dxpavelka

if the roster was constructed differently there would be less demand for a guy whose value lies mainly in his versatility.

At some point I'd love to see this team focus more on actual value than on versatility. Having guys who can play a multitude of places is great but if they are not a plus player with either the bat or the glove at any of them I don't see much actual value. How I miss the days when a manager had 8 guys that he ran out there at the start of 125 games. This year's edition of the local nine had four such guys. The 1991 Twins had 8 guys that started 112 games. The 1987 Twins had six guys start 124 games. Tom Kelly made it a point to tell a Randy Bush to grab a glove and get used to using it more than he previously had. Today's managers play the analytics game too much and spend too much time chasing micro matchups against a starting pitcher that might only pitch 2 and 2/3 innings and then find themselves at a disadvantage after the pitching change, and with only a four man bench a lack of options to change. Now you kids get the hell off my grass.

If they intend to spend more money on payroll I have no objection to that money being spent to keep guys here rather than TRYING to bring in guys that are probably not likely to be worth the price. Like it or not it's likelythat we would get twice the value for a FA 1B at $17 million AAV than we have recently from guys like Bell, Santana or Solano at less than half that.

Yup. 2027 bridge, 2028 platoon / mentor maybe even DH and 3rd catcher in 28 if two of the kids are ready and a trade chip at the 2028 deadline if two kids are REALLY ready. Ideally the team looking for a wiley veteran for a playoff run in 28 is the Minnesota Twins and we already have him.

Any defensive plan that involves Keaschall doing anything other than planting his feet in one spot in the grass or on the dirt and staying there is not a good plan.

Why would a big league team not satisfied with their catching talent in the minor leagues move their big league catcher?

Two years, I'm in.

The best? Sure. Far and away? I get that folks wearing Twins colored glasses might not believe this but he only only projects at 3-4 years at max AAV of $15 million. That doesn't scream far and away the best catcher available.

Are there a lot of 29 year old catchers with slightly average at best defensive skills getting four year contracts?

he was a teenager for most of those three years. A lot of guys spend those years in college.

Four of their top 10 prospects are catchers. A two year deal seems much more reasonable.

Five of our top 20 prospects are catchers. All of them are a ways off. And that's ok. I would be just fine with Jeffers coming back as a $23 million bridge for a year. Hopefully, by 2028, one of the five is ready to shoulder part of the load in the big leagues. By 2029 I would fully expect two of these guys to be the mainstays. And by 2029 or 2030 one or more of them is likely to end up moving out from behind the plate. Tait and Tinney would seem to be the most likely, not because of obvious defensive skills that might play elsewhere but because of bat skills that would benefit from shedding the tools of ignorance. Not a bad place to be as an organization.

Making the offer to Jeffers is a no brainer. The worst possible outcome is that he declines and we get a draft pick. If he accepts we pay him. Shouldn't be a big deal. If it IS a big deal than we have problems. Sorry but that's the truth. If we consider Culpepper, Jenkins & Rodriguez to be big league players and no longer prospects, four of our top seven (maybe ten depending on which rating you use) prospects are catchers. However, NONE of them will be ready to contribute at the big league level this year. $23 Million for one of the best catchers around to be a bridge to the young fellas would be a wise investment.

I said at the deadline that they should trade Caratini rather than Jeffers and nearly got jeered off this site.