Article: One Guy's Plan

[nicksaviking]

I like having a plan, that's a good start. I don't think I'd keep those guys down until August 1 though. That just seems like we'd be asking for the start of 2017 to be more development and experimentation time.

 

I don't expect the young guys to come up and be ready to play, I expect struggles. That's how baseball has always been. They wouldn't give awards to the top Rookie if they were all expected to play like they've been here before. Let them struggle and learn now so we can get as good of a read as possible in 2017. The plan should be to know who exactly is going to be a contributor in 2017. That should have been the plan this year but 2015's unexpected success didn't allow for that.

[GMinTraining]

I think your plan is the "PERFECT" plan moving forward Seth.  That being said - people can't expect World Series or Bust in 2017.  I think it will better prepare those young guys to feed off each other 2017 going forward.  The MLB highs and the lows can be experienced through the eyes of young teammates who shared in previous struggles together.  Not guys stressing to live up to the expectations of the MLB veterans on the team.  It would bring a completely different dynamic to the "NEW Era"  of Twins baseball.  That dugout is already divided into young guys and vets.  At least based on the celebrations I see in the dugout.  The heart felt ones anyway.   Let the young new leaders emerge together.  Bring the young guys up in August and find out who the true leader of the group will be.  Don't force it.  Great Article!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 5:55 PM, deanlambrecht said:

Maybe Seth will comment, but I agree that you've misunderstood Seth's post.  To my understanding, his point is that while the team isn't technically/mathematically eliminated, it is practically eliminated.  And from the premise that this team is practically eliminated, he lays out the plan to send most of the guys who have almost no time in AAA down until August 1 while we field the older guys and see which ones we should keep and which we should try to trade on/before July 31.

Arcia and Escobar, sure, maybe Danny Santana and a couple relievers, but the veteran starting pitchers?  Plouffe?  Dozier?  Jepsen?  Suzuki?   Nunez?  Mastroianni?  Pat Dean?  Almost nothing those guys do in the next two months will have any affect on their July trade value or long-term projections/expectations.

 

In fact, cromulent performances by those guys are more likely to buy more playing time in August, September, and beyond than they are to help us make a final decision on them by August 1st.

 

Will August and September be enough time to collect useful data on the new young players in advance of 2017?

 

Many of those veterans would be August waiver trade candidates too.  Should we push it back to September 1st if necessary?  Will September be enough to evaluate anybody?  Parmelee, Pinto...

Edited May 17, 2016 by spycake

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

Totally agree with the article's premise. I posted a thread last week with the title "The Lost Year - August 1st Roster."

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/22437-the-lost-year-august-1st-roster/

 

That would be my watershed day as well for the Twins to flip the roster over to the young guys.

[Taildragger8791]

I don't understand the heartburn over letting unprepared rookies work out their flaws in the minors. Nobody is saying Beresford, Mastroianni, or any of the underperforming vets are the answer to winning baseball. Throw that stupid strawman out the window and light it the f--- on fire. The proposal is to pull back the reigns on the prospects who are either

 

1) uncompetitive or overmatched at the big league level, thus stagnating or hindering their development; or

2) simply not improving on glaring flaws (ex: Rosario's plate discipline).

 

Put them back at a level where they are still being challenged but aren't so overmatched that they can't improve. Put the Bad News Bears on the 25-man if you need to field a team, it literally doesn't matter. Developing the prospects the right way matters. 2016 and probably 2017 is going to stink, so just accept it. We've seen too many guys come up and look flat-out helpless, whether immediately or after the first trip around the league. Considering all the complaints about guys lacking fundamentals and well-rounded games I'd have thought this was be a more popular idea.

 

Edit: Of course there will be rookie struggles and adjustments, that's expected and they should be allowed to work through it. But after a large enough sample size you have to enforce a threshold of competence or see improvements being made. Considering most of these players we're talking about have maybe a half-season of AAA experience it doesn't seem unreasonable to let them work it out down there for a while and see if it helps. The other approach wasn't working.

