South Dakota Tom

#15 - no shaking hands with catchers!

My favorite baseball card ever - 1969 George Mitterwald.

Reading the book now. Have about 30 pages left so don't spoil the ending for me!

Would like to see an entire (prior) season on TV - each team could pick which season they want to watch ('87 holds the most allure for me, just seeing how much I forgot about the personnel and arc of that season). Have the games play on FSN exactly 33 years after the original... For Pineda, I would assume the suspension will be for a pro-rated portion of the season, right? Essentially he would miss 1/4 of the "remaining" schedule? Also assuming we will know during this hiatus just how all these issues will be handled, long before resumption of the schedule.

I felt ours might be a crescendo team, anyway, with the additional pitching coming via passing time, rather than games played. Relatively deep in position play and prospects compared to prior years, bullpen has depth and multiple starters should share the load over a long season (which just got shorter). Be well, everyone, and talking baseball will be comforting in these sports-less times (and maybe watch some old sports replays you've been putting off)....

Yes, he had a down April and May (and September, apparently) but wasn’t he right up there through the summer? I kept feeling his OPS was over .800 and he was right there with the best of the lineup through those months...

Upon more careful consideration, I think we are saying the same thing....oops.

Isn't it either/or? If a guy finishes an inning with one batter, he can face just one more the next inning because he has fulfilled one of the criteria?

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but I think you both are saying the same thing. Shifting started gaining prominence when all batters tried to pull everything, all the time. Eliminating shifting will just encourage that pull-happy style even more, and I (like you both) don't like that. Tony Gwynn, Rod Carew - those are my guys. Hit 'em where they ain't.

Royce Lewis is not going to be a utility player in MLB; he will play minor league ball until a full-time spot opens up for him (or he creates his own full-time spot by his play). When I suggested that others are in the competition, his was not one of the names I think Gordon is competing with.

He was an honorable mention in the top 20 list, and he's definitely not our #1 prospect any longer. That being said, there was a lot of chatter about trading him (either solely or in a package) for some relief or starting pitching. I agree with the posters who suggest we'd be selling low on him at this time (though his abbreviated 2019 season looks pretty good to me). I see his future as a utility guy right now (in our organization, I should add); when Marwin is gone after 2020 then it will be down to him and Ehire, and Nick is under control for cheaper, longer. Sure there are also other candidates for that, but I would have him play some corner OF this year - if something happens to Adrianza or Marwin (assuming Jake Cave is also on the 26-man) much less to Polanco or Arraez, I think he is the call.

I know all the Dodger money is coming in 2020, but is it tied to Maeda's 2020 salary? I thought we got $11M no matter what ($10M plus assignment bonus).

Ted, a lot of these projections can differ widely depending on whether the author is talking about what "will" happen versus what the author predicts, or would like to see. This is a perfect case in point. I, too, like Thorpe's projectability, and feel he will show himself to be a strong rotation candidate. OTOH, it sure appears that a rotation of Berrios, Odorizzi, Bailey, and Maeda is going to be hard to dislodge, barring injury. I would also suggest that, given the roster opening(s), Chacin would be easy for management to slot into the remaining spot. That would leave Thorpe, Smeltzer, and Dobnak (all with options) as 1-3, with Duran and Balazovic in the wings, as well as the return of Pineda and Hill at some point in the season. I know you are putting no timeline on any of this (nor am I); I'm just suggesting that Thorpe's opportunity arises primarily with an injury during spring training to one of the guys above him, occurring before Pineda's return. My fear is that the leash on Chacin (even to exploit him as a showcase candidate for trade value) will be long enough that he alone will bridge the gap until 40 games in. If TSD (Thorpe, Smeltzer, Dobnak) doesn't crack the top 5 in the first month, it is going to be increasingly difficult for them to find a place when Pineda and Hill push them to the 8-10 slots, with Balazovic and Duran behind. Once Balazovic and Duran have half a season more under their respective belts at AA or higher, I would put them on an even playing field with TSD - those 5 will fight for their own pecking order in spots 8-12. For the 2020 season, however, my guess is that Thorpe is #8 on that list based on in-season performance. Just not sure he will be so much better than 5-7, quickly enough, for it to matter.

Like the old Casablanca line: "I am shocked..... shocked that gambling is going on in this establishment." "Your winnings, sir."

I like knowing both the age of the player and the age relative to his competition; knowing one without the other is the opposite of valuable - it's un-valuable.

Just a question I've been pondering (maybe someone will direct me to more on this): my sense is that any pitcher who routinely faced this obstacle is inherently better than his statistics would show. If this is as widespread as suggested, are we going to see a deflation of offensive statistics this year (beyond the tweaks to the baseball itself) merely because a percentage of ballplayers no longer know what pitch is coming? And won't folks point to any decrease by an individual player (or especially an entire team) to be "evidence" of their participation in this scheme? Not to carry this too far, but won't that increase the pressure on the cheating teams to figure out a way to continue to cheat so as not to be perceived as "cheaters?"

