chpettit19

There's a lot to be lost by having him get ripped apart by major league pitching. It can set him back or destroy him all together. He made his debut in the postseason because he had to. Injuries to a number of guys ahead of him was the only reason he played that day. And they knew he had his timing down because they'd been watching him mash in St Paul, not get shredded by ST pitchers. There probably has never been a time in his life where he was feeling better from a psyche and timing perspective than last year when he got to see the same pitching day in and day out and lock in on his timing. Prospects on good teams have to earn their spot. What message does it send to the rest of the team when they watch a prospect struggle but replace one of them anyways? Is that sending "we're trying to win it all this year" messages? The idea is to put the best 26 guys out there each and every day. The fact is that Kirilloff is not one of the best 26 guys today. That could change tomorrow, April 1, April 25, May 15, June 22, July 4, August 1, September 25, or sometime next year. If you're trying to win a world series you don't put your prospect out there simply because he's your top prospect. He needs to earn it like every other guy. And he hasn't done that.

I think sending Kirilloff to the back fields when they did was more about getting him back on track and not ruining his confidence by having him continue to get shredded as ST rosters get smaller and he faces real MLB pitchers more and more. Gave him the chance to stop pressing and just focus on getting himself right. Not worried about each and every AB helping or hurting his chances at the big club. Larnach looks real comfortable right now and I'm excited to see him at some point this year. Mauer with power. Kepler definitely needs to flip the switch pretty quick here. Especially if they still plan on having him leadoff.

No, this data was not always available. This is an incredibly new set of information. And the idea that our trend setting FO would have this data from their support group is ridiculous. No major league team has the resources to track this stuff on their own. Its why companies like SIS exist. And once a team goes to them with a request for new information it takes a year or 2 to get the data together and finalize the algorithms and data. And, while those guys at SIS are crazy smart, this is one of the more questionable data sets out there.

So you're basically asking 3 starts at each of the 4 spots? 12-15 starts? That would be nice. Don't think that's a crazy ask. I'll give you that. But if he gets off to a 4 for 31 start against major league pitchers with scouting reports and trying much harder to get him out than the guys he was facing in ST who were still working on things do you think that's good for his development? I said in that other comment that I don't think there's any rules preventing him from being in the major league clubhouse when the team is in town. One of the nice things about AAA being in St Paul now. Even if I give you the idea they could get him decent amount of ABs in the first month that doesn't automatically make it useful. If he gets sliced up by the best pitchers on the planet while trying to find his swing and timing then has to be sent down that isn't productive. Him being the top hitting prospect doesn't mean he's ready. We all wanted Buxton up because he was the top hitting prospect (better prospect than Kirilloff in fact) and the team gave us what we wanted. It set him back years. The next year they wanted to give him a confidence boost so he hit in the 3 hole to start the year and he had to be sent back down after that and set him back again. Kirilloff has played 1 competitive game since 2019 when he was good, but not insane at AA. There is no reason to start his clock by having him on the opening day roster when he clearly isn't ready to hit right now and you run a very high chance of setting him back when he can't hang at the major league level. Let the kid get his swing and timing right and call him up then. If that's 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 months, or the whole season it shouldn't matter. That platoon OFer you're not concerned about getting ABs for has a real life .803 OPS against righties. That isn't something we're crossing our fingers and hoping for because he's the top prospect. Everyone we're talking about having Kirilloff replace, or take 3 starts from, has real life production at the major league level. If your hope is Kirilloff can be the left hand bat in a platoon with Rooker he isn't the prospect we think he is. The hope should be he can tell Rooker to go sit down cuz he's playing 155 games and mashing any and everyone thrown at him, not that he's Jake Cave. We all want to see Kirilloff up and mashing. Lets give him the chance to get his swing right so we don't see him up and flailing before going back down. There will be guys who will pitch for the Twins this year who are getting sent to St Paul with him in a week and he can get his timing back against them. If Cave, Rooker, Astudillo, whoever gets off to a rough start or his swing clicks and he's launching balls all over call him up in a week. But throwing him in when he clearly isn't himself at the plate simply because he's a top prospect isn't how you develop prospects or set them up for success.

30 games, assuming 4 PAs per game (rough estimate that balances out batting order spot, high scoring games, and low scoring games), 4 positions is 480 PAs. Kepler, Cave, Rooker, Sano, Cruz, Kirilloff would be the guys rotating those spots with Kirilloff in and Astudillo out. That's 6 guys for 480 PAs. 80 PAs a piece if you split it equally. Sano, Cruz, and Kepler are key parts of the Twins plans this year and there's no way they're getting the same number of PAs as everyone else in that split so those 3 getting at least 100 PAs (for the record using 2019 stats Cruz would get 130+ PAs in 30 games so 100 is low for those 3) means there's 180 PAs for Kirilloff, Cave, and Rooker to split. That's 60 PAs a piece. Why have those 3 getting 60 PAs a piece when you could have Kirilloff in St Paul getting as many cuts as he needs each and every day (yes, I know it's not game situations, but still facing live BP and in the cage every single day) and getting his timing down while not wasting him on the end of the bench in Minneapolis? And I don't think there's any rules prohibiting him from swinging by Target Field when the team is in town, or having coaches go over to CHS Field, to be in touch with everyone. No sense in starting his clock (I don't think that's why they sent him down, but it's certainly a nice bonus) to have him sit on the bench a whole bunch when he could be getting much more work done without accumulating service time.

Lin, Maggi, and Sabato were late inning replacements who got 1 AB. Sabato has been a late inning replacement the vast majority of the spring and doesn't even get to step to the plate in most games. Lin, Riddle, Maggi, and Romine are new to the org and they are still working on assessing what they can bring in 2021 while not really caring about their overall development as they basically are what they are. Kirilloff is still developing (despite what some on here would like to believe) and sitting on the bench for 7 innings before playing 1 inning in left and crossing his fingers for an AB isn't useful in his development. Spending time in the cages and on back fields with coaches and vets and getting his swing and timing back is what helps his development. We can't judge every player by the same standards in spring. They're at different points in their careers and the org is looking at different things from all of them. Kirilloff, Rooker, and Garlic were on the 40 man coming into the spring. Lin, Riddle, Maggi, Romine, Sabato were non-roster invites who the Twins have no real plans to use in Minneapolis this year unless a number of injuries happen or they go nuclear in AAA (Sabato won't be in AAA and is just getting his feet wet at major league camp to set him up for a better start to his career after last year being wiped out) while somebody in Minneapolis completely craters. They're completely different situations. Whether you agree or not Bux, Kep, and Cave had 26 man spots locked up. Sano, Donaldson, Cruz, Arraez, Polanco, Garver, Jeffers, and Simmons had 26 man spots locked up. That's 11 guys for 12 or 13 spots depending on how many arms they carry early. That means Kirilloff, Rooker, Garlic, Astudillo, Gordon, Blankenhorn, and Celestino were fighting for 1 or 2 spots (with different likelihoods of getting a spot coming in). Rooker, Garlic, and Astudillo have vastly out performed Kirilloff to this point. And I'm not just talking box score stats. I'm talking watching them go about their business in the batter's box. Those 3 look comfortable and like they have a plan. Kirilloff looked awful. Flailing at pitches like he had no idea what was coming at him. He has stuff to work out before he steps foot on a major league field. Kirilloff lost the spring battle, has things to work on, and the Twins sent him to the back fields to work on them. That's how it works.

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.