KirbyDome89

I think it's much more about pointing out how badly the swing and miss on Happ/Shoemaker has been rather than anyone banging the drum for Flexen.

So now the FO was forced via financial constraint into making poor decisions? If I accepted that as true (I don't) wouldn't the fault still lie with the FO for putting themselves in that position? Record payroll rings hollow. These franchises aren't going to suddenly stop printing money, particularly in the era of tv deals. Natural progression means we'll continue to see payroll and contract amounts rise, even for our awe shucks, small market Twins. In comparison to the rest of the league they're still sitting where they normally do, middle to bottom third. If you're determined to pocket protect, there are at least 3-4 current SPs on 1 year deals that would've fit within the money owed to Happ & Shoemaker, or those two + Colome, and they'd all be considerable upgrades.

There isn't much to suggest that trio would've had decent success as a starting group, even if they all rotated through that 5th. Again, if that's your last rotation spot and you have a starting caliber pitcher forcing their way onto the active roster than sure, a team can live with Happ + others every 5th day for a limited amount of time. That clearly wasn't the situation with the Twins. When I say "in a vacuum," I mean you can likely justify almost any signing to some degree, but roster construction needs to be taken into consideration as well. The issue is that both Happ and Shoemaker were the same type of pitcher; bounce back candidate, back end guys that carried bust potential. You can defend Happ as a 5th guy, I'd point out that expecting a trend reversal at 38 was a big gamble even for that spot, but with Shoemaker aboard that obviously wasn't going to be Happ's role and so the expectations shift. Adrianza was a decent utility guy, but if he opens the season starting at 3B by design and puts up utility-esque numbers that's a problem. I really doubt (hope) this FO wasn't banking on Ober or Jax taking over in June, or even July. That'd be a nearly unforgivable dereliction of duty in a season where this team was expected to compete. Maybe, maybe they thought Duran could be up at one point but even banking on that would've been questionable entering the season. If they're signing pitcher(s) with the expectation that they become ineffective/replaceable within the first 2-3 months then I think that raises more serious questions than talent evaluation in regards to this FO. Expecting prospects to take over multiple rotation spots and hit the ground running while competing for a division is ahhh....yeah. Nobody is suggesting we foresaw the team being this bad. Nobody. There isn't one glaring f*** up to blame this miserable season on. It's a series of failures that has gotten us to this point.

Shoemaker not working out wasn't exactly unpredictable. If you want to say they saw something in Happ's '20 performance and chose to ignore '19 then fine. If he was the 5th starter and there was a capable backup at or near the majors then it's justifiable, but that wasn't the case. If Happ is your 4th starter and the guy ahead of him in the rotation spends a good chunk of each season on the DL, the guy behind him hasn't been reliable and/or good for 4 years, and the only internal replacement option is Randy Dobnak, that's a problem. These signings can't be viewed in a vacuum.

I don't understand the hindsight argument. How else should these decisions be judged other than by the results? Of course the FO likely didn't foresee just how terrible both starters would be, but that doesn't mean the decision to go with either of them was sound, or any way defensible at this point.

Shoemaker hadn't been healthy in years and wasn't all that good in 2020 but relying on him as the 5th starter with Happ in the 4 spot was sound? He wasn't much, if any less of a question mark than Flexen as far as ability to stick in the rotation goes, and I promise if you dig through threads at the time of the signing you'll see his issues highlighted.

I'm not necessarily against making some moves but saying "do what TB would do," when this organization isn't in the same ballpark operationally isn't a surefire path to success. You need to have elite talent evaluation and development to reshuffle the deck and stay competitive. If not, you're the Pirates of the early 2000s.

What signs have you seen that Shoemaker is turning things around? He had his worst start of the season prior to being relegated to the pen and his two recent outings there have been awful.... The signings have been a disaster. Full stop. You can't excuse the failures because FAs can be volatile and at the same time defend the decision to address 2/5 of the rotation and the back end of the pen via FA. Tossing around names is beside the point. Again, if you're going to sign rotation pieces, particularly in an organization that doesn't have much, if any, SP depth, you simply can't miss this badly. Period.

Can you point to any discernible signs that he's turning things around? He's been atrocious for 2.5 months now, this isn't a recent development. I'm at the point of audibly laughing every time I read a "there's no replacement for Shoemaker," defense for his continued presence on this roster. You don't think there was a better use of $16M other than Colome, Shoemaker, and Happ? There are at least 3-4 SPs on one year deals within that budget that would be marked upgrades. To Cheif's point; you can't whiff badly on 2/5 of your rotation plus a bullpen anchor and then throw your hands up and say "we don't have the depth to overcome this, what were we supposed to do."

Yet even in those innings Shoemaker found a way to cost this team another game. Barnes is on a very similar progression path and he's been pretty damn good at AAA, similar to Ober. Yeah, I think it's odd that a pitching starved team like the Twins haven't tried to get him some innings, particularly when his track closely matches those who have gotten that opportunity. Bloodlust? How far backwards are you willing to bend to defend the FO's decision to continue with Shoemaker? How much longer do we need to watch these performances before "bloodlust," becomes necessity for you? The names are irrelevant, the point was that any replacement represents a chance to see improvement from that roster spot. Short leash, few days, ect was the defense last week....

Not necessarily, but it's at least an attempt to be better. If he's a lame duck then cut bait and bring in a stop gap to mop up for a week. Setting a date by which he needs to be out isn't really a defense of his continued presence on the roster.

