Cap'n Piranha

Based on track record, I think it's likely this FO will attempt to start the year with 3-4 MLB veterans in the rotation, so that Duran/Balazovic/Winder are the injury replacements. Alternatively, if we have a Shoemaker or Happ situation again, and any of those three are doing well in AAA, they could be swapped out. If the FO wants to contend in 2022, they won't want zero depth behind their untested rookies starting the year in the rotation. If the FO wants to build for 2023/2024, there's no reason to rush that young trio, and ideally, they woudl strike gold on a one-year make-good veteran, and flip him for something at the deadline in 2022, and then promote the young guy(s). As such, I think the odds of any of the three making the opening day roster is much more like the 20-30% the previous poster surmised.

89.1% LOB rate (league average is 72%) doesn't stick out? That's better than all but one pitcher in the league this year. How about his 12.9% line drive rate (league average is 20.9%), despite having similar soft/medium/hard contact numbers to league average? Maybe his 58.2% FB rate (league average is 50.9%) is of concern, since he's sitting under 95 MPH? None of that means he's going to fall off a cliff of course, but I would be wary of buying on a SSS of good performance, especially based on that LOB Rate.

The large issues the Twins have had this year begin and end with the disastrous injuries (Buxton, Garver, Pineda, and to a degree, Dobnak), and the complete failure of 2020's pitching free agents (Happ, Shoemaker, Colome). No reasonable baseball person would have forecast any of those 3 being sub-replacement level this year (perhaps at replacement level), and certainly not all 3. Trading for Maeda was a good decision at the time (getting an undervalued starter with 4 years of control on a team-friendly deal for a reliever is a no-brainer), and has been a steal since (Graterol looked good last year, if you ignore the 5 k/9, but this year has spent more time in AAA than MLB, and pitched to a 6.48 ERA). Donaldson has also not been the problem. Since signing with the Twins, amongst 3B with 300+ PA's, he's 5th in OPS, 5th in wRC+, 5th in wOBA, 4th in HR/PA, 7th in Hard Hit Rate, and 2nd in bb rate. He's compiled 2.6 WAR in 103 games, which is a 4 WAR player across a full season. It's peculiar to me that your go-to examples of bad FO decisions are, other than the Nelson Cruz signing, probably the two best decisions the FO have made to date, and are two moves that they would undoubtedly make again if given the chance, I also have no idea why you think Lewis is somehow 3-4 years away--if not for the injury, he would probably be on this team now. I see no reason that he won't debut next year, and probably be a starter by 2023 at the latest. Sure, trades look bad when the prospect in return fizzles. But what if they don't? Do you think maybe the White Sox regret trading Fernando Tatis Jr for James Shields? Do you think maybe the Padres would like to have Trea Turner back, instead of Wil Myers?

I would hardly say being realistic that a pitching staff which aged faster than expected, while simultaneously losing an entire year of development on key pitching prospects makes what Falvine has done a failure. They signed Donaldson to push a 103 win team over the top, and then got COVID instead. Before this year there was no glaring reason to sign Buxton to an extension, and with Berrios...you can't sign a guy to an extension if he doesn't want to sign a reasonable one. They traded Graterol for the 2nd best pitcher in the league last year, who has definitely struggled this year, but whom they still control for 2 more years. Did they overvalue Romero and Gonsalves by keeping them around? Maybe; perhaps they tried to trade them, but other teams were lukewarm on them as well. But even if they didn't want to trade them, the Twins will always need a steady stream of players from the minors to compete, and the only way to guarantee that is to keep more than you need, and see which ones work. No front office is ever going to be 100% at figuring out which players will translate in the bigs--even seeming sure things can fall apart. As for Lewis, 7 or 8 years means he wouldn't be here until 2024/2025--that is a preposterous timeline (also worth noting he's now lost 2 entire years to injury/cancellation--hard to hold either of those against him or the front office). I actually do think the Twins should trade Garver if they get an offer, as he and Jeffers seem to be pretty redundant. My inclusion of him on that list was if the Twins wanted to keep an older guy around for team leadership purposes. I specifically stated that if the players I listed didn't work out, the Twins are sunk, both in 2023 AND 2022. If none of those players are going to be first division regulars, the Twins won't be able to obtain enough talent on the FA market to compete next year anyways, so why get nothing in return for Buxton/Berrios/Rogers in order to finish 85-77? Better to finish 70-92 with all the young guys in 2022, get some high-level prospects, and see what you truly have. Between Duran/Balazovic/Winder/Canterino, there's a decent chance the Twins get a pitcher approximately as good as Berrios, and a decent chance they get another 1-2 guys who can be a serviceable 4 or 5 for a few years. As I also mentioned, the Twins should have $80M-$100M in payroll space by 2023 (barring early extensions for pre-arb guys), so the idea that I think they are relying on prospect pitchers is not grounded in reality. Finally, I wouldn't be terribly upset if Falvine were shown the door after this year as we head into a rebuild, but nor do I think they should be. They inherited a team that had just lost 100 games, and within 4 years, had it playing at 101 win pace for almost a season and a half. This year has surely been a disappointment, and the moves have not worked out, but Falvine has shown enough to get the chance to right the ship they built.

