Article: Making Sense Of The Final Roster Decisions

[Nick Nelson]

Do the Twins really think that Ricky Nolasco is their best option as fifth starter, or that Michael Tonkin is well suited as a long reliever?

 

Maybe not, but placing the right-handers at the end of the rotation and bullpen buys the team a little more time to find out what they’ve got.When Paul Molitor stated early in spring he expected to have Tyler Duffey in the rotation, it signaled that he was considering pushing Nolasco to the bullpen. Presented with that possibility, the veteran made it clear that he would raise a stink.

 

Alas, Nolasco ends up getting his rotation spot and Duffey starts in Triple-A. Some might see it as the organization relenting to a malcontent, but I see it more as trying to salvage an asset.

 

Had the Twins decided to send Nolasco to the bullpen, it sounds like he would have implored them to trade him somewhere he could start. I’m sure they would love to do that, but he stands no chance of building any kind of market as a mop-up man.

 

If, on the other hand, he gets off to a decent start in the rotation, and some other clubs suffer early losses in their starting corps? That changes things. He’ll never bring back much in a trade but at this point that’s almost immaterial.

 

It would be hard to stomach this course of action if it meant accepting a clear performance downgrade, but that’s not the case. Duffey simply didn’t look very good this spring, and it’s not about the results. The change-up that he’s been dedicated to making a workable third pitch isn’t there. The curveball that he leaned so heavily on as a rookie isn’t having the same kind of effect, even by his own admission.

 

I thought this Duffey quote, in Parker’s story from Fort Myers last week, was telling:

 

“I think guys know it’s coming so they’re sitting on it. One guy took two fastballs. Didn’t even budge. I think he was sitting dead-red on curveball. So that’s where I’m going to have to adjust accordingly.”

 

Sounds like something he needs to work on, and maybe not against major-league hitters.

 

Nolasco throws a ton of breaking balls, but insists his fastball is his most important pitch, as it sets up everything else he does. And whereas Duffey’s key pitch was failing him, Nolasco’s was trending up. This development, much more so than their Grapefruit stats, makes the decision a justifiable one for now.

 

If the veteran gets off to a clunky start while Duffey rolls in Triple-A? Then you make the switch, and at that point Nolasco can complain all he wants but really has no leg left to stand on. Perhaps then the Twins consider a more drastic option like straight-up release.

 

Another hidden benefit of the decision to put Nolasco in the rotation is that it opened up an extra spot in the bullpen and might have saved the Twins from losing Tonkin. The vibe when I was in camp was that the 26-year-old had little chance of making the roster because the team preferred Ryan Pressly and didn’t have room for both.

 

Well, now they do. And I believe it would have been a big mistake to risk giving Tonkin (who is out of options) away on waivers, especially with the questionable overall state of the relief unit.

 

As the last guy in the bullpen, he’ll start out pitching in lower-leverage situations and being called upon after short starts, similar to the role filled last year by Rule 5 draftee J.R. Graham. But Tonkin is certainly more deserving of being in the majors on merit (he has a 2.65 ERA and 9.7 K/9 at Triple-A), and if he performs well he’ll have a chance to work his way into more important innings.

 

Carrying him means they lack a traditional long man in the pen. Giving Nolasco a rotation spot means sending down a guy in Duffey who did everything to earn it last year. But the upside of these decisions is that the Twins might get a solid middle reliever out of the deal, and get a chance to recoup some semblance of value on their $48 million investment in Nolasco.

 

The downside could be losing a few more games. But that downside only extends so far as the team's resistance to implementing quick changes if things go south, and something tells me that won't be an issue.

 

They believe in Nolasco and Tonkin enough to give them one more look, but they're skeptical enough of both that the leashes will be short.

 

Click here to view the article

[Rosterman]

Other numbers aside, Nolasco did win five games in eight starts last season. So, if the bats produce, he can win.

 

The chances of someone grabbing Tonkin were slim to none, because of the spring performance. But, yes, the Twins would've lost Arcia and.or Santana.

 

 

Ad barring injury, both Pat Dean and Tyler Duffey are the first on the list of rotation callups, unless the Twins switch May back into the rotation and bring up Strong, O'Rourke or Rogers.

