Brad Swanson

Thank you very much! You are welcome to use any and all puns that I ever use. I'm sure there will be many more in the future. I'm on Spring Break in a week, maybe I'll break out my old pogs and make Brandon Poggs. If so, you are welcome to play me for them. More importantly, we need to form a Twins Daily community theater troupe and act this out.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! INT. TARGET FIELD BOARDROOM - LATE AFTERNOON A room full of executives readies themselves for an important meeting. WILSON, JOHNSON, THOMAS, SMITH, and DAVIS each take a seat at the table. DAVIS sits at the head of the table and the others surround him. Everyone looks nervous about the events to transpire. WILSON, JOHNSON, THOMAS, and SMITH each have large, white poster boards, covered for now. There is obvious tension in the room. DAVIS Let's get this meeting started. As you know, we need to plan the promotions and giveaways for the upcoming season. We need to think outside the box, as fan interest is waning due to the on-field product. It is up to our department to make up the difference in attendance. I trust that each of you has a proposal to share. Everyone looks around at each other. There seems to be confusion as each person looks down at their covered proposal. DAVIS WILSON, why don't you get us started? WILSON Ok, no time like the present, right fellas? WILSON is carrying two poster boards. He uncovers the first to reveal JOE FLOWER. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eVMbn9Ka-gU/UU39eCF8kxI/AAAAAAAAASI/iF4jzJ-MLh0/s320/joeflower.jpg WILSON My first idea is a giveaway that ties in with the Twins' best player. We create 10,000 Joe Flowers. The idea is that Joe Flower is an "atta-boy" or a pick-me-up. When you see someone having a bad day, you give them Joe Flower. Joe Flower combines the best element of a sunny, happy gift and the Twins' best and most marketable player. WILSON pauses. The room seems confused an unimpressed. DAVIS This is confusing. Why would we give away something that people are supposed to then give away to someone else? WILSON The idea is a "pay-it-forward" sort of altruistic, gift-giving... WILSON trails off and uncovers his second poster to reveal JOE FLOUR http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UzqILaVQF38/UU39qoUJncI/AAAAAAAAASQ/T3hQGQYpj-4/s320/joeflour.jpg WILSON Joe Flour? DAVIS You're suggesting that we give away bags of flour with Joe Mauer's face on the front? You think people are going to want to haul around five pound bags of flour at a baseball game? WILSON Let's not be over dramatic, I mean, we could give away smaller bags. DAVIS But why would people want them? WILSON Well, they would be free. That would be nice. DAVIS WILSON, why don't you take a seat. Thank you for these "ideas." WILSON slowly returns to his seat. He looks noticeably embarrassed and sad. THOMAS, JOHNSON AND SMITH all develop flop sweat and look more nervous than before. DAVIS Ok, JOHNSON, you're up. Dazzle me. JOHNSON stands slowly and heads to the front of the room. He drops his poster board, revealing PANTS WORLEY. He quickly picks it up, moves to the front of the room and officially unveils PANTS WORLEY. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZZLA0CCvUPE/UU3-zaE_EDI/AAAAAAAAASY/SksnsMluu3I/s320/pantsworley.jpg JOHNSON Ok, so Vance Worley is one of our newest players and he has his signature glasses. So, I thought we could play off of his glasses and his name and give out pants that have different colored glasses sewn into the upper thigh area and call them PANTS WORLEY. DAVIS You want to give away pants to our fans? JOHNSON Yeah. I figure it would be a nice, long-lasting giveaway and most people appreciate a good pair of pants. THOMAS Wouldn't we need a lot of sizes. There is quite a range of pants-size in our crowd. JOHNSON Isn't that why we have market research? DAVIS We have market research to make more money, not to make customized pants for each person coming to a game WILSON That image is very unsettling. DAVIS JOHNSON, why don't you just take a seat? JOHNSON You could easily give out PANTS WORLEY, but cut-offs. Like, for the summer.http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HbtnQvT9VHQ/UU3_F_1gTbI/AAAAAAAAASg/3lnkzz00aZo/s320/jeanshortsworley.jpg DAVIS Thank you, I actually hadn't thought of that. Please take a seat. JOHNSON sheepishly returns to his seat. THOMAS and SMITH are now sweating profusely. WILSON still looks very sad. DAVIS seems to be turning redder and redder. DAVIS THOMAS, you had better be ready to wow me. THOMAS approaches the front of the room. He turns as though he might go sit back down, before ultimately putting his poster up and revealing BRANDON POGGS WITH AN ANTHONY SLAMMER. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u6qVKmF3Sa0/UU3_QuLpHTI/AAAAAAAAASo/oT7ircJSm_4/s320/boggspoggs.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPizHhq3G9s/UU3_T6_LqbI/AAAAAAAAASw/T_AkcOMaTyc/s320/anthonyslammer.jpg DAVIS (angrily) What is this? THOMAS Fans really like Anthony Slama, so I wanted to capitalize on that. I figured we could give away Anthony Slammers, you know because he comes in and slams the door shut. Then, I saw that we had a guy named Brandon Boggs, and I mean, what else can I say? DAVIS I don't follow. WILSON Pogs are toys. You set them up in a stack, then you hit them with a slammer and the pogs that stay upright are yours to keep. It's super cool. I got a bunch at home, I could bring them... DAVIS (interrupting) Are these popular? Is this a kid's toy? JOHNSON They were huge in the 90s. Huge! DAVIS Hmm, so I guess this would be an ideal giveaway. We just need to find a time machine first. So, if we decided to ignore the fact that these "pogs" are no longer relevant, you propose we give away toys with pictures of players who aren't going to be on the team? Couldn't we give away pogs with current, popular player on the front, or past favorites? THOMAS Well, I suppose, but what would we call them? Mauer Pogs? Puckett Poggs? It just doesn't have the same ring as Brandon Poggs with Anthony Slammer. DAVIS Go sit down. THOMAS meekly returns to his seat. As he sits down, WILSON hands him JOE FLOWER. This seems to make THOMAS feel a little better. WILSON See, it works! DAVIS does not look amused. He motions to SMITH. DAVIS You've been quiet, what do you have for us, SMITH? SMITH tries to look confident as he walks to the front of the room, but he trips a bit on his chair and nearly falls down. He actually cuts his finger on a wastebasket, as he tries to keep himself from falling. He also drops his proposal, but it does not reveal itself. He stands at the front of the room, takes a deep breath, and reveals ANTHONY SPORTSHACK. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RVAUyPJj_6M/UU3_3W4pQ9I/AAAAAAAAAS4/TEbjcXlqY2E/s320/anthonysportshackfinal.jpg DAVIS Just sit down. SMITH That's probably for the best. WILSON Do the workers wear umpire uniforms? SMITH (tripping on his chair) Yes, it's an homage to Foot Locker. DAVIS That is relatively clever. Guys! We need promotions that we can actually use to draw fans to the park. We're going to go around the room, rapid fire, and everyone gives the first idea that comes to mind. THOMAS (points to THOMAS)! THOMAS Cole de Fries. DAVIS Like, give away french fries? THOMAS Yeah, but like, with Cole de Vries face on the front or something. DAVIS SMITH (points at SMITH)! SMITH Ryan Donut? DAVIS JOHNSON (points to JOHNSON), no food! JOHNSON Um, what about Jared Curtains? Like, we could give, um, Jared Burton themed curtains to fans. DAVIS WILSON, anything to add? WILSON What about Aaron Tricks and Trevor Poof? We could dress them as magicians and have them do magic tricks. Or, we could make it a joke and have them be really bad at magic. I mean, it could go either way. DAVIS How is that a giveaway? WILSON It would be more of a promotion or something. Maybe a viral video? THOMAS What about Joe Pension? A play off Joe Benson? DAVIS What would that even be? Are you proposing that we give each fan a pension? THOMAS Well, no. Maybe like fake money or something. JOHNSON We could give away Kyle Lohsion. We'd have to convince the team to sign Kyle Lohse, but it might be worth it... SMITH What about Justin Porno? DAVIS What? No, stop, everyone stop! This is a disaster. These ideas are all horrible. We pay each of you to come up with ideas. We pay you to bring in fans. This is just a bunch of nonsense and wordplay. I should fire each and every one of you. The room falls silent. Everyone looks very disappointed. WILSON What about bobbleheads? The room erupts in murmurs and head-nods. DAVIS I love it! Excellent meeting everyone. JOHNSON, talk to marketing and order five different players. Get 10,000 of each! It's clear why you all make the big bucks! The room erupts in handshakes. The handshakes become hand-pounds. The hand-pounds become bro-hugs. The bro-hugs get weird.