Article: Offseason Primer: Who Needs a First Baseman Anyways?

[Doomtints]

Pohlad has soft spots for people and this negatively affects the team. We got stuck with Molitor because Pohlad wanted to be nice to him, now we might end up with a Joe Mauer who can no longer hit.

 

If the sum universe of available first basemen is zero, sure, keep Mauer for another year. If all of the other middling hitters are traded and Mauer is the sole mediocre hitter left, sure, keep him for another year.

 

The Twins are in a unique place financially to make upgrades right now. If they build around Mauer for a year just to be nice they making their job for 2020 onward all the more difficult.

Edited October 27, 2018 by Doomtints

[Riverbrian]

 

Well, sure. Even Ehire has started 5 games at 1B in his career. In a purely backup role, Kepler could be part of the mix at 1B.

 

What I seem to see people saying goes beyond that, that 1B is a desirable role for him. And I disagree with that. If you want him in the batting lineup, you usually will want him playing in the outfield; conversely if he is squeezed out of the starting outfield because of acquisition of significant talent, his bat (at present) probably will not be better than other 1B options you have. Finally if his bat improves from where it is at present to being an asset at 1B, we're back to the first scenario, because you want him in the outfield as a starter.

 

It would be one heck of a team, where a productive Keplerbat^* finds itself at 1B on defense.

 

^{* _{My Germanic coinage of the day}}

 

Your logic makes perfect sense... but consider these points. 

 

1. In your post... where you are referring to Max Kepler... Substitute Travis Shaw and it kind of reads the same.  

 

2. The possibility of Kepler playing 1B or the possibility of Rosario playing 3B or 2B for potentially decent sized stretches is necessary if the Twins want to acquire an OF like McCutchen. If these considerations are off the table because Kepler OF defense can't be replaced... the Twins have no room for McCutchen and we are back to hoping that Kepler and Buxton work out. 

 

3. Players get hurt. Injuries will happen and they will mess up your neatly typed paragraph. 

[ashbury]

i WiLl eNdeAVoR tO tYpE LesS nEaTLy GoInG fOrWaRd.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

That would be great. I just don't have that list of FAs in front of me that looks enticing, and it is really hard to predict trades. I'm all for better talent, all for it. 100% for it.

https://www.mlb.com/news/2019-mlb-free-agents/c-293292274

 

The first base market doesn’t do a lot for me, so I’m on Tom’s track to improve DH, OF and middle infield via FA. Kepler is pretty much a lock to be my starting CF until Buxton forces his way up to the bigs.

[USAFChief]

Your logic makes perfect sense... but consider these points.

 

1. In your post... where you are referring to Max Kepler... Substitute Travis Shaw and it kind of reads the same.

 

2. The possibility of Kepler playing 1B or the possibility of Rosario playing 3B or 2B for potentially decent sized stretches is necessary if the Twins want to acquire an OF like McCutchen. If these considerations are off the table because Kepler OF defense can't be replaced... the Twins have no room for McCutchen and we are back to hoping that Kepler and Buxton work out.

 

3. Players get hurt. Injuries will happen and they will mess up your neatly typed paragraph.

Players DO get hurt, which is why there’s plenty of room for a McCutcheon. He starts in right, with Kepler the fourth OFer/spare first baseman, and Cave in AAA. Or Kepler in CF, Cave on the bench, and Buxton in AAA.

 

If nobody gets hurt, and everyone performs, great. If not, then Cave comes up, and we’re not seeing Ehire Adrianza in left.

[Riverbrian]

 

 

 

Players DO get hurt, which is why there’s plenty of room for a McCutcheon. He starts in right, with Kepler the fourth OFer/spare first baseman, and Cave in AAA. Or Kepler in CF, Cave on the bench, and Buxton in AAA.

If nobody gets hurt, and everyone performs, great. If not, then Cave comes up, and we’re not seeing Ehire Adrianza in left.

 

Exactly

 

But... something has always stopped the Twins short from adding that McCutchen type (My vote is for Pollock BTW) to the mix with the appearance of others in place. . Somehow it always ends up being a LaMarre/Mastro/Shane Robinson type instead.

