Twins Finalize Opening Day Roster

Astudillo is a great fit for the 26th roster spot. The only alternative use of it that would make sense would be adding another platoon bat, but aside from kinda-sorta Kepler, there's no need for it.

 

With respect to Rooker . . . it seems like maybe he's just not that good, despite having posted good top-line stats in his career-to-date. The projection systems generally have him as a tick above replacement level, and as he gets older his defense will only get worse. He needs a major hitting breakthrough to hold down an MLB roster spot, and the Twins evidently want to work on that at the alternate site/minor league level. 

The logic here could be as simple as they think MLB pitchers are going to abuse him with breaking stuff. Therefore, the team decided to implement a plan that will allow him the best opportunity to overcome this weakness. I would think he knows if he is prone to breaking balls. If properly presented, Rooker himself, while being disappointed, might just see such a plan as the best way for him to have a successful MLB career.

Now that Rosario is gone, it looks like Astudillo is the new polarizing Twin....

if you look at the MLB.com stats, they have included his spring training stats into his total.  So, it's not accurate.

Text reads "MLB Career Stats": https://www.mlb.com/player/willians-astudillo-553902

If you want to parse the numbers, you can do so. I would expect career stats to reflect actual ballgames. If not, MLB.com should clarify.

You are incorrect, sir.

Baseball Reference shows that he has a .294 career batting average, and an ON BASE AVERAGE OF .319.

Pls see my response to adorduan, above. MLB.com lists Astudillo's on-base percentage as .335.

Astudillo has a career average of .318. Source is MLB.com.

I'd encourage you, and those liking your post to take a closer look at those MLB.com numbers and cross reference them....

Now that Rosario is gone, it looks like Astudillo is the new polarizing Twin....

No one has been able to fill Mauer's shoes in this regard since he retired.

Final spring training averages:

Kepler: .070

Buxton: .135

Simmons: .138

Sano: .159

Garver: .172

Maybe it's not Garlick or Astudillo who we should be worried about.

Final spring training averages:

 

Kepler: .070

Buxton: .135

Simmons: .138

Sano: .159

Garver: .172

 

Maybe it's not Garlick or Astudillo who we should be worried about.

If these guys had a solid 2020 season and strong playoff showings at the plate, I'd be less concerned about them heading into the season.

But they did not (sans Simmons BA wise), and I am.

Those numbers give me all the more reason to understand why the Twins kept Garlick and La Tortuga on the 26 man roster.

With the "deader" ball, the Twins (are likely going to need to manufacture more runs this season so they are going to need guys who can put the ball in play.

Garlick over Rooker surprised me a little.  I read that it really has to do with defense.  Rooker defense is so bad that they do not want to put him in left because his offense is not good enough to make up for it, at least as of now.  To me it is also a sign that Kirilloff will be getting a call once his bat starts finding the ball again.

I was not surprised with Law not making team off the bat because of 40 man roster situation.  I bet Twins just waiting for the flurry of moves and then make a 40 man change when they are ready to bring him in.  It is easier to sneak guys through waivers in the early part of season than just before it. 

"...they're all going to get their shot, something even more likely as a result of the inevitable injuries to Buxton, Donaldson, and Simmons."

No jinx this year, I hope. If two of those three stay healthy, we have a shot. If two go down, it's deja vu.

Great post, all of it. It could be a bumpy ride, and those batting numbers are concerning. The hitting has been woeful going back to last year, some of it tied to injuries. Along with Buxton and Donaldson missing the playoffs, Arraez and Polanco were running on bum legs. Cruz was struggling with the wrist thing. Fortunately, all of these key hitters look healthy now, and we're going to need them to sustain us until the others can figure things out. I get that spring training is for getting your work in, but you expect to see progress. 

Our starting pitching looks promising, I think, with good young arms waiting in the wings. I think Dobnak will team with Berrios and Maeda to give us a big three, and I still like Mike. I think the bullpen will come together as well, because in Wes I trust.

Hitting and health are the keys for me. Buckle up, yes, and let's see what we have here. Fans in the stands, an April start, a Twins team with pitching: it's time to play ball. 

Has this FO made a single good move in the past two years, other than Maeda?

I wonder if they know the games in April and May count towards the team’s regular season record.

It's a bit much to suggest the FO that oversees a team that has gone 137-85 over it's past 222 games isn't making good moves.  Perhaps you meant splashy move, but that should not be confused with good (btw, signing Donaldson would also count as a splashy move).

Also, on June 1, 2019, the Twins were 39-18 (111 win pace), had a 10.5 game lead in the Central, and the best record in baseball.  On August 14, 2020 (about a third of the way through the season), the Twins had a 12-7 record (102 win pace), had a 1.5 game lead in the Central, and tied for the 6th best record in baseball.  I think the FO knows early season games count.

The improbable, irepressible La Tortuga making it helps me care.

Rooker has some exciting skills, but also some serious weaknesses. Let's not forget he had a 34.7% K rate at AAA in 2019. Yes, some hitters can still do some damage even with a high K rate in the modern game -- but others can get carved up too. I had expected Rooker to get an opportunity to sink or swim, but I guess if he looked bad enough at the end of the spring, maybe all signs were pointing to "sink" and there wasn't much point to it.

 

Garlick doesn't do much for me either, but I suppose he could wind up an average-ish stop gap / placeholder.

 

Hopefully we can use LF to get Arraez's bat in the lineup (maybe even at the top of the lineup), while our starting infielders are healthy and productive too.

Garlick has had a similarly high K% in each of his major league stints. I know you're not carrying the torch for the guy, but if the right side of the LF platoon is going to be "sink or swim," I don't know why the team wouldn't just turn to Rooker. He was an advanced college bat when they drafted him, he's already hit well in the high minors, and he looked pretty good in a small sample last year. 

