IndianaTwin

Have they made any statements to suggest they are not?

This is an honest question, not a leading one. Were there any free agent outfielders, who fit Gallo’s profile of being able to play all three outfield positions and first base, potentially have a ton of power, draw a ton of walks, willing to sign for $11M and bat right-handed?

There’s probably a way to create a Pagan question.

I think one of the challenges Gallo has faced on TD is that he’s not Carlos Correa. By that, I mean that he signed when many on TD were in a “Correa or Bust” mindset. So when Gallo signed early, many expressed their angst that we weren’t going to get C4, and that angst both spiraled in general and translated to a frustration about Gallo and his style of play in particular I think there are similar dynamics at play in many folks’ perception of Farmer. Even though it was early, people interpreted the Farmer trade as a sign they didn’t think we could get C4 and that the FO was settling for Farmer as a bridge to Lewis. In reality, in the context of their overall plan and the roster they’ve developed, I think it was a shrewd move to trade Urshela for Farmer, but I don’t think the FO has gotten much credit for that move either. And even Vazquez. I haven’t seen anyone complain about that signing, but neither has there been much celebration about getting the second-best catcher on the market. We were too concerned about not yet having signed a top-flight shortstop I get it. I didn’t particularly enjoy watching Gallo as a member of opposing teams, but I do enjoy winning, and I think he can help the Twins do that. I’ll also repeat a statement I’ve made elsewhere, which is that I just find it more enjoyable to go through life expecting the best rather than expecting the worst. I think the former is what the OP is encouraging us to do.

Phone call from Addison Reed on Line 1. Not saying they’ve dropped every under-performer, but Joe Smith and Tyler Duffey come to mind as well. When they feel like they have a viable alternative and don’t see a future, they’ve been willing to do so. And to anticipate a “what about Pagan” comment from someone, I think they’ll have a much shorter leash on him this year than last year. Difference being that this is his last year of control. Throughout last year there was always the possibility of an off-season turnaround. To bring this back to Gallo, I think if he stinks and other guys have come through, they’ll try to trade him for a lottery pick or go ahead and dump him.

1. The 10/$285M contract was "reported," but the reality is that we don't know the parameters of it. 2. The final contract only has 6 years guaranteed, but it's pretty easy to imagine it going to can go to 10/$270M. In addition, it's very front-loaded, so depending on what discount rate you use, it's actually worth more in current dollars than a straight line 10/$285M. 3. I picked up the "just get it done" response in some of the interviews. After what he went through, it's easy to imagine that he was getting fed up. 4. But we're still not privy to details of the conversation (as we shouldn't be), so this is all speculation on all of our parts.

I’m more familiar with Cisco and Greiner than Walters, but I like those signings as Saint stashes as well. WIth Vazquez and Jeffers, I concur that this is the best approach for the 40-man.

I agree, and...

This is the most convincing argument I've seen on either side of the topic. KEEP KEPLER, for the good of USNMCPO's marriage!

But if several years of so-so hitting mean we have to ignore 2019’s hitting, why we would we ignore several years of great defense and anticipate “random variance” to lead to so-so defense this year? Could it happen? Sure, but so could another 2019 bat then. I’m probably jaded by last year, but “redundancy” looks different if AK can’t hit, pushing Gallo to first, and even one of Buxton, Larnach, Gordon is hurt or unproductive. With Burton’s health and Larnach and Gordon having combined for about one-half of a productive season, that doesn’t seem like a stretch. I hope those don’t happen, but it’s not a stretch to see them. Folks are down on Kepler. I get that. But the Twin are not going to get much less for Kepler if they trade him in July compared to trading him now.

Right — why would a team on a “five-year-plan” prioritize a two-year outfielder. Not to mention that the “magic trade machine” isn’t that magic. According to it, the Arraez trade wasn’t even close to even, with the Twins winning in a big way.

