the teams there could go into the offseason much more comfortable with their chances of having normal attendance next year. Although that doesn't mean much for the Marlins or Rays, but the difference between being in FL and MN could be important for FO making guesses on attendance numbers for 2021. As for the Twins and their budget, I'd guess they aren't going to be increasing it at all, but I think they see that their window is open and its more likely they'll be in the 125-130 area than the 95-100 area. Hitters: I think they try to bring Cruz back on another 1+option year deal and I think the chances are pretty good he takes that. 12ish mil for him next year and 10 mil option. I think they let one of Marwan or Ehire walk and bring back whichever of them is cheapest. I think they non-tender Rosario. I think they want to leave the door cracked for a handful of prospects, but don't want to rely on them from game 1, or start service clocks (hopefully new CBA fixes that nonsense) They're running into a 40 man crunch and need to start making some tough decisions on players like Nick Gordon. That will play a role in Rosario (along with his $) and at least 1 utility guy leaving. Need to start clearing 40 man spots for young guys, but will likely bring in Vargas types to start the year. Easily DFAed for the young guys once the extra year is locked in and they're ready. Pitchers: I don't see them changing their "strength in numbers" approach to the bullpen in that they'll bring in a number of cheap fliers they think have a chance to be good. Bullpen arms are so hit or miss I think their plan will always be to have a number of cheap options and ride the ones who are good that year wile avoiding Kimbrel type deals. I think they reach out to Bauer, but just don't see them being able to convince him they won't pull him after the second time through the order so he won't come here. They'll explore trade options similar to the Odo and Maeda deals and kick the tires on short term starter deals like the last few years. Overall they're at the point where they need to balance their ability to stay competitive with more known quantity, cheap veterans with their need to start getting the young guns up and see what they have. Don't see them having the chance to keep any of Kirilloff, Larnach, Rooker, or Lewis in the minors all year. I'd guess they also have some sort of guess on what the league will be shooting for with the new CBA and know if playing the service time game this year is vitally important since the MLBPA will be fighting hard to get rid of it. If they can grandfather in a number of prospects to 6 years of team control by calling them up this year I think they do it. In order to do that I think you see them let expensive vets (Rosario) go and retain or sign cheap vets (Ehire, Marwan, TD poster's favorite Kevin Pillar) to leave the door open for the young guys to join their core of Buxton, Polanco, Kepler, Arraez, Sano, and Donaldson.

RBI is a useless stat. There's no argument against it. The point of the game is to score runs so obviously driving runs in is good. But as a measure of a player's talent or skill they are useless as there is no context to them. Let's say Eddie and Cruz each had 200 PAs. If Eddie comes to the plate with a runner in scoring position 100 times and comes away with 25 RBIs and Cruz comes to the plate 10 times with runners in scoring position and comes away with 20 RBIs is Eddie better than Cruz? He has more RBIs so he must be! The stat doesn't tell you anything useful about their performance. Maybe Eddie went 0-fer in those 100 PAs, but hit solo and 2 run shots with a guy on 1st to get his 25 RBIs. It's still good that he got RBIs, but he was the complete opposite of clutch and you wouldn't consider him someone who "drives em in." Counting numbers provide very little context and that is why "advanced stats" have been developed. Even something as basic as ABs per HR tells you more than straight HR totals. Garver hit 31 HRs last year. Eddie hit 32. Was Eddie a better HR threat? He hit more HR so must be! Garver did his in 311 ABs, Eddie did his in 562. If you're the pitcher are you wanting to go after the guy who hit a HR every 10 ABs or the guy who hit one every 17.5? HRs, RBIs, Ks, Rs, etc. etc. etc. are all good to compile. It's better to have more than less (Ks as a pitcher, not hitter), yes. But in the context of a conversation about whether or not a player is worth keeping for a certain dollar amount or should be playing over another guy or whatever other similar conversation is being had they tell you almost nothing. So, yes, we want guys that "drive em in," but using RBIs as the stat to prove that carries no weight as it doesn't tell any real story about how they performed.

RBIs are almost completely useless. If I shoot 100 3 pointers and make 25 and Steph Curry shoots 10 3 pointers and makes 10 am I a better shooter than Steph Curry? I have more makes than him so must be better, right? That's what RBIs are. I don't have their numbers in front of me as far as BA with runners on or runners in scoring position or the number of chances they had, but that is going to tell you drastically more than RBIs about who the better run producer is. Eddie is a perfectly fine player and I wouldn't mind seeing him back, and also won't be broken up over it if he's non-tendered. Also don't have a problem with your concerns on WAR and defensive metrics. But using RBIs as a metric to claim who's good and who isn't is not a good argument.

