chpettit19

If Duran will sign a Clase style extension the Twins should do it tomorrow. Locking him up for an extra 2 or 3 years for less than $15 million per would be such a great advantage when he would normally be hitting free agency and demanding 25 per. Saving 10+ million a year on his contract would be huge for building the rest of the roster.

Fine, Kirilloff is the one that won't start the season with the Twins. Still an injury concern they aren't relying on. I've literally said 1 of those 2 won't start with the team and you continue to complain they're relying on them. They're not even going to be on the roster! This is my last response to you. Not being on the roster literally means they aren't relying on you. It's the very definition of not relying on you when they won't even let you freaking play. What do you think "depth" looks like on other teams? Do you think the average team is sitting on guys better than Ober, SWR, and Varland as their 6, 7, and 8 starters in AAA? You realize that's not the situation, right? Maeda has started 32, 25, 20, 26, and 21 games in his major league career (outside of 2020 where it was literally impossible to start 20 games). That is 124 starts in 5 years. That equals 24.8 starts per year. Sorry I took the liberty of rounding up to 25. Definitely not 22, though. And he didn't have those mid or low-20s starts because of injuries (outside of the 21 in '21), but because he moved to the pen for the stretch run and playoffs on a loaded team. His number would have been even higher if he were on a less loaded team. But don't let that context get in the way of your clearly data driven opinions.

Has Rocco explained what he means by "long reliever?" I think that's a large part of any discussion around who could fill such a role. Does he mean a guy who can come in and finish out a blowout (winning or losing version) by covering 3, 4, or 5 innings? Or does he mean a guy who can come in and throw 2 or 3 innings 3 times in 10 days to give a 1 inning reliever or 2 a day off? That would really change the decision making in my mind. I don't know that I'd want to put anyone with a truly bright future in the first role. I don't want any of my young guys sitting around for 2 weeks not getting game action because the games have all been close. So if the role is that restrictive I'm going with Dobnak or Sands (sorry, just doesn't look like a real prospect to me). To me the "long reliever" they should be looking for is a guy, or 2, who can go 2 or 3 innings 3 times every 10 days to give the 1 inning relievers an extra day off. I expect the arms in this rotation to be able to get through 6 innings more often than not so I'd want 6 one inning relievers, and 2 "long relievers." There will definitely still be times where the starters only go 4 or 5 innings, and the "long relievers" would be who I use to cover an extra inning or 2 before turning it back over to the 1 inning guys. If 6 one inning relievers can't cover the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings every day they're in trouble anyways. I'd use my "long relievers" in games the starters rack up high pitch counts early, or just don't have it, and can't get through 6. When I use them in the game would depend on where they are in the lineup when the starter comes out. If they're rolling into the top of the order when the starter comes out I'd use a 1 inning guy to get through them. Then turn to the "long reliever" for 2 innings to get me through the tail end of the lineup before turning it back over to the 1 inning guys. All of this really depends on game situations, etc. But the overall "long reliever" question is more about what that role even looks like. I don't think a guy sitting around waiting for an injury to a starter, or a blowout early, is a good use of a roster spot. To me, "long reliever" is someone I use regularly to give a little extra rest to my big time 1 inning guys. So my search for a "long reliever" would be a combination of finding a 1 inning guy who can go 2 innings or a starter who I want to move to the bullpen. But I don't know what Rocco means when he talks about a long reliever.