The reference to Kepler in the top four spots needs a deeper look. He batted very rarely in the top three spots (18 games). He was No. 4 in 44 games, but the vast majority of those were between games 60 and 96, when their other options were an as-yet-unproven Miranda, Celestino, Sanchez/Jeffers, Kirilloff, an unproven Gordon, Cave, etc. In a decent number of games in that stretch, he did bat fourth in front of Polanco, but that’s more about batting lefties 1-4-7. Don’t forget as well that by definition, the top of the order gets more plate appearance. The 1-4 spots don’t get just 4/9 of the plate appearances (44.4%) as a team. Last year, they got nearly 50 percent. The opening statement says it’s time for the Twins to “realize what they have” in Kepler. I think it’s precisely because they DO realize what they have that they haven’t traded him. He’s the quintessential “floor” player. If he stays healthy, plays a great right field, and bats ninth on a regular basis (which is where I think his skill set fits best with the current roster), that’s a good lineup. At this point, if they do end up trading him, I hope it’s for a reliever, but I’d rather just sign a Fulmer type or two.

Yes. To me, that’s one of the biggest strengths of this roster — its flexibility. Other than catcher, there’s not a single position where there aren’t at least three viable options for solid, if not outstanding, play. Not necessarily three long-term options, but options that can work in covering a 10-day IL stint, etc. And even at catcher, they have a stable of guys in St. Paul with MLB experience.

In my opinion, this takes a huge step in redeeming the new uniform look. https://uni-watch.com/2023/01/27/surprise-twins-announce-tri-colored-batting-helmet/?fbclid=IwAR09BMAhwb_x4QX_ZSuPF9Tyo67jXWLCPx-Uj3ellUM_4HoHplm3NBEWYjQ&mibextid=Zxz2cZ I’ll miss the Baby Blues, but this takes me back in a good way. Aside: I just realized why the Marlins were such a good destination for Arraez. He probably already had their cap! It’s going to be a long time before the “M” version grows on me.

Twins Will Win the Division (An Overly Optimistic Post) FTFY. I don't think it's "overly" optimistic at all to say the Twins will win the division. I'm going through Vegas on vacation a week from Sunday. Will I stop and put down some money on the Twins? No, but that has more to do with the fact that I don't bet than it does lack of optimism. For the reasons many have outlined above, I'm pretty hopeful for the season. And besides, in my experience, being an optimist is a way more fun way to live.

I'd nominate this for TD "Truth Statement of the Week," but it's only Thursday, so there's a small chance someone outdoes this in the next few days.

I don't think it will be 5 and fly. Here's why: Here are some past averages from Rocco's managerial days that are above last year's MLB average of 5.2 innings per start: Joe Ryan, 2022, 5.44 Jose Berrios, 2021, 6.08 Kenta Maeda, 2020, 6.06 Jose Berrios, 2020, 5.25 Michael Pineda, 2020 5.33 (only 5 starts) Jose Berrios, 2019, 6.26 Martin Perez, 2019, 5.41 Jake Odorizzi, 2019, 5.30 Michael Pineda, 2019, 5.62 Do you know what these guys have in common? Two things: With the exception of Ryan last year, they were experienced pitchers. They didn't suck. In fact, they were usually pretty good, sometimes even excellent. Point being, when Rocco has had the horses, he's let them ride. The notion of "Rocco pulls the starter early" is recency bias, driven by a season when A) they were beset by injuries, so they were going to rookies way more than they wanted to; B) Archer never extended; C) if they were pitching veterans, they were protecting them out of necessity, knowing that another injury meant another Cole Sands start; and D) they often sucked. Sure, there were individual games when they didn't suck, and TD readers wanted Rocco to leave the guy in longer, but Rocco seemed to take the long view that C is more important than D. I generally agree. So this year, they are going into the season with Perez, Gray, Ryan, Mahle and Maeda. That group checks Box No. 1, though Maeda is coming off TJS and Mahle missed the season's end. And all of them have the potential to be anywhere from pretty good to excellent, which checks Box No. 2. And there's the herd of young guys coming from behind -- Ober, Winder, et. al. -- who we seem to think fit Box No. 2, if not yet Box No. 1. (Apologies if I took the thread off-topic. If need be, I can cut and paste the comment to any number of other threads where it also fits!)