[Mike Sixel]

Ah, well, sure, the right way. 

 

What is the "Right way"? It doesn't appear to be whatever this team is doing, so you'll forgive some of us if we pretty much doubt every move now.

 

And hey, the goalposts are now 2018 until we should care, great......

[mlhouse]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:17 PM, Taildragger8791 said:

 

 

1) uncompetitive or overmatched at the big league level, thus stagnating or hindering their development; or

2) simply not improving on glaring flaws (ex: Rosario's plate discipline).

 

 

Here is the problem with that approach.  I would argue that the time has come for almost all of our rookies.  Maybe I could agree with your 1 and 2 points if these were 19 year old kids and we truly were rushing them.  

 

And, while age is a relative thing Eddie Rosario is 24 years old. When Kent Hrbek was 24 years old he had 3 full years of major league experience, 67 major league home runs and was the runner up in the American League MVP award.  By the end of his 24 year old season Hrbek had 1,881 major league plate appearances versus just 1088 minor league ones, with all of his minor league PAs lower than AA level.  

 

Looking at the roster, Sano is 23. Santana 25.  Arcia 25.  Kepler 23. Buxton and Polanco 22. How many years are you going to keep bouncing them back and forth between the minors and majors?

 

 Either they are quality players or they are not but the Twins approach, in my opinion, put them to the major league level too late to give the team enough options once they got there. They literally should have been working out these problems at the major league level two or more years ago when we were losing 95 games per season.  Then they could have adjusted and we would know were we are with them at this point.  Right now, we know little and it is going to take even more time to sort it all out.

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:17 PM, Taildragger8791 said:

I don't understand the heartburn over letting unprepared rookies work out their flaws in the minors. Nobody is saying Beresford, Mastroianni, or any of the underperforming vets are the answer to winning baseball. Throw that stupid strawman out the window and light it the f--- on fire. The proposal is to pull back the reigns on the prospects who are either

 

1) uncompetitive or overmatched at the big league level, thus stagnating or hindering their development; or

2) simply not improving on glaring flaws (ex: Rosario's plate discipline).

 

Put them back at a level where they are still being challenged but aren't so overmatched that they can't improve. Put the Bad News Bears on the 25-man if you need to field a team, it literally doesn't matter. Developing the prospects the right way matters. 2016 and probably 2017 is going to stink, so just accept it. We've seen too many guys come up and look flat-out helpless, whether immediately or after the first trip around the league. Considering all the complaints about guys lacking fundamentals and well-rounded games I'd have thought this was be a more popular idea.

 

Edit: Of course there will be rookie struggles and adjustments, that's expected and they should be allowed to work through it. But after a large enough sample size you have to enforce a threshold of competence or see improvements being made. Considering most of these players we're talking about have maybe a half-season of AAA experience it doesn't seem unreasonable to let them work it out down there for a while and see if it helps. The other approach wasn't working.

 

Sounds nice in theory, but Polanco -- what has he done to deserve to be buried at AAA until August 1st?

 

Which of Meyer's 4 innings convinced you he wasn't ready?

 

Which of Kepler's 2 starts did the same?

 

I'm all for demoting a prospect who looks overmatched, like Buxton and others, but you and Seth are applying blanket rules to everybody.  It's not a cookie-cutter process.  If we have a rotation opening for the next 3 weeks, there is probably a more useful way to fill it than Pat Dean.  If not Berrios, then perhaps Trevor May?  If Escobar is on the DL, you should be able to find some significant at-bats for Polanco.  If you don't see Meyer as a starting pitcher, is there a place where you can work with him in our MLB bullpen?

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 3:54 PM, mazeville said:

It does and it doesn't. Seth started out saying that he believes this team still has a chance. My whole point is that they don't. Not one bit. 