 

Being on the 40-man ahs advantages. Not being on the 40-man (Berrios) means it cane be a long minor league summer. The Twins don't really have a lot of wiggle room in adding players to their 40-man this season.

 

[DrNeau]

I thought they'd lose Tonkin, just based on how poorly the majority of spring was going. He did somewhat salvage it, though, as of late. Also, his K-rate in the minors, as well as the fact he consistently hits 97 MPH on radar guns, makes him a tough guy to let go. 

[blairpaul715]

I dont see why the Twins wouldnt do a trade of a prospect that is on their 40 man to another team for the same level type prospect that is maybe in Low or Hi A, if another team isnt tight on their 40 man, and maybe all teams feel like they are........Thoughts??!!

[h2oface]

"The downside could be losing a few more games."

 

A straight fastball gets rocked in the show. That few more games cost the Twins a wildcard slot last year. I am not a fan of either decision here, especially putting Tonkin in the MLB pen.

[kab21]

 

"The downside could be losing a few more games."

 

A straight fastball gets rocked in the show. That few more games cost the Twins a wildcard slot last year. I am not a fan of either decision here, especially putting Tonkin in the MLB pen.

 

I don't understand the willingness to let Tonkin go.  He averages 94mph, has a 3.35 career MLB ERA, a 2.65 AAA ERA, gets a lot of GB's and hasn't actually given up a lot of hits.  

[Darius]

Thank God the Pohlads might recoup some of their investment. I was really losing sleep over that.

 

I guess winning I just a luxury for those with competent ownership, and front office personnel, anyway....and apparently for those who have been utterly brain-washed into a Walking Dead-esque zombie of a baseball fan.

 

I seriously can't get over how much consideration people give the shank costs of Pohlad's when they're deciding what is a good move, and what isn't. I'll just remind e wet one: No salary cap.

 

And let's not pretend the Twins weren't setting up Duffy for this all along, by having him work on a change-up that doesn't exist up until a week before the season starts, instead of his deadly hammer that nearly carries the Twins to the playoffs last year.

 

Again, this franchise is a complete joke. They'll piss away all these prospects just like they did in the 2000s (which some, unbelievably, think was the golden age of success).

[Seth Stohs]

 

I thought they'd lose Tonkin, just based on how poorly the majority of spring was going. He did somewhat salvage it, though, as of late. Also, his K-rate in the minors, as well as the fact he consistently hits 97 MPH on radar guns, makes him a tough guy to let go. 

 

It's always easy to look to the future rather than the guys of the present who maybe haven't been what we thought or hoped they might be... 

 

But consider the amount of AAA domination that Tonkin has had compared to the amount of success that Nick Burdi, JT Chargois, Jake Reed and Mason Melotakis have had in AAA (or AA, if you will). If those guys become that, they will get plenty of chances, but you definitely don't want to lose a guy who throws 97 for nothing. Obviously the leash for Tonkin is fairly short, especially if those guys continue to pitch well. But I don't have a problem with him being on the roster.

[Seth Stohs]

 

I dont see why the Twins wouldnt do a trade of a prospect that is on their 40 man to another team for the same level type prospect that is maybe in Low or Hi A, if another team isnt tight on their 40 man, and maybe all teams feel like they are........Thoughts??!!

 

How many trades like that have there been in the last 20 years? There are few prospect-for-prospect trades. I guess there was Jesus Montero for Michael Pineda, but even when that happened the biggest talker was about how rare those trades are. I actually think it can be a good idea for clearing roster spots on the 40, but it takes just the right circumstances.

[Seth Stohs]

The other thing to remember is that the Opening Day roster is the Twins roster for a fairly small sample size of the season. Consider last year, their Opening Day roster didn't even last until Opening Day. The Twins depth is what will sustain them over the course of the season, hopefully. 

[jimmer]

In the 5 games Nolasco 'won' , the Twins offense scored 5, 6, 6, 8 and 7 runs. He went 6 or more innings in only one of those games.

