Has Alex Kirilloff Played Himself Off the Opening Day Roster?

[Harrison Greeley III]

 

I'm not so sure on that last point. ZiPS projects Broxton at a 55 wRC+, and Cave at a 98. Even if you think Broxton has righted himself after his disastrous 2019, he was only at 85 wRC+ for 2017-2018 -- and Cave was 111 for the two years prior to 2020.

Fair. But it still looks to me that the hope is getting an average bat at best either way. To me the bat part is the smallest part of this role. This is the guy who is coming in to pinch run for Nelson Cruz in late innings, replace Arraez in LF if needed, and is going to get spot starts as players need rest. I think I'd rather take the plus outfield defense instead of the hope of an ok bat. I know Cave did well defensively last year, but I'd still prefer Broxton's track record.

If you have an outfield of Buxton/Kepler/Broxton with Simmons and Donaldson on the left side of the infield in late innings, that's pretty dreamy for pitchers. 
 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Fair. But it still looks to me that the hope is getting an average bat at best either way. To me the bat part is the smallest part of this role. This is the guy who is coming in to pinch run for Nelson Cruz in late innings, replace Arraez in LF if needed, and is going to get spot starts as players need rest. I think I'd rather take the plus outfield defense instead of the hope of an ok bat. I know Cave did well defensively last year, but I'd still prefer Broxton's track record.

If you have an outfield of Buxton/Kepler/Broxton with Simmons and Donaldson on the left side of the infield in late innings, that's pretty dreamy for pitchers. 
 

I think that in the modern game, and particularly on this team, pinch-running would be the smallest part of the role, by definition. The Twins only pinch-ran 43 times combined over 2019-2020, and they're generally not attempting steals either, so the relative difference between Cave and Broxton as pinch running options is minimal.

 

The difference between their career batting lines, on the other hand, is worth about 7.9 Rbat prorated to 228 PA (which was the 2019 PA total for both of them).

 

On defense, the career gap between Broxton and Cave, prorated to Broxton's 2019 innings, would be about 2.3 UZR or 6.6 DRS. Broxton turns 31 soon, though, which could be a negative factor in his defensive projection going forward?

 

Cave's advantage in ZiPS projections, including defense, is about 8.2 runs (or 0.8 WAR) prorated to 228 PA.

[chpettit19]

 

It did create ill will that all but ruled out the possibility of extending him when he was putting up MVP numbers though. Of course he would take the Cubs offer if they were top bidder in free agency. That's basically the point, If you treat players like commodities, that's the depth of the relationship you can expect in return. There's a value in treating your players well. 

And for the record, I'm aware the situations are different and I said upthread I have issues with Kirilloff making the team. 

"Nevertheless, he needed to force the issue in March and he hasn't. I do see the potential problem in how much it would sting if he's up with the Twins in April and looks lost at the plate like Aaron Hicks in 2013."

I think the service time thing is a consideration, but it's a dicey subject and the Twins need to be careful on this one. 

Him being a Boras client ruled out an extension when he was putting up MVP numbers. You're dramatically overestimating the team/player relationship stuff. Pro athletes have a different view on this stuff than we do. Now you can be the Rockies and just have no idea what you're doing and treat your best player awfully, but simply not having Kirilloff on the opening day roster with his track record and this spring's performance is not going to ruin that relationship. The players aren't in contact with the front office constantly. They let their agents deal with them and see them in passing here and there. It's not like the relationship they have with the manager.

[chpettit19]

 

You’re looking at just one number, his OPS, and not taking into consideration the league he played in. .283/.343/.413 for a 129 wRC+ in a pitcher friendly league. He produced massively for our AA team in the playoffs. What y’all are doing is really overthinking things. Who’s the more talented player? To me it’s Kirilloff hands down. Here’s a link to an article explaining it better than I want to.

https://accesstwins.substack.com/p/for-the-twins-holding-back-alex-kirilloff

Who's the more talented player today? Rooker. Have you watched the games? It's not even about his numbers in spring, it's about the ABs he's had. Rooker looks comfortable and locked in. Kirilloff looks to still be trying to find his rhythm, timing, and swing. 

 

And that article is arguing against service time manipulation being the reason for keeping him down. Nobody on this thread seems to be arguing that. We're straight up arguing that at this point in time Rooker looks to be the player who will give you the better chance to win Major League baseball games in April. Kirilloff can stay in FL or go to St Paul and continue to fine tune his swing. When he's got it locked in make a move to get him to Minneapolis. Maybe that's by April 8th for the home opener (no manipulation), maybe it's June 8th after he's had a bunch of AAA ABs for the Saints.

