chpettit19

I think it's all playing out perfectly. Everyone who's been asked to start has been good in almost every start. They won't all make it through the entire season and reach 150+ innings. But there's currently 7 starters on the major league roster. Those 7 should get the majority of the starter innings during the season and "the pipeline" will fill in the gaps. That's how you draw it up. We've seen Gray go down already, but he'll be back soon. The rest of them will likely miss 10 days here, 10 days there. That's to be expected. That's why it's good to have 7 guys who look like legit MLB pitchers to this point already on the roster with someone like Smeltzer dominating in AAA and SWR absolutely shredding AA. Dobnak comes back at some point this season. As @stringer bell noted, Balazovic is set to make a rehab start this weekend before joining a rotation somewhere in the system. Henriquez is set to start today in St Paul I believe. Cole Sands is making starts in AAA. This is how you draw it up. Have a rotation in the bigs doing the job while you buildup their support in the system. As openings come in Minneapolis you fill them with the 7 guys you already have there and move the current minor leaguers into the spots in the majors to get their feet wet. Now we just need to hope the entire rotation doesn't collapse. Much harder to replace all 7 guys than just 1 here and there.

My understanding is that the Twins lost their 3rd round pick (88th overall I believe) for signing Correa so 8, 48, and 68 should be accurate.

What "long-term" means is really the question to me. 7 years so he's signed through age 34? I could see that working out. 10 years so you have him until he's 37? No chance. As for Lewis, he shouldn't play a role in the decision at all. Give me multiple guys who can play up the middle. Especially with how much the Twins rest guys and move guys around. Give me more athletes and fewer Rooker and Garlick types. Martin-Buxton-Lewis OF with Miranda-Correa-Polanco-Kirilloff infield? Yes please. Obviously all those prospects won't work out and maybe Lewis is the one who doesn't work out and Miller is the next homegrown SS they have and then we're waiting 3 or 4 more years and signing Simmons type FAs. Too many SSs and CFers is never a problem a baseball organization should complain about. And they already seem pretty set on not acquiring proven veteran arms. At least more than back end "proven" guys.

Jackson Holliday would be the guy I was hoping for with a realistic chance of being available at 8 if the draft were today. I don't want anything to do with a pitcher at the 8 spot, but a lot of that has to do with me being generally against drafting HS pitchers high and there's no college arms worth even talking about in the 8 spot. If the plan is not to be drafting anywhere near the top 10 again for a long time (and why wouldn't that be the plan?) I take the highest upside up the middle player available at 8. As @Sielk said, I prefer SS, CF, C or P at the top of the draft. If you're in the top 10 you have to be taking a swing at a star. I won't be super upset with Lesko being the pick, but I'd definitely go with one of the catchers or SSs if the Twins have them all graded similarly. Have to nail this pick since the hope is they're not close to the top 10 again for a while.

I agree looking strictly at exit velocity is a bad way to do things. But comparing any player to one of the 3 or 4 best right handed hitters in the history of the game is also a really bad way to do things.

Expecting Kirilloff to be back on the IL sooner than we'd like is actually why I'd send Larnach down. I'd get him back to AAA and in the lineup everyday so he can build on the progress he's made (at least I think he's made progress) in Minneapolis and hit the ground running when Kirilloff heads back to the IL. That's how I'd play it this early in the season at least. Things will obviously change as the season goes on and we'll see if/when Sano gets on his surface-of-the-sun-hot streak. If Kirilloff stays healthy for a month and Larnach and/or Miranda are mashing in AAA and Sano is still struggling I think the formula changes. But right now I'd prefer Kirilloff and Larnach both getting as many ABs as possible and think Larnach in AAA is the way to get that.

My guess is Larnach goes down when Kirilloff comes back. Celestino and Godoy go down when the rosters shrink. Or at least that's what I'd do.

Is Kirilloff healthy? If not he's not the answer right now. Is Miranda all that good? He hasn't been great in AAA yet this year and hadn't been good before an out of this world season last year. Suggesting he can replicate what Sano is likely to do over the course of a full season is a big leap of faith. Sanchez is basically a poor man's Sano so not sure why he'd be the answer. Jeffers? How does he give you Sano's production in any way (over the course of a full season)? Arraez would be my 1B or DH everyday. But that doesn't mean moving on from Sano (I read moving on as taking him off the roster) to me. It means making Sano a part time player until things click and he goes on his 2 week heater and carries the offense. When Kirilloff comes back I'd make Sano the short end of a platoon at first. Once he seems to be getting things going (that last hit last night was a good sign) I'd give him his 2 weeks as an everyday player while he bashes 12 homeruns in 13 games and wins a handful of games on his own. Then when he falls apart again I bench him unless Miranda has gotten going again and then I'd look to trade or cut him. I just don't see what cutting Sano now does. Does anyone really doubt he'll go on a crazy tear sometime in the next month or so? He always does. Every year. And the Twins don't have anyone kicking the door down to take his spot in the meantime. I mean Sanchez and Kirilloff have already missed time with injuries. Arraez misses time pretty regularly. Miranda hasn't gotten going yet. The Twins don't have a ready replacement so let him work through it (preferably in a part time role) until he does on his run or until someone takes his spot.

I watched the replay a couple times before I commented and it didn't look like the first basemen was really aware of what was happening so I think Sano would've made it back alright, but it certainly may have been close. Either way it was a mistake and both Urshella and Sano need to be much more aware of the situation.

I'd have given it an error. He mini-jumped and mostly extended because he had a terrible read on it and didn't get to the spot. I understand why they didn't give him an error, but that ball should've been caught. The over then back route at about 75% speed cost Grossman and a competent fielder catches that ball. It was Sano's best swing of the year, though. So that was good at least.

