ThejacKmp

2014 to 2017 Cruz averaged 155 games. This year he missed two weeks with a sprained ankle but will still hit 140+ games. He's pretty much an everyday DH. You're right that the Twins won't need it as much next year. Dozier was the guy who used that DH day the most and he's gone. But Rosario has done so on several occasions and it's probably not a bad idea for Sano and some other guys.

Brett Rooker has a .812 OPS at AA for the year. That ain't bad but it doesn't scream "promote me directly to the majors". He's going to start next year in AAA and he will have to adjust again. I think June 1st is a good target date. When he is ready, there's room for him in the majors. He can play corner OF, 1B, and DH. No reason Joe blocks him. And let's flip it. You don't resign Joe and Rooker isn't ready until September 1st. Are you happy having Kennys Vargas at 1B? Adrianza playing every day at 3B while Sano plays 1B? The Twins need a 1B/DH type to being the year and Joe makes as much sense as anyone. Number 2 is not speculation. Sano has shown nothing to say he's not going to be at 3B next year. If anything it's his bat sending him to the minors that is the problem (BTW, that would make Joe even more necessary). Assuming Joe plays 20 more games this year he's going to end up with around 120 games. His three year average will be 130ish (and that includes games he pinch hits so it's really like 120). I think 120 is a fair guess for Joe. Gets you 42 games for Rooker. Couple that with the inevitable injuries and rest days and you have more than enough time for Rooker or whomever. This thing isn't about internal candidates. It's about if you think there's a better outside option. If the Twins sign Donaldson and Cruz, yeah, Joe doesn't fit. But I don't know that that would be a wise use of funds and really doubt the Twins are going to commit to several long-term deals to guys north of 35. One short term deal to Joe makes way more sense.

Yeah, this is interesting with Cruz. He's a 150 game+ DH and an amazing bat but he does preclude you from the rest day but still get to hit plan. It'd be interesting to hear MLB player and staff talk about how that affects a team. Does it make you play guys in the field more and not get those days off? Does it contribute to continuity to have that same bat every day? Interesting topic with so few true DH's left.

I don't see the diminished role. Brent Rooker isn't going to be ready until June 1 at the earliest. He's dipped a bit in AA this year. Nothing awful, he just needs a bit more seasoning as expected. Sano is 3B next year with a sprinkling of 1B and DH. I don't get the people eager to get him across the diamond. He'll end up there eventually but he's an adequate 3B and the Twins have no internal candidates at 3B. They're already replacing 2B so why have to replace 3B too when you have an acceptable guy there already? Austin will get some time at 1B/DH. But I see him also getting some time as the 5th OF (behind Buxton, Rosario, Kepler, Cave) and he's an ideal platoon with Mauer anyway. Mauer isn't going to play 140 games but there's no reason he can't play a more front-loaded 125. There's not a lot better in free agency and Mauer means something to the team. Bring him back.

His agent has been saying he wants at least two years. He's an intriguing guy with an almost unparalleled career track - his best run of seasons has been ages 34-37. He'd certainly be a nice bat in the lineup. Issues to me are that he's an everyday DH so there goes spelling Sano/Rosario or working in at bats for four OFers. He also has had steroid issues which leave him open to a big suspension and perhaps cloud his late career numbers. He also seems like he'll get at least $10 million per year so the cost is higher. I wouldn't be averse but there's a lot to unpack with him.

No not at all. But I'm not sure that any of those guys are an insane upgrade over Mauer. Smoak and Matt Adams are the best of the 1B-playing bunch to me and they're nice players but I'm not sure they move the needle that much. Especially if Mauer is considerably cheaper as an older vet not looking to cash in.

There aren't great internal options and there aren't better options in free agency are also pretty good answers. The Twins don't have a first baseman that Mauer is blocking. Austin plays some OF, 1B and DH and isn't an everyday 1B in all likelihood. Sano will be at 3B next year even if the Twins get Escobar or someone like him back because they have a hole a 2B. You're likely looking at needing at least one 1B/DH type. I don't see a better option. If Joe wants to come back, he has value to this team. I wouldn't go more than 1 year unless that second year is a team or mutual option though.

I do wonder if they could keep at Fort Meyers for 13 days and then bring him to the TC. It might be too nakedly brazen but it likely is the best course for the Twins and Lord Byron.

Not good. Lucas Duda, Matt Adams, Logan Morrison, Adrian Gonzalez, Victor Martinez, Justin Smoak etc. Some of those may be looking for multiple year deals (Smoak) and that would seem to be an issue for a Twins organization with Rooker etc. on the way up.

That's not a bad thing. Logan Morrison is likely the best option in that market. These are the other prominent names available. Matt Adams Lucas Duda Nelson Cruz Evan Gattis Matt Holliday None of those guys is perfect. Duda and Holliday seem washed up. Gattis is interesting since he also can catch (poorly) but he's logged 34 MLB innings at 1B. Matt Adams is a part-time player at this point. Nelson Cruz is interesting but he's also 38, can only DH, and is looking for a long-term deal. It's not an inspiring market and Joe Mauer would seem to fit nicely in it and be a top option for the Twins, given his history with the team. You can get more pop from Adams and Gattis but the defense and OBP is significantly less. That and the Twins have openings at 1B and DH and any move of Sano to one of those spots would just leave the Twins with holes at 2B and 3B. Austin plays some OF and will likely get some time at 1B/DH but the Twins are going to need someone even when Rooker comes up. Mauer is as good as anyone on that free agent market, especially for the Twins needs.

Buxton and Sano have minimal trade value now. The only players the Twins could look to sell would be Berrios, Rosario and Gibson. I don't see the Twins doing that. And it hasn't been 10 years of losing. They made the playoffs. Last year.