 

You're arguing he should be up because he's going to be a better player. Today he is not the better player. If you had to have 1 guy take an AB to win a game right now Kirilloff would not be the choice over Rooker. Maybe his swing clicks today and this is all moot cuz he rips up spring training for the next week. But he shouldn't be on the opening day roster if they all keep putting up the ABs they are for the next week and you're trying to win as many games as possible in April.

[In My La Z boy]

 

I think that in the modern game, and particularly on this team, pinch-running would be the smallest part of the role, by definition. The Twins only pinch-ran 43 times combined over 2019-2020, and they're generally not attempting steals either, so the relative difference between Cave and Broxton as pinch running options is minimal.

 

The difference between their career batting lines, on the other hand, is worth about 7.9 Rbat prorated to 228 PA (which was the 2019 PA total for both of them).

 

On defense, the career gap between Broxton and Cave, prorated to Broxton's 2019 innings, would be about 2.3 UZR or 6.6 DRS. Broxton turns 31 soon, though, which could be a negative factor in his defensive projection going forward?

 

Cave's advantage in ZiPS projections, including defense, is about 8.2 runs (or 0.8 WAR) prorated to 228 PA.

My comments on this subject were primarily surrounding holding on to as much talent as possible, thinking we lose Broxton if we don't add him to the 40 man and keep him on the 26 man. I am not in favor of sending Cave to St. Paul. I am also not in favor of cutting Broxton loose. If and/or when Buxton goes down this year, it would be helpful to maintain the defense and the speedburner speed factor we lose when Byron's out. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

My comments on this subject were primarily surrounding holding on to as much talent as possible, thinking we lose Broxton if we don't add him to the 40 man and keep him on the 26 man. I am not in favor of sending Cave to St. Paul. I am also not in favor of cutting Broxton loose. If and/or when Buxton goes down this year, it would be helpful to maintain the defense and the speedburner speed factor we lose when Byron's out. 

I think there's a pretty good chance for Broxton to stick with the organization, knowing that Buxton is Mr Glass and he's the best (only?) reasonable AAAA backup behind him in an org that plans to contend for the division.

 

I think he probably gets lost in the shuffle that is the mad dash of last-minute demotions that happens before Opening Day and if he has an opt-out (again, haven't looked into it), I suspect he won't get much more of an opportunity to log MLB games than he would in Minnesota and there's a good chance he opts to stay here in the org.

[jimbo92107]

Like pretty much everybody else here, my biggest fear is another David Ortiz situation, where the Twins let some promising slugger get away and take on a superhero name like Big Papi. Then they hit 45 to 50 home runs every year for the next decade.

 

Somebody promise me Rooker won't do that. It's okay to lie...

[Harrison Greeley III]

 

 

On defense, the career gap between Broxton and Cave, prorated to Broxton's 2019 innings, would be about 2.3 UZR or 6.6 DRS. Broxton turns 31 soon, though, which could be a negative factor in his defensive projection going forward?

 

We'll see. But he's still got his speed so I'm not so sure how much that negative factor comes in to play. 

 

https://twitter.com/fsnorth/status/1373421889847169025?s=20

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Like pretty much everybody else here, my biggest fear is another David Ortiz situation, where the Twins let some promising slugger get away and take on a superhero name like Big Papi. Then they hit 45 to 50 home runs every year for the next decade.

 

Somebody promise me Rooker won't do that. It's okay to lie...

Even if Rooker doesn't make the roster, there's virtually a zero percent chance he's taken off the 40-man roster and at this point, I believe he's close to a lock to make the 26-man for Opening Day. He's something of a defensive liability but given that he's a capable RHB, he's pretty badly needed in both the lineup and specifically the OF alongside a Cave platoon.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

My comments on this subject were primarily surrounding holding on to as much talent as possible, thinking we lose Broxton if we don't add him to the 40 man and keep him on the 26 man.

 

 

if he has an opt-out (again, haven't looked into it),

 

The Twins official site beat writer said Broxton does *not* have an opt-out at the end of spring training:

 

There's actually a good chance of the Twins being able to hold on to Broxton without breaking camp with him because he doesn't have an opt-out at the end of Spring Training.

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/twins-inbox-can-broxton-make-the-team

[Vanimal46]

 

Can’t start that service time clock on yet! See you in June, hopefully.