 

Frankly, I think that the Twins' trades have to start NOW -- start with Fernando Abad while he has some trade value as well as guys like Plouffe. The Twins are far better off if they're realistic about their chances. And contention is not at all realistic.

 

I can't imagine anyone read these first two paragraphs in the article and thought that I counted on the Twins really having a good chance to compete in 2016:

 

  Quote

 

The Twins are now 10-27. Thirty-seven games into the season, they are 17 games under .500 and 13.5 games out of first place in the AL Central. In fact, they are 6.5 games out of fourth place in the division already.

That's not to say it's completely out of the realm of possibility that the Twins could turn things around and find themselves competing for a playoff spot. It's not, but it pretty much is.

 

 

And yes, I would definitely not suggest that they wait until July 31 to make trades. That's obviously just the deadline. 

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 6:34 PM, bluechipper said:

Are you really suggesting Danny Santana and Mastro play CF for over 2 more months, while Buxton mashes in AAA? I don't see how that's good for anyone.

 

August 1st isn't a hard date... Players can get traded before July 31.

 

I'd also suggest that the Twins look at more than just the stat line, make sure his mechanics are sound, his strike zone judgment is sound, and all of that. I just don't want him to come up next week just because he's had a nice 2-3 weeks.

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 6:42 PM, Shane Wahl said:

The thing is that yanking them up and down means they are getting inconsistent "looks" at the competition. Getting confidence in AAA, to me, is totally comical. The majors are the majors. When Berrios comes back he will be *starting all over again* in the majors. Polanco can't even get started. Meyer cannot even get started.

 

That's probably part of my point. Instead of continuing to call up Polanco and having him play one out of every five games, just leave him down so that he can play every single day at AAA. Call up Beresford and let him play a couple times a week instead. Polanco has never spent more than a few weeks straight at AAA.  Same with Buxton. 

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:02 PM, nicksaviking said:

I like having a plan, that's a good start. I don't think I'd keep those guys down until August 1 though. That just seems like we'd be asking for the start of 2017 to be more development and experimentation time.

 

I don't expect the young guys to come up and be ready to play, I expect struggles. That's how baseball has always been. They wouldn't give awards to the top Rookie if they were all expected to play like they've been here before. Let them struggle and learn now so we can get as good of a read as possible in 2017. The plan should be to know who exactly is going to be a contributor in 2017. That should have been the plan this year but 2015's unexpected success didn't allow for that.

 

Make it July 1st. I don't care about the specific date. I just want to know that when they come up, they will come up, play every day and stay up unless they are just completely over their head to the point of damage. 

[Taildragger8791]

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:34 PM, spycake said:

Sounds nice in theory, but Polanco -- what has he done to deserve to be buried at AAA until August 1st?

 

Which of Meyer's 4 innings convinced you he wasn't ready?

 

Which of Kepler's 2 starts did the same?

 

I'm all for demoting a prospect who looks overmatched, like Buxton and others, but you and Seth are applying blanket rules to everybody. It's not a cookie-cutter process. If we have a rotation opening for the next 3 weeks, there is probably a more useful way to fill it than Pat Dean. If not Berrios, then perhaps Trevor May? If Escobar is on the DL, you should be able to find some significant at-bats for Polanco. If you don't see Meyer as a starting pitcher, is there a place where you can work with him in our MLB bullpen?

I've said earlier in this thread I'm all for getting Polanco playing time and even getting Sano to 3B. I don't see Dozier and Plouffe getting moved off their spot anytime soon though, so I don't know what you do. He's blocked until management or front office do something. I'm fine with Kepler getting time but obliviously they think he isn't ready, so I trust that playing at AAA is the right thing for him. I also think Meyer needs an extended opportunity given his age, but first he needs to get healthy and get on a roll at AAA. If he craters then throw him in the bullpen. Berrios has earned an extended opportunity, but you can't allow too many 1-3 inning outings. That puts a huge load on the rest of the team. He didn't start well this year and needs to get straightened out. I'd give him that chance before sending him down to work it out. He'll be fine.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:47 PM, Seth Stohs said:

That's probably part of my point. Instead of continuing to call up Polanco and having him play one out of every five games, just leave him down so that he can play every single day at AAA. Call up Beresford and let him play a couple times a week instead. Polanco has never spent more than a few weeks straight at AAA.  Same with Buxton. 

