Your 2008 Twins Third Baseman: Mike Lamb?

Here is something I wrote on another site:

No, both will probably be starters. Lamb is a huge upgrade over Punto, and while that isn't saying a lot, it'll help some.

People are going to look at his numbers and question why we'd sign a guy that in 124 games hit just 11 HR and drove in just 40 RBI.

But people need to look closer and realize that he actually played in just 79 games if you take out the 45 games that were counted because he pinch hit.

Lamb batted just 311 times last season, 161 times less than Punto. Give him 200 more at-bats, and I think there is a chance that he can be NEAR 20 HR and 60-70 RBI.

We should be happy the Twins are making some moves and not just sitting around. If they trade Johan and get a good CF, then they'll be moving in the right direction.

Visit my blog at Twins Territory. http://www.twins-territory.blogspot.com/

by Twins Territory on Dec 14, 2007 11:28 PM EST reply actions

I like this

I like this big time. He was the one 3B I hoped we would sign. Yay Bill Smith.

by TMoney on Dec 15, 2007 12:25 AM EST reply actions

Bill Smith...

is the man, as far as I'm concerned right now.

I love EVERY move he has made so far. I certainly cannot say the same for TR (as much good as he's done for the organization) in recent years.

I think we're pretty setup either way now with Johan. Either we sign him and sign a decent CF (or just trade for Crisp) or we trade him for Ellsbury, and sign a starter like Jennings to bridge the gap with the kids.

We have increased our leverage in possible Johan trades a LOT in the last couple days too IMO.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 12:37 AM EST reply actions

exactly

If this does one thing, it increases our leverage. We are in a position where we don't HAVE to trade Santana. Or course, we really still don't stand a chance next year against the Indians and Tigers.

by TMoney on Dec 15, 2007 12:44 AM EST up reply actions

Not necessarily

The Indians might be coming off a post-season hangover like the Twins and Tigers had in 07 and the White Sox had in 06. Sabathia and Carmona just looked beaten down at the end of the ALCS.

The Tigers lost their 2 best SP prospects and that will hurt WHEN Kenny Rogers goes down. Oh yeah, and Dontrelle Willis's decline is for real. Look at those K rates drop steadily in the last 3 years. Also, the bullpen, she's a no good.

It's anyone's division this year.

by TheMattWilke on Dec 15, 2007 1:26 AM EST up reply actions

I think

the Tigers have enough pitching to go along with that killer lineup. Verlander, Bonderman, Willis, Robertson, Rogers, Miner. They aren't going to dominate, but they are going to be a pretty good group. You are right though, the big problem is their bullpen. I'm shocked they haven't made some kind of signing to bolster the bullpen. It's not as if they are penny pinchers over there.

As for the Indians. I could see them having a bit of a falloff especially with Sabathia potentially feeling the effects from '07.

by TMoney on Dec 15, 2007 2:13 AM EST up reply actions

I too...

think it's anyone's division actually (between us 3 teams).

IF we have Johan, we have the best pitching in the division. And our offense really should be just as good as Cleveland's overall now. Break it down by position.

The Tigers have the best lineup, but they also have a lot of aging vets and injuries could definitely play a factor. And their pitching is the weakest of the 3, including that likely atrocious bullpen. They actually could be the 2005 Indians right now.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 2:53 AM EST up reply actions

Our

Our offense as good as Cleveland's?

We lost Hunter. We traded Punto's black hole for about an equal one in Everett. Lamb will hit solidly better than Bartlett, and Harris solidly better than Castillo. Delmong Young is an improvement over LF, adn so is a full year of Kubel. Monroe will help a bit as well.

But 100 runs that does not make, esecially after losing Hunter.

If we get Cameron, I'd say that's about HALFWAY to Cleveland.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 15, 2007 3:01 AM EST up reply actions

If we get a decent CF...

then yes, I think we might be something like 100 runs better this year. I really do.

