chpettit19

With the current options I don't know what else you could do with this spot.

Celestino drew a pickoff throw to 1st as a pinch runner that scored the run that is currently the difference in the game. Seems like a pretty successful move to me.

Celestino running actually lead to a pretty important run right now. Pick off throw wouldn't have happened with AK on 1st.

Twins had the 9th best ERA in baseball in 2019. 4th best FIP. 4th most pitching fWAR. 4th best BB/9. 5th best HR/9. The Twins pitching in 2019 was top 10 in almost every major pitching category and top 5 in most. They were very good. Fans just remember them for being the Bomba squad when they were actually quite a complete team. Until injuries and PED suspensions crept up in the end.

264 coming into today.

Yeah, Gray was really struggling before that inning wasn't he? I see your point. You realize Rocco takes the starters out literally to avoid those innings and you're on here multiple days a week complaining about it, right? You don't get to have it both ways. Either want Rocco to have a quick hook or you don't. And you very clearly don't. So when Rocco leaves a starter in there to get out of it himself like you're constantly saying he should you don't get to complain about it without your hypocrisy being called out. Just embrace that your strategy doesn't work every time just like Rocco's doesn't. It'll be ok.

Take starter out and pen blows lead= Rocco screwed up. Leave starter in and starter blows lead= Rocco screwed up. You see the problem with these arguments?

Yet you think Rocco was wrong with the Bundy move. Weird.

Finally Rocco managing with his gut and letting a starter learn how to get out of trouble! Season saved!

Why? How would they spend his $15M a year better?

My hope is definitely that one of the top 7 falls. It feels like everyone has pretty much the same top 7 in some order and they're a step ahead of the next handful of prospects, which is a bummer for the Twins being at 8. But baseball draft is weird with bonus pools and all that so there's a chance one of the top 7 fall. But I also wouldn't be disappointed if it's Cross. He looks like a very solid pick.

Cross feels like his potential is the Kepler we all wish we had. Above average to elite defender in a corner with an above average bat. If that's the player I get at 8 I'd be pretty happy. Obviously, the hope is for an up the middle star, but a Kepler who actually deserves to hit in the top 6 in a playoff lineup is a really nice get from a first round pick.

What is up with Balazovic? Has anyone been watching the games? Is he hurt? Can he just not locate stuff? Why is he so bad now?

Byron Buxton has a full no trade clause until 2027.

And if the decision needed to be made today I wouldn't bring him back. But he's got about 17 more days before a decision has to be made.

Garlick can absolutely not field his position. He's every bit as bad in the outfield as Sano is at 1st base. And, as I've now said multiple times, if Sano is terrible on his rehab I wouldn't bring him back to Minneapolis. But if Sano is looking like he usually does in July and August he's a much better offensive threat than Garlick.

Key phrase is "platoon role." And the short end of a platoon. Garlick is completely unusable against righties. Has been his entire major league career. I'm not saving any spot on any team for a guy who can't field and can't hit righties. Sano can't field either, but when he's good (as I've said it would take for me to keep him as I'd drop him if he goes on a bad streak) he can hit anyone and is far more valuable than Kyle Garlick.

If we're doing 2 bats, 1 starter, 1 reliever I would go Buxton, Kirilloff, Winder, Duran.

I'd send Garlick down in exchange for Good Sano. Kirilloff, Buxton, Kepler, Celestino, Gordon is enough outfielders and Garlick only serves 1 purpose and it's to mash lefties. Good Sano can do that while also mashing righties. That's really the decision to me at this point. Garlick vs Sano. Sano has a far higher ceiling, but a far lower floor. But Garlick is so limited in how he can impact wins. Neither of them deserve to even carry a glove with them at the field. So if he's good on his rehab I bring Sano back and send Garlick down. Wait for Larnach to get healthy and get right at AAA and then make another decision on Sano/Garlick. Or if Sano collapses before that then I DFA him and bring Garlick back until Larnach is ready. Basically I see Garlick and Sano as place holders for a healthy and productive Larnach.

Questions for Discussion: 1. How do you think this 9-game stretch is going to go record wise? (Vote above) 5-6 2. What most heavily influenced your choice? They basically seems to be a slightly above .500 team so I expect them to remain a slightly over .500 team over the next 9. 3. What are the key x-factors for this team to finish strong before the break? Off days hopefully influencing them to lean heavier on their top pen arms and let Pagan throw no more than 2 innings between now and the break. Offense not getting shutout more than 1 time. 4. (OPTIONAL) What do you think this team will do at the trade deadline and why? I think they bring in 1 arm (not sure if it'll be a starter or reliever, but lean reliever). I think they'll underwhelm most fans. I expect it to be a 1 for 1 trade of a major leaguer with a little control left beyond this year for a prospect arm.