 

It isn't always a money thing either. The last time the Twins approached the IDEA of 4 decent OF'ers on opening day while planning a roster during the off season was 2015/2016. They couldn't figure out how to work with the depth and they traded Aaron Hicks and it wasn't the other 3 outfielders who triggered that terrible move. It was Plouffe is our 3B so Sano is our RF and never a 3B again (until Plouffe breaks a rib) and then Sano is never an OF again. It was Mauer can only play 1B so Park is our DH therefore Sano can't play 3B,1B or DH that convinced the Twins that they had too many OF'ers. Surprise... it turned out that we didn't have too many OF'ers after all and Hicks just might have been helpful all these years. 

 

For 2019... Now take the same McCutchen added to the OF process. And then repeat it at 1B/3B and 2B/SS and we are not seeing Ehire Adrianaza anywhere.

 

But... once you repeat this process at all positions... you will need a certain amount of flexibility to maintain what happens next and nobody can predict what happens next. The players will let us know. 

 

The idea that Kepler won't play any 1B or Rosario won't play any 3B or 2B has always killed the idea of adding a McCutchen type in the past. I'd love to see the Twins climb over this imaginary hurdle that leaves them short every single year and go ahead... add McCutchen or Pollock or even Harper if we dare to dream that high. 

 

 

Prepare for success and prepare for failure.

 

25 guys who can play. Compete for every job, every inning. 

 

[ChrisKnutson]

I honestly don't see the love for Nelson Cruz, Sure, he's been remarkably productive for Seattle since they signed him as a free agent (after a good tenure in Texas), but he's going to turn 39 next year. How certain are you that he can still put up good numbers, if even start on a regular basis?

Why wouldn’t you want his bat in the lineup for 2 years?? Yeah he might regress a bit (he might not, who knows), but it’s not ‘just’ his bat that would bring value to MN, as he’s also a good clubhouse presence for the Twin’s young Latin players and also happens to be a couple years older than our manager. If I were the FO, the expectation would be for Cruz to be what Carlos Beltran was for the Astros in 2017, only with more production.

 

I can understand the hesitation with Cruz, so if it’s not him, then I’d still be ok with the FO bringing in Baldelli’s former Red Sox teammate Jed Lowrie, who’d be a good no. 2 hitter who’s also capable of playing 2nd, SS and 3rd.

[Linus]

By not having a designated DH you really add one more spot to your bench (assuming the DH can’t play the field). I would rather have another bench option so long as it’s not Grossman

[USAFChief]

By not having a designated DH you really add one more spot to your bench (assuming the DH can’t play the field). I would rather have another bench option so long as it’s not Grossman

And you delete a good bat from the lineup, in favor of a bat already demonstrated to be not worthy of said spot.

[ChrisKnutson]

Exactly

 

But... something has always stopped the Twins short from adding that McCutchen type (My vote is for Pollock BTW) to the mix with the appearance of others in place. . Somehow it always ends up being a LaMarre/Mastro/Shane Robinson type instead.

 

It isn't always a money thing either. The last time the Twins approached the IDEA of 4 decent OF'ers on opening day while planning a roster during the off season was 2015/2016. They couldn't figure out how to work with the depth and they traded Aaron Hicks and it wasn't the other 3 outfielders who triggered that terrible move. It was Plouffe is our 3B so Sano is our RF and never a 3B again (until Plouffe breaks a rib) and then Sano is never an OF again. It was Mauer can only play 1B so Park is our DH therefore Sano can't play 3B,1B or DH that convinced the Twins that they had too many OF'ers. Surprise... it turned out that we didn't have too many OF'ers after all and Hicks just might have been helpful all these years. 

 

For 2019... Now take the same McCutchen added to the OF process. And then repeat it at 1B/3B and 2B/SS and we are not seeing Ehire Adrianaza anywhere.

 

But... once you repeat this process at all positions... you will need a certain amount of flexibility to maintain what happens next and nobody can predict what happens next. The players will let us know. 