[nicksaviking]

 

You’re looking at just one number, his OPS, and not taking into consideration the league he played in. .283/.343/.413 for a 129 wRC+ in a pitcher friendly league. He produced massively for our AA team in the playoffs. What y’all are doing is really overthinking things. Who’s the more talented player? To me it’s Kirilloff hands down. Here’s a link to an article explaining it better than I want to.

https://accesstwins.substack.com/p/for-the-twins-holding-back-alex-kirilloff

 

The day the front office puts guys on the roster because of their prospect ranking or talent level instead of because of production, is the day they probably need to be replaced.

 

It was Rooker's job last year before he got hurt. Rooker was hitting very well last year. Rooker is now not hurt and has resumed hitting well. Kirilloff has not hit well.

 

I don't think we are the one's over thinking this.

[Diesel]

With the Kiriloff news, I do hope that Rooker gets his fair share of at bats. Cave and Garlick have their limitations

[Channing1964]

It's not a bad problem to have. Even though I think it was a bad move to simply disrespect Rosario like that, Rooker has really been impressive. I can definitely see the potential in A.K, and where did this guy Garlick come from? Wow he has some Power! I am not a fan of Broxton because I have followed his career. The three outfielders mentioned above all have options right? Jake Cave is a good guy but I have to say A.K. and Rooker have to make this team. If something happens to Donaldson(and it will)those young guys will have to play some 1b because I trust Sano at 3b more than Arraez(this is where we miss Marwin and adrianza)

[nicksaviking]

 

With the Kiriloff news, I do hope that Rooker gets his fair share of at bats. Cave and Garlick have their limitations

 

Seems to me that the past two years, when the rest of the OF was healthy (which admittedly was rare) Cave was mostly used as you'd expect a 4th OF to be used. I'd guess if Rooker ends up being the starting RF, he'd more likely see his playing time infringed upon by Arraez, more so than Cave.

[cHawk]

 

Don’t forget La Tortuga, who has also played well enough to come up. Find a place for him, Rooker, Garlick, and Broxton. That is less tough if the Twins leave Kirilloff in St Paul and release Cave.

 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - La Tortuga has no business being on the roster of a contending team. He might’ve played well in the minors but his MLB record is...well...not great. Below average defensively, can’t hit. I would much rather have almost any of the others you listed (including Cave) on the roster than La Tortuga.

[by jiminy]

I don't see why you would put a proven hitter like Arraez on the bench in favor of a AA player, no matter how talented he is. My opening day left fielder would be Arraez. And if not him then Rooker.

 

People who say, If he was good enough to start a playoff game, how can you say he is not good enough to start in the majors, are actually making a case for Rooker, not Kiriloff.

 

Who was considered farther along last year? Rooker.

 

Who was promoted first? Rooker.

 

Who has done more to demonstrate he can hit major league pitching? Rooker.

 

Who would have started that playoff game if not for a fluke injury? Rooker.

 

And who is playing better right now? Rooker.

 

The last thing we need is to rush another highly hyped outfielder to the majors before he is ready. They did that with Gomez, Span, and Buxton, and it did all of them, and the Twins, a disservice. All three floundered for years because they were deprived of development time they needed. Gomez and Span both blossomed only after they left, and the same may still happen with Buxton. It won't kill Kiriloff to play in AAA a little. He might even learn something.

 

And people seem to forget how good Rooker is. If it weren't for all the Kiriloff hype people would be really excited about him. Well I for one still am. And unlike with Kiriloff I am confident he is really ready. I would love to see him out the there in left field opening day, and I think it is insulting to suggest he didn't deserve it, or it is unfair to Kiriloff to play Rooker. Kiriloff will get his chance. But Rooker is older and more experienced and he can rake too. If it isn't Arraez, I hope to see Rooker out there on opening day.

[nicksaviking]

I really wish this wasn't as contentious as it is. Obviously Rooker doesn't have the national prominence of Kirilloff, but man, he's been an organizational top prospect for several years now, has hit at every level and as a rookie looks like he's in line to make the opening day roster without having to dance the delayed-service-time rumba. Normally this would be cause for high-fives.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I really wish this wasn't as contentious as it is. Obviously Rooker doesn't have the national cache of Kirilloff, but man, he's been an organizational top prospect for several years now, has hit at every level and as a rookie looks like he's in line to make the opening day roster without having to dance the delayed-service-time rumba. Normally this would be cause for high-fives.

Right?!?!?!

 

I'm excited to see what Rooker can do. As I mentioned in another thread, he has done nothing but succeed since being drafted and I hope he continues that streak in a Minnesota uniform this season.

 

It's also a bummer for Kirilloff because if a damned pandemic didn't drop on our heads last year, it's likely he's also in a Minnesota Twins uniform right now alongside Rooker.