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! INT. TARGET FIELD BOARDROOM - LATE AFTERNOON A room full of executives readies themselves for an important meeting. WILSON, JOHNSON, THOMAS, SMITH, and DAVIS each take a seat at the table. DAVIS sits at the head of the table and the others surround him. Everyone looks nervous about the events to transpire. WILSON, JOHNSON, THOMAS, and SMITH each have large, white poster boards, covered for now. There is obvious tension in the room. DAVIS Let's get this meeting started. As you know, we need to plan the promotions and giveaways for the upcoming season. We need to think outside the box, as fan interest is waning due to the on-field product. It is up to our department to make up the difference in attendance. I trust that each of you has a proposal to share. Everyone looks around at each other. There seems to be confusion as each person looks down at their covered proposal. DAVIS WILSON, why don't you get us started? WILSON Ok, no time like the present, right fellas? WILSON is carrying two poster boards. He uncovers the first to reveal JOE FLOWER. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eVMbn9Ka-gU/UU39eCF8kxI/AAAAAAAAASI/iF4jzJ-MLh0/s320/joeflower.jpg WILSON My first idea is a giveaway that ties in with the Twins' best player. We create 10,000 Joe Flowers. The idea is that Joe Flower is an "atta-boy" or a pick-me-up. When you see someone having a bad day, you give them Joe Flower. Joe Flower combines the best element of a sunny, happy gift and the Twins' best and most marketable player. WILSON pauses. The room seems confused an unimpressed. DAVIS This is confusing. Why would we give away something that people are supposed to then give away to someone else? WILSON The idea is a "pay-it-forward" sort of altruistic, gift-giving... WILSON trails off and uncovers his second poster to reveal JOE FLOUR http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UzqILaVQF38/UU39qoUJncI/AAAAAAAAASQ/T3hQGQYpj-4/s320/joeflour.jpg WILSON Joe Flour? DAVIS You're suggesting that we give away bags of flour with Joe Mauer's face on the front? You think people are going to want to haul around five pound bags of flour at a baseball game? WILSON Let's not be over dramatic, I mean, we could give away smaller bags. DAVIS But why would people want them? WILSON Well, they would be free. That would be nice. DAVIS WILSON, why don't you take a seat. Thank you for these "ideas." WILSON slowly returns to his seat. He looks noticeably embarrassed and sad. THOMAS, JOHNSON AND SMITH all develop flop sweat and look more nervous than before. DAVIS Ok, JOHNSON, you're up. Dazzle me. JOHNSON stands slowly and heads to the front of the room. He drops his poster board, revealing PANTS WORLEY. He quickly picks it up, moves to the front of the room and officially unveils PANTS WORLEY. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZZLA0CCvUPE/UU3-zaE_EDI/AAAAAAAAASY/SksnsMluu3I/s320/pantsworley.jpg JOHNSON Ok, so Vance Worley is one of our newest players and he has his signature glasses. So, I thought we could play off of his glasses and his name and give out pants that have different colored glasses sewn into the upper thigh area and call them PANTS WORLEY. DAVIS You want to give away pants to our fans? JOHNSON Yeah. I figure it would be a nice, long-lasting giveaway and most people appreciate a good pair of pants. THOMAS Wouldn't we need a lot of sizes. There is quite a range of pants-size in our crowd. JOHNSON Isn't that why we have market research? DAVIS We have market research to make more money, not to make customized pants for each person coming to a game WILSON That image is very unsettling. DAVIS JOHNSON, why don't you just take a seat? JOHNSON You could easily give out PANTS WORLEY, but cut-offs. Like, for the summer.http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HbtnQvT9VHQ/UU3_F_1gTbI/AAAAAAAAASg/3lnkzz00aZo/s320/jeanshortsworley.jpg DAVIS Thank you, I actually hadn't thought of that. Please take a seat. JOHNSON sheepishly returns to his seat. THOMAS and SMITH are now sweating profusely. WILSON still looks very sad. DAVIS seems to be turning redder and redder. DAVIS THOMAS, you had better be ready to wow me. THOMAS approaches the front of the room. He turns as though he might go sit back down, before ultimately putting his poster up and revealing BRANDON POGGS WITH AN ANTHONY SLAMMER. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u6qVKmF3Sa0/UU3_QuLpHTI/AAAAAAAAASo/oT7ircJSm_4/s320/boggspoggs.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPizHhq3G9s/UU3_T6_LqbI/AAAAAAAAASw/T_AkcOMaTyc/s320/anthonyslammer.jpg DAVIS (angrily) What is this? THOMAS Fans really like Anthony Slama, so I wanted to capitalize on that. I figured we could give away Anthony Slammers, you know because he comes in and slams the door shut. Then, I saw that we had a guy named Brandon Boggs, and I mean, what else can I say? DAVIS I don't follow. WILSON Pogs are toys. You set them up in a stack, then you hit them with a slammer and the pogs that stay upright are yours to keep. It's super cool. I got a bunch at home, I could bring them... DAVIS (interrupting) Are these popular? Is this a kid's toy? JOHNSON They were huge in the 90s. Huge! DAVIS Hmm, so I guess this would be an ideal giveaway. We just need to find a time machine first. So, if we decided to ignore the fact that these "pogs" are no longer relevant, you propose we give away toys with pictures of players who aren't going to be on the team? Couldn't we give away pogs with current, popular player on the front, or past favorites? THOMAS Well, I suppose, but what would we call them? Mauer Pogs? Puckett Poggs? It just doesn't have the same ring as Brandon Poggs with Anthony Slammer. DAVIS Go sit down. THOMAS meekly returns to his seat. As he sits down, WILSON hands him JOE FLOWER. This seems to make THOMAS feel a little better. WILSON See, it works! DAVIS does not look amused. He motions to SMITH. DAVIS You've been quiet, what do you have for us, SMITH? SMITH tries to look confident as he walks to the front of the room, but he trips a bit on his chair and nearly falls down. He actually cuts his finger on a wastebasket, as he tries to keep himself from falling. He also drops his proposal, but it does not reveal itself. He stands at the front of the room, takes a deep breath, and reveals ANTHONY SPORTSHACK. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RVAUyPJj_6M/UU3_3W4pQ9I/AAAAAAAAAS4/TEbjcXlqY2E/s320/anthonysportshackfinal.jpg DAVIS Just sit down. SMITH That's probably for the best. WILSON Do the workers wear umpire uniforms? SMITH (tripping on his chair) Yes, it's an homage to Foot Locker. DAVIS That is relatively clever. Guys! We need promotions that we can actually use to draw fans to the park. We're going to go around the room, rapid fire, and everyone gives the first idea that comes to mind. THOMAS (points to THOMAS)! THOMAS Cole de Fries. DAVIS Like, give away french fries? THOMAS Yeah, but like, with Cole de Vries face on the front or something. DAVIS SMITH (points at SMITH)! SMITH Ryan Donut? DAVIS JOHNSON (points to JOHNSON), no food! JOHNSON Um, what about Jared Curtains? Like, we could give, um, Jared Burton themed curtains to fans. DAVIS WILSON, anything to add? WILSON What about Aaron Tricks and Trevor Poof? We could dress them as magicians and have them do magic tricks. Or, we could make it a joke and have them be really bad at magic. I mean, it could go either way. DAVIS How is that a giveaway? WILSON It would be more of a promotion or something. Maybe a viral video? THOMAS What about Joe Pension? A play off Joe Benson? DAVIS What would that even be? Are you proposing that we give each fan a pension? THOMAS Well, no. Maybe like fake money or something. JOHNSON We could give away Kyle Lohsion. We'd have to convince the team to sign Kyle Lohse, but it might be worth it... SMITH What about Justin Porno? DAVIS What? No, stop, everyone stop! This is a disaster. These ideas are all horrible. We pay each of you to come up with ideas. We pay you to bring in fans. This is just a bunch of nonsense and wordplay. I should fire each and every one of you. The room falls silent. Everyone looks very disappointed. WILSON What about bobbleheads? The room erupts in murmurs and head-nods. DAVIS I love it! Excellent meeting everyone. JOHNSON, talk to marketing and order five different players. Get 10,000 of each! It's clear why you all make the big bucks! The room erupts in handshakes. The handshakes become hand-pounds. The hand-pounds become bro-hugs. The bro-hugs get weird.

