chpettit19

Boras doesn't scare me at all for draft picks. Their leverage isn't based on their agents so much as their other options. Kumar is pretty well out of other options if he plans on getting to the majors anytime soon so he can't demand an above slot bonus. Kumar is 22 already. Unless people think he's making it to the majors this year he won't debut until he's 23. Add his 6 years of team control (doesn't look like that's changing at all in the new CBA) and he's in a Twins uni until he's 29 at least. If he makes it to the bigs in his second professional season and is so good that Boras can do his mega-contract thing then the Twins got a ton out of him and even though it'd suck likely seeing another homegrown stud leave I'd be happy with what they'd gotten. The medicals are the only concern. If you can't get enough data to convince yourself the Mets were wrong in their decision then that's a hard spot to be in. Is there a guy you think you can get in the early second that you want to go over slot for and think you can get 2 big time talents by taking a risk on Rocker under slot? That's something I'd consider. Thinking Rocker is going to need TJ surgery wouldn't scare me away. I assume every drafted pitcher is going to need it at some point. Just means the Twins get him til he's 30 now. But if it's a shoulder thing I'd be much more careful in drafting him. I think his season in independent ball will answer a lot of questions. Generally speaking you take the best player available in the MLB draft without any real concern to position or organizational needs. Even more so if you've got a top 10 pick. Bonus demands and injury concerns need to be considered as well, but first and foremost is getting the best player you can with the highest ceiling. You take educated home run swings in the first round so if Rocker is the best player available at #8 take him unless you think his shoulder is about to explode and he'll never be the same.

Now you're completely moving the goalpost and arguing something completely different. I don't even know what your stance on Ryan is. All you've done to this point is disagree with my comparison between the role I see him playing and the role Hader had for the first 3 years of his career. I didn't even say he would be as good as Hader. Didn't say he has the same type of "stuff" as Hader. I have no idea what point you're trying to prove. What does him being a reliever vs a starter have to do with his FB being 91.3? The reason he can throw his FB so much as a starter isn't because of the velo so why would him being able to throw it as a reliever be because of the velo? His fastball works because of his release point being so low. It doesn't move like the hitter's eyes expect it to so they swing under it. Oh, and Caleb Thielbar threw 64 innings in 59 appearances last year. Which means he had to have thrown multiple innings multiple times. His average FB velo is 91.3. He had a 10.8 K/9 and 132 ERA+ last year. Go look at Colome's career sometime and tell me you wouldn't be happy with Ryan, or anyone, having that career. He has 155 career saves. I have no idea what point you're trying to prove, but you're not doing it. "I see him coming out of the bullpen and being able to throw multiple innings or coming in and getting an important K when needed." I was clearly describing him as filling the type of role Hader has had for the majority of his career. You're more than welcome to disagree with that. But please provide some reasons why if you'd like to continue this discussion.

Hader has been a multi-inning reliever for more seasons of his career than he hasn't been. The reason he no longer is doesn't even really matter with the comparison I was clearly trying to make. The reason I question his ability to stay as a starter is that I question how well the fastball plays multiple times through an order. That's what I said in my original comment. A multi-inning reliever doesn't go through the order multiple times. In fact they rarely go through the order even once. Him failing as a starter in no ways means he couldn't pitch 2 innings out of the pen. I'm sorry that you see not being able to go multiple times through an order as the same thing as not being able to get 6 outs.

Good for him? What's your point? He's also never started a major league game and Ryan has already done that multiple times. I think the point of my statement was pretty clear. I wasn't predicting he has Hader's exact career, but was clearly comparing what I see as a possible future fit for him being as what Hader has spent over half his major league career doing. There's roughly 100000000000 variables that will play into exactly what his role looks like. The Brewers have developed 3 legit aces and have multiple shutdown arms in their pen now to the point where Hader no longer had to be the "do it all" reliever so his role changed. If the Twins suddenly have a Burnes, Peralta, and Woodruff in their rotation and Hader and Williams in their pen I'd expect roles and pitcher usage would change. But I don't know anyone who's predicting the Twins to have 3 homegrown arms turn into Burnes, Peralta, and Woodruff so I see the Twins using their pitchers differently than the Brewers currently do.