If the alternative is playing Polanco once a week, sure send him to AAA.

 

Is that the only alternative, though?  Couldn't your plan just as simply say, Polanco should start most days at SS while Escobar is out, and spell Dozier or Plouffe once or twice a week too?  If you are sending down Rosario anyway, it should be pretty easy for Nunez to pick up at-bats in the outfield.

 

I don't know why Polanco, who has looked pretty good, is getting lumped in with Rosario, who hasn't.  I  may not call Kepler up right now, but I don't know why Max, who started 2 games in 2 weeks (after 2 career games at AAA), is getting lumped in with Buxton already.  And I'm not sure why Meyer's 1 start earned him the same banishment as Berrios' four starts.  Or why your "plan" seems to omit Trevor May entirely -- wouldn't starting him over the next two month be instructive for planning our future, especially if you want to call up a bunch of other starters in August?

 

I swear I've read you time and again saying how prospects are all different and can't be treated the same, yet you create a "plan" that very explicitly does just that.

[mlhouse]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 7:47 PM, Seth Stohs said:

That's probably part of my point. Instead of continuing to call up Polanco and having him play one out of every five games, just leave him down so that he can play every single day at AAA. Call up Beresford and let him play a couple times a week instead. Polanco has never spent more than a few weeks straight at AAA.  Same with Buxton. 

 

And you identify the main problem with the Twins approach.  IF YOU CALL UP ANY OF THESE YOUNG PROSPECTS THEY SHOULD BE PLAYING EVERY DAY.  I don't care if they lose.  To eventually win they are going to have to lose.  Lets lose this year, and maybe next, to get the young guys their adjustment.  As I have pointed out many times on this board, the adjustment time should have started two or even three years ago.

 

The starting 3B should be Sano.  Polanco should play every day rotating between 2B, SS, and 3B with Sano at DH when he plays third.  The OF should be  Rosario, Buxton, Arcia, Kepler, and Santana who should also play some SS.  Pick between Garver and Turner, and get them up to split time with Suzuki (and dont give him enough PA to exercise his option).  

 

By all means keep Berrio in the starting rotation.  Let him work out his stuff at the MLB level.  Sending him back to AAA does nothing to help him.  

[Platoon]

The bottom line is you could do what Seth suggests, and have a chance to succeed long term. Or you could do what others suggest, dump a whole bunch of vets now, bring in all the young troops, and suffer through it, and likely succeed down the road. Or you could do what everyone in their hearts knows they really will do. Hang onto the Doziers, Plouffes, Hughes, maybe even Suzuki, etc, all year, and likely next year, and end up muddling around in the middle. Probably go on a faux win streak, and declare yourself in good shape for 2017! Ugh!

[tobi0040]

With Spy on these points.

 

We need to quit acting like guys like Nolasco and Hughes can be flipped after a good month. These contracts are going nowhere. We may as well move them to the pen in an attempt to salvage value and improve the pen.

 

Lastly, August 1 is way too late. You don't play 28-33 year olds an additional 2+ months. As long as guys are doing well at AAA get them here.

 

Trade plouffe and dozier now and move on. This team is terrible. Get a top 2 pick and seasoning for the next wave

[Deduno Abides]

Well written planful plan. Would be fine with it, with a couple changes.

 

1. Sano' hitting is priority 1A. Playing RF likely affects it. Move him to 3B or DH. Either trade Plouffe ASAP or move Mauer to OF, with Park to 1B and Sano to DH. I don't want to get into all the Mauer stuff, except to say that Sano is likely a bigger part of the next Twins "dynasty," so any veteran needs to make room for him.