I hope my words weren't perceived as being overly critical. I still hold out quite a bit of hope for Benson. I see so much talent, it's really hard to ignore. That being said, it's hard not to think he has a long road to travel to get back to the team. The three OF starters seem to be pretty set and one of them would have to get hurt, traded or be ineffective, for a spot to even open up. Then, Mastroianni is there as well. I still hope Benson gets a shot this season, it just seems that a lot would have to change for him to get one.

I agree with basically everything that each of you have said. He faces a real uphill climb back into the Twins' plans. He is going to have to hit, and hit soon, in order to get called up. If Arcia hits like he always has, he might even get the first call, so long as a corner is open. Mastroianni might get the first shot at center, should Hicks have issues.

The Twins made a few more cuts today, which is common during these final days of Spring Training. Joe Benson was cut and that is very disappointing to me. Benson is a player that I have been excited about for many years and a player who was given the opportunity to win the open center field job, after the trades of Ben Revere and Denard Span. Benson was not impressive this Spring. I don't put a lot of stock into Spring Training stats, but a .151/.286/.283 line with 15 strikeouts in 63 plate appearances is not something that wins an open job. He flashed power, but it was rare, and he was never in a position to use his speed on the bases. Beyond the unimpressive stats were a few miscues in the outfield and a general lack of "seizing the opportunity" that he was given. Benson's demotion to AAA means that he will be out of options after this season. If he remains on the 40-man roster through the year, he'll need to make the team next Spring, or risk being released from the organization that drafted him back in 2006. I know that I did not expect Benson to be in this situation, especially after his call-up back in September of 2011. That September seems like a billion years ago. Benson's 2012 was injury-plagued, or really injury-nuked. He missed a lot of time, and when he played, he wasn't very special. However, his return to AAA could be exactly what he needs. Benson should not have been considered for the 4th outfielder position. While he isn't young, he is inexperienced, and he needs to play every day. In AAA, he will play every day, likely in center, and rack up at bats. He needs to work on the same thing he has always needed to work on: contact. He strikes out far too often, which really masks the fact that he has great power and speed. I still hold out hope for Benson, but my hope is waning. I see Benson as a player that either isn't concentrating hard enough, or is concentrating too hard. I'm not close enough to know which side he's on. He makes mistakes in the field, although he is a good fielder. He strikes out a lot, and seems to swing a bit too hard at times. If concentration is an issue, it can be worked on. He might still be rusty, after a 2012 season when he spent much of his time trying to get healthy. If he can get into a rhythm at AAA, he might get called upon later in 2013. I think this move pretty much cinches the Opening Day center field spot for Aaron Hicks. Unless the Twins really like Brandon Boggs, it would seem that Hicks will start in center and Mastroianni will be the 4th outfielder. Hicks will not be kept as a reserve, so he is the starter or he's joining Benson in AAA. I don't see that happening. I like Mastroianni in that 4th outfielder role and I am very excited to watch Hicks all year. Getting back to Benson, all is not lost. He certainly has a long way to go, if he wants to get back into the Twins' long-term plans. He'll need to show that he can hit over .200 at AAA before he gets anywhere near Minnesota. He also will need to show that he can handle an outfield position, a task he certainly has the natural talent to accomplish. If Benson can basically do what everyone wanted him to do in 2012, things will be fine. If his 2013 season looks like his 2012 season, he may be with another team, come Spring 2014. I wrote about Benson in more detail a few months ago. If you want to know why I am infatuated with what Benson could become, please take a look.

The Twins made a few more cuts today, which is common during these final days of Spring Training. Joe Benson was cut and that is very disappointing to me. Benson is a player that I have been excited about for many years and a player who was given the opportunity to win the open center field job, after the trades of Ben Revere and Denard Span. Benson was not impressive this Spring. I don't put a lot of stock into Spring Training stats, but a .151/.286/.283 line with 15 strikeouts in 63 plate appearances is not something that wins an open job. He flashed power, but it was rare, and he was never in a position to use his speed on the bases. Beyond the unimpressive stats were a few miscues in the outfield and a general lack of "seizing the opportunity" that he was given. Benson's demotion to AAA means that he will be out of options after this season. If he remains on the 40-man roster through the year, he'll need to make the team next Spring, or risk being released from the organization that drafted him back in 2006. I know that I did not expect Benson to be in this situation, especially after his call-up back in September of 2011. That September seems like a billion years ago. Benson's 2012 was injury-plagued, or really injury-nuked. He missed a lot of time, and when he played, he wasn't very special. However, his return to AAA could be exactly what he needs. Benson should not have been considered for the 4th outfielder position. While he isn't young, he is inexperienced, and he needs to play every day. In AAA, he will play every day, likely in center, and rack up at bats. He needs to work on the same thing he has always needed to work on: contact. He strikes out far too often, which really masks the fact that he has great power and speed. I still hold out hope for Benson, but my hope is waning. I see Benson as a player that either isn't concentrating hard enough, or is concentrating too hard. I'm not close enough to know which side he's on. He makes mistakes in the field, although he is a good fielder. He strikes out a lot, and seems to swing a bit too hard at times. If concentration is an issue, it can be worked on. He might still be rusty, after a 2012 season when he spent much of his time trying to get healthy. If he can get into a rhythm at AAA, he might get called upon later in 2013. I think this move pretty much cinches the Opening Day center field spot for Aaron Hicks. Unless the Twins really like Brandon Boggs, it would seem that Hicks will start in center and Mastroianni will be the 4th outfielder. Hicks will not be kept as a reserve, so he is the starter or he's joining Benson in AAA. I don't see that happening. I like Mastroianni in that 4th outfielder role and I am very excited to watch Hicks all year. Getting back to Benson, all is not lost. He certainly has a long way to go, if he wants to get back into the Twins' long-term plans. He'll need to show that he can hit over .200 at AAA before he gets anywhere near Minnesota. He also will need to show that he can handle an outfield position, a task he certainly has the natural talent to accomplish. If Benson can basically do what everyone wanted him to do in 2012, things will be fine. If his 2013 season looks like his 2012 season, he may be with another team, come Spring 2014. I wrote about Benson in more detail a few months ago. If you want to know why I am infatuated with what Benson could become, please take a look.

I think they traded for Escobar before calling Florimon up. Their opinion could have changed. This seems to be an unpopular post. Is that because we don't like Florimon? I don't think he's great, I'm merely trying to find some value in a player who will be the staring SS.