If Garlick is going to rot on the bench and we Arraez get significant time in LF then that's another story I guess. 

If these guys had a solid 2020 season and strong playoff showings at the plate, I'd be less concerned about them heading into the season.

 

But they did not (sans Simmons BA wise), and I am.

 

Those numbers give me all the more reason to understand why the Twins kept Garlick and La Tortuga on the 26 man roster.

 

With the "deader" ball, the Twins (are likely going to need to manufacture more runs this season so they are going to need guys who can put the ball in play.

You're concerned about guys with proven MLB track records, but rostering Kyle Garlick provides insurance? 

Now that Rosario is gone, it looks like Astudillo is the new polarizing Twin....

Where's Mike Pelfrey when you need him, huh? 

Does a platoon of Garlick and Cave in LF sound like a part of a championship team?  If not Kiriloff, if not Rooker, then Larnach.  Upside and youth.  Now if Kepler does not produce, if Buxton gets injured the OF suddenly looks subpar.  The BP has some very shaky vets.  Lets hope that everyone finds their stroke, rises to the challenges and all ST worries disappear. 

Short answer, for me, is yes. Why? Because, despite their shortcomings and inexperience, in tandem, they are possibly an upgrade over Rosario. Secondly, Kirilloff, I believe, is the real deal, and Larnach and Celestino may be too. This sets the club up to convert surplus assets (Rooker? Cave? Garlick? Wade... oops nevermind) into future  assets while simultaneously upgrading a position mid-season, and importantly, a position that was NOT compromised when Rosario was allowed to walk.

I tend to think the concerns about either/both Buxton/Kepler having a bad season should at least be balanced against an equally reasonable idea of either/both taking another step, or at least holding their own. Regardless of this, I'm thinking the depth of AAA and AA prospects has adequately been calculated in the FO's assessment of it all.

Rooker was so upset upon being notified of this injustice, that he went right out there and posted three more K’s in 3 AB...to bring his ST K% to a tick over 46%.

He should demand a trade.

At some point this season, a beat writer is going to have to write this... Garlick mashed taters today. DocBauer knows his stuff too

At some point this season, a beat writer is going to have to write this... Garlick mashed taters today. DocBauer knows his stuff too

Let's hope it's not: Stench of Garlick keeps fans from the ballpark. (Hey, it's just a joke...)

There is something seriously wrong with Astudillo's mlb.com page. Besides the .318 lifetime batting average it says that he played for Atlanta! And ... he has had 155 career at bats. That earns a solid WTF?

It's a conspiracy. MLB.com wants us to believe he was a major league ballplayer in 2016, but he was actually a pizza delivery guy operating out of a basement in Buckhead.

Forgive the levity. I've learned more about Astudillo in the past two days than I know about my own pup. Really, I just want the guy to get some hits, spell a few guys in the field, and help the Twins win some ballgames. I think he can do this, while others disagree. We'll find out soon enough.

You're concerned about guys with proven MLB track records, but rostering Kyle Garlick provides insurance? 

Exactly!

The guys mentioned struggled in 2020 and thus the Twins need more bats on balls and Yes - I feel right now that Garlick provides a better chance to put the ball in play than Rooker.  

Also - from all accounts - Garlick's defense is better as well.

That said I hope Garlick's stay (and eventually Cave's) is short because Rooker, Kirilloff and Larnach force their way onto the roster very soon.

I probably would have kept Rooker over Garlick, but we'll see how it goes. I like Rooker, but I'm not blind to the fact that he can really struggle against breaking stuff and MLB pitching is going to figure that out quickly. But Garlick seems to be just another guy to me, whereas Rooker does have an elite skill in terms of his power. But it's a move that can be fixed easily if it goes sideways, so not a huge deal and maybe the team sees something I'm not (other than the spring training performance)

 

Astudillo is a really fun player. But he really doesn't have a defensive position; there's about 6 spots you can put him, but he's bad defensively at all of them. But as a 26th man...maybe you can accept that? I do think he's got real value as a pinch hitter in that he's a guy you can count on to put a ball in play. That can be very useful. But he hasn't shown that he can hit consistently in MLB, and needs to show that he can take some pitches. Is it better to have him on the bench or Rooker/Blankenhorn/*insert random SS who can't hit here*?

 

I'll be honest: I'm just happy they didn't carry 14 %$@&%*#%$& pitchers...

Kyle Garlick has 40 AAA homers in 645 AAA PA's, or a homer every 16.1 PA's (granted, in the more hitter friendly PCL).

Brent Rooker has 14 AAA homers in 274 AAA PA's, or a homer every 19.6 PA's

To quantify league impact, in 2019 there was a homer every 26.3 PA's in the PCL, compared to a homer every 30.4 PA's in the International League, so homers were 13.5% more frequent in the PCL than the IL.  However, Garlick hit homers 17.9% more frequently than Rooker.  Sure, Garlick is also older by not quite 3 years, and so was in his age 27 season, but Rooker was also in his age 24 season--he wasn't some 21 year old facing pitchers 4-5 years older than him.

To sum up, while I think Rooker probably has better power potential than Garlick, it's not like Garlick is Luis Arraez there.  When you also look at spring training stats (which are relevant when discussing two young players without proven MLB track records), Garlick posted a .987 OPS with 5 HR's and a 28% k rate, while Rooker was at .645 with 1 HR and a 48% k rate.  Rooker will almost assuredly get more career PA's with the Twins over his career than Garlick will in his, but starting the season with Garlick and not Rooker is a good decision, imo.