Yeah, missing both 2020 and 2021 with injuries, including TJ surgery is truly extreme health and recovery for Verlander. Envy of the league. Nobody has ever been able to recover from TJ in a 2 year time span. Truly inspiring bounce back. Unheard of in all the sports world really. Yes, Kirilloff is swinging a bat. Has been for quite some time. But don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions. I don't know what else to tell you about Larnach and Kirilloff. One of them isn't making the opening day roster if the 12 other guys are healthy. You seem to think that means the team is relying heavily on them. I don't understand that stance. But you're welcome to believe what you want. Not being on the roster vs being on the roster is "no different?" Again, I simply don't understand how that can be your view, but you're entitled to your thoughts. Nice that you ignored the multiple other pitchers they have at AAA who have already debuted, and are MLB ready, in your thoughts on how dire their need for Ober is, but, hey, you do you. Here's some fun with starters numbers for you: The Twins went into last season with a rotation of Ryan, Gray, Paddack, Bundy, and Archer with Ober on the periphery due to questions about Archer's ability to pitch deep into games. They needed 162 starts. Those 5 gave them 110, and that's with Paddack going down in start number 5. So in their completely blown up season with injuries to starting pitching that you're so concerned about now they needed 52 starts from guys not in the opening day roster. The Twins have Ober, SWR, and Varland waiting in the wings. That's basically 17 starts for each of those 3. Not ideal, but I don't think it's too crazy. Their 5 man rotation this year is Gray, Ryan, Mahle, Maeda, and Lopez. They made a combined 106 starts last year. That's including Maeda making 0. So this rotation that you're so concerned about being a massive health concern started 4 fewer games in total than last year's rotation while including a guy who made 0 starts. Their average starts/season over the last 5 years (or however many full seasons they had in the bigs in that time, not including 2020) are 26, 27, 26, 25, and 24. That's including Maeda going to the pen while in LA. That's 128 starts per season if they all hit their career averages. Not their career bests, just their averages. That leaves a whopping 34 starts for Ober, SWR, and Varland. 11 starts per guy. Yeah, I can see how pushing Ober from needing him to start 20+ games as their 5th start to starting 11 as part of their depth is negligible. I mean he only started 11 games last year so there's no way that he could fulfill that needed 11 starts this year with how big of a health concern he is. Maybe you don't think SWR and Varland are ready so you think they only have 6 MLB caliber starters. They'd need to 27 starts, on average, out of each of those guys then. I agree. That'd be really heavily relying on the health of their top 6. I don't know many people who don't think SWR and Varland are ready and worthy of real looks. So most people think they go 8 deep with guys worthy of MLB starts. That drops them from to needing to get 20 starts, on average, out of their top rotation candidates. Lopez got 32 starts last year, and Mahle had 33 in 2021. If just 1 guy in the rotation goes 32 starts, the other 7 guys needed starts number goes down to 18 per guy. I'm sorry that I'm failing to see this massive reliance on super extreme health this year and think that going 8 deep in worthy candidates is actually the opposite of relying heavily on amazing health. All of this doesn't even include a possible Paddack return in August.

Verlander's performance was extreme, not his health. Nobody is arguing Maeda is going to have a sub-2 ERA, just that he'll be healthy. It's not unreasonable to you, it's unneeded for me. How many more times do you need me to say we simply don't agree on what is needed to consider a guy healthy? We just don't agree. It's ok. That's why I'm done talking about him with you. Sure, you win. Larnach wasn't scheduled for AAA on whatever cutoff date you have in your head. But he is now. The addition of 3 guys without minor league options is pushing someone off the opening day roster. If pushing them literally off the roster isn't moving them down the depth chart I don't know what is. No, those 3 aren't bumping Ober, they're bumping a position player since they're, you know, position players. I'm pretty sure I already explained the whole "carrying 13 pitchers so only have 13 position player spots avaliable, and have 10 vets who can't be optioned" situation. Yes, Ober is a huge question mark. It's why they got Lopez to bump Ober off the roster. You're literally arguing against yourself. You're pointing out that they pushed a guy off the roster while arguing they didn't do things to not have to rely on that player who isn't going to be on the opening day roster. The Twins also have SWR and Varland who've debuted already that they can call up if Ober can't take the first opening created. I think that's called depth, and it's there so you don't have to rely on perfect health for the opening day roster.

No idea why I'm mentioned here or even what you're asking. You quoted a comment about the 40-man and I've never mentioned it. But to @Squirrel 's point above, the 40-man spot isn't even as important as the position player depth chart. I don't think CES even had to be on the 40-man yet. Doesn't appear to be on the Red's 40-man. I'm thoroughly confused by what you're asking and why you tagged me. Here's my stance: CES and Steer are dime a dozen prospects. Both likely make the bigs. Maybe good enough to have some seasons as everyday players. They don't play up the middle, and aren't superstar type bats. I'll trade 5 of them to get a #2 quality major league pitcher. Wouldn't even think twice. Hajjar is a nice pitching prospect with mid-rotation upside. Would trade 3 of those for a #2 quality major league pitcher. I'm a huge prospect nerd, and love the hope they provide, but things have gotten out of control around here with the prospect hype. Talk of trading Polanco to clear room for Julien is crazy. Not signing Gallo so Wallner has a spot? Blows my mind. If Julien and Wallner make 1 All Star game between them it'd be an incredible win for the FO and player dev guys. Polanco is a top 10 2B on baseball and people want to move him so a no glove, solid prospect in AA has an opening day job?! That's awful team building strategy. Matt Wallner can't field to save his life and will K every bit as much as Gallo, with less power most likely. But they shouldn't sign Gallo so Wallner can be a worse version of him in the OF instead? Nonsense. The idea that the Twins organization would be better off with 3 prospects buried at their respective positions in this organization instead of a major league pitcher of Mahle's caliber blows my mind. I can't understand it. So I don't know why you tagged me in that question about CES and the 40-man, but there's nobody, pitchers included, that I'd waive from the 40-man to get him on it because there's a puff piece on him hitting the ball hard in the first 2 weeks of spring. He'd have to jump about 10 position players for me to even think about it. We're most likely not going to remember who he is in 2 years.