Crawford must have a good agent. The whole premise relies on Florimon's defense being great or better. I'm not saying it is, but others have made that argument. If he can be a 2 WAR player, even if it all comes from defense, he provides positive value to the team.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Yesterday, I unveiled what will almost certainly go down in history as my most popular original idea: a weekly (fake) mailbag. In that mailbag I asked myself... I mean, I was asked about the Twins player I am higher on than most. I chose Pedro Florimon because I think his defense can provide enough value to overcome his complete lack of contribution on offense. I am not sure I explained my point very well and I wasn't feeling good about my selection. Then, I listened to The Baseball Show with Rany and Joe, a weekly podcast from two baseball writing powerhouses, Joe Sheehan and Rany Jazayerli. They were talking about the Trevor Bauer trade and how much they hated it. Basically, the Diamondbacks traded Bauer for Didi Gregorius, an all-glove, no-bat, low-upside player. Sheehan remarked that they basically traded an elite pitching prospect for Neifi Perez. This lead me to Perez's FanGraphs page. Turns out, he posted a 58 wRC+ for his career. Pedro Florimon posted a 59 wRC+ last season. Perez was mostly a glove, and didn't offer much in the hitting and baserunning departments. This sounds a lot like Pedro Florimon to me. Sheehan and Jazayerli weren't really questioning Perez or Gregorius as players, but the move to give up a consensus top prospect in order to acquire a player of that caliber. Gregorius might have more upside than they are giving him, but the point makes sense. It is also worth noting that Arizona received Lars Anderson and Tony Sipp in that deal, but I'm not sure that really means a whole lot. The Diamondbacks have their Neifi Perez, but at the cost of a top pitching prospect. The Twins have their Perez, but got him for basically nothing, claiming him off waivers from Baltimore. In addition, the Twins have a second Perez, in Eduardo Escobar, and they acquired him in a trade for a player that they had pretty much grown apart from in Francisco Liriano. So, what's the point? I've been investigating middle infielders a lot lately, and I have come to the realization that a good defensive shortstop is a relatively valuable commodity. Basically, a shortstop with any good quality is pretty rare. A good offensive shortstop is very rare. I made that point in a post last weekend (near the bottom in the Addendum). In addition, good, valuable shortstops are extremely rare, as I posited here. Florimon is valuable because he was acquired so cheaply and he makes almost no money. In addition, he isn't the type of player who will ever earn a lot of money through the arbitration process, as he isn't likely to put up statistics that bring back big paychecks. Fine, but how hard is it to get a Florimon or Perez or Gregorius. The Twins got Florimon cheaply, while Arizona gave up a fair amount. The only way to really find out is to find more players who fit this profile. I checked each MLB team's depth chart and found players who roughly fit this profile. I only used players who project to get significant time at shortstop this coming season. I found 14 players. These players range in their offensive abilities. Some are as poor as Perez, but others have performed at a higher level. Each has been considered below average in their offensive contributions though, using wRC+, or has a poor offensive reputation, based on minor league performance. Now that I have a sample, I investigated how each of these players was acquired by their current team. Here is the chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 607] Player Team Salary (in $) How Acquired? Brendan Ryan Seattle 3.25 Mil Traded for Maikel Cleto Adeiny Hechavarria Miami 1.75 Mil Acquired in Jose Reyes/Josh Johnson/Mark Buehrle Blockbuster Ruben Tejada New York M 491 K Amateur Free Agent Zack Cozart Cincinnati 480 K 2nd Round - 2007 Draft Clint Barmes Pittsburgh 5.5 Mil Free Agency - 2 yrs/10.5 Mil Pete Kozma St. Louis League Min 1st Round - 2007 Draft Cliff Pennington Arizona 1.75 Mil Acquired in Chris Young/Heath Bell Trade Didi Gregorius Arizona League Min Acquired in Trevor Bauer Trade Jose Iglesias Boston 2.06 Mil Amateur Free Agent Everth Cabrera San Diego 1.275 Mil Rule 5 Draft Brandon Crawford San Francisco 481 K 4th Round - 2008 Draft Freddy Galvis Philadelphia 480 K Amateur Free Agent Pedro Florimon Minnesota League Min Waivers Eduardo Escobar Minnesota 480 K Francisco Liriano Trade [/TABLE] Upon first glance, it is easy to see that the Neifi Perez type is more of a National League phenomenon. Most American League teams can boast players with average offense, but not all of those shortstops provide good defense. If a better offensive option isn't present, a good defensive shortstop seems to be a worthy trade-off. It shouldn't really matter where a player provides their value. Looking at the cost of each player, we can see that the Twins might pay the least this year and will have given up the least to acquire their Neifi Perez. This chart includes some early draft picks and some players who were centerpieces in trades for quality MLB players. Others are rule 5 picks, amateur free agents and waiver claims. The range of cost for these players is greater than I would have expected. While we can debate the true merits of a player like Florimon, if a team chooses to go that route, they could do a lot worse than a waiver claim making the league minimum. One other thing that I like about a defensive shortstop is that they can have a lucky offensive season, and provide bonus value. A random, lucky, good defensive season is pretty unlikely. Many will argue that glove-first shortstops grow on trees. While this may be true, they aren't showing up in droves on MLB teams, at least not as cheaply as Florimon has. While the Twins did not raise payroll this season, if they choose to in the future, they can save a lot of money for pitching and other positions if they have a player like Florimon at short. All of this hinges on Florimon's defense. If he is as good defensively as we saw last year, the Twins may have found a valuable commodity, at a bargain basement price. The fatal flaw would be that Florimon's biggest asset is also very hard to properly quantify. Personally, I trust defensive metrics, but many do not. If his defense is not being properly evaluated, his value cannot be accurately calculated. Offense is easy to see on the field and in a spreadsheet, but defense is much tougher. It's more than just defense though, it's more defense by cost. If Florimon was making $3 million next season, I wouldn't be writing this. Fortunately for the Twins, he will be one of their cheapest players. He may not be a sexy player, but I do know that short of better options, a Florimon type makes sense and clearly other teams agree with the Twins.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Yesterday, I unveiled what will almost certainly go down in history as my most popular original idea: a weekly (fake) mailbag. In that mailbag I asked myself... I mean, I was asked about the Twins player I am higher on than most. I chose Pedro Florimon because I think his defense can provide enough value to overcome his complete lack of contribution on offense. I am not sure I explained my point very well and I wasn't feeling good about my selection. Then, I listened to The Baseball Show with Rany and Joe, a weekly podcast from two baseball writing powerhouses, Joe Sheehan and Rany Jazayerli. They were talking about the Trevor Bauer trade and how much they hated it. Basically, the Diamondbacks traded Bauer for Didi Gregorius, an all-glove, no-bat, low-upside player. Sheehan remarked that they basically traded an elite pitching prospect for Neifi Perez. This lead me to Perez's FanGraphs page. Turns out, he posted a 58 wRC+ for his career. Pedro Florimon posted a 59 wRC+ last season. Perez was mostly a glove, and didn't offer much in the hitting and baserunning departments. This sounds a lot like Pedro Florimon to me. Sheehan and Jazayerli weren't really questioning Perez or Gregorius as players, but the move to give up a consensus top prospect in order to acquire a player of that caliber. Gregorius might have more upside than they are giving him, but the point makes sense. It is also worth noting that Arizona received Lars Anderson and Tony Sipp in that deal, but I'm not sure that really means a whole lot. The Diamondbacks have their Neifi Perez, but at the cost of a top pitching prospect. The Twins have their Perez, but got him for basically nothing, claiming him off waivers from Baltimore. In addition, the Twins have a second Perez, in Eduardo Escobar, and they acquired him in a trade for a player that they had pretty much grown apart from in Francisco Liriano. So, what's the point? I've been investigating middle infielders a lot lately, and I have come to the realization that a good defensive shortstop is a relatively valuable commodity. Basically, a shortstop with any good quality is pretty rare. A good offensive shortstop is very rare. I made that point in a post last weekend (near the bottom in the Addendum). In addition, good, valuable shortstops are extremely rare, as I posited here. Florimon is valuable because he was acquired so cheaply and he makes almost no money. In addition, he isn't the type of player who will ever earn a lot of money through the arbitration process, as he isn't likely to put up statistics that bring back big paychecks. Fine, but how hard is it to get a Florimon or Perez or Gregorius. The Twins got Florimon cheaply, while Arizona gave up a fair amount. The only way to really find out is to find more players who fit this profile. I checked each MLB team's depth chart and found players who roughly fit this profile. I only used players who project to get significant time at shortstop this coming season. I found 14 players. These players range in their offensive abilities. Some are as poor as Perez, but others have performed at a higher level. Each has been considered below average in their offensive contributions though, using wRC+, or has a poor offensive reputation, based on minor league performance. Now that I have a sample, I investigated how each of these players was acquired by their current team. Here is the chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 607] Player Team Salary (in $) How Acquired? Brendan Ryan Seattle 3.25 Mil Traded for Maikel Cleto Adeiny Hechavarria Miami 1.75 Mil Acquired in Jose Reyes/Josh Johnson/Mark Buehrle Blockbuster Ruben Tejada New York M 491 K Amateur Free Agent Zack Cozart Cincinnati 480 K 2nd Round - 2007 Draft Clint Barmes Pittsburgh 5.5 Mil Free Agency - 2 yrs/10.5 Mil Pete Kozma St. Louis League Min 1st Round - 2007 Draft Cliff Pennington Arizona 1.75 Mil Acquired in Chris Young/Heath Bell Trade Didi Gregorius Arizona League Min Acquired in Trevor Bauer Trade Jose Iglesias Boston 2.06 Mil Amateur Free Agent Everth Cabrera San Diego 1.275 Mil Rule 5 Draft Brandon Crawford San Francisco 481 K 4th Round - 2008 Draft Freddy Galvis Philadelphia 480 K Amateur Free Agent Pedro Florimon Minnesota League Min Waivers Eduardo Escobar Minnesota 480 K Francisco Liriano Trade [/TABLE] Upon first glance, it is easy to see that the Neifi Perez type is more of a National League phenomenon. Most American League teams can boast players with average offense, but not all of those shortstops provide good defense. If a better offensive option isn't present, a good defensive shortstop seems to be a worthy trade-off. It shouldn't really matter where a player provides their value. Looking at the cost of each player, we can see that the Twins might pay the least this year and will have given up the least to acquire their Neifi Perez. This chart includes some early draft picks and some players who were centerpieces in trades for quality MLB players. Others are rule 5 picks, amateur free agents and waiver claims. The range of cost for these players is greater than I would have expected. While we can debate the true merits of a player like Florimon, if a team chooses to go that route, they could do a lot worse than a waiver claim making the league minimum. One other thing that I like about a defensive shortstop is that they can have a lucky offensive season, and provide bonus value. A random, lucky, good defensive season is pretty unlikely. Many will argue that glove-first shortstops grow on trees. While this may be true, they aren't showing up in droves on MLB teams, at least not as cheaply as Florimon has. While the Twins did not raise payroll this season, if they choose to in the future, they can save a lot of money for pitching and other positions if they have a player like Florimon at short. All of this hinges on Florimon's defense. If he is as good defensively as we saw last year, the Twins may have found a valuable commodity, at a bargain basement price. The fatal flaw would be that Florimon's biggest asset is also very hard to properly quantify. Personally, I trust defensive metrics, but many do not. If his defense is not being properly evaluated, his value cannot be accurately calculated. Offense is easy to see on the field and in a spreadsheet, but defense is much tougher. It's more than just defense though, it's more defense by cost. If Florimon was making $3 million next season, I wouldn't be writing this. Fortunately for the Twins, he will be one of their cheapest players. He may not be a sexy player, but I do know that short of better options, a Florimon type makes sense and clearly other teams agree with the Twins.

