Article: Troubled Youth

[Nick Nelson]

Anyone with a level head understands that patience is warranted with the likes of Byron Buxton and Jose Berrios, two young men who have barely surpassed the legal drinking age.

 

Still, it's tough not to be alarmed by the degree of the introductory struggles being faced by not just those two, but several others among the vaunted wave of young talent that has been anointed as the primary impetus of a turnaround for this presently dismal franchise.While the depth and upside on the roster heading into the season positioned the Minnesota Twins as a fringe playoff contender, most fans came in with the understanding that this team remained a work in progress. The postseason was a nice dream, but above all, getting signs of positive progress from the core prospects was imperative.

 

Instead, things have played out brutally for most of the organization's key young players, many of whom look nowhere near ready to compete at the major-league level despite their demonstrable mastery of the minors. This serves to exacerbate the miserable results on the field, leaving Twins fans with painfully little to feel good about.

 

It was reasonable to expect further growing pains from Buxton as he continued to adapt to the MLB learning curve. But given his immense talent and his history of catching on quickly, few would have imagined that his play would plummet. From 2015 to 2016, Buxton's OPS dropped from 576 to 497 and his K-rate rose from 34 percent to an outrageous 49 percent.

 

Hitting in the majors is hard. But it is exceedingly rare to see a player of any age or experience level flounder to the extent that Buxton has. In total he has whiffed in 36.4 percent of his 187 MLB plate appearances; since the year 2000, only four non-pitchers have struck out at a higher rate in 150-plus plate appearances and none had a lower walk rate than Buxton's 4.3 percent.

 

As for Berrios, he had not been pitching well through three big-league starts, entering Monday's game with a 6.28 ERA and 989 opponents' OPS, but in Detroit he unraveled in a way that hasn't often been seen. The righty faced nine hitters and recorded only two outs, allowing a homer, a double, a single and four walks. According to Mike Berardino, Berrios became just the seventh starter in Twins history to allow seven earned runs while lasting less than one inning.

 

To be clear, there's no reason to lose hope for either player. Both are very young and neither has accrued a whole lot of experience at Triple-A. But their initial exposure to the majors has been just about as bad as it possibly could be. And this is made more difficult to stomach by the ugly results from nearly every other top prospect entering the fray.

 

Eddie Rosario became the latest victim on Thursday, when he received a long-deserved demotion to Triple-A following a terrible first six weeks. Like Danny Santana and Kennys Vargas before him, Rosario imploded following an impressive rookie showing, and showed little interest in adjusting his often out-of-control approach. John Ryan Murphy, acquired during the offseason as a hopeful heir at catcher, was shipped out earlier this month with an unspeakable 219 OPS. Alex Meyer has been a disaster in all four of his major-league appearances. Jorge Polanco has impressed in limited playing time but for some reason can't get on the field with any regularity. Miguel Sano has taken a sizable step backward after a great rookie year.

 

The 10-30 record is horrendous, no doubt. But the more deeply disturbing development of this 2016 season is just how far away this young core collectively looks from turning a corner. Terry Ryan put his full faith into these kids and what he's received is a bitter reality check.

 

Click here to view the article

[huhguy]

Nick, right on the money.  This was so well written I had to look to see who wrote it.

 

I think the bottom line is, Terry Ryan and his cohorts are TERRIBLE evaluators of talent.....which of course means, as long as he stays, there is no hope for improvement

[nicksaviking]

Sheer dumb luck should cause at least one or two of these guys to play well, but we aren't seeing anything. Something intangible is at play here. I want to see the young guys, but there's something toxic in that clubhouse, and until wholesale changes are made, I might be in favor of sending them all down so whatever it is doesn't contaminate them permenantly.

 

It might not be fair, but they need to clean house simply to try to bleach away this losing environment. Molitor has handled himself well, but he's clearly dejected and he sounds beaten, and surely all front office and field staff are. Even if they are putting up an honorably encouraging front, it's not working. The Pohlads have to get that negativity away from the young players.

 

Not all business decisions are fair.

[mumoo13]

None of Sano, Buxton, Berrios, Meyer, or Rosario (if I remember correctly) had consistent success at AAA before being called up. I know it's surprising that 4 out of 5 did so badly at the same time, but aren't we setting ourselves up for this possibility by consistently skipping AAA?

[Shane Wahl]

 

None of Sano, Buxton, Berrios, Meyer, or Rosario (if I remember correctly) had consistent success at AAA before being called up. I know it's surprising that 4 out of 5 did so badly at the same time, but aren't we setting ourselves up for this possibility by consistently skipping AAA?

Yes, yes, yes. I almost never recommend skipping AAA. I think *moving* a bit quicker up is warranted, but not skipping. I said this about Rosario at the beginning of last year.

[KirbyDome89]

 

for some reason can't get on the field with any regularity. 
 