I think it's pretty well accepted that he needs to tone it down from what it was in 2019 if he wants a realistic chance of hitting ML pitching. I just read your comment as the Twins having been the ones that encouraged the leg kick. From the sounds of it they were kind of just letting him feel his way through 2019 and learn the lesson of needing to tone the leg kick down on his own. It was probably still too big in the AFL, but there's some solid side by side videos out there of him having been more in control during the AFL. Will be fun to see what it looks like coming out of his rehab. He's had a bunch of time to get it locked in during cage work and such as he gets rolling again over the last few months so I'm excited to see him again when MLB and MLBPA get their s*** figured out.

Royce added that leg kick himself, that wasn't a Twins coaching move. Royce has openly stated that he added that on his own. Will be very interesting to see what he looks like when games finally get going again and see if he's toned that kick down. I'd say Ober stepped up and performed well at the MLB level. But I'm also frustrated that we haven't really even seen any of the prospects make debuts beyond Ober and the newly acquired Ryan. I don't think it's fair to say drafting pitchers hasn't been a high priority with the Twins. I assume that take comes from them going with bats with their top 15 picks, but that doesn't equal it not being a high priority at all. I think the responses Law gave in the piece Tom is featuring here should be tempered by his comments on the system in his ranking of all the systems: "Farm systems change each year for two reasons: Teams add/let go of talent in the system, and the players in the system themselves improve or regress. The Twins’ system is the most likely of any team ranked in the bottom half to benefit from that second part because they have so many players who should be on the upswing and be more valuable in a year than they are now. They have a ton of players who need to get healthy and get on the field — highlighted by Royce Lewis — and a number of players who should see progress from working with the Twins’ player development department. But that doesn’t mean I could wishcast this into a top-half system just yet." That reads to me like he thinks the Twins system has a bunch of guys that have the chance to be very good if they could just get on the field.

The FO. The stuff Shoemaker was complaining about is organizational philosophy that comes from the FO and isn't going to change no matter who they hire as manager or pitching coach because they'll just hire other people with the same philosophy. Pitching changes I also put on the FO. Again, I just don't see a different manager hired by the same FO doing things differently. This is how they want the team run so Rocco wouldn't be the manager if he didn't agree with those types of moves because they wouldn't have hired him. I agree there were times late in close games where they'd have Kepler or someone up with the tying run on first and no outs and I was begging for a bunt down the wide open 3B line. I can see why that'd be something we can put on Rocco, but if that's the worst thing about him I think it's quite minor. But even most of that kind of stuff to me is on the FO. Or even front offices as a collective whole. This is how the numbers say they can best win and I blame the nerds (of which I'm one so I can tease like that) for making the game this way.

Each D1 program has 11.7 scholarships available to spread between 27 players on the 35 man official roster. They don't have 27 full scholarships. 11.7 scholarships divided by 27 players is .43 scholarships per player. The idea that kids are just moving around chasing full scholarships is far fetched at best. The guys on full scholarships are likely the guys who have a chance at being a 1st round pick and then this discussion on minor leaguer salaries isn't about them anyways since they're getting $1M+ coming out of school anyways. But @DJL44 is correct and there are very few full baseball scholarships awarded by any schools. Those 7 Vandy kids likely all left school with significant debt.

I voted for the middle section as I would with just about every manager in baseball. I don' think you can really rank them 1 to 30. It's more of a Good-Neutral-Bad sort of thing for me when it comes to managers. I'd call him neutral. Don't care what Morneau, or any other player who's literally never played for him, has to say. Rocco's job isn't to do what Morneau would do or run his team the way that would work best for Morneau. I haven't seen any complaints coming from guys who actually play(ed) for him. There are certainly some player usage things that I don't get, but I don't think they happen often enough that I'd call him bad. From the sounds of things players love the atmosphere he helps create in the clubhouse and that's probably job #1 for any manager. I think he's also pretty neutered by the FO when it comes to some decisions. Or at least if he was fired I don't have any reason to believe they'd bring in somebody who'd make any drastically different decisions so why not keep Rocco? The FO want the game managed "by the book" so that's always going to be a big part of the manager's strategy here as long as they're in charge. Players seem to like playing for him so that's good enough for me since I don't think it's realistic to ask him to make too different of decisions based on what his bosses want from him.

