Option C(astellanos)

[Tomj14]

 

If we really are "in" on Donaldson, I don't see a reason why they could not spend less to get Castellanos, even if it was a bit of a splurge (especially if it is for a player entering his age-28 season). 

It is the Twins so that is why they won't splurge, they might offer something like 2 years 24 million. Why would they pay more or go longer when you have possibly the greatest minor league system ever? On top of next year they will possibly be looking at starting pitchers again, plus Cruz could be gone, and they year after that possibly replacing Sano and Rosario.

 

[twins_89]

Adding Donaldson would have been enough of an upgrade to justify spending the money, Castellanos really isn't. I have no interest in blocking Rooker or Kirilloff for at a guy who is at best a slightly above average player (on an expensive contract).

[cmoss84]

 

I wouldn't say no, but I'm not really interested in Castellanos. He went from a possible fun buy-low reclamation project to possible 4-year deal because of only two months with the Cubs. I think I'd rather keep 1B open for Sano and/or one of the guys in the minors. I'm not a guy who pounds the table for defense, but he likely won't help. Since he's never played 1B and has been poor everywhere else I doubt he'd be a positive there, but more importantly, he'd be keeping Sano at 3B. 

 

Assuming Donaldson is a no, I think offensively I'd only be looking for trades to move Sano/Polcanco to the right side of the infield.

 

If they happen to make a trade that involves Rosario, AND Castllanos shows the willingness and ability to man 1B, then I suppose I'd have some interest in him.

I'm seeing a lot of people with this opinion or that he is an average hitter.

 

I am not saying he has been one of the best hitters in the league, but he has been pretty damn good/consistent. Can someone point out what makes him "average" versus my thoughts of him being really good?

 

Last time I checked, Detroit is not an easy place to hit (to put it mildly). Right?

In 2017 and 2018, he played 157 games and basically averaged .285 with 25 HRs and 95 RBI (with 73 XBH/year). In Detroit. To me, those numbers trump his "deflated" numbers when he was with the Cubs for 2 months.

 

He is going to be 28-do you expect him to have better numbers or worse numbers, especially getting out of Det? Is he not entering his prime?

 

Again, I am not saying he is better than Donaldson or that his defense will be average. I am saying that he might be an option worth exploring a bit more...

[Doctor Gast]

I think we go could after Castellanos for let`s say 4yrs. or longer, he can be our 1st baseman/ RF sub until Cruz wants to hang it up of coarse if the price is right. If Texas is willing to take a gamble, it`s worth looking into

[Tomj14]

 

I'm seeing a lot of people with this opinion or that he is an average hitter.

 

I am not saying he has been one of the best hitters in the league, but he has been pretty damn good/consistent. Can someone point out what makes him "average" versus my thoughts of him being really good?

 

Last time I checked, Detroit is not an easy place to hit (to put it mildly). Right?

In 2017 and 2018, he played 157 games and basically averaged .285 with 25 HRs and 95 RBI (with 73 XBH/year). In Detroit. To me, those numbers trump his "deflated" numbers when he was with the Cubs for 2 months.

 

He is going to be 28-do you expect him to have better numbers or worse numbers, especially getting out of Det? Is he not entering his prime?

 

Again, I am not saying he is better than Donaldson or that his defense will be average. I am saying that he might be an option worth exploring a bit more...

I am guessing that it is his career high WAR is 2.9 in 2018 (he does have a pretty decent oWAR the last two years at 3.6 and 4.7). He doesn't wow people, plays no defense, costs a bunch of money and if the Twins aren't going to spend on pitching don't be stupid and spend on guys that block the greatest collections of prospects possibly ever assembled.
 

[Tomj14]

 

 

I think we go could after Castellanos for let`s say 4yrs. or longer, he can be our 1st baseman/ RF sub until Cruz wants to hang it up of coarse if the price is right. If Texas is willing to take a gamble, it`s worth looking into

If you aren't going to sign an all star (non-pitcher) you don't give any player a contract longer than two years. You have so many guys getting close (in the next few years) that in no way should a costly non-all star be blocking them.

[Mr. Brooks]

If you aren't going to sign an all star (non-pitcher) you don't give any player a contract longer than two years. You have so many guys getting close (in the next few years) that in no way should a costly non-all star be blocking them.

If they are blocked by a DH, then they aren't that great of an option to begin with.

[Tomj14]

 

If they are blocked by a DH, then they aren't that great of an option to begin with.

So you are going to pay more (Nick) for less than what Cruz gives you offensively? That is some sort of logic.

 

[Mr. Brooks]

So you are going to pay more (Nick) for less than what Cruz gives you offensively? That is some sort of logic.

No, I'm not interested in Castellanos, not even a little bit.

 

But if one of our prospects are blocked by Castellanos playing DH, then they aren't a prospect that I'm at all interested in.

 

The only one I can even think of that might have to play DH right out of the gate is Rooker, and he's unlikely (IMO) to ever be more than a AAAA/ bench player anyway.

[Mr. Brooks]

So you are going to pay more (Nick) for less than what Cruz gives you offensively? That is some sort of logic.

Plus I think the suggestion was he'd be moved to DH after Cruz retires. Retired players give you zero production, so Castellanos would automatically be giving you more production than Cruz.