 

2. Keep Rosario in the majors. Assuming Buxton and Kepler are ready on August 1, Rosario and Arcia can have the same opportunity to prove themselves against major league pitching. This may sacrifice his development, but I'm less sure he'll get something out of playing in Rochester. Also, keeping Rosario enables #3.

 

3. Get rid of Mastroianni. He doesn't belong on a major league team. At best, he's a pinch runner and late inning defensive replacement.

[DocBauer]

  On 5/17/2016 at 8:33 PM, Platoon said:

The bottom line is you could do what Seth suggests, and have a chance to succeed long term. Or you could do what others suggest, dump a whole bunch of vets now, bring in all the young troops, and suffer through it, and likely succeed down the road. Or you could do what everyone in their hearts knows they really will do. Hang onto the Doziers, Plouffes, Hughes, maybe even Suzuki, etc, all year, and likely next year, and end up muddling around in the middle. Probably go on a faux win streak, and declare yourself in good shape for 2017! Ugh!

 

I read Seth's post twice now, everyone's rebuttles, and Seth's counter rebuttles, and mulled everything over in my head. And Platoon's post sort of sums up a lot of sentiments being expressed here.

 

To reiterate:

 

1} You can throw everyone out there to play, take their lumps, hope they don't get overwhelmed or lose confidence or lose mechanics because they are overwhelmed and trying too hard. This practice has been done successfully, or somewhat successfully, before, though not always.

 

2} Platoon is also right that what the Twins are doing now is an odd my and match of youth and veterans, some/many of whom don't fit in the teams long term plans, and brining up kids to sit. This clearly is not working.

 

3} You can do what Seth suggests and take a step back, take a pause, and make sure the youngsters are playing daily at Rochester, (not saying there aren't AA promotions that shouldn't take place and fringe roster guys to move there either), get guys in a successful groove before bringing them up, probably in several bulk moves. August 1st doesn't have to be the deadline, it's just an example of a deadline.

 

Hopefully, some of the struggling veteran players will play at least well enough to assist in some trade value. Others, you may to just ditch and eat their contracts entirely.

 

Is Seth's proposed plan ideal? He himself states he doesn't know. But it IS a plan. There IS a logic behind it, and a destination of events; building up the kids, many of whom have limited AAA still, as well as providing opportunity to formulate some exit strategies for the veterans that have to go.

 

All things being equal in a lost season, I'd be in favor of this plan because, again, at least it is a plan. Taking the emotion out of it, it is a plan with a calculation behind it because right now, that's a hell of a lot more than what is currently taking place.

[mlhouse]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 9:58 PM, DocBauer said:

I read Seth's post twice now, everyone's rebuttles, and Seth's counter rebuttles, and mulled everything over in my head. And Platoon's post sort of sums up a lot of sentiments being expressed here. To reiterate: 1} You can throw everyone out there to play, take their lumps, hope they don't get overwhelmed or lose confidence or lose mechanics because they are overwhelmed and trying too hard. This practice has been done successfully, or somewhat successfully, before, though not always. 2} Platoon is also right that what the Twins are doing now is an odd my and match of youth and veterans, some/many of whom don't fit in the teams long term plans, and brining up kids to sit. This clearly is not working. 3} You can do what Seth suggests and take a step back, take a pause, and make sure the youngsters are playing daily at Rochester, (not saying there aren't AA promotions that shouldn't take place and fringe roster guys to move there either), get guys in a successful groove before bringing them up, probably in several bulk moves. August 1st doesn't have to be the deadline, it's just an example of a deadline. Hopefully, some of the struggling veteran players will play at least well enough to assist in some trade value. Others, you may to just ditch and eat their contracts entirely. Is Seth's proposed plan ideal? He himself states he doesn't know. But it IS a plan. There IS a logic behind it, and a destination of events; building up the kids, many of whom have limited AAA still, as well as providing opportunity to formulate some exit strategies for the veterans that have to go. All things being equal in a lost season, I'd be in favor of this plan because, again, at least it is a plan. Taking the emotion out of it, it is a plan with a calculation behind it because right now, that's a hell of a lot more than what is currently taking place.