 

The idea that Kepler won't play any 1B or Rosario won't play any 3B or 2B has always killed the idea of adding a McCutchen type in the past. I'd love to see the Twins climb over this imaginary hurdle that leaves them short every single year and go ahead... add McCutchen or Pollock or even Harper if we dare to dream that high. 

 

 

Prepare for success and prepare for failure.

 

25 guys who can play. Compete for every job, every inning.

 

Let’s say instead of McCutchen or Pollock, the FO signs Adam Jones, how would you feel about that??

[Riverbrian]

 

Let’s say instead of McCutchen or Pollock, the FO signs Adam Jones, how would you feel about that??

 

I feel great because we just upgraded from Grossman to Adam Jones. 

 

At this point... I'm not overly passionate about individual names. I have my preferences but what I want right now is real simple... I want upgrades! Whoever they may be. 

 

With the end result being depth and flexibility and open competition at every spot. 

[Riverbrian]

 

Players DO get hurt, which is why there’s plenty of room for a McCutcheon. He starts in right, with Kepler the fourth OFer/spare first baseman, and Cave in AAA. Or Kepler in CF, Cave on the bench, and Buxton in AAA.

If nobody gets hurt, and everyone performs, great. If not, then Cave comes up, and we’re not seeing Ehire Adrianza in left.

 

Here's the scenario where Kepler playing 1B for a decent sized stretch of games comes into play. 

 

The front office listens to us and signs Andrew McCutchen or Adam Jones. Jake Cave has options so they place him in AAA and on opening day we have (let's call him) Cutch/Jones in RF, Rosario in LF and either Kepler or Buxton in CF with the other on the bench.

 

During the month of April... it all goes as planned. All 4 are producing at a plus .800 OPS Clip. Our new Manager Rocco is doing a great job using the DH position and the occasional day off' for all 4 and everybody is getting decent playing time. 

 

Tyler Austin is playing 1B because he is out of options and too intriguing to just cut a drift. On May 1st... Austin pulls a doo-hickey and is projected to be out a month. 

 

The Twins look around the farm and there isn't a decent 1B option at Rochester. The best option is Rooker in Pensacola. However... Rooker still hasn't shown the ability to handle a decent curveball and is only producing an OPS in the .750 range in AA but he is the best we have at the moment.  

 

Rooker also isn't on the 40 man roster which means that the Twins will have to cut Chase DeJong to make room for Rooker. 

 

Rooker also starts his service time clock early before he is ready and he shows up and we pray that he figures it out quickly because the need is now and things have been going pretty well in April. 

 

The other option is Jake Cave who we stashed in AAA to make room for Cutch/Jones. Jake Cave has had a taste of the big leagues and he wants to get back so he is raking in Rochester. Cave is earning it... but the opening is at 1B so Rooker is called up instead and DeJong is cut a a result despite decent numbers in Rochester. Rooker struggles at 1B and we lost a pitcher. 

 

If Kepler can swing over to 1B for the month of May and back to the OF in June when Austin returns. Cave is the call up and now we have 5 OF'ers in June, Wade is coming along and all of a sudden one of those guys can be traded to pick up Justin Verlander from the Astros in July because we have a 10 game lead and it's time to keep upgrading. 

 

And then you and I are both happy. 

 

How do you prepare Kepler for a month at 1B... Play him at 1B in Spring Training and on occasion in April before Austin gets hurt. You can do it because we signed Cutch/Jones along with Buxton and Rosario that will allow for the opportunity.  

[DocBauer]

While you just know guys will get banged up and miss time here and there, and you should always try to have depth and roster flexibility, ( not to mention AAA depth), the roster is constructed with the idea of health in mind. And, of course, production that is less predictable. Rosters simply aren't large enough to have a back up/platoon player at each and every spot.

 

I have no problem with a Cruz signing, and would welcome him with open arms even with some age regression. My preference is McCutchen for his bat and ability to play the OF. I also have no problem with signing someone like Lowrie for 2B, but really like the idea of previously mentioned trades for Starlin Castro.