Old friend Homer Bailey is still unsigned. Rick Porcello, Mike Leake if he's open to playing, Cole Hamels if he's healthy enough. Not exactly appealing options, but it doesn't have to be a starter, just find a mop up bullpen arm. I just don't believe the Twins simply can't do better than what Shoemaker has given them.

I think it's more about a reluctance to admit defeat with Shoemaker than it is about concern over Barnes preparedness. I don't think he'd be selected in the the Rule V either, but if he was, a soft tossing guy with modest numbers isn't someone even this site would be up in arms over. If you're concerned over him blocking actual prospects on the 40 man that kind of says it all about his standing in the organization. I'm with you, I'd rather not see this team use their resources poorly, but I don't think his addition right now would fall into that category. What kind of leash do you think a guy like Barnes would have in a season where the Twins aren't fighting for the 1st pick in the draft? Is it any better to be a 40 man casualty because he was forced to be added and opportunities were limited? He spent three years in college, he's soon to be 26, he's on his second run in AAA, and he's nowhere near prized prospect status. I don't think the situation is all that fragile. It isn't really a matter of whether he continues to be this bad for 3 more months, it's more a question of what allowing him to be this bad at the present time does for this organization. We clearly have different views on that.

Me neither, but in the specific case you brought up we're talking about a 26 year old college arm that's a fringe prospect at best. I think the 3.5 months remaining are more valuable than the likely limited opportunities he'd likely get if the Twins were to wait and bring him up when they had to add him.

Maybe, but I think that has more to do with a reluctance to admit failure than a belief he can be an actual asset in the pen. At best he's on mop up duty and there isn't much to suggest he'll be able to handle even that.

Why not take the chance that the FO can identify a pitcher and salvage something, even if it's only temporary? That was a large part of their selling point. Worst case scenario, as you put it, we watch a Shoemaker-esque performance in the short term. If there isn't anybody on the 40 man at this exact moment there are 5ish arms that'll be available in the near future that can at minimum eat some innings.

Look, I'm not caping for Barnes or Jax in particular. My issue is with how the roster space is being utilized. I agree with you, that in general, 40 man spots shouldn't be treated haphazardly, and if you can avoid exposing players to waivers it's almost always preferable. I think the combination of a historically awful bullpen, some really bad back end starting, and an awful record has put the Twins in a situation where conventional roster management isn't the best option. There's significant turnover at the bottom of any 40 man roster. I'd be more concerned about limited opportunities for these fringe guys if the Twins, by some miracle, find themselves near contention next season. Even if that's not the case, there's still a decent chance they're 40 man casualties in the near future. The likelihood any of them are even moderate contributors next season is low. Right now we know this team isn't competing and they have 3.75 months worth of innings to evaluate. Whether it's Jax, Barnes, Vasquez, ect doesn't really matter, the point is that there's more value in getting an extended look at potential filler now than sinking more innings into Shoemaker.

Calling it a "why not," move seems overstated given how truly awful Shoemaker has been coupled with the fact that he has no future in this organization. I don't understand how Jax or Barnes can be disqualified from picking up starts based on their lack of prospect luster but we're lamenting the potential of losing them. Neither is being thrown onto the 40 man; Jax is already there and Barnes will need to be or risk being selected in the Rule V. The only way either is lost is if they're DFA'd and claimed, or selected in the Rule V. The Twins have an opportunity to give extended auditions this year, and the one in question comes at the expense of one of the worst pitchers in baseball.

Why does their prospect ranking matter? In a lost season why not start to find out whether some fringe 40 man arms can contribute? Both pitchers listed are former college pitchers already in their mid 20s. If the Twins simply need innings eaten to bridge the gap until Maeda and Pineda are back then why not someone with even a modicum of upside fill them? I just see absolutely no value, or point, in continuing to give Shoemaker the ball.

Jax falls into none of those categories and he was just called up. If Pineda isn't out any extended period of time, Ober is an option as well. Duran should be considered before too long. If the argument is that the Twins just need an arm to throw innings, then play the waiver wire carousel. Honestly, the results can't be any worse than what they're getting from Shoemaker.

What is gained from Shoemaker starting another game for the Twins?

I don't see any justifiable reason to cut Sano in a lost season and then potentially pay him to play elsewhere. The move should 100% be off the table. I don't know what his odds of being claimed are, but I'd imagine most teams would roll the dice on getting him for the minimum rather than commit to taking on his salary.

The Twins bought low in '17 when he was coming off an injury and again following his suspension in '19. I don't want to commit to more than 2 years or a high AAV either, but if Pineda avoids major injury this season I think the odds of having our cake and eating it too are slim. This might be his best chance to cash in during FA.

Colome gets his first taste of high leverage work since imploding throughout all of April and he promptly gives up a walk off in 2 pitches. You can't make this stuff up. Just feed him middle innings in meaningless games and hope so poor team at the deadline decides he's worth a flier....

There's a 0% chance he doesn't test FA. If the Twins refuse to pay him then you're right, it's rebuild time. I'm holding onto a small hope that they can convince/pay him to stick around. Regardless, the Twins aren't getting an answer on whether he'd consider resigning at this time. Berrios isn't committing to anything when FA is 1.5 years away, so I'm opposed to the notion that if he won't sign long term prior to this trade deadline then he has to be dealt. Probably, but that's also an incredibly niche market no? You'd need a find a team that has the pitching talent and is willing to deal it. They'd also need to either be ok with Berrios walking or be willing to pay him. Lastly they'd need to view themselves as a true WS contender and in that "one piece away," mode. We're in agreement there. Something has to change regarding this FOs approach to pitching.