I don't mind the idea of Walls as a possible SS, but I wouldn't give up anything of real value for him. I would even view Sano for Walls as selling very low on Sano. Walls is a fine player, but certainly no franchise SS and is probably best suited for a utility glove role. If they're sold on Royce being able to stick at SS I'd be happy with Walls being the bridge SS, but if Royce isn't that guy then I'd prefer they shoot much higher than Walls with whoever they're bringing in to play SS.

I have very little doubt that Ryan is a major leaguer, but I'm not sure he's a long-term starter. He feels like a righthanded Josh Hader to me. I see him coming out of the bullpen and being able to throw multiple innings or coming in and getting an important K when needed. No reason to make any kind of move to the pen yet, but that's where I see him ending up in the long run. Just think multiple times through the order and guys will get on top of that FB better and balls will be leaving the park too much to be a sustained starter for his career. But he deserves every chance to prove me wrong!

I think asking me this question after this week may lead to a much different answer, but right now I think it starts in April, but is delayed a week or 2. They're scheduled to meet every day this week which gives me the slightest glimmer of hope. How this week goes will tell us everything we need to know about the likelihood of starting anywhere close to on time. Hopefully they all realize they're going to crush the game if they miss any sort of significant time this year.

I'm confused by this idea that signing Story likely means a JD trade. There's no financial reason why the Twins would have to trade JD if they sign Story. There's nobody left on the pitching market who's going to cost massive amounts of money and they have plenty of payroll left before they even get close to what the payrolls have been the last few years. I actually agree with how you list their future positions, but I don't get why that'd mean they need to trade JD. He plays 3B and DHs this year as Miranda gets his feet wet at some point. Sano leaves after this season and JD is primary DH with some stints at 3B to give Miranda a day off here and there throughout 2023.

If the Twins trade the guy who may have the most upside of any of their pitching prospects and a guy who's probably top 3 in ceiling for their position player prospects for Taylor Walls I'll never watch another Twins game in my life. That would be an epic overpay.

It's been proven time and time again that home road splits for Colorado players don't mean anything. Arenado had some gnarly home road splits too, but I'm pretty sure St Louis is more than happy with his gold glove, 121 OPS+ performance for them last year. The home/road splits for Colorado players can basically be completely thrown out. It's easier to find hits in Colorado because there's so much extra OF grass, but it's harder to hit on the road when breaking balls move different. There's plenty of data to show that the first 3 games after playing in Colorado leads to worse hitting for every team (so teams who play a series in Col and then go to another place to play also hit worse the first few games as they adjust). Story is by no means a sure thing, but his home/road splits aren't the concern.

Why would anyone think the Twins would extend any pitcher they traded for? Unless that pitcher is willing to take a very team friendly deal I just don't see how anyone could think the Twins would extend them. They didn't extend Berrios and they didn't just pay for a FA. Why would we think they're going to trade legit prospects and then pay money to extend them when they wouldn't do it for Berrios or any of the FAs? There are no pitchers worthy of big money left on the market. Not signing Story more than likely means they just aren't going to spend to the same place they have been the last few years. They don't have enough openings to sign a bunch of guys and add them to the 40-man. The White Sox wouldn't risk Rodon accepting a 1 year, 18.4M qualifying offer so I don't know why other teams would be thinking he's worth that, or more, when the team who knows him the best and is trying to win a World Series wasn't willing to even give him the QA. Story is the only player left on the market that would make sense to spend on and is even remotely possible.

