twinstalker

siap. Family. Home.

I must have missed how the five rounds hurt the Twins, in particular. The bad trade they made with the Dodgers already hurt them, as did losing their 3rd for Donaldson. That part hasn't changed. I didn't catch the argument that the strong farm system plays against them. I guess it's possible, but that seems an iffy argument. Most of those players won't be competing with the "strong system" guys, and the rules are such that you don't get improperly buried in the minor leagues of baseball like you did maybe 50-60 years ago. If I'm someone apt to take the $20,000 from a team, I'm going to foremost look for a system that will best develop me. A strong system is at least a possible indication of that, so I therefore let the Twins in the front door. I would look for a team with a strong organizational development philosophy along with a clear cut plan for how they take my strengths and weakness and prepare me for the major leagues. Nobody likely explains this better than the Twins, who are likely to impress with their innovation, their "science," and their detailed strategies that I'm sure they easily customize to me. I think the things that hurts the Twins will be more base, like players preferring the teams that get all the attention or that they grew up rooting for (basically the Twins get shut out in this area of reasoning). A kid growing up in Georgia or North Carolina who's getting screwed by this whole thing might as well at least get to play for the organization they grew up adoring. The Twins get the leftovers of these types. I know if I could choose an organization growing up, I would have chosen the Twins because they were my favorite. But that also means I'm probably not very good, because I probably live in Minnesota and baseball's limited here.

East: NYY, NYM, Bos, Bal, Phi, Was, Pit Central: Tor, Det, Cle, Min, ChC, ChW, Mil, KC South: Mia, TB, Atl, Hou, Tex, StL, Cin West: Col, Ari, SD, LAA, LAD, SF, Oak, Sea Play 42 games in your division, 46 outside, then an extra X (0-8) games against your rival, like Milwaukee for us. That's plenty of season, given what we're dealing with.

Well, if the treatment is as efficacious as what we've come up with for the flu and pneumonia, I wouldn't pin your hopes it making a big difference. We'll all be lined up in September 2021 for our vaccine. Let's hope, anyway.

Ok, first, I had to watch all 3:33 of this. Second, young-ish Carly kind of turned me on. Third, I look forward to the next Carly video with great anticipation.

It will be interesting to see how these Twins handle a late first round pick, because it's pretty clear they steer clear of pitchers early. Twins have the 27th pick. That might be late enough where a pitcher isn't out of the question.

Sorry if this has been said already. I'd be thrilled if the Twins threw them Duran and kept Graterol.

Ridiculous. If the idea is to trade Graterol, and you can't get more than Maeda right this moment (they probably could have), you have him making starts in the minors and trade him during the season. This trade sickens me. If the 4+ ERA over the last three years isn't enough, consider that was without facing the DH or having the worst infield defense behind him. Plus, let's lower your leverage by saying you're moving him to the pen, then deal him. Brilliant.

It's probably not an inefficiency if you're spending $92 million for it.

Excellent points brought up, Matthew. It's funny to see the expected "best case scenario" arguments: "of course Josh D. is a great signing because he's so great that we will have greatness now and the Twins will be great." Or something along those lines. You have laid out much better than I why this was a signing I would not have done. Personally, I think the Twins will get one year of "better than what you'd find in the normal course of filling the position," and yet they are likely paying $60 million more for that right. The Twins did not succeed in getting a premium starter this year. That doesn't mean in the next year they won't get get a premium starting pitcher to pay over 3-4 years. But, well, now it does. You may say the Twins will still have money for 2021, but really they won't because whatever they have will be no more money than a lot of teams have. Not every year is the same, in terms of pitchers rejecting us. I think we could outspend to get an impact pitcher...but no longer. This contract will be an albatross, and the front office will not admit that until at least 2023, because it's their deal, just like they've favored the guys they dealt for at the past couple trade deadlines while not placing many of the since-successful guys from the past regime on their 40-man (think Nick Anderson, Dereck Rodriguez, etc). It's natural. I've stated my position, which is similar to what we generally can infer from Falvine's actions to date: better to build for every year than use your magic beans for one year. The window is always open if you don't go overboard or trade away your future. Winning takes a lot of luck, so put yourself in a position each year by building from within and spending wisely. But instead they play loose with their money this off season. $92 million is about $60 too much for a good player there. How much is Donaldson going to outplay "good player," and is that worth $60 million? On average, I think he's going to be at best "good player," and I think we only see one year where he's better than that. Nope, wouldn't do it.