So those 3 pitchers were only able to stay healthy after TJ because they're HOFers? That's an interesting take. You wanted an example of an older (you asked for a 35 year old) pitcher who'd missed 18 months and returned to throw a healthy season. You asked for that because your argument is that Maeda is an increased health risk due to having missed 18 months and being 35. I provided you an example of a 39 year old doing it literally last season and your response is "Verlander doesn't count because he's talented." Forgive me for not being impressed by that response. He's a guy with multiple TJ surgeries. He's 4 years older. And had missed more time than Maeda. Him being a really good pitcher doesn't make him less injury prone. For proof of that go ahead and reference the fact that it was his second TJ. Your argument is literally "well, yeah, Verlander has been hurt more, and is older, but he's better when he's healthy so you can't count him." That's nonsense. That's not how injury risk works. Yes. Mahle missed 3 starts in July. I've said that. Over and over and over. He then came back during July and made 2 6 inning starts before the trade. I understand that that doesn't impress you, but if we went by your logic here you'd basically just be putting everyone on the 60-day and ending their season if they get hurt. Your argument is that it's impossible to get hurt and heal again in a month. That's nonsense. Oh, and I was wrong, Mahle was at Driveline in October, not November. Gleeman has a nice article about Twins pitchers, including Mahle going to driveline last October on The Athletic today. You should check it out. It even explains the dozens and dozens of max effort pitches they throw to rework their pitches. Tyler Mahle was healthy in October and has been healthy all offseason and spring training! I'm done talking about Mahle. You're asking for a full season of health to clear him. I think that's ridiculous and unreasonable. We simply just don't agree on what constitutes an injury concern. Nope, likely wasn't the plan from the start. But in an effort to not be so heavily reliant on better health for Kirilloff and Larnach they made the Solano signing. We can't separate those 2 things because your argument makes no sense! If you accept that they've pushed the injury concern guys down the depth chart you can't also argue that they're relying on them to be healthier. It's impossible. You simply can't make that argument. Because they're directly opposite ideas. By pushing them down the depth chart they're not relying on them. I mean that's literally what pushing them down the depth chart means! And, no, this FO doesn't pivot very much. In fact, perhaps the #1 complaint on these boards is their refusal to pivot away from "the plan." They're much more known for sticking with "the plan" for too long when it isn't working than for pivoting. Even I jump onto the complain train when it comes to them pivoting off "the plan" quick enough. It's the #1 deficit they have in my opinion.

There's multiple reports from many of the beat writers that Kirilloff has been taking live BP for at least a week.

I love the WBC! Stayed up way too late last night watching the first game, and got up too early this morning to watch that butt kicking. I want to see the best players in the world play against each other. It's a fantastic watch for me. Really excited to see what Julien can do for Canada. Maybe he can pick up a little nugget of hitting knowledge from Freddie Freeman during his time with him in that clubhouse. Pablo, Jorge, and Emilio are the arms I care about watching. Is Pablo dominant? Jorge looking more like the Baltimore version from last year or the Twins? Emilio still terrible and I still need to be cranky he's on the roster? Should be a great few weeks of really great baseball!

So? He came back and threw 12 innings in 2 starts before the trade. What does it take to be considered healthy and no longer a health risk? 3 starts? 4? 12? If he hadn't gotten hurt with the Twins would you still be saying it was a health risk they shouldn't have taken? The Yankees took the same risk with Montas. Really didn't work out. The Yankees traded for Bader while he was on the injured listed and he came back and had no problems. These are professional athletes testing the limits of the human body 162 games a year. Injuries happen. There's plenty of guys who've never been injured and then suddenly are. Plenty of guys who are always hurt and suddenly stop being. Injuries happen in professional sports. Let's quit acting like they're predictable.