[big dog]

Not the rotation I wanted, but new year, new start, maybe it works.  If it doesn't hopefully they make changes quickly.  Plenty of possible replacements, for a change.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I dont see why the Twins wouldnt do a trade of a prospect that is on their 40 man to another team for the same level type prospect that is maybe in Low or Hi A, if another team isnt tight on their 40 man, and maybe all teams feel like they are........Thoughts??!!

In theory, prospect trades are a great idea to shuffle around players based on team need.

 

In reality, they're hard to pull off for some reason. GMs simply don't do prospect swaps. Dunno why, exactly.

[blairpaul715]

 

In theory, prospect trades are a great idea to shuffle around players based on team need.

 

In reality, they're hard to pull off for some reason. GMs simply don't do prospect swaps. Dunno why, exactly.

Well ,my guess then is they (like us) overvalue their own prospects........Cause in reality, you would think there would be more men who are dropped from 40 man picked up, because not all teams are equal, some teams 35 man isnt as good as another teams 41st or 42........I know this is a simplistic view, but my view nonetheless.

[Blackjack]

Good article Nick!!! Thanks!!! Its too bad that Duffy didn't pitch better and make the decisions tougher but in the long run this will work out better for the Twins, and that's the type of long range decisions that GM's need to make.  

[alarp33]

I'm unclear why there is so much angst recently about the 40 man roster, and lack of "room".  Anyone have a red marker to hand me, I'll cross some names off that 40 man if a need for a spot (Berrios, Burdi) arises in the next month. 

 

Pat Dean

Ryan O'Rourke - nice loogy, but not much value with a 12 man staff, especially if they prefer Abad. And Melotakis is on the way

Michael Tonkin - I'm fine keeping him for now, but not going to lose much sleep over losing him

JR Graham - see above

Casey Fien - not going to happen, but its my list... see ya

 

[bird]

 

In theory, prospect trades are a great idea to shuffle around players based on team need.

 

In reality, they're hard to pull off for some reason. GMs simply don't do prospect swaps. Dunno why, exactly.

 

Yeah, I just don't get why this is so rare, because it would seem to be a good idea in practice as well. Sure wish someone would ask the question some time....

[Mike Sixel]

 

Yeah, I just don't get why this is so rare, because it would seem to be a good idea in practice as well. Sure wish someone would ask the question some time....

 

What I've read on line is that teams feel like they have "perfect" information about their prospects, and less perfect information about other teams' prospects, and so risk aversion kicks in that if the other team is dealing this guy, they must know something. Or something like that.

 

I do agree that it seems odd. But let's be honest, people hate change. They invested a lot of time and money in this guy, they know his strengths and weaknesses, what oh what is the other guy really like?

[Vanimal46]

 

I don't understand the willingness to let Tonkin go.  He averages 94mph, has a 3.35 career MLB ERA, a 2.65 AAA ERA, gets a lot of GB's and hasn't actually given up a lot of hits.  

He's done okay, but has mainly been thrown out there in low leverage situations. He's trending in the wrong direction as far as letting inherited runners to score, even when they're giving him the ball in low leverage situations. He's probably going to be fine in the long-relief/mop-up role, but are the Twins ever going to trust him in more crucial situations? I don't know. 

[DaveW]

I would personally rather get rid of Fien then Tonkin.

[alarp33]

 

I would personally rather get rid of Fien then Tonkin.

 

Ditto, but Fien appears to be their right handed Brian Duensing.  Will be kept around much longer than his usefulness.  

[gocgo]

I don't want to pee on anyone's parade here, but I posted on another link a quote in SI from a rival scout and as I remember it went something like this:

 

"If Nolasco is in the Twins rotation, then their rotation stinks"

 

That's pretty brutal.

 

It's also interesting that I see people wanting Plouffe traded and Sano moved to 3rd.  I get that, but the market for 3rd basemen wasn't high to begin with this offseason and Plouffe is not viewed outside of the Twins organization the way he is viewed by the Twins.  Outside of the Twins, he seems to be viewed as just OK.  Not an upgrade from what teams already have.  So, trading him isn't going to get much back.  I really thought they would move him to left field, put Sano at 3rd, and move Rosario to right, but I understand the reasons for not doing that too.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

It isn't about getting anything for Plouffe, though. It is 100% about putting the best team on the field.