It wasn't a mistake at all. As bean points out it wasn't much of an extension at all really. What it was was cost certainty. They didn't have to play the guessing game with arbitration from year to year and knew exactly what his payroll number was going to be. Every team wants that, even if they end up spending a little more than arbitration would've cost them. There was (and oddly still is) hope that he'd be a higher average player than he is and if that'd have happened the deal would have been a steal. This is how it works. There's a risk/reward balance to all contracts. He's maybe underperformed his deal slightly, but it's not like he's making $20M a year or anything. I don't like judging contracts in hindsight. The thought process at the time was sound and the contract was more than reasonable. It's a good deal I'm sure many here complaining about it wish they would've been able to do with Berrios. They reached agreements with Polanco, Kepler, and Sano at roughly the same time. That group of deals has been very good for the team. They get 3 legit major league players for a more than reasonable cost with certainty that allowed them to spend more on someone like JD since they knew any of those 3 guys blowing up would've caused skyrocketing arbitration prices. That was good asset management.

Sure, about 3 years for the average minor leaguer. So your argument is that they should plan to fail and thus spend their bonus money and yearly salary as if they'll only be in the minors for 3 years?

Canterino looks like a top of the rotation guy if he can stay healthy. He's the guy I have the most hope for from a pitching ability view, but there's concern with every Rice pitcher who played for Wayne Graham. To the point that I question how he was ever able to get top arms to go there (to be fair he developed a large number of not highly recruited guys). He retired in 2018 so we can have hope that Canterino was saved from the full force of the Rice pitcher abuse, but who knows. Kid is legit if he stays healthy.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Are you suggesting they'd have a longer or shorter minor league career than 4-5 years?

Just last Friday in federal court Major League Baseball had a lawyer argue that minor league players shouldn't be paid during spring training. And they will fight tooth and nail to keep their minimum wage exemption. So, no, I don't think the Rays, or any team, would gladly shave any money anywhere to pay minor leaguers any more money than the absolute minimum they're forced to.

Players aren't taking home 75K on a 75K signing bonus. Taxes and agent fees alone drop that down a significant amount. They are then expected to live on that far diminished amount plus 11k a year for the next 4-5 years. Let's call it 60k take home after taxes and agent fees, etc. Plus 44-55k. So for the next 4-5 years of their lives they have 104-115k to live on. That's 23 to 26k a year. Not nothing, but teams can certainly afford to pay more than $11/hr to their minor leaguers.

Are you saying you made literally the same amount when you were a young adult and you were able to survive by budgeting or are you saying you made the same amount as adjusted for inflation? Because those are 2 very different things. Your profile says you were born in 1983 which puts you in the 18-24 age range in the early 2000s. During that time the average rent was about $600-650 per month. Average rent now is $1100 per month. You living with 2-3 roommates meant you were paying $200-$300 a month, they'd be paying $360 to $550 a month. And that's just rent, not even taking into account the rise in cost of literally everything else. So I think you can see why comparing making 11K now is not in any way comparable to making 11K in 2001 or 2007. Even making $18,560 or $15,080 now compared to 2001 or 2007 is an awful comparison. If their MiLB team is located in a big city prices could be significantly higher. Living on $20,000 a year in 2022 is absolutely not an easy thing to do, even with budgeting and roommates. And 50K spread out over 4 or 5 years is not "substantial financial reserves." It's not nothing, but it's certainly not substantial. $11000 in 2001 is just over $17000 today. $18000 in 2001 is over $28,500 today. So that "substantial financial reserve" the players in the top 10 rounds get is wiped out completely simply by the cost of inflation over what you were making back in the early 2000s.

I know this is the time of year for these types of articles (Gleeman and Hayes just did one on The Athletic, too), but I don't get the point. The offseason isn't just not over, it's not even happening right now. There's a 0% chance this is the opening day roster.

Kepler has a career 18.4% K rate. League average is 22%. He was in the 62nd percentile for K rate last year. Ks aren't really his problem. Career 10.2% BB rate. League average is 8.4%. His problem is his BABIP. He doesn't get hits because he hits balls on the ground into the shift too often.