I have to admit, I'm not as excited about this as you all. Between injuries, payroll concerns, and a drop in production vs NL pitching, not to mention he's now 34 (Mauer was basically on his last leg at that age), I can see this going badly. For one or two years, fine, but even those years are risky. I'm not so sure this is as good a deal as you all think it is. Hope I'm wrong.

I am sure Marwin let the Twins know. If he didn't, that's almost fire-able in and of itself. Funny, I just checked Marwin's 2017 and 2018 stats in Houston, and his away stats are significantly better.

If MLB had done any of this, then Crane would have demanded an investigation into every team, and MLB can't withstand that. Especially because the Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers (the teams most likely to be doing it) are too important to MLB's brand.

Why would we give the Mets Kirilloff when they only asked for Buxton?

I think a lot of us think it's okay to spend a whole bunch of $$$ unwisely this "one" time. I'll take my chances with someone who thinks there's a better way to go about this, to use the extra money this year on one-year moves, to use all the bad money saved in years 3 and 4 or 5 to make a smarter splash next year or thereafter. Cole and Strasburg (and Rendon) were the only real game-changers. After that, I'm not sure we could have anything more than a hope that the addition worked. Falvine's job is to win as much as possible for as long as they're here, with emphasis on championships. Right now Derek Falvey should expect to be here for thirty years and win multiple championships. Why do anything to the detriment of that vision? He and Levine know they have a chance to win in 2020. It's not a good chance no matter what they do. The Yankees, Astros, and then a bunch of others stand in the way. At best the Twins are approx 5% to win the WS after they do something. They will do some things to make the team better, we know they will. But to expect idiocy with money that will improve your chances 1% or 2% is perplexing to me, especially when the moves that will be made will likely get you that same improvement in chances anyway. Of course, and here's the kicker, when things ultimately don't work out, everybody will be blaming the moves they didn't make. Because this group-think mentality we have going on here (Twins fandom) is the king of Captain Hindsight: 1. Expect them to do everything. 2. The Twins will lose eventually and certainly be likely to win less than 101 games. Because, one winner. 3. Blame the FO for not doing the 99% of the things in #1 they didn't do. This is a process. I wish the Twins had been able to sign Zack Wheeler. It turns out there was no realistic chance. If they had signed Wheeler, their chance of winning it all may have improved from 4% to 6%. Now they will do something different, and their chances will improve to 5% or 5.5%. But eventually, when our Klubers, Civales, Biebers, Plesacs, and Carrascos have taken over the rotation and our prospect hitters we keep drafting high are ready and add to Kepler and Co., we'll have a much stronger starting point and be less in need of a major upgrade that, except in our best-case scenarios, stands little chance of being filled to the degree we need, especially at the $$$ we throw at it.

The Royals were LUCKY. They had a good team. They had dominant relief you can't really hope for when even when you sign the supposed best of the best. But to get through the playoff maze, they were also very lucky. You can follow a model that creates a strong team and strong organization, but then you need a lot of luck to win. People who win poker tournaments actually build their organization, and develop strong play. But unless they also get very lucky, they will not win. There are cases where not so good poker players win by making high powered moves and, of course, getting lucky. But what you don't want to focus on is that one winner. What you need to focus on is that a hundred bad poker players tried that strategy, and so the fact that one of them had a chance at the end against all the good players who developed their organizations doesn't mean anything. That the one bad poker player then got lucky doesn't mean anything, because it's going to happen from time to time just by chance. You need to be a player that is consistently vying for the final table. That doesn't depend on luck or wild ass plays that by chance work out just to get there (and one bad player will usually get there because there's so many who take those shots). But either way, you need a lot of luck, and since a lot of that is out of your control, the best chance to win it all is to be there more often. That pop-up player might win, but your best bets are with the ones who are strong time after time. Kansas City had some foundations to build a good organization. They had a lot of top picks. When things started to stabilize, they, just like one of many "bad" poker players, took extreme risks to get to the final table (the playoffs). They made it, others with similar strategies didn't. After 30 years they invested everything and got there twice, and proceeded to get lucky. Then they went right back to the bottom, and have incredibly little hope of doing anything again in a long, long, time. I would much rather the Twins take the Indians' path. Always, with a few exceptions, have that ability to be there at the end. Make plays that count but don't take away from the basis, the foundation. Then, at some point, the luck will turn our way. Please don't mistake that with anything Terry Ryan did, because he never made the plays that count, nor did he have the foundation this FO has. The fact that the Indians haven't won in the last 25 years is due to one thing only: luck. Since we can't buy a championship like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, and Cubs, our best bet is keep the foundation, make it stronger, and add when the opportunity avails itself. The fact that it didn't these last six weeks is hardly a concern in the big picture.

