whosafraidofluigirussolo

The pitcher the article refers to as a (near) certainty to end up in the bullpen was Sands, not Ober. If they consider a non-roster pitcher for this role, Jeff Hoffman likely would be in consideration too. He also has been on the starter/reliever line. I remember reading that his minor league deal has opt-outs, which might motivate the Twins to give him a look, although coming late to spring camp also could mean he goes to the minors and waits to opt out at a later date.

Checked out the box scores and it looks like it was NRI pitcher day at ... wherever the Pirates spring stadium is. Looks like De León pitched well (granted, it was against the Pirates), Hoffman and Aaron Sanchez not so much...

Why was this game in the Rays' regular stadium? I noticed this when watching a couple highlights.

And José De León, Brock Stewart, et al. Maybe Santana has a little more perceived upside since he's kept getting picked up on waivers, or Hoffman does because he's still somewhat in the process of converting to relief, but all these guys seem like they're loosely in the same "kinda interesting, not super-promising ex-prospect or reclamation project" bucket.

Today's listed lineup on mlb.com as of about 45 minutes before game time. I'm guessing that, between the very early stage of spring training they're at and this being an away game, they're filling the lineup with guys from the minor league camp (not even non-roster invitees), so the site doesn't even pull those players' names since they're "invisible" on the ST roster...?

Waiting for a small but vocal percentage of the people who post on this site to chime in about how Rocco will never let his dog go more than 5 feet from him

Wow - Darvish is set to sign a 6-year extension (the first year replaces his contract this season, so it's five new years) with the Padres: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2023/02/padres-extend-yu-darvish-six-years.html He'll turn 42 when the contract ends. I thought that if the Twins were ever to break their precedent to sign a top free agent pitcher, Darvish at the end of his current deal would be a good target for that, with his wide variety of pitches making him a better bet to age well. Seems like the Padres thought so too.

I like reading Law's writing—he writes from experience, he's opinionated but he backs up his opinions thoughtfully, and you can tell he thinks about things other than baseball. I'm not sold on his rationale here, though. If lack of a clear path to a position is part of the reasoning for dropping a player in rankings, that seems like a demerit based on team and organizational construction, stuff that's out of the player's control. If some hypothetical minor leaguer was playing shortstop not because he had the ability to play it well, but because his organization was otherwise barren of talent at SS, I feel like evaluators like Law would rate the player based on his skills in an absolute sense. They wouldn't regard him more highly because of opportunity to claim a position they didn't think he had the skills to play. Isn't this the same thing in the opposite direction?

One issue with going with three righty hitters at spots 2, 3, and 4 is that it makes it almost inevitable to stack 3 lefty hitters later in the order. Even if those are the hitters who would most belong at the top of the lineup in a vacuum, planning for matchups might call for mixing the order up.

Another way to look at it is that it leaves you with three or four competent position players on the 40-man and in the minors (presumably Julien, Celestino, Wallner, and Lewis once healthy)—which is something you want. Wallner in the majors right now is not a need, for the team or the player, IMO. He's played 50 games at AAA and 18 in the majors, where he was okay but didn't really force the issue. He can marinate a while longer. The trade was announced, so they've had to make room on the roster already, which they did by DFAing A.J. Alexy. Celestino's spot is safe. With that said, I don't disagree that by midyear, if everyone is healthy, the Twins may expect the minor-league guys to be pushing for a spot on the roster and expect that someone else will become trade bait.

In the comments on the original announcement of the trade from yesterday, there's a rundown of the 13 position players who would appear likely to come out of spring training. It doesn't require Kepler being traded in order to work: C: Jeffers, Vazquez IF: Miranda, Correa, Polanco, Kirilloff, Farmer OF: Buxton, Larnach, Gallo, Kepler, Taylor, Gordon There's no one locked into the DH spot, so that opens it up for a rotation among the OFs (those of them whose hitting justifies starting at DH, ha.) Plus Gallo or Gordon can spot start in the infield if one of the infielders gets a DH day. There still is something of a redundancy of lefty-hitting outfielders, but there are enough places and situations to deploy them that it doesn't scream waste of a roster spot. If they had gotten a righty hitter to split time at 1B/DH (like the Gurriel rumors suggested) then all the outfielders would seem more superfluous, but maybe the Taylor acquisition means a shift away from that 1B/DH strategy. I bet the Twins still would trade Kepler to meet another significant need, but I doubt they do it because of any perceived roster crunch. I think they're going for more depth with, if everyone is healthy, a bench full of players who could be at least low-end starters.

Not the hardest joke to pick up on, either...even if I didn't.

With this set of starters: Polanco, Correa, and Buxton batting 1-3 makes sense—in some order, and that order probably makes sense too. Vázquez and Kepler batting 8 & 9 makes sense, and makes most sense in that order—Kepler is the faster player to have on base ahead of the 1-3 guys, and not batting him 8th avoids stacking lefties more than they have to. What to do with Miranda, Kirilloff, Gallo, and Larnach at 4-7... Three of them bat left-handed, all of them are strikeout-prone, three of them don't have long track records in the majors. The lineup above is probably as good a solution as any. If Buxton batted 3rd, I wouldn't want Gallo 4th—I'd worry about too many rally-killing back-to-back Ks. But Miranda and Larnach could probably fit higher than 6-7. It's a puzzle.

I think there was a story last winter where Ober had 17 for a minute in the post-Berríos era, chosen because it was his lucky number or something, but then Archer got signed and wanted the number and they deferred to his veteran status. Was Trevor May still on the market when Jax vacated #65?

