Ian Gibaut coming to a MLB team near you

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, a-wan said:

So I know how to say Gibaut.

But do you want to say Gibaut?

[a-wan]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

But do you want to say Gibaut?

If that name was attached to a different pitcher, it would be fun to say. Instead of Joe Smith, Gibaut would be so much cooler.

[cHawk]

He’ll be DFA’d quickly.

[DJL44]

The front office is clearly avoiding adding any player who may have a future with the team. Are they tanking? Playing service time games? Worried about negotiations in the upcoming CBA? Did someone lose a double-dog dare?

We'll see Randy Dobnak return but I'm starting to think our "callups" on September 1 will be Charlie Barnes and Kyle Barraclough.

[Dodecahedron]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

The front office is clearly avoiding adding any player who may have a future with the team. Are they tanking? Playing service time games? Worried about negotiations in the upcoming CBA? Did someone lose a double-dog dare?

We'll see Randy Dobnak return but I'm starting to think our "callups" on September 1 will be Charlie Barnes and Kyle Barraclough.

Yes.

Service time consideration is a strategy this team has been known to use.  But, given the situation the Twins are in, it's the wrong strategy.

• Service time manipulation is a fair strategy when your team is currently competitive.  You're not hurting the team when you're holding a player in the minors if the team is doing well.
• Service time manipulation is also a fair strategy when you will be competitive in the near future.  Blowing a few weeks in a lost season doesn't matter if you'll be in the thick of things next year.  Usually, this would be because other teams are dominant, not because your team is bad.  This would work when you have no chance of making the playoffs through no fault of your own.
• Service time manipulation is the wrong strategy when there is nothing to indicate that you will be competitive in the following year and beyond.  You are simply prolonging the team's misery, there is no point in guaranteeing you will squeeze one extra year out of a player X years from now if all the years in between are trash.  In this scenario, you want your rookies to get up to speed as quickly as possible.

This is another example of the Twins using a valid tactic but at the wrong time, illustrating a profound misunderstanding of what the tactic is meant to accomplish.

Now, there are also 40-man roster considerations.  There is a belief among many that there will be a "roster crunch" even though at least a dozen players won't be back next year.  It's possible the Twins are holding people back for this reason.  This is especially possible if the Twins expect a big haul from trading Buxton.

[Mike Sixel]

They aren't playing service time games with pitchers in their mid twenties...

[Dodecahedron]

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They aren't playing service time games with pitchers in their mid twenties...

Why not?  It's not unusual for college pitchers to debut later, and it's not a bad plan to sew up a player's services until they are past their primes.  It avoids that whole pesky having to pay them free agent wages in their peak years thing.

But given where the Twins are today, they shouldn't be thinking about the maybes of five years from now.

[DJL44]

I thought what was really desired was to get all your rookies promoted at roughly the same time so they can grow together (see 1982 Twins).

They clearly aren't going to add anyone to the roster who isn't absolutely required to be added to the roster. As far as I know the only AAA prospects who absolutely have to be added to avoid being selected in Rule 5 are Jose Miranda, Joe Ryan and Jovani Moran. Right now I am betting they all finish out the AAA schedule but those are your only possible roster adds between now and November who are actual prospects.

With the Maeda injury the front office might be ready to tear this team down and trade everyone with 2 or fewer years of team control (Donaldson, Sano, Garver, Taylor Rogers, Tyler Duffey and Buxton).

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Dodecahedron said:

Yes.

Service time consideration is a strategy this team has been known to use.  But, given the situation the Twins are in, it's the wrong strategy.

• Service time manipulation is a fair strategy when your team is currently competitive.  You're not hurting the team when you're holding a player in the minors if the team is doing well.
• Service time manipulation is also a fair strategy when you will be competitive in the near future.  Blowing a few weeks in a lost season doesn't matter if you'll be in the thick of things next year.  Usually, this would be because other teams are dominant, not because your team is bad.  This would work when you have no chance of making the playoffs through no fault of your own.
• Service time manipulation is the wrong strategy when there is nothing to indicate that you will be competitive in the following year and beyond.  You are simply prolonging the team's misery, there is no point in guaranteeing you will squeeze one extra year out of a player X years from now if all the years in between are trash.  In this scenario, you want your rookies to get up to speed as quickly as possible.

This is another example of the Twins using a valid tactic but at the wrong time, illustrating a profound misunderstanding of what the tactic is meant to accomplish.

