Darius

The Pohlad pocket protectors continue to blow my mind. I refuse to be bullied with passive-aggressive insults into accepting a falsehood (Pohlads aren’t cheap). It does not make one enlightened, or a higher-quality baseball mind to refute that the Pohlads are cheap. I’m sorry. Please explain how they are not cheap. When your biggest free agent signing of all time is Ervin Santana, Ricky Nolasco, and Jason Castro....you’re cheap. Since 2010, other teams have signed 56 free agents to contract larger than the Twins largest of all time (Santana at $55 million). Three of the five largest free agent contracts in Twins history are under $25 million. How is that not the definition of cheap? Let’s keep in mind that this is during a period of decades of total ineptitude for the most part. It’s not like they had the luxury of being cheap, because they were stacked with young talent. Since 1992, they’re one of the worst franchises in baseball. Supplementing the roster with free agents was as necessary as it could ever possibly be. I’m not even arguing they shouldn’t be cheap, or which approach is correct here. But, they certainly don’t spend a lot of money. Bonnes’ podcast cohost has even pointed out how they haven’t even lived up to their bargain of spending X percent of their revenue (50% or something, don’t remember the exact number). We have loads of evidence in the form of player negotiations, actual contracts signed, etc, that they are cheap. There are giant holes on the team annually that never get filled with competent players available on the market (bullpen and rotation, namely). Where is the evidence that they aren’t? The fact that they’re not dead least in payroll means nothing. Simply stating they aren’t cheap doesn’t create a tulpa version of Pohlad brother who wants to sign a front-line starter. And let not forget the timeless gem of imploring tax dollars get used for a new stadium so they can compete for free agents. If a company like Amazon considered building a location in the Twin Cities (which they did) if the appropriate tax abatements were in place, promising to hire 5,000 people....don’t you think people would be upset if they only hired 500? Exact same scenario. Not being upset that they’re cheap, or agreeing with that approach is one thing (and probably not the worst take, even though the big dollar spenders hav 95% of the success). But flat out calling the blue sky green is another. Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled program. I’m sure I’ll get banned for not having a take that’s agreeable to powers at be around here (because calling the Pohlads cheap is out of line, but berating those with those opinions isn’t). But, I just couldn’t pass up the opportunity to address this epidemic going around Twins Territory.

I’m really trying to feel good about it. But, when is the last time to Twins FO has made a decision that has worked out? 2006? Also, the team needs good players otherwise it’s meaningless. They could have the best manager ever to walk the Earth...but if Buxton can’t hit, Sano can’t stay healthy/out of trouble, Berrios can’t put together a complete season, and the bullpen can resemble something competent, Baldelli will look just as bad as Molly did.

People are so soft these days. Whining about being outside in September? Then move to Boca Raton with all of the other 87 year olds. Pneumonia can be really tough on the fragile.

I’m sure there is no comparison in terms of how the clubs are managed, starting from ownership on down. He probably thought he died and went to heaven. “Wait, you’re not going to initially offer me 2 million per year.....and I don’t have to get my in-charter meal off the dollar menu, or cut it in fourths to share with the starting infield? I don’t have to take my uniform home and wash it myself? Where do I sign?”

I’d reluctantly concede a Core 3 at this point: Berrios, Gibson, Rosario. I’m not sure you can even call that “a core.” I’m not sure any of them are at an elite level, or ever will be. Berrios may be eventually, but there are still plenty of inconsistencies there. They’re really just the “Pretty Good 3.” Sano might be out of the league by this time next year. There are risks there in regards to behavior, health, conditioning, and performance. Frankly, he can’t be counted on for anything st this point. It doesn’t really look like Buxton will ever figure things out offensively. It doesn’t really look like he’ll ever be to stay healthy, either. Banking on him for anything outside of half a season of great defense from the 9-hole is a prayer. Certainly not anything you want to build around long-term. Kepler appears to be a solid role, unspectacular role player, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Time is starting to run out to prove that he’ll fulfill the expectations created by his minor league career. Good guy to have around, but hardly a franchise cornerstone. Polanco is a black market Dominican supplement away from his second offense....and isn’t really that great of a defensive shortstop to begin with. If we’re considering Mitch Garver a “core” player, we’re in trouble. Who knows it Romero will ever pitch 100+ innings effectively in a major league season. He seems to fade hard every year, even in the minor leagues. How many more years does a guy need to ramp up? There is nobody else worth mentioning that had stepped foot on a major league diamond. It’s probably time to start thinking about the next “core.”