 

Frankly, this situation is pretty muddy and there isn't a clear answer, I can see the validity of both sides. And while it's fine to be disappointed for Kirilloff, the certainty felt by some about the decision one way or the other is quite unwarranted. It's a tough call to make.

[mikelink45]

 

While I get your point that Spring stats don't matter you are kind of comparing apples and oranges here.  Kepler, Cave and Buxton all have years of MLB experience and track record.  We all know they will have better stats than that during the regular season, well except maybe Kepler.  Also Buxton is a centerfielder and not really in competition with Kirilloff, but I digress. 

 

With no "proven" MLB experience to rely on the next closest thing is Spring training where Kirilloff's competition is Rooker and Garlic who also have little to no MLB experience (apples to apples).  Who has performed better?  Who looks more ready to start the season?  If Kirilloff is so much better than those two where are the results?  For guys with no MLB track record you have to prove that you belong.  Kirilloff has only played about a half season of AA ball and hasn't had a big spring.  I think those results tell us he isn't as ready as his competition.

 

Rooker had a very good MLB debut and is having a very good spring.  Garlick has been very good at AAA with an up and down track record in MLB but also having arguably the best spring of any hitter on the team.  Then you have Kirilloff who has been ho hum to this point.  In this game you can't live on reputation you have to prove you belong.  IMO Rooker and Garlick look more ready at this point in time than Alex and he should find his swing at AAA before bumping off two guys that look ready to go.

You are right, Garlick has two years of MLB experience and according to baseball reference his has accumulated -0.4 WAR.  If the Twins rhetoric is to be believed a bad spring would not matter.  Have you ever looked at Willie Mays career?  He was awful for his first few weeks, but they stayed with him and the rest is a record in the HOF.  Not to say Kiriloff would be HOF worthy, but ST stats do not mean anything or Buxton, Kepler, Cave, Simmons would all be cut. 

[Dman]

 

You are right, Garlick has two years of MLB experience and according to baseball reference his has accumulated -0.4 WAR.  If the Twins rhetoric is to be believed a bad spring would not matter.  Have you ever looked at Willie Mays career?  He was awful for his first few weeks, but they stayed with him and the rest is a record in the HOF.  Not to say Kiriloff would be HOF worthy, but ST stats do not mean anything or Buxton, Kepler, Cave, Simmons would all be cut. 

 

And yet decisions are made in spring all the time.  The Twins kept Wisler, Harper and Lamare due to spring performances.  Many, many other players on other teams play their way on as well.  They might not be great but they made it out of spring non the less.  Throw spring out the window if you like the reality is it matters.  Why was everyone so upset about the Cubs and Kris Bryant including his agent?  According to you those numbers are meaningless they don't tell you a thing.  There should have been no reason for a grievance in your world and yet pretty much the entire baseball world took notice.

 

While I can concede spring isn't everything I cannot concede the numbers and they way players play in spring is meaningless.  There are way too many examples to disprove that theory.

[Fatbat]

Welp. AK was optioned today so we won't see him until june.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And yet decisions are made in spring all the time.  The Twins kept Wisler, Harper and Lamare due to spring performances.

Did they keep them based on spring training box scores, though?

 

I feel like there's a correlation and causation issue you're missing here. Certainly in the case of Wisler and Harper, a refined pitch approach led to better spring results but without the underlying analysis that led to that altered approach in the first place, the shiny box scores wouldn't exist.

 

So did the Twins look at the box score and make a decision or did they see individual potential, make analytical-based changes, and then base their decision on the changes they saw within that player? It's almost surely the latter, rendering the box score analysis somewhat irrelevant.

 

And if the Twins were swayed by box scores, it was coupled with loads of more nuanced data and analysis we do not have, which makes basing opinions only on box scores really misguided. We're looking at *maybe* 10% of the data and challenging the decisions of people who have 100% of the data.

[Vanimal46]

The day the front office puts guys on the roster because of their prospect ranking or talent level instead of because of production, is the day they probably need to be replaced.

 

It was Rooker's job last year before he got hurt. Rooker was hitting very well last year. Rooker is now not hurt and has resumed hitting well. Kirilloff has not hit well.

 

I don't think we are the one's over thinking this.

And Cave won the job over Kirilloff in the platoon because? What sample size is required for Kirilloff to show he’s now MLB ready? 3 weeks in AAA?

[Brock Beauchamp]

And Cave won the job over Kirilloff in the platoon because? What sample size is required for Kirilloff to show he’s now MLB ready? 3 weeks in AAA?

They go on the data they have available, which is about a month of workouts and training.