Signings of players of this profile—righty-hitting veteran outfielder, likely to be a platoon guy or part-time starter—are picking up. I'm seeing Tommy Pham to the Mets, Adam Duvall to the Red Sox, and Brian Anderson (part-time corner OF) all reported today. With all these guys going off the board, it seems like the Twins haven't been all that invested in adding a player for that role.

I was just going to say - a surfeit? An abundance?

Celestino being the "ideal backup for Buxton" doesn't necessitate him being on the major-league roster. When Buxton needs rest, Gordon or Gallo (who the Twins FO seems to believe in as a viable part-time CF) can start, or can move to CF in the late innings. If (.....when) Buxton gets hurt, Celestino is on call at AAA.

Other members of the starting staff are returning from injury, so it seems more likely for Gray to be traded over Kenta Maeda or Tyler Mahle Saying this in the context of trade options reveals a contradiction. If the Twins are (relatively) sure that Maeda and Mahle will come back at full strength from injury, then they have a strong and pretty well set starting five. And then they could trade Gray for some other impact player (position player or pitcher) but there are limited possibilities for such a deal to be a net gain. If they're uncertain about how Mahle and/or Maeda will come back and that's one of the main things fueling trade speculation (which I believe is the case), then trading Gray is likely to weaken the very part of the roster they're trying to reinforce.

My guess, totally just a guess based on this signing and the status of the younger players: They now are not going to trade anyone very impactful this offseason, but Lewis and Lee will be on the table for trades at midseason or next offseason. For now those guys aren't blocked by Correa yet. Lee can play his first full pro season, Lewis can rehab, and the team can see what they're getting from the current roster. If at midseason the hitters are underperforming or (more likely) the starting pitching isn't healthy or deep enough, they're better positioned to use one of the young infielders to make a big move.

"As recently as Saturday morning another offer was made, and Minnesota is not making the deal contingent upon a new physical." This seems like trouble.

I haven't frequented the threads about Bauer, but opening this one now I was glad to read this (and don't think it's hypocritical.) Yes, rehabilitation after wrongdoing and harm is better than only punishing the wrongdoer. It does more at least to attempt to avoid the same kind of harm in the future. Unfortunately our society has very little norm of public atonement or rehabilitation for men in positions of power or fame (and yeah, both those things are relative, but at the very least a pro athlete is a public figure with a kind of cultural power.) And almost no norm of public atonement or rehabilitation for sexual abuse and assault. That lack is particularly insidious for a kind of harm where so often those affected by it experience further effects of secrecy and stigma surrounding it. The less chance of rehabilitation, the less likely a public admission of wrongdoing, the more denial and secrecy continue to flourish instead. I hope all of this changes on a broader scale. In principle, yes, "people can change...when met with public disapproval of their actions." But so often the standard isn't for disapproval to steer a public figure to change, and the conditions don't encourage it if the person has the option of digging in and vague denial. If Trevor Bauer responds differently, great, but I don't see anything to suggest that he will.

Kimbrel was reported to have an agreement with Philadelphia on 12/23: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/12/phillies-to-sign-craig-kimbrel.html

First base would probably become Miranda’s long term home anyway, with reports stating the Twins front office has questions with his defense. While 3B is the more demanding position than 1B overall, the way I've interpreted the questioning of Miranda's defense has been that the Twins FO thinks he's better at 3B, in part because of lack of 1B experience. If the Twins do make this trade, a 300 plus million dollar contract might make more sense. This is suggesting a long-term deal for Devers, right? Miranda aside, 3B is also a position where Royce Lewis or (especially) Brooks Lee is likely to end up if/when either of them moves off SS. I still believe that one of Lewis or Lee can be the Twins' next non-stopgap starting shortstop, but it's maybe even safer to predict that the next longer-term starting third baseman is in the system and not far from the majors. I suppose the plan for a team signing Devers long-term is likely that he'd go to 1B before long. Investing in a good player who's proven it at the MLB level is absolutely worth it sometimes, but still, it's hard for me to see the Twins prioritizing the corner infield spots if they want to invest in a big contract. Rafael Devers will probably be the next homegrown talent to walk beyond the Green Monster Boston is still capable of running a big payroll, even if they seem to be operating with a more budget-conscious mindset lately. They've let a couple of marquee players go; that also could indicate that they'll try harder to retain Devers, so fans still have part of the last core to cheer for. It's an interesting proposition and I'm not trying to pick it apart! Just a few quick reactions as I read.

The way people have talked about Moreno, I'm surprised it took more than him to get Arizona to make this deal.

However, the new amount that Correa [accepted] is seemingly much closer to the level the Twins were willing to pay. Adding $15M per year over two years (perhaps on a player option?) for Correa when he would be 38 and 39 years old is still a significant risk. But by 2033 and 2034, even the Twins' payroll could be well north of $200M given MLB’s rising salaries. It might have been risky, maybe even silly, but $15M of dead money for those two years should not have been crippling to a franchise. Bingo. Whether the Twins decided not to take that risk, or whether the Mets, Correa and agent Scott Boras never game them that chance, is unknown. My guess, just a guess, is that this turn of events had much less to do with the Twins being hesitant about the risk than with the Mets being aggressive and opportunistic with the opening that the Giants hiccup provided. That doesn't excuse the Twins for not being more aggressive if they were even possibly willing to take the risk. As the Mets are sort of my second team, I guess I could enjoy this development - but more than anything I'm bummed that the Twins weren't the team to capitalize, and the Mets' approach is starting to teeter from "being aggressive to try to win more" to "buying a superteam" in a way that almost starts to remove the fun.