I would say that each is equally unsatisfying, each has the same likelihood to turn out well and each leaves you feeling sick from what just transpired.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! I get asked a lot of questions in my daily travels. Most of them are related to social studies and asked by 14-year-olds. However, I was once asked a question about the Twins and that inspired me to start a weekly (probably not) Friday mailbag! A recent report stated that the Texas Rangers are likely to trade Elvis Andrus if they cannot extend him. With Jurickson Profar on his way to stardom, should the Twins try to low-ball the Rangers to help with their impending problem? What would be a realistic trade proposal the Twins could make and would you make that trade. Thanks, huge fan! - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Aw, that's sweet. Elvis Andrus is an excellent player. He plays great defense, is improving on offense and runs the bases well. He is only 24 years old and could be a star shortstop for the next 10 years. Of course, the Rangers know that as well. I don't think a low-ball offer is a good idea, because the Rangers have other options. They may try to trade him, find that no offer is up to their standards, and then simply move him to second base, to make room for Profar. It's not their ideal scenario, but it's better than taking back a poor return. A fair offer would probably start with Miguel Sano or Byron Buxton. Both are excellent prospects, but Andrus is a proven shortstop with upside of his own. I wouldn't see any scenario where the Twins acquire Andrus without giving up one of those players. Then, they would likely need to add 2 more good prospects (think some combination of two of the following: Eddie Rosario, Alex Meyer, Jose Berrios, Max Kepler), to make it work. That sounds like a lot to give up, as we tend to grow to love our teams' prospects. However, a player like Andrus is rare and has a ton of value. You can't low-ball and expect to land him. If the Twins offered Sano, Oswaldo Arcia and Berrios, I bet it would be a done deal. Would you make that deal? Hi Brad, huge fan. I have three questions. Who wins a "Battle of the Network Stars" style competition between current Red Sox players and current Celtics players? Can you please compare the cast of Cheers (Shelly Long version, of course) to the 2004 Red Sox? Which 90210 character would make the best shortstop? Thanks! - Bill S. (Los Angeles, CA) Wow. I had no idea you were a reader. I'm a huge fan as well. However, these questions are well outside of my area of expertise. I just assumed you were working on 5000-word-columns about each of these questions. I'll answer rapid fire: Red Sox because they'd have PEDs, No, I cannot, and Robbie? Oh, and thanks for letting me use your mailbag idea. That was very kind. Hi Brad, big fan. I would say that you and Teddy Roosevelt are my two heroes. I print all your posts and use them to line my walls as wallpaper. Anyway, which Twin are you higher on than most and which Twin are you lower on than most? - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Thank you for the kind words. Although, Roosevelt was a known conservationist, and he would probably be appalled to hear that you are wasting paper in such a manner. In fact, he'd probably hunt you for sport. However, he is dead, and ghosts can't hunt. Going forward, just make PDF copies of my posts and set them as your computer desktop background instead. As for your question, it depends on what you mean by higher and lower. I certainly think that Pedro Florimon can provide better value than many are expecting, if his glove is as advertised. A 2-win player is a 2-win player is a 2-win player. If a player provides value in one area and not the other, it shouldn't matter which area the player provides value. Ryan Doumit was pretty much all offense and no defense. Pedro Florimon could prove to be the opposite. If both provide equal value, who cares where it comes from? I am lower on Justin Morneau, but just because I think his World Baseball Classic showing might be inflating his expectations. I think he will be good, but I don't see him returning to his MVP form or anything like that. If he can provide a .280/.350/.475 line, I'd be pretty happy with that. I'd probably trade him before he can put up a full season at that rate though. Stop making fun of my cheeks, stomach and tiny running steps. - Delmon Y (Philadelphia, PA) You're right, I need to stop resorting to making fun of your body. It's just not nice, and it's lazy. Instead, I shall refer to you now as Elmn Yung, since you have no O and no D. Hi Brad, I am a relatively huge fan. I consider you the Sacagawea of Kevin Slowey was Framed! The Twins recently reassigned Kyle Gibson to AAA. He wasn't having a great Spring, but it seems he is a better option than a few slated for the rotation. Where do you stand on Gibson and his contributions in 2013? - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Wow, two U.S. History references! Who are these people, am I right? To be fair, I am the only member of Kevin Slowey was Framed! so I am all things and nothing at once. I think Gibson is going to be a really good pitcher. I like that his stuff is mostly back after his surgery. He seems to be working on getting his feel and consistency back, but those were his hallmarks prior to his arm issues. If those two things come back, he could be a quality starting pitcher for the Twins, in the near future. That being said, I am fine with Gibson being cut and I would be fine with Gibson spending all of 2013 in AAA, if it comes to that. The Twins have other starting options. We may not like them, but they exist. Gibson is still recovering from major elbow surgery and he hasn't been consistently effective yet. I'm not saying they should hold him down in AAA no matter what. If he pitches well for a sustained period of time, he should be called up. However, if he remains inconsistent and is still getting his feel back, he should do that in AAA. I would like to see him get at least a handful of starts with the Twins, at some point this season. Joe Mauer is the Worst. - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) That's not a question. It's not true either. This stuff has to stop. You are either expecting too much from Mauer or you hate everyone. Either way isn't good for your blood pressure. In 2012, no one made outs at a lower rate than Mauer. That seems to be better than "the worst." Just enjoy him. He'll be gone before you know it. Thanks for all the great questions everyone. If you want to contribute to a future mailbag, you should probably contact me. I think I have a hotmail account that I use, but I can't remember the password. How about this, post your question as a review of this Little Caesar's Pizza on Yelp. I'll just know to check that review periodically. Have a nice weekend! Brad Swanson is not qualified to answer your questions. He really needs to start cleaning the garage. His musings can be heard if you are in his car between the hours of roughly 7:30 - 8:30am and 4:00 - 5:00pm, depending on traffic.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! I get asked a lot of questions in my daily travels. Most of them are related to social studies and asked by 14-year-olds. However, I was once asked a question about the Twins and that inspired me to start a weekly (probably not) Friday mailbag! A recent report stated that the Texas Rangers are likely to trade Elvis Andrus if they cannot extend him. With Jurickson Profar on his way to stardom, should the Twins try to low-ball the Rangers to help with their impending problem? What would be a realistic trade proposal the Twins could make and would you make that trade. Thanks, huge fan! - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Aw, that's sweet. Elvis Andrus is an excellent player. He plays great defense, is improving on offense and runs the bases well. He is only 24 years old and could be a star shortstop for the next 10 years. Of course, the Rangers know that as well. I don't think a low-ball offer is a good idea, because the Rangers have other options. They may try to trade him, find that no offer is up to their standards, and then simply move him to second base, to make room for Profar. It's not their ideal scenario, but it's better than taking back a poor return. A fair offer would probably start with Miguel Sano or Byron Buxton. Both are excellent prospects, but Andrus is a proven shortstop with upside of his own. I wouldn't see any scenario where the Twins acquire Andrus without giving up one of those players. Then, they would likely need to add 2 more good prospects (think some combination of two of the following: Eddie Rosario, Alex Meyer, Jose Berrios, Max Kepler), to make it work. That sounds like a lot to give up, as we tend to grow to love our teams' prospects. However, a player like Andrus is rare and has a ton of value. You can't low-ball and expect to land him. If the Twins offered Sano, Oswaldo Arcia and Berrios, I bet it would be a done deal. Would you make that deal? Hi Brad, huge fan. I have three questions. Who wins a "Battle of the Network Stars" style competition between current Red Sox players and current Celtics players? Can you please compare the cast of Cheers (Shelly Long version, of course) to the 2004 Red Sox? Which 90210 character would make the best shortstop? Thanks! - Bill S. (Los Angeles, CA) Wow. I had no idea you were a reader. I'm a huge fan as well. However, these questions are well outside of my area of expertise. I just assumed you were working on 5000-word-columns about each of these questions. I'll answer rapid fire: Red Sox because they'd have PEDs, No, I cannot, and Robbie? Oh, and thanks for letting me use your mailbag idea. That was very kind. Hi Brad, big fan. I would say that you and Teddy Roosevelt are my two heroes. I print all your posts and use them to line my walls as wallpaper. Anyway, which Twin are you higher on than most and which Twin are you lower on than most? - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Thank you for the kind words. Although, Roosevelt was a known conservationist, and he would probably be appalled to hear that you are wasting paper in such a manner. In fact, he'd probably hunt you for sport. However, he is dead, and ghosts can't hunt. Going forward, just make PDF copies of my posts and set them as your computer desktop background instead. As for your question, it depends on what you mean by higher and lower. I certainly think that Pedro Florimon can provide better value than many are expecting, if his glove is as advertised. A 2-win player is a 2-win player is a 2-win player. If a player provides value in one area and not the other, it shouldn't matter which area the player provides value. Ryan Doumit was pretty much all offense and no defense. Pedro Florimon could prove to be the opposite. If both provide equal value, who cares where it comes from? I am lower on Justin Morneau, but just because I think his World Baseball Classic showing might be inflating his expectations. I think he will be good, but I don't see him returning to his MVP form or anything like that. If he can provide a .280/.350/.475 line, I'd be pretty happy with that. I'd probably trade him before he can put up a full season at that rate though. Stop making fun of my cheeks, stomach and tiny running steps. - Delmon Y (Philadelphia, PA) You're right, I need to stop resorting to making fun of your body. It's just not nice, and it's lazy. Instead, I shall refer to you now as Elmn Yung, since you have no O and no D. Hi Brad, I am a relatively huge fan. I consider you the Sacagawea of Kevin Slowey was Framed! The Twins recently reassigned Kyle Gibson to AAA. He wasn't having a great Spring, but it seems he is a better option than a few slated for the rotation. Where do you stand on Gibson and his contributions in 2013? - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) Wow, two U.S. History references! Who are these people, am I right? To be fair, I am the only member of Kevin Slowey was Framed! so I am all things and nothing at once. I think Gibson is going to be a really good pitcher. I like that his stuff is mostly back after his surgery. He seems to be working on getting his feel and consistency back, but those were his hallmarks prior to his arm issues. If those two things come back, he could be a quality starting pitcher for the Twins, in the near future. That being said, I am fine with Gibson being cut and I would be fine with Gibson spending all of 2013 in AAA, if it comes to that. The Twins have other starting options. We may not like them, but they exist. Gibson is still recovering from major elbow surgery and he hasn't been consistently effective yet. I'm not saying they should hold him down in AAA no matter what. If he pitches well for a sustained period of time, he should be called up. However, if he remains inconsistent and is still getting his feel back, he should do that in AAA. I would like to see him get at least a handful of starts with the Twins, at some point this season. Joe Mauer is the Worst. - Brad S (Twin Cities, MN) That's not a question. It's not true either. This stuff has to stop. You are either expecting too much from Mauer or you hate everyone. Either way isn't good for your blood pressure. In 2012, no one made outs at a lower rate than Mauer. That seems to be better than "the worst." Just enjoy him. He'll be gone before you know it. Thanks for all the great questions everyone. If you want to contribute to a future mailbag, you should probably contact me. I think I have a hotmail account that I use, but I can't remember the password. How about this, post your question as a review of this Little Caesar's Pizza on Yelp. I'll just know to check that review periodically. Have a nice weekend! Brad Swanson is not qualified to answer your questions. He really needs to start cleaning the garage. His musings can be heard if you are in his car between the hours of roughly 7:30 - 8:30am and 4:00 - 5:00pm, depending on traffic.