Now, there are also 40-man roster considerations.  There is a belief among many that there will be a "roster crunch" even though at least a dozen players won't be back next year.  It's possible the Twins are holding people back for this reason.  This is especially possible if the Twins expect a big haul from trading Buxton.

You have no evidence this is a service time game and considering where we are in the season, it's unlikely it's a service time game because the team would have to punt on a player through the end of next April to see any service time gains... under the current service time rules.

Except even then, the CBA expires in a couple of months. We have no idea what service time rules will look like next April so fiddling with service time right now is a pretty foolish game to be playing.

I don't understand what this front office is thinking right now and why they're dragging their feet but it's rather unlikely service time is the driving force behind the decisions.

[Dodecahedron]

36 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

You have no evidence this is a service time game and considering where we are in the season, it's unlikely it's a service time game because the team would have to punt on a player through the end of next April to see any service time gains... 

Keeping someone in the minors for 3 weeks in April for service considerations happens all the time.  I don't know why you say it's "unlikely" when it's commonplace and normal.  

This is precisely the time of year when service time enters the conversation.  

We will see what happens.

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

Keeping someone in the minors for 3 weeks in April for service considerations happens all the time.  I don't know why you say it's "unlikely" when it's commonplace and normal.  

This is precisely the time of year when service time enters the conversation.  

We will see what happens.

Except I’d put odds of service time changes happening this off-season at over 50%, which renders all the planning in the world moot. 

[Dodecahedron]

5 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Except I’d put odds of service time changes happening this off-season at over 50%, which renders all the planning in the world moot. 

Maybe.  How many years has it been since the service time rules changed?  The longer it's been, the less likely there will be drastic changes.

[Battle ur tail off]

4 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

They aren't playing service time games with pitchers in their mid twenties...

That's just it, they shouldn't be. A guys best darts in in his mid-20s - 30 years old.

The real kicker here is that these guys that are touted as top pitching prospects in our system, flat out AREN'T. They are mid-tier mop-up #5 starter types. They aren't good. That is why they haven't been called up. Right now, they may have some trade value, but when they come up and instantly bomb, all that is out the window.

These guys have about 2 years to get something going with this pitching or they are out. They won't be fired this year, but a couple more years of this type of pitching staff will get them sent packing. So far, they have been bad, maybe the worst in the entire league at drafting/developing and trading for pitching. Terry Ryan did a much better job. Too arrogant these folks, it is biting them in the butt this year. 

[Mike Sixel]

33 minutes ago, Battle ur tail off said:

That's just it, they shouldn't be. A guys best darts in in his mid-20s - 30 years old.

The real kicker here is that these guys that are touted as top pitching prospects in our system, flat out AREN'T. They are mid-tier mop-up #5 starter types. They aren't good. That is why they haven't been called up. Right now, they may have some trade value, but when they come up and instantly bomb, all that is out the window.

These guys have about 2 years to get something going with this pitching or they are out. They won't be fired this year, but a couple more years of this type of pitching staff will get them sent packing. So far, they have been bad, maybe the worst in the entire league at drafting/developing and trading for pitching. Terry Ryan did a much better job. Too arrogant these folks, it is biting them in the butt this year. 

I see no evidence for most of this post. But, that's ok. We can disagree.

[AceWrigley]

So after all this fan angst, what does Gibaut do? He comes in against the Brew Crew on Sunday and throws 3 scoreless innings. Bazinga!

[prouster]

58 minutes ago, AceWrigley said:

So after all this fan angst, what does Gibaut do? He comes in against the Brew Crew on Sunday and throws 3 scoreless innings. Bazinga!

It’s almost like the main factor for winning isn’t the manager or GM, but players doing their jobs well. 

[Brandon]

On 8/27/2021 at 3:18 PM, twins_89 said:

The Twins have an impressive list of scrap heap relievers that have been on the 24 man roster at some point this season. To date the 11 player list includes Ian Gibaut, Kyle Barraclough, Brandon Waddell, Nick Vincent, Ralph Garza, Beau Burrows, Edgar Garcia, Derek Law, Luke Farrell, Danny Coulombe, and Juan Minaya.

But a couple of them have produced positive results.  I am a little surprised Nick Vincent wasn't given a longer tryout.  He did his job and has a decent track record.  Minaya and Coulombe could be keepers.  They have low 3 ERA's so far.  Ralph Garza is also working out so far.  and Luke Farrell, Whether that is sustainable is another thing but for having the entire pitching staff minus maybe 2 relievers completely blow up, the bullpen has been doing a decent job lately.

