Squirrel

I actually think this sounds like you are creating a reason to dislike the FO. If the team is doing well, even if they are in first place, with a roster the FO put together, based on trades and bringing up young players, you will constitute the pipeline a failure because we won’t trade half of a winning rotation in order to play prospects? If the FO did that, I would revolt. The time to trade expiring contracts at the deadline is when the team is doing poorly not when it’s winning. If that expiring contract isn’t contributing to the winning season and there is a chance to get someone who will, by all means, yes. None of that has any bearing on the pipeline, at all, imo. And my guess is, the young players you’ve mentioned WILL have contributed to the good season, if indeed there is one. Or, they are used to get someone to add to a winning roster that could strengthen our chances. That, actually, would be an example of the pipeline bearing fruit.

This hardly constitutes 'rebuilding' to trade away a player who doesn't really have a position to get a player of need who will help NOW. This is what teams looking to win do. This is what we should be doing.

We have seen SWR ... he pitched at the end of last season and we will see him this year, too. And he projects to be very good. I was and still am a fan of that trade, but then I wasn't a huge fan of Berrios. He wasn't going to stay with the Twins. Talks to extend him went nowhere and he's not doing that well with the Blue Jays. I get trading away favorite players ... I HATED losing Escobar. But, again, it was the right thing to do and now we are enjoying what Duran brings. If a team is unable to sign pitching, this is how it goes.

We aren't talking about about trading him for prospects. We are talking about trading him for mlb starting pitching. While I'd like a bit better return than Lopez, and I'd hate to lose Luis, it is the way to go about it.

So you think the Twins are going to be out of the picture by the deadline?

You can look for drink rail seats in sections 301 and 302. Those seats are always shady. If not in the 300 sections, look in the 200 sections. On the left field side, those seats start out in the sun, but gets shady by the the start of the game, but I'd go at least 2/3 of the way up. There may be sun for an inning or two, but those sections get shadier throughout the game. On the right field side, you can easily go about halfway back. The sun may make its way to you by the end of the game, but you'll be good for most of it. I generally look in the upper most rows of the 200 sections. You can take the elevators to the 3rd floor, and then it's a step or two down to your row.

The silver lining!

Nice write up! I think he's got a very sharp, baseball mind. He will do something post-career whether managing or general managing ... wouldn't surprise me!

I think it's for AAA depth, but I don't see him on the team, unless we've had a 2nd season of a lot of injuries.

This is the part with all of this that confuses me. Maybe. I mean ... the guaranteed dollar amounts and years are very different than the Twins contract. Could it be that insurance said, 'Okay, this is doable' where the others were not, again because of the guaranteed length and amounts? Front loading it as they did, and basically have 4 years of being opt outs at lower rates ... maybe the insurance said that was workable where the other structures were not? Totally guessing. If, indeed, insurance was part of the problem. If it truly wasn't, then, I'm back to they were trying to put the screws to Correa.

I liked the trade for Paddack and I would do it again. My only problem with it (which has nothing to do with this article) is that they didn't effectively stock the BP. But back to Paddack, I'm excited to see what he brings when he's all recovered.

I'm surprised you didn't get complaints that this spoiled the game thread for the Vikings WC game ... ;)

To truly emulate Wrigley, you need some critters living in the ivy, too ... along with the rats in the other areas.

At least they waited until AFTER all the Correa stuff … can you imagine if this was in the middle of that? I say, ‘Well timed, Brock!’

It was also something they said in the press conference … maybe not those exact words, but there was certainly an ‘Okay, let’s figure this out’ attitude. And you are right, it’s a good way to approach negotiations. It’s why I said the Twins negotiated in good faith. I can’t really speak to the Giants, or really to the Mets, either, but the Mets asking him to ‘pass’ a physical every year to guarantee money is not a good faith negotiation and is basically a yearly opt out clause. And the Twins didn’t give Correa what they initially offered, either, but I think they approached it fairly, which shows the amount of respect they bring to the table (despite my earlier whines that they only offered 10/285). Perhaps a different thread, but I’m not sure it’s a luxury tax issue. I think the later years, low AAV and opt outs was simply an insurance plan to a few things. IF Correa’s speculative ankle arthritis is a problem in those later years, it gives the Twins options to move him to another position, become a lesser role player or to cut him if it’s indeed that bad. And if it’s not that bad, Correa has already made his money up front. The lower salary later also leaves them room to take on another big contract or extend younger players. I mean, I’d guess it is more a payroll issue because I don’t ever see the Twins reaching a luxury tax threshold. They have the payroll room now and can do the higher AAV, but again, maybe an insurance plan … who knows what payroll will be then, but the Twins haven’t hampered themselves.

I think this is the crux of it for all three teams. And I believe that the Twins were the only team that was willing to be creative enough to structure a contract that basically said ‘We’re both covered either way.’ The high AAV early on, the very low AAV with the team opt outs in the latter years beyond 6. The Giants balked and Boras/Correa walked away thinking the Mets were offering guaranteed years and money. But then I think the Mets tried to play a game and leverage information against Correa. And then the Twins came in, with the same information, asking, ‘How can we make this work for both of us?’ The Twins negotiated, imo, in good faith. I’m not sure a deal could have been made with the Giants or not because it seemed the Giants weren’t given opportunity, but I don’t really know. And I believe the Mets tried to put the screws to him. All knowing the exact same thing.

Eh ... maybe as depth as long as he's not taking up a 40-man spot. Seems as if we have enough backups to play 1st, otherwise he has no position. And we have someone else on the roster with no position in Arraez. I just don't see a fit, in the long run. And if we are calling him up, then something is amiss.

If he isn't fit to play 2nd, he is definitely not fit to play 3rd. He has played a very passable 2nd over the last few years ... he has not played a passable 3rd. 2nd is probably his best position, followed by 1st, followed very distantly by 3rd. If he can improve at 3rd base, he would still be better suited for 2nd. This is part of the problem with keeping Arraez ... no position for him.

Eh, I took a nap :)

Actually, I think it’s when ST starts, unless you were counting that as the beginning of the season

I’m not sure, but this will now be every AAA team

I like this deal. The off season continues!

Or looking to trade ... ? I imagine his would take more to get done given his year last year.

We got Martin and SWR. That’s a great return, imo

This will be interesting to follow this summer. It’s the next step toward implementation in the majors. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/35434317/sources-all-aaa-parks-use-electronic-strike-zone-23