 I think those words highlight a large part of the problem. The handling of the prospects by the Twins has been more than questionable. Berrios started 4 games. Meyer had 1 start. Even if you think none of them were good starts (personally I think Berrios 2nd and 3rd starts were decent) I don't know how you give top prospects such a short leash before sending them down. Growing pains are part of the process. The Twins have been preaching about the youth movement coming up through the farm system, yet it seems they can't commit fully to what building a young team truly entails. 

 

Buxton struggled last year and this year. He spent part of the 2nd half last year on the bench with the Twins. They were so sure he was ready this year they traded Hicks. Then 3 weeks into the season they're convinced he can't handle the big leagues and he's back in AAA. Something just doesn't add up. Buxton in AAA right now isn't a bad thing, but the process by which he landed there again is problematic. 

 

Rosario having a down year shouldn't be a shock but I don't think anybody saw a .200 avg. There wasn't much the Twins could do about that one so they get a pass there. 

 

Sano will come around. In the last week he's trending upward so hopefully that continues. 

[TwinsWonWithHunter]

There are so many things to say about this team.   Where to start, I have no idea.    Certainly, as Nick writes, the vaunted up and comers have not delivered at the ML level.   Whether they are just overmatched right now; are/were overrated; or were counted on too heavily--probably a combination therein.

 

What I found most alarming during the off-season (aside from not tending to the bullpen) was that, even though the FO wanted Hunter back; was willing to pay him handsomely and guarantee him 350-400 at-bats, to be that veteran guy the young core could lean on; and to serve as a safety net to a completely unproven outfield lot, when he retired, the FO elected to make no attempt to replace him.

 

Let's think about this for a minute.   Since the FO wanted Hunter back, even in a 4th outfielder/spot-starter capacity, the "want" indicated a need for him, for what he or presumably someone "like" him could provide: Experience, personality, and a track record of production.   Someone who would not waste at-bats, someone who understood fundamentals.   Someone who could be a voice in the clubhouse.   And oh, by the way, back up that voice with some clutch hits.   Not talking MVP-caliber here, or even all-star.   But for God's sake, at least someone we could count on not to run into outs on the bases, and to not look totally overmatched.  

 

Now, an argument could be made that Hunter's abysmal June thru Aug last year may have signaled he was all but done.   And that he knew it, his decent September/swan song notwithstanding.   Fair enough.   But that would not negate the need to, at the least, replace his production--and his standing as a veteran outfielder.

 

So where was the 4th outfielder signing?   Why didn't we push for, say, Raj Davis, who signed a 1 year deal for 5.25 million - exactly the type of team-friendly pact the Twins try to specialize in; that does not clog up a spot long-term or get in the way of the young guys.   On the contrary, it is to protect the TEAM short-term (from depending too heavily on the youth) and to help the young guys. 

 

Davis is hitting .256 with 4 homers, 18 RBI, and 10 steals.   Does anyone on this forum think anything other than, had the Twins signed Davis, he would be a fixture in the lead-off spot.   Good grief. 

 

And no, Raj Davis is not the difference between 10-30 and contending.   But I would like someone to explain the logic of not backing up these young outfielders with a veteran who can produce (the Park signing did not replace Hunter.  Maybe in the abstract--a 6-hitter, 20 HR, 80 RBI--but not in the tangible reality of putting a veteran in the OF to replace the veteran we lost).

 

Anyway, today's rant.                          

[David HK]

I was hot for them to get Raj, not only for a vet presence, but to tutor those fast young guys in the art of stealing.  What a woeful load of winter time decisions they made.  Pfft.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Sheer dumb luck should cause at least one or two of these guys to play well, but we aren't seeing anything.

Duffey and Sano have generally played well. Polanco in very tiny doses....

Edited May 20, 2016 by spycake

[TheLeviathan]

Something is definitely amiss in the whole process.  But I think it all stems from an organizational philosophy that seems to have lost the idea of trusting young talent to struggle to sucess but also has ignored putting them in the best positions to succeed. We have too many infielders in the outfield and too many low ceiling veterans in the rotation.  We just seem to think you can shuffle people around however you'd like and things just work out.

 

Time to clean house.

[Riverbrian]

 

 Terry Ryan and his cohorts are TERRIBLE evaluators of talent.....

 

This sounds so harsh and my instinct is to defend Terry Ryan from it... but... there is really no other conclusion to be drawn. 

 

 

[notoriousgod71]

 

Yes, yes, yes. I almost never recommend skipping AAA. I think *moving* a bit quicker up is warranted, but not skipping. I said this about Rosario at the beginning of last year.

 

 

At one point skipping AAA was a semi-regular occurrence. Most of the top prospects are in AA and AAA is for AAAA players and 37 year old journeymen trying to hang on.