Welcome back GarvSauce!

All on one pitch. Say what you will about Jose, but he's efficient!

But banning the shift won't fix this. If teams currently value pulled fly balls over easy singles hit against the shift, why would they all of the sudden switch that opinion when the easy single goes away, AND there are fewer defenders on the pull side? If the real issue here is that baseball doesn't value putting the ball in play, but instead wants to play the Three True Outcomes game, the only way to stop that is to make it more valuable for teams to hit singles and doubles.

Jeffers has a 1.074 OPS with a 187 wRC+ against lefties this year. Not for nothing, but for his career, Mike Trout has a 1.002 OPS with a 172 wRC+. The problem is that when Garver is on the team, Jeffers never gets to hit against lefties. I would imagine that the front office would be reasonably happy if they got a good trade offer for Garver this year.

I was referring to before the pitch/snap, which is the only time positioning for the shift is applicable. When a play is in progress, you are correct--no sport allows defenses to do whatever they want. Before the play commences? Every sport allows defenses to position themselves in any way they choose (other than occupying areas designated for the offense). I'm also not sure what strawman comment I made--let me know!

First comment is not a strawman. You said you didn't like the shift because it reduces babip, I offered another fact of baseball that reduces babip. If the goal is to increase babip, reducing the number of fielders is the quickest and easiest way to do that. I will also note that every rule area in football you mentioned here applies ONLY to the offense, and NEVER to the defense (other than not being able to stand on the offense's side of the line of scrimmage). This is much like baseball, where the players on offense are told where they can stand, when they can move, and whether they can make contact with the ball.

So with no shift, there will be even less reason to try and go the other way, leading to more pull hitting, which will inevitably be tied to a desire for optimal launch angles in order to hit home runs. So...eliminating the shift will do...what, exactly?

This is a joke right? There are raging debates about unwritten rules every year. If that's not an honor system, I don't know what is.

3 outfielders and 4 infielders also reduces BABIP; let's reduce that so we can have more hits. Football is also a spectator sport, and has no qualms about allowing the defense to do whatever it wants on it's side of the line of scrimmage. The problem is not the shift. The problem is front offices that don't insist players learn to hit the other way, and find gaps in the defense. Maybe this will start to change--look at CWS, for example. The White Sox are 3rd in runs, but are 23rd in homers, 15th in hard hit rate, 20th in barrels. How? They're 4th in average, 1st in OBP, and 3rd in opposite field rate, which could be tied to being 1st in babip (hit it where they ain't).

He's had 10, just this year.

It doesn't lead to less action, it leads to fewer hits. You know what else leads to less action? Intentional unintentional balls. Pick off attempts. Catchers throwing behind runners after pitches. The big problem baseball has is that putting balls in play has been deemphasized. The best way to fix that is to make having baserunners more valuable. Make it worth it for lefties to go the other way against the shift, and it will go away. Quickly.

Ok, let's put in our closer to finish this one off! Oh, wait...

Unless you're Keith Richards.

Routine ground balls to second are so boring. Ban them already.