 

Was Jose Berrios struggling in AAA???  When he was called up his ERA was 1.06 and WHIP 0.941.  Last season he was moved up to AAA and had a 2.62 ERA and WHIP of 0.965. 

 

HOw much more success at AAA does Berrios need to experience?  

 

Let him face his lumps on the big league stage.  Why are the Twins so afraid of this?  Do they draft players with such fragile psyches they cannot overcome their initial failures?  

 

Frank Viola was a 22 year old pitcher in 1982 in his first major league season.  He went 4 and 10.  His ERA was 5.21.  The next season he was worse, 7-15 with a 5.49 ERA and worse WHIP.  But the TWins did not send him down.  They sent him out to the mound in 1983 for 210 innings.  Failure bred success.  

 

In a rebuilding scenario you need to develop your team at the major league level.  If you don't, when the players arrive they are running out of time to have a lot of options, the ones that will not be able to make it are not known, and to develop the whole team takes too much time.  

 

While last season's apparent fluke season stopped 4 straight 90 loss seasons, the Twins still seemingly prefer to pretend that they are some sort of minor contender, keeping their prospects on a one step at a time approach, and signing mediocre veterans to play (at surprisingly high level contracts) instead of the young prospect.  

 

This approach has obviously failed as this season shows we have not advanced significantly, and quite frankly, all of the top name prospects have not performed like we expected them to.  So, lets lose some more.  I repeat myself but how much worse would a lineup of   Sano-Buxton-Kepler-Polanco-Arcia-Rosario-Garver/Turner do than the previous 5 years?  Bring JT Chargois and Nick Burdi up to the bullpen.  Berrios, Duffey locked into the starting rotation.  110 losses?    Does it really matter?  We would for sure get the #1 overall pick in 2017, and probably in 2018 which is a major plus. 

 

How we would get rid of our veteran players would be a question mark, although Plouffe and Dozier probably have a little trade value being veteran players on reasonable MLB contacts.  I think only Ervin Santana has value amongst the veteran starters.  Phil Hughes looks like he is done and still ahs $40 million left. 

 

While it looked better before the season started, the Twins situation is really in dire straits.

 

[jimmer]

 

  On 5/17/2016 at 11:37 PM, mlhouse said:

Was Jose Berrios struggling in AAA???  When he was called up his ERA was 1.06 and WHIP 0.941.  Last season he was moved up to AAA and had a 2.62 ERA and WHIP of 0.965. 

 

HOw much more success at AAA does Berrios need to experience?  

 

Let him face his lumps on the big league stage.  Why are the Twins so afraid of this?  Do they draft players with such fragile psyches they cannot overcome their initial failures?  

 

Frank Viola was a 22 year old pitcher in 1982 in his first major league season.  He went 4 and 10.  His ERA was 5.21.  The next season he was worse, 7-15 with a 5.49 ERA and worse WHIP.  But the TWins did not send him down.  They sent him out to the mound in 1983 for 210 innings.  Failure bred success.  

 

In a rebuilding scenario you need to develop your team at the major league level.  If you don't, when the players arrive they are running out of time to have a lot of options, the ones that will not be able to make it are not known, and to develop the whole team takes too much time.  

 

While last season's apparent fluke season stopped 4 straight 90 loss seasons, the Twins still seemingly prefer to pretend that they are some sort of minor contender, keeping their prospects on a one step at a time approach, and signing mediocre veterans to play (at surprisingly high level contracts) instead of the young prospect.  