This is an excellent list! I'm a big fan of Frazier. I know the Twins have a glut of outfielders, but that guy could be a huge star. I would also keep an eye on Jon Denney, the high school catcher from Oklahoma. Good catcher, good power. Could really move up draft boards if he has a big senior year.

You are very welcome, I am enjoying the research!

I kid about De Vries. Really, I'm trying to motivate him, and I have to say, it's working.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! If you prefer real baseball news to tomfoolery, I analyzed the Kyle Lohse signing that hasn't happened yet. You can read it here: Kyle Lohse signs with [MLB Team]. If you like tomfoolery... I buy MLB the Show every single year. I always think that I won't and then I do. I buy it, play it a lot, then completely forget about it. In fact, here is an easy to use monthly breakdown of my MLB the Show usage: March - Buy the game, play it often April - Continue to play the game, less often, tell myself "I'll just play this one for the next two years and buy the newer version every other year" May-February - Completely forget about MLB the Show, place disk under a couch, in a cereal bowl or on a shelf Late February - See a commercial or read a review for the next MLB the Show, tell myself "eh, I don't really need to buy this" Early March - See some extremely minor change in the new game that makes me want to buy it March - Buy the game, play it often Using this information, you can logically conclude that I am in the "play it often" stage of my MLB the Show development cycle. In fact, I did buy the game. I stopped on my way home from work Wednesday and I bought it. I played it for a little bit that night, then really got into it on Friday, when I didn't have to work. It's fun. It always is. The minor change that convinced me to buy the game this year is about as minor as it gets. They finally decided to give players numerical ratings instead of vague bar graph ratings! Yeah! This is nice because it is now much easier to see which players are better than others. This is important to me for some reason. I'm 30. Anyway, I thought it would be fun to see what Sony thinks of the Twins. In looking at the player ratings, there are some questionable ratings, along with some downright comical ratings. All of the ratings are out of 99. Joe Mauer leads the way with an overall 93. He also has a clutch rating of 99, so take that, haterz1! Mauer also leads the way with a 90 contact rating, an 82 arm strength rating, a 90 fielding rating, and a 99 handsome rating. In short: Sony ♥ Joe Mauer The Twins best pitcher, according to Sony, is Glen Perkins, with an overall rating of 90. He has the best control on the team, at 90, and the highest K/9 rating with an 81. He also has a fielding rating of 6. Interestingly, whenever a ball is hit to Perkins in the game, he falls down and splits his pants. Nobody's perfect. The Twins best starter is Vance Worley, with his 84 rating. Their top Canadian player is Justin Morneau at an 86. The best bad player on the team is Esmerling Vasquez at a baffling 74 overall rating, the same overall rating as Trevor Plouffe, Brian Duensing and Kevin Correia. Are you still with me? Let's look some of the Twins' best ratings: Stamina - Scott Diamond - 90 Velocity - Mike Pelfrey - 82 Break - Casey Fien - 90 BB/9 - Scott Diamond - 87 Power - Josh Willingham - 78 ? Durability - 88-year-old Jamey Carroll - 84 Speed - Darin Mastroianni - 77 Horseplay - Anthony Swarzak - 99 (see below) http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-as8M6JW5Aok/UTvFX193jNI/AAAAAAAAARg/hw-dl-a66tk/s320/Swarzak_finished.png This opens itself to a debate. Is Anthony Swarzak good or bad at horseplay? He did crack ribs as a result of horseplay, but what is the true goal of horseplay? Perhaps we can come back to this, at another time. A few other things I learned from the game: Pedro Florimon and Brian Dozier are equally good fielders - 59 Kevin Correia is a better strikeout pitcher than Mike Pelfrey - 46 to 43 Jamey Carroll has "A" potential, and stands to get better as he gets older Now, not all Twins players are in the game. If a player wasn't in the MLB last season, they do not appear. So, Aaron Hicks, Joe Benson, Rich Harden, Kyle Gibson, and so forth, are all MIA. But, you can make players, which is a tedious chore. I made Aaron Hicks, based on his current Spring Training performance. Here is the result: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YMNhE8FoW0c/UTvFw1F_BDI/AAAAAAAAARo/7pzuAWSuTYw/s320/photo+(19).JPG Not sure I captured his eyes perfectly, but everything else seems about right. If Sony has anything to say about it, here is the Opening Day lineup: [TABLE=width: 134] Mastroianni CF Carroll 2B Mauer C Willingham LF Morneau 1B Doumit DH Parmelee RF Plouffe 3B Florimon SS [/TD][TD] [/TABLE] Apparently, Ron Gardenhire works for Sony. Here is the rotation: Worley Diamond Correia Hendriks Pelfrey Looks to be fairly accurate actually. I might flip a few around, but those five seem pretty likely. Of course, if you take the five best starters by rating, it would look like this: Worley - 84 Pelfrey - 78 Diamond - 77 De Vries - 76 Correia - 74 Prior to a roster update, De Vries was an embarrassing 81 overall, and was the Twins' best starter. They addressed that issue within the first 24 hours of the game launch. His rating is still much too high. Apparently Sony loves players from Minnesota as much as we all do. You like former Twins? Here are some of the more notable ratings I found when looking around: Danny Valencia - Clutch - 71 - lol Tsuyoshi Nishioka - Fielding - 81 !!!! Yep, Nishi's in the game; get excited! Delmon Young - Speed - 36 - HA! Delmon Young - Clutch - 92 - Come on Delmon Young - Fielding - 58 - *spit-take, fall-over-in-chair, choke-on-gum, pants-fall-down, head explodes* Denard Span - Fielding - 53, worse than Delmon, but wait Carlos Gomez - Fielding - 46, so yeah Luke Hughes - Spring Training - 99 (see below) http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-peU0kD_jYFU/UTvGRpvy-iI/AAAAAAAAARw/iEsPUScnqzQ/s320/Hughes_finished.png I want that hat. The worst former Twin I could find is Eric Komatsu, at an emasculating 55 overall. Most of the computer generated minor leaguers are better than Eric Komatsu. Jeff Gray is nowhere to be found, but I am sure we can all agree that he would be a -84. But, my favorite part of this whole exercise was finding Nick Blackburn, pitching as the Ace of the New Britain Rock Cats. In fact, Sony didn't even put his picture in the game, opting to computer generate him. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hiugLXh00TE/UTvGb2v5qqI/AAAAAAAAAR4/zKfwGk6n4Fo/s320/photo+(17).JPG Not terrible, but Blackburn's real face isn't that fat. His K/9 is worst on the team, but you already knew that.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! If you prefer real baseball news to tomfoolery, I analyzed the Kyle Lohse signing that hasn't happened yet. You can read it here: Kyle Lohse signs with [MLB Team]. If you like tomfoolery... I buy MLB the Show every single year. I always think that I won't and then I do. I buy it, play it a lot, then completely forget about it. In fact, here is an easy to use monthly breakdown of my MLB the Show usage: March - Buy the game, play it often April - Continue to play the game, less often, tell myself "I'll just play this one for the next two years and buy the newer version every other year" May-February - Completely forget about MLB the Show, place disk under a couch, in a cereal bowl or on a shelf Late February - See a commercial or read a review for the next MLB the Show, tell myself "eh, I don't really need to buy this" Early March - See some extremely minor change in the new game that makes me want to buy it March - Buy the game, play it often Using this information, you can logically conclude that I am in the "play it often" stage of my MLB the Show development cycle. In fact, I did buy the game. I stopped on my way home from work Wednesday and I bought it. I played it for a little bit that night, then really got into it on Friday, when I didn't have to work. It's fun. It always is. The minor change that convinced me to buy the game this year is about as minor as it gets. They finally decided to give players numerical ratings instead of vague bar graph ratings! Yeah! This is nice because it is now much easier to see which players are better than others. This is important to me for some reason. I'm 30. Anyway, I thought it would be fun to see what Sony thinks of the Twins. In looking at the player ratings, there are some questionable ratings, along with some downright comical ratings. All of the ratings are out of 99. Joe Mauer leads the way with an overall 93. He also has a clutch rating of 99, so take that, haterz1! Mauer also leads the way with a 90 contact rating, an 82 arm strength rating, a 90 fielding rating, and a 99 handsome rating. In short: Sony ♥ Joe Mauer The Twins best pitcher, according to Sony, is Glen Perkins, with an overall rating of 90. He has the best control on the team, at 90, and the highest K/9 rating with an 81. He also has a fielding rating of 6. Interestingly, whenever a ball is hit to Perkins in the game, he falls down and splits his pants. Nobody's perfect. The Twins best starter is Vance Worley, with his 84 rating. Their top Canadian player is Justin Morneau at an 86. The best bad player on the team is Esmerling Vasquez at a baffling 74 overall rating, the same overall rating as Trevor Plouffe, Brian Duensing and Kevin Correia. Are you still with me? Let's look some of the Twins' best ratings: Stamina - Scott Diamond - 90 Velocity - Mike Pelfrey - 82 Break - Casey Fien - 90 BB/9 - Scott Diamond - 87 Power - Josh Willingham - 78 ? Durability - 88-year-old Jamey Carroll - 84 Speed - Darin Mastroianni - 77 Horseplay - Anthony Swarzak - 99 (see below) http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-as8M6JW5Aok/UTvFX193jNI/AAAAAAAAARg/hw-dl-a66tk/s320/Swarzak_finished.png This opens itself to a debate. Is Anthony Swarzak good or bad at horseplay? He did crack ribs as a result of horseplay, but what is the true goal of horseplay? Perhaps we can come back to this, at another time. A few other things I learned from the game: Pedro Florimon and Brian Dozier are equally good fielders - 59 Kevin Correia is a better strikeout pitcher than Mike Pelfrey - 46 to 43 Jamey Carroll has "A" potential, and stands to get better as he gets older Now, not all Twins players are in the game. If a player wasn't in the MLB last season, they do not appear. So, Aaron Hicks, Joe Benson, Rich Harden, Kyle Gibson, and so forth, are all MIA. But, you can make players, which is a tedious chore. I made Aaron Hicks, based on his current Spring Training performance. Here is the result: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YMNhE8FoW0c/UTvFw1F_BDI/AAAAAAAAARo/7pzuAWSuTYw/s320/photo+(19).JPG Not sure I captured his eyes perfectly, but everything else seems about right. If Sony has anything to say about it, here is the Opening Day lineup: [TABLE=width: 134] Mastroianni CF Carroll 2B Mauer C Willingham LF Morneau 1B Doumit DH Parmelee RF Plouffe 3B Florimon SS [/TD][TD] [/TABLE] Apparently, Ron Gardenhire works for Sony. Here is the rotation: Worley Diamond Correia Hendriks Pelfrey Looks to be fairly accurate actually. I might flip a few around, but those five seem pretty likely. Of course, if you take the five best starters by rating, it would look like this: Worley - 84 Pelfrey - 78 Diamond - 77 De Vries - 76 Correia - 74 Prior to a roster update, De Vries was an embarrassing 81 overall, and was the Twins' best starter. They addressed that issue within the first 24 hours of the game launch. His rating is still much too high. Apparently Sony loves players from Minnesota as much as we all do. You like former Twins? Here are some of the more notable ratings I found when looking around: Danny Valencia - Clutch - 71 - lol Tsuyoshi Nishioka - Fielding - 81 !!!! Yep, Nishi's in the game; get excited! Delmon Young - Speed - 36 - HA! Delmon Young - Clutch - 92 - Come on Delmon Young - Fielding - 58 - *spit-take, fall-over-in-chair, choke-on-gum, pants-fall-down, head explodes* Denard Span - Fielding - 53, worse than Delmon, but wait Carlos Gomez - Fielding - 46, so yeah Luke Hughes - Spring Training - 99 (see below) http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-peU0kD_jYFU/UTvGRpvy-iI/AAAAAAAAARw/iEsPUScnqzQ/s320/Hughes_finished.png I want that hat. The worst former Twin I could find is Eric Komatsu, at an emasculating 55 overall. Most of the computer generated minor leaguers are better than Eric Komatsu. Jeff Gray is nowhere to be found, but I am sure we can all agree that he would be a -84. But, my favorite part of this whole exercise was finding Nick Blackburn, pitching as the Ace of the New Britain Rock Cats. In fact, Sony didn't even put his picture in the game, opting to computer generate him. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hiugLXh00TE/UTvGb2v5qqI/AAAAAAAAAR4/zKfwGk6n4Fo/s320/photo+(17).JPG Not terrible, but Blackburn's real face isn't that fat. His K/9 is worst on the team, but you already knew that.

