IndianaTwin

I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been. I agree that Gordon may end up actually playing more games in the OF than IF, particularly given that Correa and Polanco are perhaps the two most likely guys on the roster to play 140+ games. I put Gordon in group B because he CAN play the infield, whereas the other OFs are OF/1B-only. That and because I could see Julien being the callup if Gordon is the one injured, particularly if it's a short stint and they don't want to use a 40-man spot for a Willi Castro-type. My post was more about roster makeup than actual usage, but I think your take on this being a roster that's designed to have a lot of guys in the 110-140 range of games played is right on. I extend a bit on the top end, primarily for Correa and Polanco (and maybe Miranda, if he continues to progress). Based on past patterns, I think catcher will be pretty close to a 80/80 split if both are healthy. Maybe as far as 90/70, but not too far outside of that.

Agree on a strong preference to Julien to get time in AAA. Interesting that amidst my typing comments, I see this post regarding the Twins rotation: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/?s=ober. I have wondered about a six-man rotation if all are healthy. The downside is that it shortens the bullpen. Otherwise, I see the health of the other starters being the primary determinant of whether he starts in the Twins rotation vs. the one in St. Paul.

I wasn't sure what to do with Dobnak. WIth the contract, I could agree with you, or maybe even slot him in before Ober. The only thing that holds Dobnak back is the need to open a 40-man spot. We're not privy to these conversations, but I wonder if a part of his accepting the minor league assignment was a commitment from the team to give him one of the first shots if he's healthy. As to Caitlin, I've had more fun watching Iowa women's basketball this season than any team (any gender. any sport) over the past few years. Living in Indiana, I've only been able to see three games in person this year, but I'm fortunate to have a work trip scheduled to the Iowa City area over the first weekend of NCAA tournament. I've been watching my email to jump on tickets as soon as they are available. Last season they started selling with a few weeks left in the regular season, when it was pretty clear they had a good shot of hosting. With only four games left (two against top 10 teams), I think it's almost a given they are going to host. The selection committee is smart enough to know they'll get a sellout if Iowa hosts.

And yes, welcome to TD!

I don't disagree with you on Ober deserving to stick. I just think that if health allows, he'll be the odd man out. However, given history across MLB, he won't be out for long. He'll start for the Twins by mid-April, late-April at the least. And if he's still stuck in St. Paul because the other five guys stayed healthy (and effective), that's an awesome problem to have! HOWEVER, if they decide that a guy who has never exceeded 108 innings in a season is unlikely to last as a starter, so they want to move him to the bullpen, then sure, put him in Group 6 or 7 and have that long man. But don't put him in the bullpen with the hopes of bringing him back as a starter. And I realize that you didn't specify that part. If you're meaning move him to the bullpen full time, I don't fully disagree, but I suspect the Twins aren't there yet. Oh, and I do put Megill on the Short Leash List. I like his career 3.16 SO/W ratio, his 3.29 FIP from last year and his ability to go more than an inning, which he did on several occasions, but I could easily see him as a DFA candidate if he gets off to a rocky start and they feel like there are St. Paul options. He's also in the group with an option, so he could be sent down as easily as dropped.

First, keep in mind that this is what I think will happen, not necessarily what I think should happen. In reality, I don't see too many people doing the bounce-back-and-forth thing between the rotation and bullpen. In addition, I did a lookback a few weeks ago to see when they've first used their No. 6 pitcher and, on average, it was something like April 15. With a guy like Ober that's had some injury issues, I think they will want to have him on a predictable throwing schedule (including on off days), which is much easier to do as a starter. That April 15 date also doesn't take into account the possibility of one of the Group 1 starters not making it to Opening Day. Let's please not have that happen, but it's a pretty common occurrence across MLB. So with that, I think there's at least a 50/50 chance he'll be needed to start a game by mid-April, so I'd rather send him to St. Paul for a start or even two before that's needed, in order to keep him at starter length. See also my next comment.

We've reached the point of the year where a lot of deals are minor league contracts with an opt-out for the player if they are not added to the roster by a certain date. If that's what we're talking about, I'm all for it. Or shucks -- sign him to a major league deal, put Canterino on the 60-day IL and then trade Hand for a lottery ticket when some other team has spring training injuries and is desperate for a lefty.