 

This approach has obviously failed as this season shows we have not advanced significantly, and quite frankly, all of the top name prospects have not performed like we expected them to.  So, lets lose some more.  I repeat myself but how much worse would a lineup of   Sano-Buxton-Kepler-Polanco-Arcia-Rosario-Garver/Turner do than the previous 5 years?  Bring JT Chargois and Nick Burdi up to the bullpen.  Berrios, Duffey locked into the starting rotation.  110 losses?    Does it really matter?  We would for sure get the #1 overall pick in 2017, and probably in 2018 which is a major plus. 

 

How we would get rid of our veteran players would be a question mark, although Plouffe and Dozier probably have a little trade value being veteran players on reasonable MLB contacts.  I think only Ervin Santana has value amongst the veteran starters.  Phil Hughes looks like he is done and still ahs $40 million left. 

 

While it looked better before the season started, the Twins situation is really in dire straits.

great post!

[David HK]

Dang, Seth, that was downright poetic.  

[TheLeviathan]

I'm with spycake, this plan is the worst of both worlds.  If we play the vets in hopes of trade value we have three possible outcomes:

 

1) They stink and we wasted at-bats and innings on guys that are not part of the solution only to be bad anyway and get nothing out of them in deals.

 

2) They're decent to pretty good and we get lulled into a false sense of security that these players are actually part of the future and dismiss the first two months as a fluke and don't trade any of them.

 

3) They're pretty good but we believe we should trade them, leaving that option in the hands of a notorious non-dealer at the deadline.  Meaning few, if any, actually get traded to make room for the kids.

 

I simply don't see how this plan can be spun positively.

Edited May 18, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[Richie the Rally Goat]

  On 5/17/2016 at 5:55 PM, deanlambrecht said:

Maybe Seth will comment, but I agree that you've misunderstood Seth's post. To my understanding, his point is that while the team isn't technically/mathematically eliminated, it is practically eliminated. And from the premise that this team is practically eliminated, he lays out the plan to send most of the guys who have almost no time in AAA down until August 1 while we field the older guys and see which ones we should keep and which we should try to trade on/before July 31.

 

Frankly (and assuming that I'm right about Seth's underlying premise), I agree with that assessment and also generally agree with the subsequent plan.

i think part of Seths premise is with sending the players down for a couple months to AAA (a development league) is that they go with assignments and use that time to hone some skills while TR jettisons the old fogeys. the challenge I have, is how much do you gain in 6 weeks of development league as a player. And how much trade value does a mediocre veteran gain by playing more? i very much agree with the outcome and I'd be tempted to send Sano down to play 3rd at Rochester every day until Plouffe is traded (hopefully about 10 days).

[magiklair]

Does anyone get the Mastro move? I sure as hell don't. Time to get a new GM.

[brvama]

Generally, I agree with this plan. it assumes that these young prospects have things to work on that can best be done at the minor league level. Give them the daily work without the pressure to win to hone their craft. If I may share an analogy that gives the basis for my opinion.

 

When my son went to college for structural engineering he had to take calculus, but didn't have a strong background in algebra from HS. He passed the course with a "c" but said he just didn't get it, so he took the course over. The light went on and he ended up on the deans list.

 

His father, OTOH, majoring in math, had calculus in HS and aced his first 3 calc semesters in college but didn't really get it either. He didn't repeat any classes to "get it", instead continue on the path toward his major. All subsequent courses proved difficult and lacked the mastery needed to fully comprehend this discipline.

 

So, if going down to "get it" under less stress results in a better chance of mastery than I'm all for it. The ages of these kids are not such that forces the sink or swim mantra.

 

[mlhouse]

 

  On 5/18/2016 at 2:47 AM, brvama said:

Generally, I agree with this plan. it assumes that these young prospects have things to work on that can best be done at the minor league level. Give them the daily work without the pressure to win to hone their craft. If I may share an analogy that gives the basis for my opinion. When my son went to college for structural engineering he had to take calculus, but didn't have a strong background in algebra from HS. He passed the course with a "c" but said he just didn't get it, so he took the course over. The light went on and he ended up on the deans list. His father, OTOH, majoring in math, had calculus in HS and aced his first 3 calc semesters in college but didn't really get it either. He didn't repeat any classes to "get it", instead continue on the path toward his major. All subsequent courses proved difficult and lacked the mastery needed to fully comprehend this discipline. So, if going down to "get it" under less stress results in a better chance of mastery than I'm all for it. The ages of these kids are not such that forces the sink or swim mantra.