Carew's career arc with the Twins didn't include the inevitable downturn later in his career because he went to the Angels. Mauer's did. The relative age matters to some extent, up to you how much I imagine. Carew certainly hit better than Mauer by raw numbers. When you're talking best Twins or looking at their Twins career in context, you'd have to take position into account however. Mauer and Carew both ended up at 1B but before that Mauer caught and Carew was a 2B. It would be a matter of debate how important that is to your concept of the player. I'd go Mauer over Carew but would certainly have no issue with someone going the other way. Both won gold gloves at their position, both had similar postseason success (or lack thereof) - it's a fun debate. I'd go Killebrew at #1 (clear OPS advantage at 145, with the Twins org for 21 seasons, counting stats etc.) but I don't think it's as big a gulf as people might think. Mauer without concussions probably catches him - conjecture of course, can't predict the "what ifs"

It is. My hypothesis looking at it would not have been that Puckett and Mauer were in a dead heat in PA and that close in games. I thought Mauer would still have substantially more because of the two extra years. He really has missed time due to catching and a few bigger injuries. Also really shows what a fantastic hitter Carew was. Especially with the deader ball of the era. It's interesting to think if Mauer might have had Carew's mid-career (more batting titles, a run or two at .400) if he hadn't been catching 100+ games a year and was at 3B or a corner OF instead.

Repeating some from above: Yes Mauer did that in two extra years (his rookie year was 35 games, not really a full year) but he was also a catcher for nine of those years and thus sat more games due to the position. The total number of games played is Mauer 1829, Puckett 1783, Carew 1635. The total plate appearances is Mauer 7839, Puckett 7831, and Carew 6980. Since we’re really measuring getting on base when we count hits, a better stat would be to include walks to hits. With that, Mauer is a 3020, Puckett is at 2754, and Carew is at 2698. If you want to look at it another way, you can do total bases including walks since clearly hitting home runs is better than singles. Mauer is at 3926, Puckett at 3903, Carew is at 3405. And ridiculous to talk about the salaries. Is Mike Trout overrated because Babe Ruth didn’t get paid as much back in the day? Get a clue about context, find some evidence, and stop trolling.

This is pretty misleading. Since we’re really measuring getting on base when we count hits, a better stat would be to include walks to hits. With that, Mauer is a 3020, Puckett is at 2754, and Carew is at 2698. If you want to look at it another way, you can do total bases including walks since clearly hitting home runs is better than singles. Mauer is at 3926, Puckett at 3903, Carew is at 3405. And yes Mauer did that in two extra years (his rookie year was 35 games, not really a full year) but he was also a catcher for nine of those years and thus sat more games due to the position. The total number of games played is Mauer 1829, Puckett 1783, Carew 1635. The total plate appearances is Mauer 7839, Puckett 7831, and Carew 6980. Joe Mauer’s statistical profile compares quite admirably to Rod Carew’s Twins career and Kirby Puckett’s entire career. In my book, he’s ahead of Puckett for sure (equivalent OPS+ while playing nine years at catcher) and Carew is debatable depending on how you weight positional value and take into context the relative ages of the two men during their Twins careers. Joe Mauer had a strong HOF case before he got this hit. You’re right that passing Carew doesn’t change that but I don’t think anyone besides you said it did.

Definitely tongue in cheek. Can I ask why you don't want the service time to be a factor? It seems a no-brainer to me - this year isn't so much of a wasted year if the Twins get to tack another one on at the end. I guess I just don't see what Buxton is going to prove in September that us worth losing 162 games of control.

If Buxton doesn't come up in September the twins gain an extra year of control. You can argue the merits but leaving Buxton off the September roster is not inexpliacable. I'm kind of hoping he hits well til the last red wings game and then tweaks a muscle so the twins have an excuse.

Vargas should go to Japan or Korea.

You never know, it's only been a few starts and he's coming off an injury. The Twins can bring Gonsalves up Sept 1 and go with a six man rotation down the stretch (or skip starts for each starter once to give them a break). If Santana had two or three good starts now (seems unlikely but could happen) you might still trade him. If he's still this bad, then you might have to think pen.

This is not a question. They should absolutely trade him if anyone will take him. Same as with Dozier and Escobar and Lynn. They should sign someone better on a 2 year deal to play 2B this offseason. Hopefully Dozier or Escobar. 2 years vs. 2 weeks. This isn't a tough one

Sometimes I wish we were an NL team. They do such a good job of having guys who can play multiple positions. Look at the Cubs. Bryant can play OF and 3B, Baez plays all three IF positions, Bote plays 2B and 3B, La Stella plays 2B and 3B, etc. The Twins never seem to do that. Rosario's cameo shows he's probably capable of playing a bit of IF, it would be nice to see the Twins pursue that more assiduously in the minors

Relentless and reflexive negativity (not Number3's first post) with nothing to back it up generally deserves a strong response that accentuates the positive. But note taken. P.S. it's not noble. It's realistic. It's easy to get dragged down in a 162 game disappointing season. Everyone would do a lot better to look at the bigger picture, which is overwhelmingly positive.

Not really. They didn't know the 2019 reliever FA market (especially since reliever performance is so variable). They also don't know that internal guys will develop (though they certainly haven't rewarded any of those guys with MLB time so hard to see how they're so sure there). Maybe they just didn't like Rodney as much once they had him for a year. He is 40+. It'll be fascinating to see what happens with Rodney this offseason. Is his option picked up by the A's? If he hits the FA market, what does he get? it will tell a lot about this decision I imagine.

Is that a bad thing? An insult? I think they're all good things?

Maybe they're looking at internal development and the free agent pool this year and think that Rodney isn't going to be a great value? They also might realy like Chalmers/