[cmoss84]

 

So you are going to pay more (Nick) for less than what Cruz gives you offensively? That is some sort of logic.

 

Don't you think this statement is a bit unfair? Cruz's value is crazy high-considering production/leadership and salary. Also, paying someone more than Cruz to produce less is okay-it might mean they had an excellent year-just Cruz might have a bit better numbers. And yes, the notion was to have Castellanos take over at DH (at least part time) when Cruz is done. 

 

I'll take .285 25-30 bombs/90-100 RBI from a guy every year, especially if it is for the next 4 or 5 years

 

It is more of a comparison of value between Donaldson and Castellanos, not Cruz.

[Tomj14]

 

Don't you think this statement is a bit unfair? Cruz's value is crazy high-considering production/leadership and salary. Also, paying someone more than Cruz to produce less is okay-it might mean they had an excellent year-just Cruz might have a bit better numbers. And yes, the notion was to have Castellanos take over at DH (at least part time) when Cruz is done. 

 

I'll take .285 25-30 bombs/90-100 RBI from a guy every year, especially if it is for the next 4 or 5 years

 

It is more of a comparison of value between Donaldson and Castellanos, not Cruz.

I don't think it is unfair at all Cruz makes 12 million any young guy will make basically league minimum, and Castellanos will make more than Cruz with possibly less production, if the Twins minor league system is as good as everybody says, Rooker, Kirilloff, Larnach, Wallner and others could be putting up those numbers by 2021 or 2022 when Castellanos be given a full time job. By then Jeffers could be up and Garver be the DH, it makes zero sense to sign a DH for more than one or two years, plus everybody loves this so called "payroll flexibility" why give up any of that on a bat only player? I mean if Cruz wasn't here I could get behind giving Castellanos a 2/24 contract but that is it.

[Mr. Brooks]

I don't think it is unfair at all Cruz makes 12 million any young guy will make basically league minimum, and Castellanos will make more than Cruz with possibly less production, if the Twins minor league system is as good as everybody says, Rooker, Kirilloff, Larnach, Wallner and others could be putting up those numbers by 2021 or 2022 when Castellanos be given a full time job. By then Jeffers could be up and Garver be the DH, it makes zero sense to sign a DH for more than one or two years, plus everybody loves this so called "payroll flexibility" why give up any of that on a bat only player? I mean if Cruz wasn't here I could get behind giving Castellanos a 2/24 contract but that is it.

Wallner and Larnach are outfielders. Kirilloff is an outfielder or first baseman.

 

Nobody is going to put these guys at DH in their 20's, when they are perfectly capable of playing in the field.

 

Again, I have zero interest in Castellanos, but he's 100% not going to block any of these guys at DH, with the possible exception of Rooker.

[Tomj14]

 

Wallner and Larnach are outfielders. Kirilloff is an outfielder or first baseman.

Nobody is going to put these guys at DH in their 20's, when they are perfectly capable of playing in the field.

Again, I have zero interest in Castellanos, but he's 100% not going to block any of these guys at DH, with the possible exception of Rooker.

So in Two years when the Twins have Buxton, Kepler, Rosario, the guys will be in the minors and not playing on the big club at whatever position is needed? If that is the case they need to start trading some of the depth that is going to rot in the minors.

[Mr. Brooks]

So in Two years when the Twins have Buxton, Kepler, Rosario, the guys will be in the minors and not playing on the big club at whatever position is needed? If that is the case they need to start trading some of the depth that is going to rot in the minors.

Well first, statistically only about 1/3 of those guys will actually get to and stay in the majors. So that immediately cuts your list from 5 guys to 1 or 2.

 

First base is already open. And, we know from Buxton's history that it's likely there will be plenty of OF opportunities when he's unavailable.

 

And finally, Rosario can be traded if one of these guys looks legit and is pounding on the door.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Last time I checked, Detroit is not an easy place to hit (to put it mildly). Right?

Actually, Detroit has graded out as a hitter's park the last few years...

[cmoss84]

 

Actually, Detroit has graded out as a hitter's park the last few years...

Did not know that-thanks for sharing.

 

Anyone know the numbers between that stadium and target field? 

[Oxtung]

 

Did not know that-thanks for sharing.

 

Anyone know the numbers between that stadium and target field? 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

[cmoss84]

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

Again, thanks for sharing-very cool stuff.

 

I just wonder how much these stats are skewed by teams with bad pitching and bad competition in general...but good stuff!

[Oxtung]

 

Again, thanks for sharing-very cool stuff.

 

I just wonder how much these stats are skewed by teams with bad pitching and bad competition in general...but good stuff!

None? At least not in a large sense. These stats measure how a team does at home and compares it to how they do on the road. So it is apples to apples.

 

You could go look at exactly the splits on who the Twins played at home versus who they played on the road and try and do some analysis. I suspect over the course of 81 games they are pretty similar in aggregate. Especially if you look at Park Effects as trends over multiple years.

[cmoss84]

Anyone wish we had gone this route?

[jkcarew]

Anyone wish we had gone this route?

Would love those results through 15 games. Hate the contract though. Basically, you get to keep him if he’s ok or worse. If he’s great, he’s gone (with the opt outs). I’d hate to lose him after one great (yet short and relatively meaningless) season.