Beckmt - Thanks! I'll add age to my analysis of the 2B and SS that I am working on. That is an excellent addition, and I wish I had added it earlier. As for 'roids, if I could remove the players that I know took 'roids, I would. However, it's probably just best to assume the 1998-2002 numbers are a bit inflated, due to this issue. The year-by-year data would support that claim. Jim - I certainly cannot reconcile your (or my) issues with WAR. I completely agree that this "research" isn't breaking new ground. However, it does give me a new avenue to explore, which I think will be worth pursuing. As for the offensive part, your wish is my command. I added a part at the end, just for you!

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Last weekend, I introduced the Gagne Threshold. I used a variety of criteria to find good middle infielders over the past 30 seasons. I'm not going to go through everything again, but if you missed it and want to take a look, you can find it here. To summarize, I found 63 good players, 33 at second and 30 at short. I also found that there wasn't a specific team that was more or less adept at finding these players, as the sample is so small that no team really stands out. In the end, 30 shortstops in 30 years seemed like an impossibly low number. However, the number on its own isn't all that useful, unless it can be compared to other positions. Therefore, I decided to investigate if the middle infield positions have been harder to fill with good players over the past 30 years. Career numbers aren't as important to me, so I focused on seasonal data. If a team has five or six good, young middle infielders that they rotate through, they may not produce good career players, but would still get good value at those positions on a relatively regular basis. I looked at each offensive position, year-by-year, over the past 30 seasons. I wanted to know how many players would be considered "good" in each year and how "good" the best players were during those 30 seasons. I decided to use WAR again. Terrible toothbrush analogies aside, I do think WAR is the best available measure that we can use to compare players from 2012 to 1983. It isn't perfect, but it gives us some information, which is better than just throwing our hands up in the air and crying under the bed. FanGraphs.com has an excellent explanation of how they calculate WAR. You can start here, and choose to read as much as you'd like. I read through the all the pages, and I feel that I understand their methods very well. FanGraphs outlines a player with a 2+ WAR as being a solid starter or better, which is a number I will be using as the basis of this analysis. Here are the two factors I investigated: How many players provided a 2+ WAR at each position, in each season? This was an easy way to look at how many good players each position supplied. What was the cumulative WAR for the top ten players at each position? This allowed me to compare the actual value given at each position. Here is my resulting chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] Year # of 2+ WAR 2+ WAR/ Season Top 10 Total WAR Top 10 Avg WAR Top 10 Player Avg WAR C 417 13.90 1131.8 37.73 3.77 1B 564 18.80 1512.1 50.40 5.04 2B 487 16.23 1307.6 43.59 4.36 3B 569 18.97 1472.8 49.09 4.91 SS 442 14.73 1308.6 43.62 4.36 LF 592 19.73 1475.2 49.17 4.92 CF 617 20.57 1541.9 51.40 5.14 RF 624 20.80 1427 47.57 4.76 OF 1625 18.06 4389.8 48.78 4.88 [/TABLE] I am terrible at labeling fields, so let me just clarify: # of 2+ WAR = Number of players with 2+ WAR in the last 30 seasons # of 2+ WAR/Season = Average number of players with 2+ WAR, over 30 seasons Top 10 Total WAR = Total WAR from all top ten players, added together from the last 30 seasons Top 10 Avg WAR = Seasonal average for the top ten players (as a whole), by WAR Top 10 Player Avg WAR = Average WAR for a top ten player, over the past 30 seasons I broke down outfielders by individual position, but also by all outfielders. I did this because many outfielders played multiple outfield positions. The OF value is most accurate, but the LF, CF and RF values are still interesting to look at. The results show that the two middle infield positions are pretty hard to find, compared with all other positions other than catcher. Catcher is the hardest position to fill, according to these findings. The number of 2+ WAR second basemen was higher, but the overall WAR value was almost identical. So, it seems to be easier to find second basemen, but good shortstops provide more value. In short, the average top ten middle infielder between 1983 and 2012 provided 4.36 WAR. Teams get roughly 10-15% less value from the middle infield, compared with corner infield and outfield. Of course, teams get even less value from catcher. Having Joe Mauer on the team over the last 9 seasons has been a really big boost for the Twins. Just finding a good catcher is hard to do, but having a consistently good catcher is extremely hard to pull off. Of course, that is a separate topic. The average top ten middle infielder provides about .5 WAR less than the average top ten player at nearly every other position. This shows that teams are often playing middle infielders that are both below average and below the quality of players at other positions. Something to keep in mind about WAR is that the stat already gives players credit for playing these difficult positions, so some of their value actually comes from simply playing the position, saying nothing about how well they play it. Basically, if two players are completely equal in all ways - batting, slugging, baserunning, defense, etc, the shortstop will have a higher WAR than the first baseman, simply for playing the more difficult position; shortstop more than second base, but still. So, the actual production of these players might even be worse than would be indicated in my chart. By giving these middle infielders an automatic bump, their WARs are artificially inflated (on purpose). In addition, the first basemen and corner outfielders are actually penalized in WAR, ever widening the gap. There is logic in the positional adjustments made in calculating WAR. However, these adjustments show that if the sample of shortstops and first basemen are about .5 WAR apart, their production might actually be much farther off than one might think, just looking at WAR. Finding a good shortstop or second baseman is clearly hard to find, and that is why these players get a boost in their value. The actual production is important though. We can see that over the past 30 seasons, the middle infield has provided less value than most of the other positions and that good middle infielders are clearly rarer than good players at most of the other positions. While this may seem like an obvious conclusion, having the research and data to support the conclusion is very important. The next step is to investigate the samples of good second basemen and shortstops. Where does their value come from? Why are they more rare than players at other positions? I'm working on analyzing some data and I hope to share it with you very soon. Stay tuned! Here is a link to the spreadsheet I created while doing this research. It breaks down most of this data by year, and it is pretty interesting to look at: Raw data For Jim: wRC+ is my metric of choice. wRC+ is slick because all the factors that create runs are put together and then the values are normalized and adjusted for park factors and era. Thus, you can compare Greg Gagne to Brendan Ryan, to see who was the better hitter. The metric is based off of the number 100, where 100 is average and each corresponding number is a percentage above or below. So, Gagne's career wRC+ is 82, meaning he was 18% below league average for his career. I decided to look by position, to see if good, offensive shortstops are particularly rare. I decided I had no use for players with fewer than 500 games played. Roughly three seasons worth of games seems like a decent sample size. Here is my resulting chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] [/TD] # of Players Good Offense Good % C 238 46 19.33% 1B 230 137 59.57% 2B 284 52 18.31% 3B 249 84 33.73% SS 239 24 10.04% LF 341 150 43.99% CF 269 76 28.25% RF 296 143 48.31% 500 games min [TD] [/TABLE] n is the number of players, "good" refers to players with above average offensive production (wRC+ > 100) and "good %" shows what percentage of each sample met that criteria. As you can see, the further down the defensive spectrum you go, the harder it is to find a good offensive player at that position. This is hardly breaking news. The part that surprised me was just how small the sample was at short. There were only 24 players from the past 30 seasons who posted a career wRC+ over 100.