Tyler Mahle had made 19 starts before the trade. There 4 pitchers in the majors with 22 starts at that point. The majority of fully healthy starters had made 21. He was 2 off a full workload. He returned from the IL and made 2 starts of 6 innings each before the trade. Made 2 starts of 6 innings each for the Twins after the trade. Luis Castillo had only made 14 starts for the Reds before he was traded. Should Seattle fans be pissed at their FO for ignoring the red flag of him having been on the IL in the first half?

No, you aren't the only one ignorant to that, but that's why we said we just have to agree to disagree on that situation. You automatically connect 1 injury with an ongoing problem. I don't. Players go down with injuries "where rest is the remedy" all the time. And then they come back with no problem. You have a need to see an entire season out of him before you're willing to say it isn't a problem. I don't. So we simply disagree on this. John Smoltz wasn't quite 35, but he was 32 or so I think. Billy Wagner was like 36 or 37 if I'm remembering correctly. Justin Verlander missed all but 1 start in 2020, and all of 2021 with TJ then came back and won the Cy Young with a 1.75 ERA in 28 starts at the age of 39. Is that a recent enough example? Oh, and that was his 2nd, which is supposed to be harder to come back from. Mahle missed 2/3 starts in July. I've already given this info, but I'll do it again. When he was traded he was 3 starts behind the 22 that 4 whole major league pitchers had reached, and 2 starts behind the majority of pitchers who hadn't missed a start. Please stop acting like he missed a ton of time before the trade. He was tied for 47th in all of baseball in starts made (with that Verlander character that won the Cy Young coming off basically 2 missed seasons with TJ). He made 5 starts in June going 6, 6, 9, 6, 6.2 innings. Then 3 before the trade going 5, 6, and 6. Doesn't look like a guy who's arm is hanging by a thread. He got to MN and immediately went 6 innings, 6 innings in his first 2 starts. Again, no signs of concern there. Then he got hurt. Tried to come back and couldn't go. It happens. You want to count August 17th as his last game? Fine. 10 whole entire days before Mr Polanco who you're not worried about at all. The Twins played their 125th game on August 27th last year. Polanco played in his 104th, and final, game of the season on that date. So, again, the idea that Mahle missed 2/3 starts and that's a really big concern, but Polanco having had missed 21 games before he got hurt isn't is inconsistant. Yeah, this FO never makes any moves late in the offseason to set their roster. They're definitely not known for that. Your complaint is that they're relying too much on better health. They mitigated that by pushing Larnach (or Kirilloff) to AAA to start the year. You not liking the players they got to create depth is entirely different than them relying too much on better health to Kirilloff and Larnach. By definition, they can't be relying on Larnach (or Kirilloff) to produce for the Twins if they aren't even planning on having him on the roster. I don't get why that's controversial.

Yeah, we just need to agree to disagree that just because someone was hurt in August doesn't automatically mean they're at a higher risk to be hurt this season. You not knowing what Mahle's health situation is all offseason isn't the same thing as him not being healthy. He wasn't at Driveline throwing 75% trying to reshape his slider. He was there throwing at 100% effort to rework his pitches. A guy with concerns about the health of his arm isn't doing that. So, no, I don't see there being a concern about his shoulder just because the last time you happened to see him he was hurt. What "bothers me" is you saying "don't look at this 'outlier' because it doesn't fit my narrative, but do look at these 'outliers' because they do fit my narrative." The entire debate comes down to "does a guy who doesn't have a track record of serious health concerns count as an increased injury risk simply because they were hurt last year?" I say no. Mahle was healthy enough to be throwing max effort in November. He's been healthy all offseason and came into spring training 100% healthy, and hasn't missed a bullpen or spring training start. That doesn't sound like a guy who's struggling with his health to me. It's not about whether or not he could be hurt, it's about is Maeda a higher injury risk than the average starting pitcher. And he isn't. There's no reason to believe he is. There's no data you can find that says guys coming off a missed season due to TJ (or any major injury) are more likely to be injured. Again, this is just you (and others) trying to fit this into your narrative. There's a difference between being a larger health risk than the average pitcher, and there being a risk someone gets hurt. You kept asking if the Twins were "investing more in injury risks" and I've answered you. No. They aren't. There's a difference you seem not to want to accept. Having been hurt last year doesn't mean you're a bigger injury risk this year. That's not how it works (unless you're Byron Buxton). Mahle missed the month of September and you're convinced he's some massive injury risk because of it. So, yes, you're all over the place. Especially since Mahle is the one currently playing in games and Polanco isn't. Mahle made 3 August starts and 1 start on September 3rd before being shutdown. You claim he's a gigantic injury risk. Jorge Polanco's last game played was August 27th, and hasn't appeared in a spring game yet. You claim he's no injury risk. Do you see the inconsistencies? Larnach has missed basically the second half of 2 seasons in a row. That's what we call the start of a track record. Thus he's starting to look like an injury concern. Solano wasn't signed to a major league deal with any idea other than him being on the opening day roster. That's not complicated. They will carry 13 position players on opening day. 10 of them (Buxton, Correa, Vazquez, Polanco, Farmer, Gallo, Kepler, Taylor, Gordon, and Solano) have no more minor league options left. They can't be sent to the minors without being put on waivers. They can even choose free agency over going to the minors if they want. Those 10 guys have opening day spots locked up unless they're hurt. No question about it. None at all. They didn't sign Solano 2 weeks ago just to cut him in 3 weeks. They simply didn't. Larnach, Kirilloff, Miranda, and Jeffers do have options left. Jeffers is their second catcher, and Miranda is their starting 3B/DH. They have opening day roster spots locked up (barring injury). There's no debate about that. That's simply how it is. That leaves 1 more spot for Kirilloff and Larnach. 1 of them is going to AAA or starting the year on the IL. No question about it.