Opening paragraph: "With the trade of Luis Arraez to the Marlins, the Twins are taking a risk by swapping a critical bat in their line up in the hope of pitching depth. But as many analysts here have shown, the trade leaves quite a few questions. So is it possible the Twins know something about the health of their players that we currently do not?" Uh, yeah. Of course they know more about player health than we do.

Polanco vs. Schoop at 2B? Duran vs. Rogers at closer? To me, where I think they are better is in the "collection" of folks. As in Gallo-Buxton-Kepler-Taylor-Gordon (+Larnach-Wallner-Celestino) feels better than Rosario-Buxton-Kepler-Cave-Marwin (+Wade-rookie Arraez-Ian Miller) or Kirilloff-Polanco-Correa-Miranda-Farmer (+Gordon-Lewis-and others) vs. Cron-Schoop-Polanco-Sano-Adrianza (+Marwin-rookie Arraez-Astudillo) But you're right, there's still significant question marks in the '23 batch, such as whether Kirilloff will be legit, whether it's Gallo '21 or Gallo '22, etc. It just feels like they have way more possibilities for upside than the 2019 did going into the season. Said another way, since folks are into this language -- I think there's just as much likelihood for "ceiling" as the 2019 team had going into the season, but also a much higher "floor." But hey, that's why they play the game on the field, not on the computer screen.

I also can't believe many people looked at the 2019 roster and then said to themselves, "This is a 100-win team." But baseball happens. I'm with those who suggest that Jan. 24, 2023, looks better than April 1, 2019, did, which is what I think the point of the article is. And interestingly, both the 2019 and 2024 teams were coming off 78-win seasons. We've also still got a couple months' worth of tweaking from a FO that has often good in the closing weeks of the offseason. In about three weeks, a couple more roster spots open, and I'd love to see them quickly filled by Fulmer, et. al.

Maybe. We only see the final results of who signed and who didn't. We actually don't know what the conversations with others have been along the way. We're told that they made significant offers to Wheeler and others and that they were pursuing Rodon, etc. I think the bigger trend may be to say that they are "risk-averse" when it comes to free agent offers. They took a (comparably) cautious approach to Correa, and he took it. They took a (comparably) cautious approach to Wheeler, and he didn't, etc. As a result, and as the result of what they already had and player development, they've needed to supplement the pitching side via trade more than they have needed to supplement the hitting side.

Another factor is that he doesn’t spend a lot of time on first base. With his power, teams have to play deep. With the outfield playing deep and with his speed, what are singles for others become doubles for him.

I also think Gallo will age well.

I suspect that we will indeed see a lot of 5-inning starts for Maeda. Difference being that with the depth of Gray, Ryan, Mahle and now Lopez, Maeda is the only that needs to be limited. Contrary to popular belief, in years when he has had the horses to do so, Rocco’s innings count for starters has been right at the league average. They were 0.3 innings shorter in the year when they used an opener on a number of occasions. They were 0.3 innings longer the year that he had Berrios, Gibson, Perez, Odo, Pineda. We’re just jaded right now because last season he had Archer going short, a bunch of guys who were injured and a bunch of guys he had to be cautious with out of concern for their GETTING hurt and being replaced by Nos. 12-14. With the depth they have, I’ll not be surprised if they are average or even slightly above average in start length this year.

I get the suggestions about moving Maeda to the pen for innings management purposes, but the thing of it is that innings can be more predictable as a starter, since you know which days you're going to be used and can schedule the throw days in between. I concur that it's difficult to expect 30 starts from Maeda, but I think it's easier to manage his workload by going with 20 or so starts and then shifting to the bullpen as needed, particularly if that aligns with Paddack's return or guys like Winder, Woods Richardson or Varland kicking the door in in St. Paul. It's really hard to gradually increase the workload from being a reliever to a starter in a systematic way while trying to win games.