I don’t really feel sorry for Buxton, like everyone seems to. He hasn’t really earned anything, and he’s been given ample opportunity. Should he have been called up? Probably. Will this light a fire under his butt? Is he has a pulse, it sure should. Something tells me he’ll have a good spring.

The previous regim's problem was sitting on their hands. They put a few decent clubs together, but would never take the initiative to supplement the roster via trade and/or free agency. It felt like they never made a serious run at anything, even when they had a roster with multiple Cy Young awards and multiple MVPs within 5-6 years. It was a terribly botched situation that, by the grace of a higher power, fell out of the sky and flopped into Ryan's lap (Santana in the rule 5, cheaping out with Mauer at #1 and having it work out). Not only would they not make a run when the talent was there, but they would never be aggressive sellers, either. The new guys seem to be aggressive, and commit to a plan beyond the bottom line, and I like that.

Nick Gordon's OPS over the last 28 days is significantly lower than Kirilloff's batting average. Kind of unbelievable on multiple levels (Gordon so bad, Kirilloff so good).

I don't think the extra year matters if he doesn't improve at the plate. At that point, his speed, and thus his defensive range, will likely have degraded somewhat. So, would it really be that expensive, or even be worth keeping around, if he slides back towards the mean defensively, but doesn't approach it offensively? If there is even a minute chance that some September playing time gets him back on track going into next year, you have to take it. I don't see how sending him home would help anything in any way.

I'm all for this. It seems to make total sense. Even as young kid, I remember wondering about the current paradigm. When playing the Angels, for example, in any one given game, how are you most likely to win? Contain Mike Trout. How are you most likely to keep Trout hitless? Throw your 3-4 best pitchers available at him, don't let him face the same guy twice, change the location from which the call leaves the pitchers hand as much as possible. Same for nearly any other good team. If you hold Francisco Lindor hitless in a series against Cleveland, you'll probably win it (or at least make it much more likely). They'd definitely need to figure out a way to not slow the game down any more, but I think we'll see this.

I don't want to see Buxton the rest of the year. Get him healthy, then give him another two-week off. That'll probably run out the season. Then, send him home with the best hitting coach money can buy living in an RV in his driveway. He can come back next year with a cleared head and play his way back to the big club from AA/AAA.

First time I'm hearing about this, I must live under a rock. I'm sure G Cinco's rap career is something that could be good for the sport. It could help bridge a gap between a younger demographic that they're purportedly losing, and all that. That said, I can't really imagine how he could find it a good idea to spend time doing that. Does he have some buddies in his ear in regards to his big signing bonus? You have a foot in the door with the lineage (father and brother very prominent and respected). You have apparent talent that has you a step away from the major leagues, with a hundred million dollars for the taking over the next decade plus....and you're taking a day off of work to go record yourself half-singing in max auto-tune? That probably sounds really curmudgeonly, but what a gross and negligent misappropriation of effort at this time in his life. (Only my opinion on how I'd feel, this is America and live, laugh, love, et. all).

Its hard not to agree with the overall sentiment, here. On the surface, if we're going to stink and throw in some place holders, I'd rather watch Hanley Ramirez take hacks at the short porch in right and Greg Holland try and return to form. You're at least providing a potential story line with entertainment value. But, I suppose, a few million bucks is a few million bucks. And, if you're going to play for the top 10 draft pick, upside is bad. They seem to have a plan at the moment. As long as this doesn't turn into an annual exercise like it did under TR, I'll remain on the Falvine bandwagon.

Do we really have to feel sorry for these guys because their co-worker got traded to a contender? Just something I've wondered a lot lately. People leaving, people arriving, getting put in a different 3rd grade class than your BFF, running out of room at a lunch table, etc, is a normal part of everyone's lives. Is it really so emotionally debilitating? As a CPA, I don't think a client or Board of Accountancy would say, "we'll let this one slide, your co-worker left for a rival firm so it must have been a tough week." I should also point out the obvious that us schmuks are making exponentially less money for longer hours and higher day-to-day stress. It's another interesting double standard applied to professional athletes for reasons unknown.