Lamb is a HUGE upgrade over Punto at 3b
Young equals Hunter this year to me
Morneau should be as good or better
Cuddyer should be better with health (battling that thumb injury for the last 2 months-sapping power)
Mauer should be a lot better with health
Harris should make us better at 2b
Everett is actually a small loss offensively from Bartlett's year last year
Kubel/Monroe is a HUGE upgrade from DH last year
The bench is better
And CF (again, a decent one) should be at least as good as our LF production last year

I think that could all add up to 100 runs, yes, I do.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 3:21 AM EST up reply actions

Quick comparison of Indians/Twins...

C-Martinez vs. Mauer; Push. Though I like Mauer's upside.
1b-Garko/Hafner vs. Morneau/Kubel/Monroe; Morneau is close to Hafner, and I'll take Kubel/Monroe over Garko. It's close though. I'll call it a push. Though I really like Kubel's upside here as well.
2b-Cabrera vs. Harris; Push
SS-Peralta vs. Everett; Advantage Indians by about .100 in OPS
3b-Blake vs. Lamb; Push
RF-Gutierrez vs. Cuddyer; Advantage Twins by a bit
CF-Sizemore vs. "good" CF (Lofton/Cameron); Advantage Indians by about 60 points in OPS
LF-Michaels vs. Young; This is the real key. Right now it's a push, but I really think Young makes BIG strides this year and gains a good 100 points in OPS with Mauer teaching him patience, and with good protection in the lineup.

So in the end, IF Young develops, you're probably looking at something like a total difference of something like 30 points in OPS between all the starting players. The benches are pretty negligible. And that's not expecting any major improvements other than Young.

I think our offense is closer than the casual observer would think right now.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 4:04 AM EST up reply actions

I do

I do not find it likely that Young will take such a massive stride. You're talking abouT over a .100 point SLG increase from Young!

SS- You said Everett is about .100 OPS points below Peralta.

Peralta's OPS last year was .130 points higher than Everett's career OPS. Evertt's OPS last year, at age 30, was another .50 points below that. We already know that Evertt's injury did not negatively affect his performance before he missed games because it was a sudden injury. So IF Everett recovered to his career line, which is a big if at his age, he would still be short of what you are giving us credit for.

RF - I disagree that we have the advantage with Cuddyer. Cuddyer and Gutierrez had identical OPS's last year, Gutierrez with a bit more power, Cuddyer with a bit more patience. Gutierrez was only 25 last year, and in his first real go around in the majors.Cuddyer was in his prime at 28 last year and has played in the majors for several years. Any supposed expected gains from Cuddyer due to injury are no more likely than Gutierrez's improvements due to experience.

CF - Both Lofton and Cameron had OPS quite a bit further below Sizemore's than .60 points last year. Sizemore is still young, while the other two are old and going in the opposite direction.

1B/DH - You said Morneau is nearly as good as Hafner.

Hafner's career line: .290/.398/.552
Morneau's career line: .276/.340/.498

Hafner's career AVERAGE is arguably better than Morneau's breakthrough MVP season.

For Dh, I like Kubel's upside a lot hear too (especially after that torrid .303/.379/.511 second half line last year), and even though i expect Monroe to steal a lot of at bats, I think with him playing almost entirely against lefties, he should put up pretty good numbers as well.

However, Ryan Garko hit .290/.358/.483 last season (which was almost identical to the line he put up the previous year in only part of a season in his first year in the bigs, and, you will not, very close to our esteemed Justin Morneau's career line). Garko will be 27 this year, starting only his second full year in the majors, and ALSO had a hot second half last year (hitting .286/.352/.502), so a healthy chunk of improvement is a distinct possibility for him as well.

Bottom line, despite my belief in Jason Kubel, if we received a hitting line from our DH's this year matching Garko's line from last year, I think we would have to be absolutely thrilled with that.

C - I agree that Martinez and Mauer are a push offensively. Martinez has put up a very consistent line over the last several years, with a final OPS lining up very near .860. Mauer's career line is very similar to Martinez's but with a bit more patience at the cost of some power.

For Mauer to match that .860 OPS Martinez can be expected to produce, he'd have to raise his OPS by about 50 points. I say Mauer is likely to do that. All that will take would be a 20 point BA increase (showing itself in OPS as a 20 point OBP increase) leaving Mauer hitting .315, and a 30 point SLG increase, which would be done if just a couple of those extra hits fell in for doubles.