 

Is that enough? Probably not but it’s what they have.

[Dman]

 

Did they keep them based on spring training box scores, though?

 

I feel like there's a correlation and causation issue you're missing here. Certainly in the case of Wisler and Harper, a refined pitch approach led to better spring results but without the underlying analysis that led to that altered approach in the first place, the shiny box scores wouldn't exist.

 

So did the Twins look at the box score and make a decision or did they see individual potential, make analytical-based changes, and then base their decision on the changes they saw within that player? It's almost surely the latter, rendering the box score analysis somewhat irrelevant.

 

And if the Twins were swayed by box scores, it was coupled with loads of more nuanced data and analysis we do not have, which makes basing opinions only on box scores really misguided. We're looking at *maybe* 10% of the data and challenging the decisions of people who have 100% of the data.

 

That isn't really my argument though.  I agree with you that they saw something they could fix and were successful in fixing it.  My argument though is that what they fixed showed up in the box score.  We could all see the success.  In my argument I don't care what the Twins see in Kirilloff or how they develop him I am just saying the box score will reflect his success or failure.

 

The box showed Kirllioff played poorly this spring and he was sent down according to the box not surprising.  Rooker's success at three different levels looks pretty much the same in the box scores and he has not been sent down yet.  Again the box reflects how the player is doing.  I realize SSS interferer's with this type of analysis and there are other influences that will normalize things like BABIP etc.  but the box is a reflection in time and can't be and isn't completely ignored.  It matters and the longer the amount of data the more it matters..

 

Most things outside of the box eventually get reflected in the box.  SSS is the enemy to a degree because improvement is made and things can and will change but again that will ultimately be reflected in the box.  The box is the record that determines a players value for the most part.

[Brock Beauchamp]

That isn't really my argument though. I agree with you that they saw something they could fix and were successful in fixing it. My argument though is that what they fixed showed up in the box score. We could all see the success. In my argument I don't care what the Twins see in Kirilloff or how they develop him I am just saying the box score will reflect his success or failure.

 

The box showed Kirllioff played poorly this spring and he was sent down according to the box not surprising. Rooker's success at three different levels looks pretty much the same in the box scores and he has not been sent down yet. Again the box reflects how the player is doing. I realize SSS interferer's with this type of analysis and there are other influences that will normalize things like BABIP etc. but the box is a reflection in time and can't be and isn't completely ignored. It matters and the longer the amount of data the more it matters..

 

Most things outside of the box eventually get reflected in the box. SSS is the enemy to a degree because improvement is made and things can and will change but again that will ultimately be reflected in the box. The box is the record that determines a players value for the most part.

Fair enough, we’re saying many of the same things.

 

The only part where it appears we differ is that I believe many things happen and exist that are not reflected in a box score. A player could look fantastic in so many ways and have an atrocious box score, and vice versa. Ultimately, the box score doesn’t tell the team anything they don’t already know, though it may confirm what they already know.

[Dman]

 

Fair enough, we’re saying many of the same things.

The only part where it appears we differ is that I believe many things happen and exist that are not reflected in a box score. A player could look fantastic in so many ways and have an atrocious box score, and vice versa. Ultimately, the box score doesn’t tell the team anything they don’t already know, though it may confirm what they know.

 

I agree. I think we are close and I admit the box score doesn't tell us the whole story but it does pretty much define production.  It is why we compare OPS and WAR to determine which player is more successful.  I get that spring is a SSS and not as meaningful as other venue's but I still feel decisions for marginal players are made there and the box plays its part.  Thanks for the insight and discussion!  

[nicksaviking]

 

And Cave won the job over Kirilloff in the platoon because? What sample size is required for Kirilloff to show he’s now MLB ready? 3 weeks in AAA?

 

I'm really excited to see Kirilloff. Larnach, Wallner and Sabatao too. But to be the fourth OF, or more likely the fifth OF as Arraez is going to be getting regular playing time, I don't need to see him just sitting on the bench when Cave is also MLB ready.

 

I don't think there is or should be a specific clock on how long he stays down. There's just not a starting gig for him. If everyone stays healthy and productive he could stay down most of the year.

 

Lucky for him, though unfortunately for Twins fans, OF and corner IF health has been an issue the last several years so he'll likely get a good look real soon.

[Dr. Evil]

Rooker might be a horse and the timing is right for him. I would not look past him to get to Kiriloff a few weeks early as some suggest. We have been needing a good right handed outfield bat for a while and he is on the brink of breaking through. When Kiriloff moves up I suggest that it not be at the peril of Rooker.