Urshella making his own mistake doesn't mean Sano's original decision to go to second wasn't a bad base running play. It was. It just didn't have a big consequence on it's own since he could've made it back with no issue since the 1B wasn't there. But "assuming either a runner was going home or had already" is a mistake and shows a great lack of situational awareness. It was 100% a mistake. Just wasn't the biggest mistake on the play.

10 years and 350 million dollars is what it will take for Carlos Correa to stay in Minnesota. Easy question.

Him going to 3rd was the correct play. The winning run was on it's way to the plate and the Detroit throw should have gone home (wouldn't have gotten him anyways). If that run is thrown out at the plate Sano should be at 3rd, not 2nd. Going to 3rd was 100% the correct play. Going to 2nd was a massive mistake that turned out for the better after Urshela made his own massive mistake and Haase bailed them both out with whatever kind of mistake is bigger than massive.

You think the most analytically driven organization in baseball has a manager not using spreadsheets? Dusty Baker managed a world series team last year that averaged less than 4 innings per start throughout the playoffs and you think that's him managing by gut/instincts and not a spreadsheet?

That I agree with. I don't like the frequency of days off in general. It's been 16 games and Correa has already had 2 games off before off days. I don't like that. If you're paying someone over 35M he should be able to play the first 16 games with just natural off days in the schedule providing enough rest. They have very smart medical people advising them so I'm sure there's something they believe in about those extra rest days saving significant wear and tear on the body, but pinch hitting and playing an inning or 2 in the field shouldn't destroy those benefits. But I'm certainly no Dr so what do I know?

Celestino's BA was presented in the original argument. I combatted it by using Correa's BA. You're smart enough to follow that logic, Chief. The argument is that the original post called it, literally, "unconscionable" to not hit Correa there as if Correa is some sort of world beater and would've done more than hit a 106.9 MPH liner to center. Correa hasn't been good this year. There's no argument to be made that he has been. The point is that if it didn't say Correa on the back of his jersey and people didn't dislike Rocco this argument wouldn't be happening at all. And you're more than smart enough to follow all that. So you can take your condescending "you made a terrible argument" trash and go pick a fight somewhere else.

It's my contention that if it didn't say Correa on the back of his jersey nobody, including you, would have been calling for a guy struggling so mightily at the plate in the early going to be pinch hitting for anyone. I don't care what Correa did while he was in Houston. This season he's been terrible at the plate. There's a sizeable anti-Kepler crowd around here. Is it your contention Baldelli shouldn't use past performance to inform his playing time decisions? Because he's been good in the past so that means he should play everyday now, right? Or does that only apply to Correa?

Celestino's batting prowess was already presented in the original argument so I was providing the counterpoint. Celestino was brought into run and played the field before his AB which allowed him to warm up more than sitting on the bench in his coat the entire time then taking it off just to go hit as Correa would've done. It's a valid question and I provided valid counterpoints to point out that "unconscionable" was an extreme word choice. There's a difference between you not agreeing with my arguments and them not being valid, isn't there?

Because it says Correa on the back of his jersey.

Certainly has an argument for most talented. Think the question of best comes down to health.

And if Celestino's ball was hit 5 feet further to the right it wouldn't be a talking point at all as he would've won the game. Why didn't Rocco pinch hit for Sano ever? He's hitting .083 right now. Or Gordon who is at .214 and hit right after Celestino in the 9th and struck out. Shoot, Polanco is only hitting .200 so why didn't he pinch hit for him? And, yes, Henricks proved to be quite hittable. As shown by Celestino hitting a ball 106.9 MPH off him. Not sure you could've asked for Correa to do anymore than that. It's interesting that you accept the points about Correa not being good right now and coming in cold yet still call for a "better effort" in the 9th. Again, this seems to be far more about the names on the backs of jerseys than a real question about the thought process. And @RpR makes a very good point about it being a nice way to boost a young player's confidence during 1 game in April so when you need him to step up in a game in September he's feeling good about himself. It was the 16th game of the season. If they couldn't rebound from losing game 16 because Correa didn't pinch hit for Celestino I'm not sure the next 146 would've been worth following anyways.

I mean Celestino hit a 106.9 MPH missile to center in that AB. And Correa is hitting a whopping .192 this year and a dazzling .154 with runners in scoring position. I think "unconscionable" is a bit of an extreme description of that decision. Bringing in a guy who's been sitting on the bench for 4 hours in 40 degree weather and hasn't been hitting at all to this point in the season and asking him to step in against one of the game's best closers isn't exactly a no doubt move. If you did a blind look at his numbers and ignored that he's Carlos Correa I don't think you'd be so animated in your calls for him to hit in that situation.

Don't know that I agree those are likely lineups for August '22, but I think there's a very real chance the non-Correa lineup is pretty accurate for opening day '23. I'd at least think that's the hope at least.

I believe the statements from the Twins was that they'd go to a 5 man while Gray was out and figure it out from there. They were pretty clear they had no intention of putting Winder into his spot. I agree with your earlier comment that their treatment of him concerns me. I'd much rather he be in St Paul starting every 5th day and someone like Smeltzer was in Minneapolis crossing his fingers for a bad start so he could actually pitch.

I think I'd hit Gordon 9th and go Buxton-Arraez-Polanco-Correa-Urshela-Flavor of the day-Catcher of the day-Kepler-Gordon. But I like the idea here. Gives us likely our best defensive lineup, and there's very few guys who could complain about a lack of ABs with how they're all performing right now. I just think keeping Gordon 9 keeps the pressure off him and lets him just play for those 10 days you suggest and they can adjust things from there. I'd do that lineup for the rest of April and make adjustments when rosters go back down to 26 in May with a better idea of what we have with Gordon and others.