Defensively, obviously, it's a different story, and that's a big reason why Mauer is such a fantastic all around player, but your claim was purely offensive.

A case could be made that much of the difference between our offense and Cleveland's can be made up through our superior defense. We have a distinct advantage defensively over the Indians at C, SS, and probably both corner outfield positions (Cuddyer has average range, Young has athletic range, both have cannon arms). The Indians have a moderate advantage at 2B (I believe Carera was touted as a defensive talent) and a HUGE advantage in CF, although this disparity would be cut down to a healthy amount if we signed Mike Cameron.

So while an argument could be made that the entire contribution of our position players will be near that of Cleveland's next year, I cannot see it as accurate that we are likely to match them offensively.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 15, 2007 4:51 AM EST up reply actions

I guess we disagree on some of these...

Adam.

I think Cuddyer was GREATLY effected by that injury of his last year. It completely sapped his power for basically 2 full months. I think he returns to his 2006, normal, form. Maybe even a little above. I was basically giving Cuddyer about a 30 point advantage. It might be slightly below that, but I think Cuddyer will have the advantage. Plus Guittierez is essentially a platoon player I believe, and I think his mates are worse than him.

On Young, I do think he makes that stride. It's not just 100 points in slugging. It's 100 points between slugging AND OBP. I think he will make that this year. The guy is that good and he will finally have protection, plus a batting coach who believes in patience, and Joe Mauer to teach him the ropes a bit. I think that could easily make a 100 point difference for him all things considered. And let's not forget that he was a rookie last year.

At DH, I think we WILL be very pleasantly "surprised" this year. I really think Kubel's going to mash. He's a much better hitting prospect than Garko, and now that he's recovered, I think we'll have the advantage there, albeit not by all that much. I love Hafner and I agree his numbers used to be better, but I don't think we'll see the same from him. Something changed for him last year drastically that while he'll still be a beast, I don't think we'll ever see him quite like he was. I really think Kubel/Morneau is about equal to Hafner/Garko this year.

You're right on Everett/Peralta. Tack on another 30 points.

On CF, I don't think that's accurate. Cameron for instance was less than 100 points behind but that was in Petco and the NL West! Even so, I might give you the benefit of the doubt and give you 80 points difference.

Still overall, I think we're looking at a range of some 250 points behind max to even. That's pretty damn close offensively to me, and a LOT closer than we were last year.

Call me optimistic, but I think people are really underestimating just how good this offense can be (at LEAST league average) and how good Lamb/Harris can be in improving us, plus Kubel. Our problem was never the heart of our order; it was the complementary pieces. We seem to have solved that (if we get a CF, which I expect).

Coupled with our defense (should be much better than Cleveland) and our overall staff (WITH Santana, without they're still about equal overall IF Liriano is back healthy) I fully expect us to be very competitive next year with Cleveland, and I really don't think Detroit's any better than that either.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 12:48 PM EST up reply actions

A couple

Just a couple things I'd like to point out:

"I really think Kubel's going to mash. He's a much better hitting prospect than Garko"

Once again, with Garko you're talking about guy who isn't 27 yet who's got a .290/.358/.479 career line over his first two major league seasons. Once again, that's not very far off at all from Morneau's line.

Also, Garko isn't a hitting prospect anymore. He's a starting major league player now, and one who hits very well.

"all that much. I love Hafner and I agree his numbers used to be better, but I don't think we'll see the same from him. Something changed for him last year drastically that while he'll still be a beast"

I just think it is interesting that you are so willing to give Cuddyer a pass due to some supposed injury while Hafner, only a year and a half older, is not given any kind of benefit of the doubt, despite a far mroe drastic fall in numbers than Cuddyer had. Cuddyer's numbers weren't THAT far below his career line!

You make good points on CF, and I think I agree, the disparity is not so much as I said (though I still think it is sizeable).

Overall, what you are saying is possible, but I think the idea that ALL these things happen is very unlikely.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 15, 2007 6:33 PM EST up reply actions

In fairness...