 

[gil4]

On 8/27/2021 at 3:43 PM, AceWrigley said:

Ian Gibaut (pronounced jih-BOH) called up, Alcala reinstated. Edgar García and Kyle Barraclough banished to St. Paul.

Luke Farrell transferred from 10-day to 60-day injured list to make room for Gibaut.

I'm not sure if Gibaut's 7.20 era  or 1.80 whip excites me most.

 

MLB.com published a "Every team's best in-season addition" piece yesterday.  For the Twins, it was Kyle Barraclough, which struck me as both funny and fitting for the season.  Maybe was can ask them to update it to Ian Gibaut instead, since he's actually on the 25-man roster.  (We might have to hurry.)

https://www.mlb.com/news/every-team-s-best-in-season-addition

[Rosterman]

Think of it this way...the clubhouse sewing machine is kept constantly busy creating uniform backs.,

[Rosterman]

27 minutes ago, gil4 said:

MLB.com published a "Every team's best in-season addition" piece yesterday.  For the Twins, it was Kyle Barraclough, which struck me as both funny and fitting for the season.  Maybe was can ask them to update it to Ian Gibaut instead, since he's actually on the 25-man roster.  (We might have to hurry.)

https://www.mlb.com/news/every-team-s-best-in-season-addition

This is ignorance. Refsnyder was a plus. For a while Kyle Garlick was, too. Robles was actually a plus since the Red Sox traded something for him (although Happ wasn't a plus). 

[Rosterman]

9 hours ago, DJL44 said:

I thought what was really desired was to get all your rookies promoted at roughly the same time so they can grow together (see 1982 Twins).

They clearly aren't going to add anyone to the roster who isn't absolutely required to be added to the roster. As far as I know the only AAA prospects who absolutely have to be added to avoid being selected in Rule 5 are Jose Miranda, Joe Ryan and Jovani Moran. Right now I am betting they all finish out the AAA schedule but those are your only possible roster adds between now and November who are actual prospects.

With the Maeda injury the front office might be ready to tear this team down and trade everyone with 2 or fewer years of team control (Donaldson, Sano, Garver, Taylor Rogers, Tyler Duffey and Buxton).

Miranda and Moran could become minor league free agents if they aren't added. Royce Lewis is eligible for the Rule 5, as is Josh Winder. Trey Cabbage is a potential minor league free agent. Cole Sands and Blayne Enlow are Rule 5 eligible, as is Bryan Sammons. Plus guys like Kerrigan and Contreras are Rule 5. Former Twins Aaron Whitefield and Andrew Vasquez are also minor league free agents. There will be some house cleaning amongst all the minor league free agents the Twins signed (30+) and their own guys who have come of age. Be interesting to see how the rosters are also shuffled in the minors. We forget there is a minor league part of the draft.

 

Oh, and Wander Javier could be grabbed, too. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

4 hours ago, prouster said:

It’s almost like the main factor for winning isn’t the manager or GM, but players doing their jobs well. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

7 minutes ago, Rosterman said:

This is ignorance. Refsnyder was a plus. For a while Kyle Garlick was, too. Robles was actually a plus since the Red Sox traded something for him (although Happ wasn't a plus). 

I generally agree about Refsnyder and Garlick but Robles wasn't an in-season add, he was a free agent signing in the offseason.

[gil4]

24 minutes ago, Rosterman said:

This is ignorance. Refsnyder was a plus. For a while Kyle Garlick was, too. Robles was actually a plus since the Red Sox traded something for him (although Happ wasn't a plus). 

Were any of those in-season additions?  I know Robles was signed during the off-season, and I think the others were as well. 
To be fair to MLB.com, once the Twins tanked in April and May, they were sellers and dumpster-divers, not buyers.  (They acknowledged that with the O's, but could have said it for the Twins and seral other teams as well.)

[DJL44]

10 hours ago, Rosterman said:

Royce Lewis is eligible for the Rule 5, as is Josh Winder. Trey Cabbage is a potential minor league free agent. Cole Sands and Blayne Enlow are Rule 5 eligible, as is Bryan Sammons. Plus guys like Kerrigan and Contreras are Rule 5. Former Twins Aaron Whitefield and Andrew Vasquez are also minor league free agents. Oh, and Wander Javier could be grabbed, too. 

None of them will be promoted in September. Some are out for the season with injury.

[GCTF]

21 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Except I’d put odds of service time changes happening this off-season at over 50%, which renders all the planning in the world moot. 

Feels like we need a word filter for "service time" Make it happen, Boss.