 

Assuming you have 13 position players:

 

OF: Rosario, Buxton, Kepler, Cave and McCutchen.

INF: Sano, Polanco, Castro, Austin, Adrianza and X.

C: Garver and Castro

13th: Astudillo?

 

Your OF has great position flexibility and allows Kepler to be part of the 1B equation. In addition to Max and Austin, you also have Sano, Garver, and even Astudillo to play some 1B.

[yarnivek1972]

I’m not sure we can assume having 13 position players. I’d wager the Twins had 12 more often than 13 from April through August.

[ashbury]

Your logic makes perfect sense... but consider these points. 

 

1. In your post... where you are referring to Max Kepler... Substitute Travis Shaw and it kind of reads the same.  

 

2. The possibility of Kepler playing 1B or the possibility of Rosario playing 3B or 2B for potentially decent sized stretches is necessary if the Twins want to acquire an OF like McCutchen. If these considerations are off the table because Kepler OF defense can't be replaced... the Twins have no room for McCutchen and we are back to hoping that Kepler and Buxton work out. 

 

3. Players get hurt. Injuries will happen and they will mess up your neatly typed paragraph. 

I've been trying to wrap my mind around this response from you, and I'm still not sure I've figured it out.

 

See, I'm in favor of positional flexibility. Extremely so. Hugely so. Probably for at least as long as you have (I'm older, for one thing). Certainly for longer than the 4-23-16 date when you started the Club. When I play Out Of The Park (which makes no one an expert on being a GM, but hear me out), I force every decent infield prospect to become proficient at SS, 2B, and 3B. I force every decent outfield prospect to become proficient at CF, RF, and LF. If they have decent skills in both infield and outfield, I work to get them proficiency on all six. That way, the ones who reach the majors are ready for anything. The game makes it hard to develop catchers unless they already have the ability, and the game makes it quick to develop first basemen, so those are special cases. The game is just bits and bytes on the computer (and in particular it leaves out the human element of making players do all this), but whether I'm any good or not, what I'm saying is that I'm predisposed as GM to dictate players get good at a variety of roles, and then let the on-field manager choose whom to plug in where. I've done it that way for years.

 

So I feel like you are disagreeing with a position I don't take.

 

But, for some players, positional flexibility is (as an old boss of mine liked to say) "interesting, but irrelevant". Byron Buxton probably could become a quality first baseman, but that skill would rarely be called upon for the foreseeable future. Max Kepler is nowhere near that class, but still a good enough outfielder that I would personally not call upon the skill at 1B very much, in preference to just about anyone else on the current roster.

 

What I'm saying here is, 1) I think Kepler is a very good outfielder, better by a lot than Cave in particular (even though Cave has some tools), 2) 1B defense pales in comparison to the importance of corner outfield defense (which of course pales in comparison to CF)., and 3) pretty much any athletic outfielder can master the necessary techniques at 1B such as scoops and foul pops without years of exclusive training. Those who disagree with me on any of the three points will put Kep at 1B far more than I would. That's defensible, but then the discussion shifts to those underlying opinions, and (except for point #1) away from Max himself.

 

I don't remember exactly what I was responding to at the time, but it might have been the idea to move Kepler to 1B to make room for Cave in the outfield. But, positional flexibility applies to Jake Cave too. And I would use whatever skills he developed at 1B more frequently than Kepler's.

 

You now bring up McCutchen. If we acquired him, you know what I'd want to do the first day of Spring Training if I were manager? I'd hand McCutchen a first-baseman's mitt, show him how it operates, and ask him to get proficient, along with his outfielding skills. I'd position it to him as in his own self-interest, as his career progresses into his 30s. But my real reason? I think Kepler is better than him in RF at the present moment. Positional flexibility applies to McCutchen too, and in my world it's even more important for him at this point in his career arc.

 

Now, you didn't state it, but maybe your assumption is that McCutchen is too prideful to accept this assessment. That's quite possible. Putting Max at first base in that situation might be the right solution. McCutchen wasn't in the scenario I was discussing. Clubhouse chemistry factors into such decisions. I don't think anything I said before precludes that. OTOH, why doesn't Max get to have his pride hurt too? This is the manager's job, to sort out.