I did say the wide margin would be something like 250 points.

That's still a pretty small difference overall.

On the Cuddyer/Hafner thing, the difference for Cuddyer was clear. Vavra even mentioned it in an article that he shouldn't have even been playing the last 2 months. But he did, and it hurt him bigtime.

Hafner, I don't know what the reason is, but man, he just wasn't even close. He might be again, and that would make that 250 point difference probably, but again, that's still a pretty small overall difference to me.

What was our difference last year? 800 points?

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 7:12 PM EST up reply actions

I

I dunno, that's a pretty tough measure too add up, OPS difference among starters...

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 15, 2007 7:42 PM EST up reply actions

He was the best free agent 3B....

Smith couldn't have done better at 3B using free agency, but still...I was hoping for the cheap flyer on Koskie. I could be wrong, so I'm not upset. It just wasn't what I had in mind.

by TheMattWilke on Dec 15, 2007 1:21 AM EST reply actions

I think Koskie is done

Lamb is ready to go. Koskie, not so much. In the unlikely event Koskie recovers his preconcussion form despite being out of the game for 20 months, I'd still rather have Lamb. The last three of healthy years out of Koskie are very Lamb-like, judging from OPS+:

Koskie

113
95
110

Lamb

119
81
113
112

Plus, Koskie's two years older and much more injury prone overall. They might have saved a couple of mil on Koskie, but it's not worth the risk, IMO.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Dec 15, 2007 8:49 AM EST up reply actions

guys come on

the divisions aren't played out in the offseason. There are actual leagues that have actual games. I know people will jump on me like that's obvious but this pessimism about next season is a little ridiculous. I think Bill Smith has made good, marginal moves so far and if he carries the strategy out we'll have a CF and no holes in our lineup except at SS where an AL team should expect a hole and we'll either have Santana or we won't. If we do, and Everett is any better than Punto was offensively we stand to have a winning season. That's maybe not swinging for the fences but it's not mortgaging the future either and that's really all you can ask for, even in the Moneyball era. The games need to be played out and you put the team we're putting on the field and you have a shot. We can't guarantee a playoff spot this season any more than we can guarantee one in 2010.

Personally I hope we have Koufax and Drysdale intact but if it ain't in the cards it ain't in the cards. Either way, '08 will be fun to watch and thanks, Bill Smith for making December fun so far too

"I don't care about feelings." - Lou Piniella

by natetheskate on Dec 15, 2007 4:29 AM EST reply actions

And we now have 14...

...players that should be on the Rochester/Twins at 2B, SS, 3B. I like this signing, but spring should be lots of fun to see these battles play out. With the two teams probably keeping 10 or 11 at the most at these positions, they seem to have 3-4 players to many...unless Hughes and Plofuffe return to New Britain.

by roger @ Twinkie Town on Dec 15, 2007 9:15 AM EST reply actions

I do wonder...

if we might include one or two of these middle infielders in one of these Santana deals. For instance, maybe if Boston ends up caving and giving Lowrie/Ellsbury/Lester, we give them back a guy like Casilla or Machado (or both) as filler. Something like that.

And I would think Watkins will end up being cut, too.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 12:34 PM EST reply actions

Or do we no longer...

...take Lowrie as part of the deal. Maybe they get to keep Lowrie and we get Ellsbury, Buchholz, Masterson and a low level prospect. Start going more for quality and less quantity?

Watkins wouldn't be cut, he would move to Ft. Myers and become a coach. I don't see him leaving the organization, although he very well may no longer be a player.

by roger @ Twinkie Town on Dec 15, 2007 2:49 PM EST reply actions

Buchholz

I don't know how you make a deal with Santana without getting at least a possible frontline starter and a significant offensive upgrade at a given position. I like how Smith has waited this out. If the Yankees and Red Sox have gotten to a point where they think they can get the best players in baseball while only sacrificing their second tier young talent then they can go ahead and find another sucker organization.

On another note with the signing of Everett I've contacted a graphic designer friend of mind we're proposing a new Twins logo featuring a pirahna with most of its teeth knocked out playing the banjo.