The end is in sight. While I'll have one eye on Caitlin Clark and her Iowa Hawkeye team's amazingness the next six weeks (hopefully), it's great to see Spring Training starting this week. Much speculation has been made about the roster, so I'll add my read on how I see things shaking out. Here goes: Offensively, I see the Opening Day roster as: Group A: C - Jeffers, Vazquez Group B: 2B/SS/3B - Polanco, Correa, Miranda, Farmer, Gordon Group C: 1B/LF/RF/DH - Kirilloff, Gallo, Kepler, Larnach Group D: CF - Buxton, Taylor They'll move around, of course, but this provides a framework. The other three position players on the 40-man roster and healthy are Julien, Wallner and Celestino. If one of the guys in Group B gets hurt, the door opens for Julien. If a Group C player gets hurt, the door opens for Wallner. If a Group D player gets hurt, it could be Celestino, but with Gordon's (and even Gallo's) ability to play CF, it could mean either Wallner or Julien, so that Celestino stays in St. Paul. If a catcher gets hurt, they have to make a corresponding 40-man move, but they have Wolters, Sisco and Greiner in St. Paul and Paddack and Canterino (and maybe Lewis) as possibilities to go on the 60-Day IL. And hey, it's a catcher. If they get hurt, it could well be the 60-day for him anyway! I didn't mention Lewis, but momma always said, "We'll cross that bridge when we get to it." When Lewis is healthy, something will have happened to provide a spot for him. And if not, awesome! As for other prospects not on the 40-man, they'll take a number and get worked in as spots become available. And spots will become available. Injuries happen. So does suckitude. On the pitching side, the starting pool looks like: Group 1; Ryan, Gray, PLopez, Mahle and Maeda as the intended starting five. Group 2: Ober, Varland, Winder and Woods Richardson are all on the 40-man and have made starts in the majors, so any are options to step into the rotation when one from Group 1 goes on the IL. Otherwise, it's assumed they'll start in St. Paul. They're listed in the order of when they made appearances, so that may be a clue as to the order. Group 3: Paddack can go on the 60-man as needed, but it's assumed that he'll get starts at some point. Group 4: Dobnak, Rodriguez and Sanchez are also in St. Paul, but not on the 40-man. I think they'll churn through Group 2 before going here, but they are available if needed. By the time it gets to these guys, at least one of the injuries will likely have been of the 60-day variety, creating another spot on the 40-man. Group 5: Balazovic and Headrick are two guys on the 40-man that I'm guessing they aren't ready to move them to the pen yet. With great starts, they could theoretically move to the back of Group 2. The bullpen looks like: Group 6: Duran, JLopez, Jax, Alcala, Thielbar, Moran, Megill, Pagan as the assumed bullpen. Alcala, Moran and Megill have options. Group 7: Sands and Henriquez. Sands only pitched in relief in August and September, but it was usually multiple innings. That could be a sign of moving him to the pen full time. Henriquez bounced back and forth between starting and relieving, and I wonder if he might move to relieving full time as well. They could join Alcala, Moran and Megill on the St. Paul shuffle. Conceivably, either of these could bump one of the guys in Group 5, particularly given that they are viable multi-inning guys. Group 8: Coulombe, DeLeon, Ortega are three guys not on the 40-man, but who have major league experience. Once Canterino goes on the 60-day IL, any of these could be added to the 40-man in his spot. With that in mind, several observations: I really like the flexibility they have created on the position player side. I also don't trade Kepler, unless it's for a right-handed hitting 1B or OF, but that's just tinkering. If it was going to happen, it would have happened earlier. Groups 1-3 make 10 starting pitchers that I can feel good about as options. And Group 4 is a nice group to have in St. Paul, hopefully beating down the door with good performances, and otherwise providing enough starts to keep the prospect pipeline flowing. I've been one of the group wishing they would have signed a Fulmer-type for the bullpen. As I play this out, I'm not that sure it's a big deal. He'd add another player to Group 6, but it feels like they have enough options to not worry about that. Pagan deserves his own observation. Folks want him gone. I see one of two things happening. Best case scenario is that he pitches like he did the last couple months and earns his keep. But I think he'll be on a relatively short leash. Consider last year -- when Duffey and Smith stunk and they had other bodies available, they cut bait and DFAed both. What was different about Pagan was that he had another year of control, so there was hope of a turnaround. Now that he's in the last year of control, I think his leash will be much shorter. I think this is a playoff contender. From what I gather, this group is WAY deeper across the board than Cleveland or Chicago. Ace/Schmace. I hate the articles debating what classifies as an "ace" and how an "ace" is needed in the playoffs, but here's the way I view it: Are any Twins starters Hall of Famers? No. Are any of them Sure-Fire Top 10 (or 15) MLB Starters, or however you want to define this "Ace" term? Probably not. BUT, and I've got a big but(t), I think that any of the guys in Group 1 or Group 3 can pitch like an "Ace" on any given night and even for an extended run. Consider Maeda's 2020, for example. And if the Twins have made it into the playoffs, it's likely because at least one has been pitching like an "Ace," so I'll take my chances. I'm sure we're biased and have rose-colored glasses on Ober, Winder, et. al, but if you look at the depth charts of other teams, there's very few that have the kind of depth we, both in the top five and particularly in the top 10. Goodness -- we just waived A.J. Alexy and he shows up as the No. 7 starter on one list for The Team That Shall Not Be Named. What did I miss? Besides noting that we're at T-minus 44 days and counting to Opening Day.