 

In the meantime since I posted, someone else brought up the possibility of Pollock. That would be different. Pollock is better in the outfield than Kepler. In that case (Buxton being CF in all these scenarios) I'd be asking both Rosario and Kepler to increase their reps in the infield - Eddie at third moreso than first, Max at first base. I think I actually like Kepler in the third outfield spot better than Rosario, but it's a much closer decision than versus McCutchen, above.

 

Someone else mentioned Adam Jones, who is also a rival to Kepler in skills, but with the additional age I'd still be inclined to hand Jones the funny looking mitt and tell him it's time to branch out some, if it comes down to him or Kepler in the outfield.

 

Like I said, any lineup that has Max Kepler at first base almost certainly involves one heck of a defensive outfield. We do need to add a high-end talent to make that happen. That would be great.

 

Injuries at 1B are a necessary part of the plan. But unless whoever is inserted in the lineup is a better defensive outfielder than Max, I start my thinking with the other guy being stationed at 1B - we're working on assuring that everyone is positionally flexible, right? Not just Maximilian?

 

Finally, as for Travis Shaw, If we ever trade Kepler for him, I'll conduct my lineup analysis at that time. I'll say, though, that a good defensive third baseman who has never in his career been penciled into a lineup at SS is a less interesting guy to think about than a right fielder who sees some time in center field. I don't think it'll read the same at all. Shaw is less, dare I say, positionally-flexible.

[Riverbrian]

 

I've been trying to wrap my mind around this response from you, and I'm still not sure I've figured it out.

 

See, I'm in favor of positional flexibility. Extremely so. Hugely so. Probably for at least as long as you have (I'm older, for one thing). Certainly for longer than the 4-23-16 date when you started the Club. When I play Out Of The Park (which makes no one an expert on being a GM, but hear me out), I force every decent infield prospect to become proficient at SS, 2B, and 3B. I force every decent outfield prospect to become proficient at CF, RF, and LF. If they have decent skills in both infield and outfield, I work to get them proficiency on all six. That way, the ones who reach the majors are ready for anything. The game makes it hard to develop catchers unless they already have the ability, and the game makes it quick to develop first basemen, so those are special cases. The game is just bits and bytes on the computer (and in particular it leaves out the human element of making players do all this), but whether I'm any good or not, what I'm saying is that I'm predisposed as GM to dictate players get good at a variety of roles, and then let the on-field manager choose whom to plug in where. I've done it that way for years.

 

So I feel like you are disagreeing with a position I don't take.

 

But, for some players, positional flexibility is (as an old boss of mine liked to say) "interesting, but irrelevant". Byron Buxton probably could become a quality first baseman, but that skill would rarely be called upon for the foreseeable future. Max Kepler is nowhere near that class, but still a good enough outfielder that I would personally not call upon the skill at 1B very much, in preference to just about anyone else on the current roster.

 

What I'm saying here is, 1) I think Kepler is a very good outfielder, better by a lot than Cave in particular (even though Cave has some tools), 2) 1B defense pales in comparison to the importance of corner outfield defense (which of course pales in comparison to CF)., and 3) pretty much any athletic outfielder can master the necessary techniques at 1B such as scoops and foul pops without years of exclusive training. Those who disagree with me on any of the three points will put Kep at 1B far more than I would. That's defensible, but then the discussion shifts to those underlying opinions, and (except for point #1) away from Max himself.

 

I don't remember exactly what I was responding to at the time, but it might have been the idea to move Kepler to 1B to make room for Cave in the outfield. But, positional flexibility applies to Jake Cave too. And I would use whatever skills he developed at 1B more frequently than Kepler's.

 

You now bring up McCutchen. If we acquired him, you know what I'd want to do the first day of Spring Training if I were manager? I'd hand McCutchen a first-baseman's mitt, show him how it operates, and ask him to get proficient, along with his outfielding skills. I'd position it to him as in his own self-interest, as his career progresses into his 30s. But my real reason? I think Kepler is better than him in RF at the present moment. Positional flexibility applies to McCutchen too, and in my world it's even more important for him at this point in his career arc.