This is a thread about CES and what he's doing now after having been involved in the Mahle trade. That poster had made numerous comments before the one I quoted that the trade was bad because the team failed. I think you and I are saying pretty much the same thing. The team has to be better. But that's completely separate from "grading" the Mahle trade. The Mahle trade could have been a good move, and the team could still fail. They're separate things. One is an isolated event while the other is a collection of events. You grade a trade based on what was known about the players involved in the trade at the time of the trade. Nobody was throwing a fit (nationally, not just in Twins Territory) about the Tatis Jr for Shields trade. You look back on it now and it's a disaster for Chicago. That's unfortunate, but it was a solid trade at the time. People everywhere were blasting the Pirates for their Archer trade. It looked bad at the time, and has turned out to be a disaster. Both trades ended up very 1 sided, but that was an easily predictable outcome for 1 of them while the other it was a very unlikely outcome. My problem is simply the isolation of an individual move in the downfall of last season. They absolutely need better on-field results moving forward. No argument from me on that. But I disagree with commenting on/grading the Mahle trade in regards to the season outcome as a whole. The FO didn't make a mistake in the Mahle trade because he got hurt and the season tanked. It's just an unfortunate outcome. One of many last year. That trade alone didn't tank the season. They're out of "get out of jail free because of injuries" cards (at least with the fans). They can't use that excuse again this year. And it looks like they know that and built up as much depth as they could to avoid it. But having to use OFers 7-9 on the depth chart (plus Tim Beckham, yikes) in September and watching the season go down the drains with a AAA squad out there isn't, or shouldn't be, a condemnation of the Mahle trade. They're separate things. The Mahle trade made sense. The season failed. Both can be true. Mahle could've missed no starts for them and given up no runs, and they still would've ended up below .500.

I mean your argument is basically that the Twins need to be able to see the future. Luis Castillo had missed 5 more starts before the deadline than Mahle had, but he didn't get hurt for Seattle. Mahle had come back from his injury and was pitching with no problems before the trade. Him getting hurt after the trade can count against the FO in your head, but it doesn't make any logical sense to me. The team finishing below .500 because a bunch of other guys got hurt, too, shouldn't play into the trade grade for Mahle. It's entirely possible for the trade to have been just fine (I think it was exactly what FOs try for when they make trades- news flash: FOs aren't actually trying to "win" trades like fans want them to, they're always looking for fair trades), but for the outcome of the season to have been disappointing. They don't have to be tied together. The implosion at the end of the year because of the incredible amount of injuries they suffered was brutal, and not fun at all. But that doesn't make giving up 2 mid-level position prospects who were blocked by multiple players in our own system, and a decent arm with mid-rotation upside, of which the Twins have plenty, a bad trade. The trade made sense, and is the kind of trade they should make regularly, but the season didn't go how they wanted for reasons completely outside of the trade itself. I don't get bashing the trade because of things that have nothing to do with the trade.