As I read these comments, I get the sense that some of you people think Falvine wants to fail at their job. That they'd rather unnecessarily save a few dollars than succeed. I do not have time to read crap like that. Disagreeing with not overpaying Ryu is fine. Being bummed that Wheeler, MadBum, Cole, and Strasburg were NEVER going to come here is fine. Thinking Keuchel is something he's not is even okay. Misunderstanding the benefit/detriment of giving big money to average pitching is maybe understandable. But the comments here that imply Falvine has some agenda other than winning championships are both laughable and sad.

Certainly, the last thing Gordon has ever been is "can't miss." Jorge Polanco is a bad MLB shortstop, but if you want to make it worse for the Twins, put Gordon there instead. Further, Gordon will not hit for years. Do you not think the Twins would have dealt him by now if anyone would give up something? Putting my Gordon love aside for the moment, I think Kirilloff (especially) and Larnach will be up this year. Kirilloff may be the 1B solution and may be ready somewhat immediately (after a necessary month at AAA to work on, um, defense and fundamentals and maturing). And I think that's why the Twins are reluctant to trade him. Larnach looks to be a suitable and apt replacement for Rosario. I'm sort of in the camp where you don't trade away your prospects. You scout and develop them better. You save your money until it gives you the opportunity to make a big and obvious splash. Maybe that splash is next year instead of this year due to bad ju ju this offseason--sometimes not everything is in your and your wallet's control. In the meantime, use the this-year $$$ to make small upgrades.

Nothing in Blankenship's profile amounts to anything other than fringe major leaguer. The Twins will have to have a true breakthrough player, unlike Arraez, to surprise in MLB like Arraez. And therefore, I don't see it on the roster. As far as a guy who could provide some initial excitement like Arraez (who I believe is the real deal), Brent Rooker might fool us for a while.

If the Tigers weren't willing to take Wander Javier and do the mlb roster/rehab thing for a year, perhaps we should reset our expectations for him. As for Jax, I've not understood how anyone thought he would be protected. I see no "apparent" upside, and the Twins now have about twenty pitchers in the minors that are probably ahead of him in some way. Not all guys who needed to be protected, but the point being, who cares? Luis Rijo I thought would be taken, probably attesting to my ignorance of what's good-looking and what's not. His K rate also is not excellent, though I thought it possible someone would see potential in that stat for him. Heh, potential for increasing a stat that is merely a predictive measure...that's stretching it for sure.

I'm not sure it's as interesting as you think. Kind of like doing a countdown to the number one prospect. Much more interesting the other direction, where it's wide open. I mean, if you want a poll, do a poll. You're likely to get more "relevant" comments using that format.

Generally, the "this year" of the multi year would be about the same as they would get in arbitration. Your scenario doesn't affect things at all. However, the more interesting scenario is if in the middle of the season or at the deadline, they want to take on a big contract. Let's say the Cubs are slightly under .500 and want to get out from under Darvish's contract. That's about $7 million at the deadline, I think, plus the issues of his contract and those other ones you've signed, who are more often than not going to be on multi-year deals.

I thought Celestino was a virtual lock the way he crush the ball midseason. I pass on Raley and Blank, neither of whom I see as an eventual regular. Rijo and Javier? Well, Rijo for sure is a bad decision, and Javier, if you're trying to sneak him through, is, too. But they may just feel Javier isn't any good. Unless teams know something I don't about these guys, Rijo is gone for sure and Javier might well be. We'll see. I hope as we're cutting Travis Blankenhorn and Rijo is becoming a great prospect, Falvine will ask themselves what the the hell they were thinking. As much as I love the front office, they've made some head-shaking decisions. Also, how in the world does Raley stand out? He seems so AAAA.

Just to note: Anibal had fixed himself prior to joining the Twins. The Twins just didn't have enough faith that was the case and let him go when they needed his spot on the 40. But becoming horrible and finding a fix is pretty much Anibal's whole career in a nutshell.

Archer for Colina? Really? smh Ben Cherington is smart enough that he's either going to try to fix Archer himself or, and this is a thing, he's going to realize if he has to sell that another team can probably fix him, and so he has to get an actual real and close prospect for him. I mean, he needs to pull a Glasnow or a Meadows just to keep the fans from storming the stadium with torches. The Mets GM who wouldn't sell Syndergaard for anything less than the world took that stance because he knew Thor would be fixed by smart teams like the new Twins, and he'd look really bad. It must be a sort of hell to know you don't really deserve your job, and that because of that, it could end at any time.