 

Now, you didn't state it, but maybe your assumption is that McCutchen is too prideful to accept this assessment. That's quite possible. Putting Max at first base in that situation might be the right solution. McCutchen wasn't in the scenario I was discussing. Clubhouse chemistry factors into such decisions. I don't think anything I said before precludes that. OTOH, why doesn't Max get to have his pride hurt too? This is the manager's job, to sort out.

 

In the meantime since I posted, someone else brought up the possibility of Pollock. That would be different. Pollock is better in the outfield than Kepler. In that case (Buxton being CF in all these scenarios) I'd be asking both Rosario and Kepler to increase their reps in the infield - Eddie at third moreso than first, Max at first base. I think I actually like Kepler in the third outfield spot better than Rosario, but it's a much closer decision than versus McCutchen, above.

 

Someone else mentioned Adam Jones, who is also a rival to Kepler in skills, but with the additional age I'd still be inclined to hand Jones the funny looking mitt and tell him it's time to branch out some, if it comes down to him or Kepler in the outfield.

 

Like I said, any lineup that has Max Kepler at first base almost certainly involves one heck of a defensive outfield. We do need to add a high-end talent to make that happen. That would be great.

 

Injuries at 1B are a necessary part of the plan. But unless whoever is inserted in the lineup is a better defensive outfielder than Max, I start my thinking with the other guy being stationed at 1B - we're working on assuring that everyone is positionally flexible, right? Not just Maximilian?

 

Finally, as for Travis Shaw, If we ever trade Kepler for him, I'll conduct my lineup analysis at that time. I'll say, though, that a good defensive third baseman who has never in his career been penciled into a lineup at SS is a less interesting guy to think about than a right fielder who sees some time in center field. I don't think it'll read the same at all. Shaw is less, dare I say, positionally-flexible.

 

Sounds to me like we are on the exact same page. I just read your earlier post as a countering to not trying it. 

 

You could join the club. I'm the president and I'll vouch for your membership and I am absolutely down with Adam Jones or Cutch joining the club and being handed a 1B mitt. Even the Dodgers play Seager at SS exclusively. The Cubs wouldn't move Russell from SS and they won't move Rizzo off of 1st base. You don't have to move everybody but you got to be able to move someone to accommodate the multiple scenerios that take place over the course of a season. Kepler became the poster child because he has 1B experience. 

 

 

I'm always surprised anytime any one doubts the efficacy of moving players around. I make assumptions like they must think Kepler at 1B is a full time gig and he will never play OF again. Or I assume they assume the Twins could never find an outfielder better than Kepler or only 2% of major league ball players can actually learn a 2nd position. 

 

I can't blame anyone for thinking that way because it has been entrenched in Twins DNA since you and I have been alive (You are Absolutely Older and you look it  ) and we saw it manifest painfully this season. 

 

The Twins were uncompromising in regards to playing Kepler in the OF exclusively because of his talent but willing to compromise every time they played Grossman in the OF.

 

The Twins were willing to compromise with Polanco as a full time average to below average SS but uncompromising in consideration of playing Polanco at 2B and the better SS Adrianaza at SS when both were in the lineup. 

 

I just want it to stop. I want 2018 to be the end of it. I can't struggle through another season like this one because I know it's out there and it's working. I'm hoping that Baldelli will be the one who stops it. I'm also under the assumption (based on where the finalists for the manager's job came from) that the Twins are ready to stop. Hyde from the Cubs? Baldelli from the Rays? No Showalter? I assume things are about to change for the positive. 

 

You can acquire 4 quality outfielders, 3 quality corner infielders and 3 quality middle infielders. You don't have to staff your 25 man on the back end with LaMarre and not play him. You just need a manager who can creatively figure it out.

 

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

It's a far cry to justify playing Rosario at 3B by comparing it to Polanco playing SS.  