I think the answer is probably c) both of these.

I disagree strongly with your suggestion that patience wasn’t a factor in the Twins getting Correa. Yes, the Giants and Mets “agreed” to terms first, but if the Twins would have been impatient they would have turned to an overpay on another shortstop once they thought they were out on Correa. If they’d been impatient, they would have thrown $180 million at Rodon. If they’d been impatient, they could have started dealing the pitchers you mention. If they’d been impatient, they wouldn’t have maintained contact with Boras when they sniffed some uncertainty with the Giants. They caught a break with the Giants/Mets debacle, sure, but I would say that patience played a huge part in their ability to get Correa.

With Maeda and Mahle perhaps most likely to have the shortest starts, at least early on, I’d prefer to have them separated in the rotation. With Lopez perhaps most likely to throw the longest starts, I’d put him in between them. And I tend to give the veteran the advantage over the younger guy, so that leaves me with Gray-Ryan-Mahle-Lopez-Maeda. That also gives Ryan the home opener. OR, I’d consider going with Lopez No. 2, since that’s the only spot that doesn’t get an extra day between the first and second starts. It also avoids the Marlins. I’d think that the hitters have an advantage over the pitcher when the pitcher has just moved from one team to the other. But mainly, I’d be fine with drawing them out of the hat if it means that all get through spring training healthy.

It seems to me that either… a) the AL Central is really bad in RF; or b) maybe we shouldn’t be clamoring so much to trade Kepler.

After the joy Bartolo brought to our lives, can we agree to call Miranda “Little Sexy”?

If you’re from out of town, there’s a reasonable likelihood you might want to check out the Mall of America. If so, park there for free and take the Light Rail to the game.

Dang. Is that what I’ve been doing wrong? Next you’re probably going to say it doesn’t help my jump shot either!

"All about..." seems too strong. I wasn't there, so I can't say that incentive issues wasn't a factor, but in 2019, for example, the move to the bullpen on Sept. 1 probably only saved the Dodgers about $1.75 million. Maeda finished with 26 starts and would have probably gotten to the next step at 30 starts, but not 32, so that was $1.5M in savings for the team. He finished with 153.2 innings, but pitched 15.2 of those from the bullpen in September. Convert that to five additional starts and it probably meant an extra 10-12 innings, enough to get the $250k bonus for 160 innings, but not the $250k for 170 innings. Additionally, the switch happened at a time when his ERA had gone from 3.71 in mid-July to 4.21 at the end of August thanks to a 5.35 ERA over his last five starts. In addition, Urias and his 2.53 ERA and Stripling and is 3.64 ERA were coming off the IL, so it made baseball sense to slide them into the rotation. And though I didn't dig into the context of 2017 and 2018, I did notice that the shift to the bullpen happened at 20 and 25 starts respectively, which smells a lot different than doing it at 19 and 24 starts. In other words, at the least, they allowed him to reach an incentive step before making the switch.