*Trigger warning*: I'm about to not be completely and utterly negative about Sano. If that makes you uncomfortable you can stop reading now. I generally don't pay attention to rehab assignments and the player's performance on them when it's a veteran type. Winder coming back from his injury I was a little more concerned with his performance in St Paul being that he's a rookie and a more unknown talent. We know Sano's ceiling, though. Like we know most veteran's ceilings. But we also know Sano's floor. He's one of, if not the, most polarized player in baseball. Bad Sano is unplayable, but Good Sano is an MVP caliber bat. His problem has always been that Bad Sano shows up too often. For me the Sano decision comes down strictly to how he performs in his rehab games. If he's Good Sano he'd get another shot with the Twins for me. Until Bad Sano shows up and then he's DFA'd if the rest of the lineup is healthy, or benched if there's a bunch of injuries. If he's Bad Sano in his rehab games I don't give him a chance again. The Twins can't afford Bad Sano in the lineup for any real amount of time while he tries to find a Good Sano streak. They have too many other flaws, and are in too tight of a division battle, to add a guy hitting .100, with no defensive value, to the lineup. If he's bad Sano and I'm getting rid of him I definitely offer to eat the rest of his salary this year and his buyout next year to get some sort of flier in return. They're eating the money anyways if they DFA him so may as well take a young flier if they can get it, and I think they could. Those borderline buyer/seller teams may be willing to take a shot on him getting hot in August while not having to give up any of their elite prospects. If he gets hot and helps them they have the option to keep him for next year. I think you could find a buyer for him if you're willing to pay the contract and not expect something great back in return. That'd be my strategy. Although, I also wouldn't mind a month worth of Good Sano before DFAing him when he turns back into Bad Sano. Good Sano is really, really good.

I fully understand the point you're trying to make, and I'm directly refuting your stance on that because you're going off of data from "about 5 years ago." The millions of lines of data go back to when 1-2 hitters in lineups were slap hitter, table setters. And every starter, Bundy types and Kershaw types, were all asked to go deep into the game. So, yes, it is 100% about millions of data points. Teams used that data to adapt their approach to not let their mediocre starters face the heart of the order a 3rd time because that data, which isn't skewed by the things you're concerned recent data is skewed by, showed that letting mediocre pitchers face a lineup (especially the big boppers that used to hit 3-5) a 3rd time was worse than letting a middle reliever face them the first time. Now you're looking at the data from the adjustment that was made to shorten starts. Offenses adjusted by taking the Punto and Casilla type slap hitters out of the 1-2 holes and putting Buxton and Judge types there. The question is how teams adjust their pitching next. The league is trying to get them to go back to longer starts by implementing roster restriction rules. We'll see what happens. But, yes, the recent data has some bias on both sides that lead it closer to the middle. If a bad pitcher gets into the lineup a 3rd time they're mostly facing the big time hitters. But most of the pitchers who pitch into a lineup a 3rd time frequently are the best pitchers in the game so they're lowering the stats. So you'd expect there to be a reduced difference in numbers when it's the best hitters and best pitchers making up the majority of the stats on both offense and defense. My stance is you're going off inadequate data.

The problem with the narrative is that broadcasters and writers need to play to the general public, not the super fans that find themselves on sites like this. They also need to be somewhat concise to keep listeners/readers engaged. And those things lead to grand generalizations. "Starters" and "relievers" are what the general public baseball fans know. It's what they're used to. "Out getters" is a deeper conversation that is written and talked about by baseball nerds on baseball nerd sites for baseball nerd fans. There have been links provided to such content in this thread and others. The guys on Twins broadcasts are also not as informed as the baseball nerds on baseball sites, but the general fan assumes they are. If you sat with a current baseball FO exec or coach and listened to a game with them they'd tell you half a dozen times that what the broadcasters are saying isn't how it's done anymore. It's just the nature of the beast. So the problem is that people want to discuss things as grand generalizations when the truth is the plans the teams execute are far, far, far more player specific. The "Bundy rules" aren't the same as the "Ryan rules" which aren't the same as the "Archer rules" which differ from the "Gray rules." And each other player's rules/roles change depending on game situation, pen arms available, and dozens of other factors. But people want general rules. So we discuss the third time through the order situation as a general rule for pitchers. And it's definitely a large part of the equation for a large part of the league's starters. But when a team has a huge lead the rules change in that game and Bundy ends up with 8 innings pitched. None of that even gets into using data from the last 5 years or so as teams have adjusted to the new role pitchers fill and how that data is far too little to go off. Teams started pulling their pitchers earlier because of historical data. Then the teams started putting Acuna and Buxton types in the leadoff spot to give them a better chance of seeing the low end starters a 3rd time or forcing the manager to go to the pen earlier than they'd like. Now you have Aaron Judge types hitting in the 2 hole instead of Nick Punto types. That brings the numbers back up in general terms of 3rd time through the order since you're getting the big boppers as soon as the lineup turns over. That's how it all works. And pitcher usage and lineup construction will continue to adapt and adjust and change until we all die. Third time through isn't a hard and fast cutoff line. There's far too many factors to discuss on boards like this. But it is 100% a real decision driving data point based on crazy amounts of data. Like millions and millions of lines worth of data. More data than the general broadcaster and writer can explain to the general baseball fan.

The part I bolded about a backend starter like Bundy is a huge part of this. Comparing how backend starters are treated to how frontend starters are treated gives people bad info. If Max Scherzer is at 58 pitches after 5 the Twins would let him go longer. In fact when Ryan or Gray are at 58 after 5 they go back for the 6th. But they're better than Bundy and their "standard" (to steal the word Wainwright used) is higher than Bundy's. That's why this is such a difficult thing to discuss. There are just so many variables. Trying to make overarching statements about 1 stat in 1 start is a losing battle.

I just have so much to say!