[Riverbrian]

 

It's a far cry to justify playing Rosario at 3B by comparing it to Polanco playing SS.  

 

How? 

[TheLeviathan]

 

How? 

 

One is a position the player has barely ever played and a major change in style (OF-IF) and the other is a position the player frequently played in the minors and is only slightly different.  

 

We've seen the ability players have to completely trainwreck games and seasons by being inadequate in the field.  Whatever offensive advantage you gain from putting players into a game at different positions can easily be negated by their inability to play those positions.  

 

Otherwise....why not field 9 slugging 1B?  Just sign nine guys that mash the ball and throw a dart every game?  You might say, "of course I don't want that"...but I don't see much of any indication in your posts that you weigh this factor at all.

[ashbury]

Sounds to me like we are on the exact same page.

[Riverbrian]

 

One is a position the player has barely ever played and a major change in style (OF-IF) and the other is a position the player frequently played in the minors and is only slightly different.  

 

We've seen the ability players have to completely trainwreck games and seasons by being inadequate in the field.  Whatever offensive advantage you gain from putting players into a game at different positions can easily be negated by their inability to play those positions.  

 

Otherwise....why not field 9 slugging 1B?  Just sign nine guys that mash the ball and throw a dart every game?  You might say, "of course I don't want that"...but I don't see much of any indication in your posts that you weigh this factor at all.

 

If Rosario can't play Infield decently... Of Course. 

 

We don't know that he can't. But if he can't... then he obviously isn't an option.  Was he moved to OF because he wasn't any good at 2B or was he moved to the OF because Brian Dozier was in front of him? We did hear a few years ago that Polanco was moved from SS in the minors because he wasn't any good at it and here he is our SS. 

 

Polanco... We got somewhat of an idea. Yet he can't be moved? 

 

Grossman we got somewhat of an idea. Yet... He gets to play defense. 

 

If the concern is the thought of some sort of defensive compromise taking place? I'm saying we don't know the depth of that compromise, if there is one and also that we make defensive compromises all the time (example Polanco). 

 

If you know for sure that Rosario playing IF is a guaranteed defensive liability and that Sano and Forsythe are way better at it. Then I'll take your word for it and I won't consider it ever again but I will be curious how you know and I will keep looking for someone else. 

 

For the record... You are right... I am 100% against signing 9 1st basemen and playing them all over the field. 

 

Believe it or not... I think defense is important and I'm misunderstood if I'm giving that impression. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

 

 

For the record... You are right... I am 100% against signing 9 1st basemen and playing them all over the field. 

 

Believe it or not... I think defense is important and I'm misunderstood if I'm giving that impression. 

 

I almost never see you throw in the caveat that the players have to be able to play the position well.  You seem to prize flexibility over ability.

 

I see flexibility as an asset to be sought, not a strategy to force.  Sometimes it does feel like you advocate the latter.

[Riverbrian]

 

I almost never see you throw in the caveat that the players have to be able to play the position well.  You seem to prize flexibility over ability.

 

I see flexibility as an asset to be sought, not a strategy to force.  Sometimes it does feel like you advocate the latter.

 

That's because when I make those caveats they get ignored as respondents end up focusing on something more sensational in my posts... such as "it's OK to play Kepler at 1B". (Gasp). 

 

I get responses like "Why not play Kennys Vargas in CF". or "Paul Molitor was responsible for 9/11 and I get marginalized in seconds using a ridiculous extreme, miles from my point.

 

 

The Below quote was posted by me, in the same post, that triggered your reply and our discussion. 

 

 

 

Even the Dodgers play Seager at SS exclusively. The Cubs wouldn't move Russell from SS and they won't move Rizzo off of 1st base. You don't have to move everybody but you got to be able to move someone to accommodate the multiple scenerios that take place over the course of a season. Kepler became the poster child because he has 1B experience. 

 

 

If you see flexibility as an asset to be sought.

 

We agree 100% 

 

The Twins haven't been seeking it and that includes as recent as 2018 and they gotta start somewhere.  