I think we need to keep perspective on the Lewis pick. It appears as though they didn't draft him because he was the best player. By many accounts, it was a decision based on the slot system, and wanting to allocate some funds later in the draft. It could be argued that they got lucky. It's sort of similar to the Mauer scenario. Passing on Prior due to monetary concerns turned out well....but it wasn't because the FO identified some flaw in Prior or some superiority in Mauer (relative to Prior). We should also keep in mind that Lewis is only at High A. He is by no means a done-deal. The knee issue is enough to be cautious. It's certainly possible the he's not the best player out of that top 5 group. It's just a little early to call that a great move. Buxton looked like a future HOFer all the way up through AA/AAA as roughly a 21 year old. He drew Mike Trout comparisons. Same with Sano and Miguel Cabrera comparisons.

I don't know why a manager blowup is mentioned as a reason to not ask tough questions that fans want to know. Why are these people held to a different standard than normal people? As a CPA, if I screw up a tax return or an audit, I'd have to answer some tough questions that would likely make me feel some stress. Nobody will let that slide to spare my feelings. Me ranting at the inquirer would only get me fired. My point: if you're so fragile that you can't be expected answer legitimate questions about your poor performance....you have serious issues. You have the mental wherewithal of my three year old when he hasn't had a nap. Same can be said for treating a reporter punitively for taking a 5 minute break from hand-feeding you grapes and fanning you with palm leaves. It's spineless behavior on both sides.

This team is mentally weak. That alone is a reason for an overhaul. The kind of culture necessary to be successful just isn't there.

It think it would be irresponsible to not actively shop guys like Dozier, Escobar, Rodney, Duke, etc. You have to maximize value, not emotion. The Twins have a 1.5% chance of making the playoffs (per Fangraphs) as it stands. Unless they make up 3-4 games before the deadline, it's kind of a no brainer. That isn't to say give them away for nothing. But leaving a reasonable offer on the table would be a poor decision 98.5% of the time.

"How much longer the Twins can stick with Matt Belisle," could be quantified with negative numbers.

The Belisle thing is turning into one of the greatest mysteries in American history. Who really killed JFK, and why? Did we really land on the moon? What really happened in Roswell, New Mexico? Why did the Twins sign and repeatedly use Matt Belisle in the summer of 2018? Science and logic still cannot conclusively answer any of these questions.

I have a feeling we'll see a reinvigorated Sano, who will look a lot closer to last year's first half.

Worst case scenario: The Twins go on a run and pull within 4-5 games. They decide to stand pat at the deadline, maybe even add a few minor pieces. They promptly fall back off the cliff shortly after the deadline. No prospects returned for expiring contracts. Waiver deals don't work, or they get much less than they could have during the frenzy of the non-waiver deadline. No MLB playing time for current prospects (Gordon, etc).

Hottest team in baseball. Sweep KC and win the series against TB, and they just may be close enough to dash any hopes of selling off pieces that should be sold. Could potentially be a bad time for a winning streak if the FO then refuses to sell.

Nobody on the current active 25 man should be left off of this list, aside from Berrios. Some I'd pull the trigger in faster than others. Dozier, Morrison, Lynn, Rodney, Duke, and Reed I'd take just about anything for. Guys like Gibson and Escobar I'd need to get a nice return. I'm still hoping Dozier, Morrison, and Lynn go a bit of a streak over the next couple weeks to entice some palatable offers. Reed could potentially fetch a nice piece. Santana could be a waiver guy in August if e comes back. They could potentially turn in a pretty nice haul. They won't be getting any top 50 prospects, but they could add some nice peices to the system.

They'll never get a requisite return, IMO, in relation to what he could do for the team next year. A pitcher of his current caliber will also be expensive on the free agent market. If this team can figure the offense out this offseason, which is by no means out of the question, having a rotation consisting of Berrios, Romero, Gibson, Gonsalves, and some filler, could potentially compete for the division. That said, I've always been higher on Gibson's stuff than most and was an advocate of keeping him around when nearly everyone else wanted to dump him. I'm still of the opinion that what we're seeing is for real, and sustainable for the foreseeable future. Unless they're going full-blown rebuild on this thing, trading him is highly counterproductive. I'd definitely raise an eyebrow if they deal a guy like Gibson while hanging onto guys like Santana and Dozier to the bitter end.