 

 

So, after bouncing them around for 3 more years maybe they will get it, when they are 27-28 years old.  The difference in pro sports is that you either sink or swim. 

 

The other thing I question is whether the minor leagues is where you should "get it".  Eddie Rosario can hit minor league pitching.  Max Kepler can hit minor league pitching.  Jose Berrio can get minor league hitters out.  What they are lacking in their development is hitting major league pitchers and getting major league hitters out.

 

Using your analogy, sending these guys back to the minor leagues is like having them take and re-take "pre-calculus" when they have already gotten an A in that course several times, but at the same time they still need work to pass the full calculus course.  Since they will never work on the aspects of calc that are not part of the pre-calc course, they will not really get better.

 

 

[Blackjack]

 

  On 5/18/2016 at 12:52 AM, Sconnie said:

. And how much trade value does a mediocre veteran gain by playing more?

By July the demand for veteran players may be higher from teams fighting for a playoff spot. Or a team that has an injury. Plus playoff contenders are ALWAYS looking for pitching help.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 5/18/2016 at 1:07 PM, Blackjack said:

By July the demand for veteran players may be higher from teams fighting for a playoff spot. Or a team that has an injury. Plus playoff contenders are ALWAYS looking for pitching help.

We all know that teams make deals in July.  But what's the likely return for mediocre veterans?  Find me a guy (and contract) in the class of Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. who fetched a meaningful return in July.

 

And even if they fetch something modest -- how much does that modest return have to do with their playing time in June & July?  The above names are all very much veteran known quantities -- we can't exactly predict their performance, but we know the range pretty well.  And they're mostly controlled for multiple years, so short-term streaks are much less meaningful to their July trade value.

 

Put simply: guys like Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. aren't going to fetch a top 100 prospect in July, and they're not going to fetch a meaningfully different class of prospect due to their playing time and likely performance range in the 2 months leading up to the deadline either.  Similarly, especially for those starting pitchers, teams aren't going to pick up 100% of their salary in July, and they're not going to pick up a meaningfully larger portion of their salary due to their playing time in the 2 months leading up to the leading either.

Edited May 18, 2016 by spycake

[mlhouse]

 

  On 5/18/2016 at 2:14 PM, spycake said:

We all know that teams make deals in July.  But what's the likely return for mediocre veterans?  Find me a guy (and contract) in the class of Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. who fetched a meaningful return in July.

 

And even if they fetch something modest -- how much does that modest return have to do with their playing time in June & July?  The above names are all very much veteran known quantities -- we can't exactly predict their performance, but we know the range pretty well.  And they're mostly controlled for multiple years, so short-term streaks are much less meaningful to their July trade value.

 

Put simply: guys like Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. aren't going to fetch a top 100 prospect in July, and they're not going to fetch a meaningfully different class of prospect due to their playing time and likely performance range in the 2 months leading up to the deadline either.  Similarly, especially for those starting pitchers, teams aren't going to pick up 100% of their salary in July, and they're not going to pick up a meaningfully larger portion of their salary due to their playing time in the 2 months leading up to the leading either.

 

Hughes and Nolansco might be contracts the team needs to eat over the next couple of years.  These were poor decisions, adding mediocre veteran arms on long term contracts to a rebuilding franchise. 

 

On the other hand, I think that Plouffe, Dozier, and E. Santana have a little trade value because their contracts are reasonable.  If you are a team needing a 3B for a stretch run Plouffe would be a perfect acquisition:  expiring contract, reasonable, veteran skill.