 

Some people don't think this is the ideal alignment.....

[HitInAPinch]

Nolasco in the rotation is all on Duffy.  Some how, all he heard was "work on your change-up" and missed on the part where he had to earn the job.  Nobody set him up.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

It isn't about getting anything for Plouffe, though. It is 100% about putting the best team on the field.

 

Some people don't think this is the ideal alignment.....

I get the thinking but I just can't see how Sano at third and Player X in right is going to be appreciably different, much less better, than Plouffe at third and Sano in right.

 

Plouffe is a pretty valuable player. He had a 3.9 WAR in 2014 and a 2.5 WAR in 2015. While that's not spectacular, it's not easy to replace, either. Those aren't plug and play numbers where you just plop a guy in and achieve net zero gains/losses.

 

I don't like Sano in right and I was hoping Plouffe would be traded but once the market bombed out on third basemen, this move seemed the most logical.

 

Giving away a player who averaged 3-something WAR over the past two seasons just for the hell of it seems like terrible asset management to me. I would have been really irritated had the Twins given away Plouffe for a C level relief prospect in A ball.

 

In a perfect world, the Twins get value from Plouffe and Sano takes the hot corner. It didn't happen. I think it's time to move on and accept they made the best out of an awkward situation (one they helped put themselves into but an awkward situation none-the-less).

[alarp33]

 

It isn't about getting anything for Plouffe, though. It is 100% about putting the best team on the field.

 

Some people don't think this is the ideal alignment.....

 

Right. Personally I think its a better team with Sano at 3B and Kepler in RF.  I hope Plouffe surprises me since he obviously is not going anywhere.  

[alarp33]

 

I get the thinking but I just can't see how Sano at third and Player X in right is going to be appreciably different, much less better, than Plouffe at third and Sano in right.

 

Plouffe is a pretty valuable player. He had a 3.9 WAR in 2014 and a 2.5 WAR in 2015. While that's not spectacular, it's not easy to replace, either. Those aren't plug and play numbers where you just plop a guy in and achieve net zero gains/losses.

 

 

 

I don't think looking at WAR in this situation is necessarily right.  I think its fair to assume the infield defense would be worse, and the OF defense would be much better, with Sano at 3b and Kepler in RF.  

 

I think from a lineup stand point, Kepler is the left handed bat they lack, and would certainly be more than capable of exceeding the low to mid .700's ops that Plouffe puts up (higher obp, potentially lower slg%, but debateable).

 

That said, its not going to happen... so I will hope for the best.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Right. Personally I think its a better team with Sano at 3B and Kepler in RF.  I hope Plouffe surprises me since he obviously is not going anywhere.  

Relying on a guy who had one breakout season in AA as your Opening Day starter is a good way to cripple a team for the first half of the season.

 

I'm a huge Kepler fan but he shouldn't be Plan A at any position on Opening Day of 2016. Yes, he dominated the Southern League and I'm extremely bullish on him but the fact of the matter is that he dominated exactly zero levels of minor league baseball before that point.

[birddog]

Nolasco's ERA of 4.05 in ST would produce a good percentage of wins this year IF he can keep it up in the regular season. The Twins are going to score runs and will win most games if the opponents score 4 or less. If Nolasco is 3-1 with a near 4.00 ERA in late April or early May, TR will swing a trade minimizing the damage of his contract and eat a majority of it. I might be dreaming, but not even Nolasco in the rotation is going to hinder my excitement for this season. Heck, even Reusse is positive this year. If Berrios and Duffey prove they belong, we will see them soon enough.

[alarp33]

 

Relying on a guy who had one breakout season in AA as your Opening Day starter is a good way to cripple a team for the first half of the season.

 

I'm a huge Kepler fan but he shouldn't be Plan A at any position on Opening Day of 2016. Yes, he dominated the Southern League and I'm extremely bullish on him but the fact of the matter is that he dominated exactly zero levels of minor league baseball before that point.

 

I'm talking over the entire season, not merely April.  I think Plouffe's bat is redundant in this lineup, low obp, some HR power, right handed.  I think Kepler would be more than capable of being a top 2-3 obp guy this season.