 

I've taken a lot of angles to point out relevant examples from today to bring the issue to light. From our playing time distribution to the Dodgers playing time distribution, from Nick Castellenos never playing 3B again to the curious case of Willans Astudillo to Max Muncy to David Bote to Josh Donaldson joining the Indians and Travis Shaw bouncing across the Milwaukee infield to Mookie Betts being considered for 2B play in the World Series. 

 

My intention is to be constructive and get people to notice what is happening in Chicago, Los Angeles, Milwaukee and Tampa Bay just to point out that Logan Morrison didn't have to play every day and Trevor Ploufffe didn't have to play every day in 2016 either. 

 

Did Joe Maddon have to endure "Why Not Play Kyle Schwarber at SS when he decided to play Kris Bryant in the OF? Sadly... Yeah... He probably did.

 

Suggesting something different is the slow boring of hard boards and anyone who seeks to do it risks losing their soul. 

 

I've clearly lost my soul in my efforts to point out something different. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I almost never see you throw in the caveat that the players have to be able to play the position well.  You seem to prize flexibility over ability.

 

I see flexibility as an asset to be sought, not a strategy to force.  Sometimes it does feel like you advocate the latter.

 

it's clearly, at least to me, implied that if they can't play the position, then they won't. NO ONE is saying sign 9 DH types that can't field. That's not flexibility. 

[Ben Noble]

 

If Rosario can't play Infield decently... Of Course. 

 

We don't know that he can't. But if he can't... then he obviously isn't an option.  Was he moved to OF because he wasn't any good at 2B or was he moved to the OF because Brian Dozier was in front of him?

 

I could be misunderstanding you, but I think you might have this backwards. Just to be clear, Rosario didn't come into the Twins system as a 2B. Rosario was drafted as an outfielder and the Twins tried converting him to 2B after a couple of years in the minors -- I believe due to a perceived glut of outfielders in the system -- but moved him back to OF.

 

As a side note, I saw Rosario play 2B for Beloit...back when they were a Twins affiliate...in a game where Sano stole home on a double steal. So do we know that Rosario can't play the infield? I guess not, but it's been a long time since Rosario last got regular reps at the keystone.

[nicksaviking]

 

I could be misunderstanding you, but I think you might have this backwards. Just to be clear, Rosario didn't come into the Twins system as a 2B. Rosario was drafted as an outfielder and the Twins tried converting him to 2B after a couple of years in the minors -- I believe due to a perceived glut of outfielders in the system -- but moved him back to OF.

 

As a side note, I saw Rosario play 2B for Beloit...back when they were a Twins affiliate...in a game where Sano stole home on a double steal. So do we know that Rosario can't play the infield? I guess not, but it's been a long time since Rosario last got regular reps at the keystone.

 

So if I'm reading this correctly, Rosario may still be able to play 2B just like Sano may still be able to steal home?

[Ben Noble]

 

So if I'm reading this correctly, Rosario may still be able to 2B just like Sano may still be able to steal home?

 

Exactly. And we should also see if Sano can play shortstop decently. I mean, we don't know that he can't. Was Sano moved off of SS because of JJ Hardy?

[yarnivek1972]

FWIW, Rosario’s fielding percentage at 2b isn’t much worse than it is as an OFer in the minors. .975 vs .969. Thing is, OFers usually have a far higher pct than middle infielders.

 

Like I said, FWIW.

[Battle ur tail off]

 

 

How do you prepare Kepler for a month at 1B... 

 

Give him a glove and tell him to catch the ball. 1B easiest position to fill defensively on the diamond. I'm not worried at all having someone or anyone play out of position for a short stretch to play 1B.

[Battle ur tail off]

 

By not having a designated DH you really add one more spot to your bench (assuming the DH can’t play the field). I would rather have another bench option so long as it’s not Grossman

 

This is classic Twins/Terry Ryan/Cheapskate thinking. DH is a position that should hit well and for power. Not a place to put a guy that is decent at everything, but not particularly good at anything. When is the last time to Twin have employed a good DH? Get a bat. One that hits for power and gets on base. Or move Sano over there and be done with him in the field. 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Battle ur tail off