Agreed. And most of the stories we see about Bauer's attitude are him not getting along with coaches because he wants to train his own way. The Twins have openly embraced that attitude since Rocco took over. They believe in the professionalism of their guys and expect them to do what is needed to be ready to perform and don't push any specific protocols. The idea that 1 guy could come in and screw up a whole locker room is a little outlandish. There's 26 players, coaches, FO personnel, clubhouse personnel, grounds crew members, etc. who are around every single day in the clubhouse. To think that you're going to have 1 guy come in and destroy things isn't realistic. Do people think every player on the 2020 club got along and weren't individuals wanting to do things their own way? He goes out and performs. That's what teammates ask of each other. They don't have to agree on everything or approach things the same way. They're grown adults who work together. Get your job done and nothing else matters.

There aren't many people in the world who are as confident in themselves as Trevor Bauer. I don't see any reason to think he won't follow his year by year plan. Teams are much more willing to throw out crazy money for 1 year than multiple. Why not try to get 40 mil a year for a few years? I wouldn't pick the Twins over the field, but there's no reason they can't throw crazy 1 year money at him. The concern Bauer is likely to have is the Twins seemingly unwavering obsession with pulling pitchers early. He won't go for that stuff.

https://www.mlb.com/news/homers-are-still-the-key-to-winning-in-playoffs The idea that power doesn't play in the postseason just isn't true. The A's hit 5 bombs against the Astros yesterday. The Twins lack of playoff power is atrocious, but power still wins games in the postseason. It can't be your only weapon, but it is the most useful weapon to have. Going against the top pitchers from top teams means its harder to get ANY hit against them. So stringing together a handful of hits to score isn't exactly a world beating strategy either.

This^ There's been a lot of posts on Twins Daily since the abomination of a sweep last week suggesting the Twins' strategy of building a powerful lineup is forever doomed because teams just don't hit HRs in the playoffs. It's just not true. Stanton has about 1000 HRs himself already this postseason. I understand he is a different kind of beast, but Randy Arozarena has 3 in 5 games and he's certainly no Stanton. HRs play in the postseason, but they can't be your only weapon. The failure of the Twins is that many of their hitters don't adjust their approach (seemingly from the outside looking in at least) based on the situation. I don't know whether this is guys simply being stubborn and refusing to adjust or coaching staff not promoting a varied approach or what, but it needs to change before next season. Cruz took advantage of the shift all year. He has spoken many times about his change in approach from at bat to at bat and pitch to pitch based on the situation. I assume he's had conversations with Sano and others about that. The Twins need to figure out if it's a matter of convincing guys to change or if it's a lack of ability to change and make team building decisions around that. As for the shift in general, it's a tricky beast. Baseball is a game of adjustments. The best players are able to constantly adjust to what the league is doing to them. Especially hitters. The shift has been prominent enough for long enough that good hitters are adjusting and starting to beat it by taking their singles from time to time instead of trying to hit over it. Again, it's situation based, but the good teams are giving their good hitters the info needed for them to take the right approach at the plate. And good teams are convincing their good hitters that just getting on and moving the line along is how you win. Bases loaded less than 2 outs in the first inning of a playoff game? Sure, sit fast ball and look to lift and separate until you get a strike on you. Then adjust and make sure you score a run. It would be interesting to see the reverse side of shift data and see what hitters are the most successful against them. See how long teams continue to shift after a player "proves" he can/will beat the shift by hitting to the open spot. And what teams are most successful at beating the shift and how that influences run scoring and winning. All about balance. The Twins seem to have swung their analytics pendulum too far (pulling starters, pinch hitting, shifting, etc.) at this point. I know Rocco takes a lot of flack, but I think a lot of it is pre-determined and he is given less leeway than we think when it comes to making decisions. Could certainly be 100% wrong about that, but my guess would be the Berrios decision was heavily influenced by Falvine pregame and that trio decided before the game Berrios wasn't seeing the lineup for a 3rd time.