P.S. if Kelly Theiser reports again that a pitcher had a bad start because he didn't keep the ball down, I might have to kill myself.

by caseintheface on Dec 15, 2007 4:27 PM EST up reply actions

haha...

Family Guy "down to Dixie" style?

Awesome.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 4:40 PM EST up reply actions

Submitted for Gardy's approval

New Twins hard working, good guy, all-star banjo hitting team.

Tyner CF
Punto 2B
Redmond DH
Ford RF
Rodriguez 1B
White LF
Lecroy C
Watkins 3B
Everett SS

P.S. if Kelly Theiser reports again that a pitcher had a bad start because he didn't keep the ball down, I might have to kill myself.

by caseintheface on Dec 15, 2007 4:43 PM EST up reply actions

Oh man

I just threw up a little bit in my mouth at that lineup.

Of course I giggled afterward ;)

by ravenfly on Dec 15, 2007 10:57 PM EST up reply actions

.350

watkins was a .350 hitter in the bigs. sample size not withstanding. he should be higher up in the lineup.

by doofus04 on Dec 16, 2007 10:50 AM EST up reply actions

Nah....

This is Gardy we're talking about.

You don't hit your best hitters at the top.

by djskilbr on Dec 16, 2007 1:14 PM EST up reply actions

Seems kind of a crime actually...

to include Mike "Chuck Norris and Jack Bauer rolled into 1" Redmond in that lineup.

by djskilbr on Dec 15, 2007 11:09 PM EST reply actions

Yeah

Yeah, it should be Chris Heintz. And White wasn't really his hard working guy. How about...

Shannon Stewart?

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 16, 2007 12:38 AM EST up reply actions

Nah...

Stewart doesn't belong with those clowns either.

Garrett Jones maybe, ya.

by djskilbr on Dec 16, 2007 1:45 AM EST reply actions

Hmm...

Too young...

How about a platoon, with Jacque Jones hitting against lefties?

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Dec 16, 2007 1:56 AM EST up reply actions

haha...

there you go!

by djskilbr on Dec 16, 2007 2:49 AM EST reply actions

That's the thing

Remember, gotta stick with Gardy's guys, the one's he sticks in the lineup when they have no business doing so. Gardy had no extreme love for Jacque Jones so that doesn't work, Garrett Jones definitely not (he should have been playing a lot more of the meaningless games in the second half) and Gardy had no special affection for Heintz either he just rode the pine. Don't you guys remember when Gardy put Redmond out for the year when he tried to win a meaningless game against Detroit by pinch hitting him for Heintz and then Mauer had to come of the bench hurt? Redmond is definitely one of Gardy's favorites, that's why he's on this list. Also while I have a lot of respect for him as a ball player and I kind of regretted putting him on here, he his a singles machine therefore qualifying him as a banjo hitter.

P.S. if Kelly Theiser reports again that a pitcher had a bad start because he didn't keep the ball down, I might have to kill myself.

by caseintheface on Dec 16, 2007 10:14 AM EST reply actions

Further

Lecroy has to catch in this lineup because he caught that one awesome game for Silva therefore qualifying him for a whole season of starting. Just like Punto went 4-5 in some game in 2006 with a couple of defensive gems therefore qualifying him for 500 at bats and appearance in 150 games for the next 5 years.

P.S. if Kelly Theiser reports again that a pitcher had a bad start because he didn't keep the ball down, I might have to kill myself.

by caseintheface on Dec 16, 2007 10:21 AM EST up reply actions

Finally

Setting:
Santana is on the mound after striking out 15 in his last appearance with 5 of the 6 other outs recorded by harmless pop flies.
Commentary:
When reached for comment about his lineup, "Well we wanted our best defensive team on the mound for our ace. They're a hardworking bunch that'll catch the ball when they have a ball hit at them. Offensively, I know they'll be able to hit a ground ball to the right side of the infield to advance the runner when I need it."

P.S. if Kelly Theiser reports again that a pitcher had a bad start because he didn't keep the ball down, I might have to kill myself.

by caseintheface on Dec 16, 2007 10:27 AM EST up reply actions