JONRON!!!

Why type two words when I can type 4, along with some scrolling and hot copy-paste action?

Sure! Tuned in right at the end of the Top of the 4th, and I see that what I missed is exactly the same as what War's good for... Absolutely nothing. You're welcome!

Tuned in right at the end of the Top of the 4th, and I see that what I missed is exactly the same as what War's good for... Absolutely nothing.

No, it does not guarantee a window in 2023/2024, but it makes it much more likely. If you start 2023 with Larnach, Kiriloff, Polanco, Garver, Arraez, Lewis, and Miranda in your lineup, along with Duran, Winder, Balazovic, Canterino, Ober, and Barnes as pitchers, but then add another 3-5 Top 100 prospects to that, along with a high draft pick in the 2022 draft, you could have 6-8 Top 100 guys. Add in potentially a ton of cash to spend (if the Twins buy out Sano--likely--and eat half of Donaldson's salary in a trade, they only have $33.4M in commitments. If the players listed above are finding success, you could do Polanco/Kepler style contracts on them, and still have $50M to $60M to spend. If the players listed above are failing, nothing the Twins do for 2022 will fix that. The point of giving up on contention in 2022 right now is to accelerate the rebuild that is probably coming in 2023 if you don't. Do it right, and you can shave 1-2 years off of that.

On paper, if you bring back everyone who have control over, and make no additions, the 2022 Twins lineup is pretty decent. C--Garver/Jeffers/Rortvedt 1B--Kiriloff/Sano 2B--Polanco/Arraez SS--Polanco/Gordon/Lewis 3B--Donaldson/Sano/Miranda LF--Larnach/Arraez CF--Buxton/Kepler RF--Kepler/Kiriloff DH--Rooker That's 15 guys that we can all say should not really be in the minors (with a roster of 13 position players, only 2 need be injured concurrently for all of those guys to be up), with the exception of Miranda and Lewis, who can be brought up when injuries inevitably strike. Ideally the defense at short would be better, but other than that, the roster would have a ton of flexibility, players could be cycled through the DH slot for "half-days", there's some room to platoon based on the opponent's starter, and the bench should be reasonably robust. From a pitching standpoint, it looks a little different. SP1--Berrios SP2--Maeda SP3--Ober SP4--Barnes SP5--Duran/Winder/Balazovic/Dobnak RP1--Rogers RP2--Duffey RP3--Alcala RP4--Theilbar RP5--Stashak RP6--Farrell RP7--Law RP8--Coulombe That's a not particularly good rotation, with completely unproven depth, and a pretty poor bullpen, with essentially no depth. If the Twins do indeed have $40M to spend this offseason, and do indeed spend it, and argue that even that won't be enough to make the team competitive (on paper) on Opening Day, from a pitching standpoint. Getting two arms to bring the rotation to playoff-caliber probably requires the totality of that $40M, leaving nothing for bullpen upgrades. Alternatively, the Twins could spend $20M on one starter, and then $10M each on two relievers, and that might be intriguing, but it would still necessitate two out of our 6 young starters being in the rotation, while leaving the back of our bullpen thin. If injuries/decline reared their head, the bullpen could fall apart quickly. It's this reality that leads me to the conclusion that the Twins should trade anyone who is not guaranteed to be here in 2023, and attempt to open a new window in 2023/2024. If they try to compete next year, and wind up 85-77 and missing the playoffs by 7 games, they're probably looking at the next window not opening until 2025 or 2026 at the earliest.

You cut my sentence off at a comma, never a good thing to do. I'm worried they go 11-4 out of the break, WHICH causes the FO to not trade anyone. The fear is on the second part, as I don't think it's super likely they go 11-4 out of the break, but nor is it impossible. At the time of writing, the Twins had 8 games against Detroit, 4 against the White Sox, and 3 against the Angels in those 15 games. Is 7-1 against Det, 2-1 against LA, and 2-2 against Chi really so far-fetched? Maybe a 20% chance? Even if only a 1% chance, I still doubt that lightning strikes/bears attack 3-4 times a year in your neighborhood, and if it does, I bet you would worry about it.