The reason I would advocate for standing pat at this point is two-fold (and largely already addressed): 1. We have a plethora of starters, when you include the additional four of Smeltzer, Dobnak, Graterol and Thorpe. Everyone says on one hand that they want to give the rising players a shot, and this is a locked-in way to do it. Further, leaving room with players who have options in that rotation allows transportation up and down from Rochester. Once Pineda and Hill join the rotation, we have five guaranteed contracts on the books already and a much better idea by mid-summer of who the top five might be and just how good (or bad). 2. The pickings are wickedly slim right now. Not only don't we know for certain that we need someone else, but adding a guaranteed contract right now puts us in a horrible position for flexibility. Sign someone now and then what do you do if Graterol blossoms, Dobnak stands tall, Thorpe keeps missing bats, and Alcala/Balazovic forces our hand? I know, I know, good problem to have, but a problem. No one wants to "waste" the first month of the season or treat it like old September when you could bring up a bunch of minor league guys and test them out. I don't feel like our 4-5 starters fall into that category (and maybe that's where we differ most). Plus, the number of teams designated for tanking in February, and the number of teams out of it in June/July are wildly different and if we are to find a solid trade of a frontline starter for prospects, I just don't see that happening now.

He is first-year arb eligible this year (2020), meaning arb years in '21 and '22. Assuming he is (as you say) $5.4M this year, there seems to me no way he earns $33M in his last two arb years. So a 3/$38M only allows him to know his income with certainty right up until free agency. That being the case (and I am not familiar enough with salaries paid to higher-end arb 2 and 3 pitchers), don't we look at these situations as risk/reward and try to buy out at least one free agent year, rather than solely a gamble on how much he increases his income through arbitration alone? If we assume $10M in 2021, and $15 in 2022, he'd be owed $30M (more or less) from now through the end of the 2022 season. I don't think $25M for his first free-agent season is without any worthy consideration, but doesn't this have to be a 4-year deal at a minimum in order to talk about risk/reward at all, other than minor (and at least somewhat predictable) arbitration awards variations in years 2 and 3?

I do think at least two of Smeltzer, Dobnak, Thorpe or Graterol will be in the early-April five (maybe you were already assuming Brusdar). But I do think there will be one more add in a high-ceiling trade or a couple of fliers - Walker plus one (Wood, Jimmy Nelson?). I also believe they trust Romo and Clippard over May (and equal with Duffey).

My sense last year was that the team's ability to scramble players up and down during the season was as valuable to their overall effectiveness as any individual contribution. It seemed weirdly effective to run 10 pitchers through 4 roster spots. "Solid bullpen" = no ability to remove a player without waivers?

Yet every year, there are a couple that remind us why non-guaranteed contracts with an invite are not bad things. I'm not saying these guys won't get major league deals, but there will come a time of the year in early February when the "fall through the cracks" pitchers can be had. We have both opportunity and some innings to give them in spring...and this is assuming we sign at least one more rotation lock, via trade or free agency. Lots of internal candidates, I know, but we right now have 2 rotation locks for the start of the season, and 3 for the last 3/4 of the season. Hope we don't get to Desperation Point (and don't think we will) but would love to know what Plans C-D-E-F and G are right now.

I like that plan - thought about Wood at the deadline as he was coming back with Cincinnati (glad that didn't happen in retrospect); I'll endorse the above but put Pineda on a two-year deal or one plus a team option(makes all of them that much more tradeable if it ever came to that and locks up 2-3 years of pitching all in one off-season).

I don't disagree with the Dobnak game 2, Odo game 3 decision. The "decision" was made by the FO in July, when they already knew that Big Mike was going to be suspended (barring a miracle), saw that we were (most likely, and if they didn't foresee it because the Indians were catching up, shame on them) headed for the post-season, and didn't do anything to bolster the starting rotation. I can take some losing. I just implode when they play so poorly. I'm old enough that I was an adult in '87 and '91, so that takes some of the sting out of the post-season losses. But not much. Not much.

Depends on where you start the discussion. If you start with "I want Dobnak, Stashak, Thorpe, and Smeltzer in the lineup" it becomes, I don't know, easier. Add Rogers, May, Duffey, Romo, and Littell, you have 9. Add Berrios and Odo, you have 11. Last guy? I say Brusdar. (yes, I know this leaves Gibson and Perez off the roster). 13 position players are pretty set - 2 catchers, the 6 infielders you mention, the 4 outfielders, and Cruz. Either Astudillo is off, or Adrianza, and I choose to leave Astudillo off (that one is toughest - I love the contact play). Going back to the first paragraph, though, I think that combination gives us the best chance at flexibility, lots of guys who can pitch more than one inning, and I agree with a separate poster who suggested starting the bullpen game in game two, using Berrios in 1 and 5 (if necessary, or your game 1 starter in the ALCS), bullpen in 2 and 4, and Odo in game 3. Just weird enough to work.

Noticing a lot of “3 runs (1 earned)” throughout. Nothing harder for a hurler than having to get extra outs. Is this just a Twins MiLB problem, or are field conditions an issue? Typically, guys can either field their position or they can’t - any sense that the same dedication is being made to overall defense as it is to receiving or framing for catchers (I realize that is “defense” as well)?