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Last weekend, I introduced the Gagne Threshold. I used a variety of criteria to find good middle infielders over the past 30 seasons. I'm not going to go through everything again, but if you missed it and want to take a look, you can find it here. To summarize, I found 63 good players, 33 at second and 30 at short. I also found that there wasn't a specific team that was more or less adept at finding these players, as the sample is so small that no team really stands out. In the end, 30 shortstops in 30 years seemed like an impossibly low number. However, the number on its own isn't all that useful, unless it can be compared to other positions. Therefore, I decided to investigate if the middle infield positions have been harder to fill with good players over the past 30 years. Career numbers aren't as important to me, so I focused on seasonal data. If a team has five or six good, young middle infielders that they rotate through, they may not produce good career players, but would still get good value at those positions on a relatively regular basis. I looked at each offensive position, year-by-year, over the past 30 seasons. I wanted to know how many players would be considered "good" in each year and how "good" the best players were during those 30 seasons. I decided to use WAR again. Terrible toothbrush analogies aside, I do think WAR is the best available measure that we can use to compare players from 2012 to 1983. It isn't perfect, but it gives us some information, which is better than just throwing our hands up in the air and crying under the bed. FanGraphs.com has an excellent explanation of how they calculate WAR. You can start here, and choose to read as much as you'd like. I read through the all the pages, and I feel that I understand their methods very well. FanGraphs outlines a player with a 2+ WAR as being a solid starter or better, which is a number I will be using as the basis of this analysis. Here are the two factors I investigated: How many players provided a 2+ WAR at each position, in each season? This was an easy way to look at how many good players each position supplied. What was the cumulative WAR for the top ten players at each position? This allowed me to compare the actual value given at each position. Here is my resulting chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] Year # of 2+ WAR 2+ WAR/ Season Top 10 Total WAR Top 10 Avg WAR Top 10 Player Avg WAR C 417 13.90 1131.8 37.73 3.77 1B 564 18.80 1512.1 50.40 5.04 2B 487 16.23 1307.6 43.59 4.36 3B 569 18.97 1472.8 49.09 4.91 SS 442 14.73 1308.6 43.62 4.36 LF 592 19.73 1475.2 49.17 4.92 CF 617 20.57 1541.9 51.40 5.14 RF 624 20.80 1427 47.57 4.76 OF 1625 18.06 4389.8 48.78 4.88 [/TABLE] I am terrible at labeling fields, so let me just clarify: # of 2+ WAR = Number of players with 2+ WAR in the last 30 seasons # of 2+ WAR/Season = Average number of players with 2+ WAR, over 30 seasons Top 10 Total WAR = Total WAR from all top ten players, added together from the last 30 seasons Top 10 Avg WAR = Seasonal average for the top ten players (as a whole), by WAR Top 10 Player Avg WAR = Average WAR for a top ten player, over the past 30 seasons I broke down outfielders by individual position, but also by all outfielders. I did this because many outfielders played multiple outfield positions. The OF value is most accurate, but the LF, CF and RF values are still interesting to look at. The results show that the two middle infield positions are pretty hard to find, compared with all other positions other than catcher. Catcher is the hardest position to fill, according to these findings. The number of 2+ WAR second basemen was higher, but the overall WAR value was almost identical. So, it seems to be easier to find second basemen, but good shortstops provide more value. In short, the average top ten middle infielder between 1983 and 2012 provided 4.36 WAR. Teams get roughly 10-15% less value from the middle infield, compared with corner infield and outfield. Of course, teams get even less value from catcher. Having Joe Mauer on the team over the last 9 seasons has been a really big boost for the Twins. Just finding a good catcher is hard to do, but having a consistently good catcher is extremely hard to pull off. Of course, that is a separate topic. The average top ten middle infielder provides about .5 WAR less than the average top ten player at nearly every other position. This shows that teams are often playing middle infielders that are both below average and below the quality of players at other positions. Something to keep in mind about WAR is that the stat already gives players credit for playing these difficult positions, so some of their value actually comes from simply playing the position, saying nothing about how well they play it. Basically, if two players are completely equal in all ways - batting, slugging, baserunning, defense, etc, the shortstop will have a higher WAR than the first baseman, simply for playing the more difficult position; shortstop more than second base, but still. So, the actual production of these players might even be worse than would be indicated in my chart. By giving these middle infielders an automatic bump, their WARs are artificially inflated (on purpose). In addition, the first basemen and corner outfielders are actually penalized in WAR, ever widening the gap. There is logic in the positional adjustments made in calculating WAR. However, these adjustments show that if the sample of shortstops and first basemen are about .5 WAR apart, their production might actually be much farther off than one might think, just looking at WAR. Finding a good shortstop or second baseman is clearly hard to find, and that is why these players get a boost in their value. The actual production is important though. We can see that over the past 30 seasons, the middle infield has provided less value than most of the other positions and that good middle infielders are clearly rarer than good players at most of the other positions. While this may seem like an obvious conclusion, having the research and data to support the conclusion is very important. The next step is to investigate the samples of good second basemen and shortstops. Where does their value come from? Why are they more rare than players at other positions? I'm working on analyzing some data and I hope to share it with you very soon. Stay tuned! Here is a link to the spreadsheet I created while doing this research. It breaks down most of this data by year, and it is pretty interesting to look at: Raw data For Jim: wRC+ is my metric of choice. wRC+ is slick because all the factors that create runs are put together and then the values are normalized and adjusted for park factors and era. Thus, you can compare Greg Gagne to Brendan Ryan, to see who was the better hitter. The metric is based off of the number 100, where 100 is average and each corresponding number is a percentage above or below. So, Gagne's career wRC+ is 82, meaning he was 18% below league average for his career. I decided to look by position, to see if good, offensive shortstops are particularly rare. I decided I had no use for players with fewer than 500 games played. Roughly three seasons worth of games seems like a decent sample size. Here is my resulting chart: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] [/TD] # of Players Good Offense Good % C 238 46 19.33% 1B 230 137 59.57% 2B 284 52 18.31% 3B 249 84 33.73% SS 239 24 10.04% LF 341 150 43.99% CF 269 76 28.25% RF 296 143 48.31% 500 games min [TD] [/TABLE] n is the number of players, "good" refers to players with above average offensive production (wRC+ > 100) and "good %" shows what percentage of each sample met that criteria. As you can see, the further down the defensive spectrum you go, the harder it is to find a good offensive player at that position. This is hardly breaking news. The part that surprised me was just how small the sample was at short. There were only 24 players from the past 30 seasons who posted a career wRC+ over 100.

I would fully agree. The total zone rating that is used for WAR prior to 2002 really likes Gagne's defense. I think he was 6th in that span, behind guys like Ozzie Smith, Cal Ripken and Omar Vizquel. Of course, the way TZ is calculated is not perfect. It does seem to confirm some form of the eye-test though.

Yep, Bartlett was the third Twins player. He actually had a really nice 5-year peak. And thank you, glunn. I appreciate the kind words and I am glad you enjoyed the post!