I'm not disagreeing with your post as a whole, but the challenge with comparing to the stock market is that "let the hot player continue" is analogous to folks' financial tendencies to chase the hot stock and dump those that tank. That leads to buying high and selling low, a sure way to lose money. And how does that fit with the notion of regression to the mean? I mean, if Rod Carew is hitting .280, I'm keeping him in the lineup, because you know he's going to get hot enough to end up at .330. (And to clarify, I'm talking about 30-year-old Rod Carew hitting .330. He's 77 now, so .280 is about what we might expect from him in 2023.) And therein lies the challenge. It's easy to say, "Keep Carew in the lineup," because he's Rod Carew. But how do you handle a Gallo to determine whether 2023 will be a regression-to-his-mean year or the continuation of a decline?

My memory of Maeda going to the bullpen for LA was that it was more about other quality guys returning from injury than it was about managing innings. He was the odd man out in the rotation, and after transitioning successfully the first time, they decided to do it again the next season. But that's just my memory, and I don't have a good gene pool when it comes to memory loss.

I don't like THAT weather, that's for sure! What part of the country are you in? I heard on the news tonight that they reached -110 wind chill on Mt. Washington this evening.

I don't think it makes sense to put Maeda in long relief. Intuitively it seems logical to do that for shorter outings, but injury rehab requires predictable patterns of work and recovery, which isn't possible in the bullpen. I think they'll want to keep him in the rotation, so they can project his throwing days.

A good exercise. I think you're maybe a little high on the innings. In his five full seasons (i.e., not 2020), he's averaged 139 innings. Coming off TJS, I'll suggest 125 as a target. Maybe skip his spot in the rotation a time or two, and because of the surgery, he may have the shortest starts on average, so 25 starts x 5 innings feels about right. ERA is maybe a bit high. His career is 3.70 and his highest is 4.10. TJS guys often have days when they are not sharp, but it makes sense to try letting them pitch through some things. I think there will be many days when he's on his career average of 3.70, but throw in a few of the clunkers and it's maybe pushing 4.00. I'll take 125 innings of 4.00 or a little better from the No. 5 guy.

It would be interesting to do a study of projected starting pitchers from the beginning of the season to Opening Day to see how many of them make it through spring training uninjured. By "projected starting pitcher," I'm not referring to those involved in battles for the No. 5 spot, but guys actually expected to start the season in the rotation. If the number is anywhere near 83.333 percent, it makes perfect sense to start spring training with a starting rotation of six, assuming that one will be injured by Opening Day and that the problem has resolved itself. And if they accidently all make it through spring training, then use all six for a couple times, knowing that one of them will almost certainly miss starts by mid to late April. For that reason, I think it's fine to assume that the "Opening Day rotation" is currently Gray, Lopez, Ryan, Mahle, Maeda and Ober. It will play itself out, and we'll see Nos. 7-10 soon enough.

I think too that if you sign the letter "Mikelink45" you'll have more credibility with Joey. None of this silly first name-last name signing convention that suggests that those of us on the internet have a real life. Being Midwesterners, I always like to add a few observations about the weather as well. 😄 Your friend, Indiana Twin

Thanks -- those are helpful comparisons. If I use the "housing appraisal" model, where you add or subtract a little based on the number of bathrooms, bedrooms, square footage, etc., it seems like the contract size for Gallo is about right. Certainly not way out of line. The question is whether the Twins are the right team to give him that contract. For guys in that price range, there's always going to be some positives and a flaw or two. Where I'm coming out is that he checks quite a few boxes, but isn't perfect, with the primary flaw being his handedness. There's also his strikeout level, but his walks and slugging ability are apparently good enough to have him with decent stats over the course of his career. He profiles as a slightly above-average hitter, just not a well-rounded one. If Gallo is the biggest acquisition of the offseason, we've got a problem. But with the Correa signing and Lopez trade, I'm cool with signing Gallo as a second-level move, like I see the Farmer trade and Vazquez signings. I continue to feel that depth and roster flexibility are a couple of their biggest strengths, and I think he adds to that.

And as an average, 2022 was greatly affected by Archer. Take out his 4.1 innings per start and the average goes up nearly .2 innings.