Thoughts on the Dozier comp: Baseball Reference Stats: Dozier OPS+ 2015-2017: 104, 134, 126 traded in 2018 Rosario OPS+ 2017-2019: 119, 116, 108 and now people talking about shipping him out in 2020 (or non-tender him after) His level of hitting has never been as high as Dozier's and has been declining for 3 years. (He's at 107 right now this year) Dozier WAR 2015-2017: 2.8, 5.8, 4.6 Rosario WAR 2017-2019: 1.5, 4.1, 1.7 (only 2 seasons over 2 WAR in his career) His overall play had 1 spike year 2 years ago, but otherwise hasn't been close to peak Dozier. Fangraphs Stats: Dozier WRC+ 2015-2017: 102, 132, 126 Rosario WRC+ 2017-2019: 117, 114, 103 (101 this year) Dozier WAR 2015-2017: 3.1, 6.3, 5.1 Rosario WAR 2017-2019: 2.6, 3.5, 1.2 Rosario's peak has never reached Dozier's peak and he has been declining for 3 years now. I think Dozier is a very accurate comp, and was trade-able because he was drastically better the 2 seasons before his trade than Rosario is. When we step back and actually look at the player Rosario is we can see why they weren't able to swing a trade this off season. He's incredibly replaceable. Response to the article and thread as a whole: Corner outfielders with similar WRC+ to Rosario last year (plus peak career year): Whit Merrifield (utility so bit of stretch on the Corner OF thing) 110/119 Franmil Reyes 109/129 (141 this year) Marcel Ozuna 109/143 (158 this year) Kole Calhoun 108/127 (over 120 twice) Adam Eaton 107/124 (over 120 3 times) Domingo Santana 107/127 Eddie Rosario 103/117 Dexter Fowler 103/129 (over 120 5 times including this year) Jason Heyward 101/134 (over 120 5 times including this year) Yasiel Puig 101/160 (over 120 3 times and currently unemployed) Andrew Benintendi 100/122 (over 120 twice) Alex Gordon 96/140 (over 120 4 times) Josh Reddick 94/127 Randal Grichuk 90/138 Eddie has the lowest peak year out of that entire group and basically all of them have beat his best year multiple times. This is just offense so it doesn't even take into account his terrible defense where many on this list are drastically better. Are these guys all worthy of major league jobs? For sure. But I don't think many fighting for Eddie to stick around would be thrilled to have him replaced by Kole Calhoun, but the reality is Kole Calhoun has had a better career than Eddie. Eddie is simply a league average corner outfielder offensively, and, as discussed in the article and thread, a well below average defender. Does that mean one of the prospects are guaranteed to perform better? No. But unless you're wanting to go out and spend close to $10 mil on Kole Calhoun instead of give a young guy a shot next year you shouldn't be fighting for Eddie who adds terrible defense and much more frequent than you'd like base running gaffes.

Ray? As in Robbie Ray? As in the guy with a 7.84 ERA and is walking a batter an inning (literally has 31 BB in 31 innings)? I hope you weren't suggesting he would've been the ace the Twins have been missing. Even with another year of team control, Robbie Ray is no ace, even in his best seasons.

I think it's a dangerous road to go down when speaking to the intent of these actions. I think it would be absurd to assume 100% of MLB players even care about the American social strife these postponements are meant to bring attention to. My guess would be that many of the foreign players who are only here to play baseball and don't have a great deal of interaction with the general public outside the field don't care about the subject and are standing with their teammates. The American born players, or players who live here year round and are much more versed in the issues, probably had very intense and heartfelt discussions on the subject. At the end of the day everyone involved decided to stand together. Was it an "empty gesture" because of that? I would say no. Was it empty for some of them? Almost a 100% certainty that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of MLB players (not to mention staff, owners, etc) who didn't agree to postpone because they aren't overly interested or invested in these things, or plainly disagree with the stance the postponements take. But to me you don't need 100% die hard, super invested participation to make the action itself not "empty." Not to mention there are already numerous reports of lots of money being donated by lots of individuals and organizations. Probably some "good PR" moves in there, but those actions also aren't "empty" just because some aren't 100% behind it.

He said Morey was either misinformed or not very educated on the China and NBA relationship and that his comments could hurt a lot of people not just financially but physically, emotionally, spiritually. And he got absolutely destroyed for it. But, again, I'm not sure what this has to do with the Twins and Tiger's decision yesterday. I used the "shut up and dribble" line in response to the idea that athletes shouldn't speak on things and you guys have chosen to take it as a stand alone statement and discuss Lebron James and China outside the scope of the conversation that is being had right now.