[Riverbrian]

 

There are so many things to say about this team.   Where to start, I have no idea.    Certainly, as Nick writes, the vaunted up and comers have not delivered at the ML level.   Whether they are just overmatched right now; are/were overrated; or were counted on too heavily--probably a combination therein.

 

What I found most alarming during the off-season (aside from not tending to the bullpen) was that, even though the FO wanted Hunter back; was willing to pay him handsomely and guarantee him 350-400 at-bats, to be that veteran guy the young core could lean on; and to serve as a safety net to a completely unproven outfield lot, when he retired, the FO elected to make no attempt to replace him.

 

Let's think about this for a minute.   Since the FO wanted Hunter back, even in a 4th outfielder/spot-starter capacity, the "want" indicated a need for him, for what he or presumably someone "like" him could provide: Experience, personality, and a track record of production.   Someone who would not waste at-bats, someone who understood fundamentals.   Someone who could be a voice in the clubhouse.   And oh, by the way, back up that voice with some clutch hits.   Not talking MVP-caliber here, or even all-star.   But for God's sake, at least someone we could count on not to run into outs on the bases, and to not look totally overmatched.  

 

Now, an argument could be made that Hunter's abysmal June thru Aug last year may have signaled he was all but done.   And that he knew it, his decent September/swan song notwithstanding.   Fair enough.   But that would not negate the need to, at the least, replace his production--and his standing as a veteran outfielder.

 

So where was the 4th outfielder signing?   Why didn't we push for, say, Raj Davis, who signed a 1 year deal for 5.25 million - exactly the type of team-friendly pact the Twins try to specialize in; that does not clog up a spot long-term or get in the way of the young guys.   On the contrary, it is to protect the TEAM short-term (from depending too heavily on the youth) and to help the young guys. 

 

Davis is hitting .256 with 4 homers, 18 RBI, and 10 steals.   Does anyone on this forum think anything other than, had the Twins signed Davis, he would be a fixture in the lead-off spot.   Good grief. 

 

And no, Raj Davis is not the difference between 10-30 and contending.   But I would like someone to explain the logic of not backing up these young outfielders with a veteran who can produce (the Park signing did not replace Hunter.  Maybe in the abstract--a 6-hitter, 20 HR, 80 RBI--but not in the tangible reality of putting a veteran in the OF to replace the veteran we lost).

 

Anyway, today's rant.                          

 

I can't explain it. 

 

Sign... Trade for... Build one out of used car parts but the team needed a vet CF and two top shelf bullpen arms.

 

Would it have fixed things? most likely not cuz this is real bad... But... Mastro probably wouldn't be on the roster in May following a year of playoff contention and If the Bullpen wasn't coughing everything up when leads are gained... who knows... maybe 15 wins and from there who knows. 

 

1. The young Twins were playing meaningful baseball in September

2. They spend the off season getting even younger instead of acquiring vets. 

3. The 40 man is over run with youth

4. The Manager won't play youth

5. Mastro and Grossman are added to the roster in a panic. 

 

 

 

 

[Han Joelo]

Honestly, whatever ails this team must go way higher than Molitor.  Or even Ryan or the Pohlads.  We are in serious chicken sacrificing territory here.  Maybe even need a turkey, or small ostrich.

 

 

[ToddlerHarmon]

A major culprit is that Terry Ryan doesn't treat major league roster spots as the precious commodity they are. He gums up those spots with long contracts for one-year successes, tryouts for has-beens and never-will-bes, and lifetime achievement awards for mediocre starters that passed their undeserved tryouts. All of these make it impossible for high-ceiling prospects to get any run, even on terrible teams.

[alarp33]

 

Something is definitely amiss in the whole process.  But I think it all stems from an organizational philosophy that seems to have lost the idea of trusting young talent to struggle to sucess but also has ignored putting them in the best positions to succeed. We have too many infielders in the outfield and too many low ceiling veterans in the rotation.  We just seem to think you can shuffle people around however you'd like and things just work out.

 

Time to clean house.

 

Bingo.  "Vets" are allowed to struggle, young guys have the threat of demotion hagning over their head during each at bat/ start.  Buxton never got more than 4 starts in a row, Meyer got 4 innings, Berrios 4 starts, Kepler's 1 start in 10 days was vs a lefty.  It's just an absurd way to handle the future cornerstones

[tobi0040]

Alarp, "Absurd" is a great word to describe the leash the young guys have had. While Nolasco and Hughes can be terrible for years.

 

Whether we have an issue identifying talent, developing talent, or bringing guys up at the right time, or yanking them too early it is an organizational problem that starts and ends with the GM.

 

It seems to me that they lack a big picture thought process. Eddie Rosario for example, did anyone ever tell him in the minors that his plate discipline would not work in the big leagues? I am not saying completely change him. He was never going to walk 100 times a year. But at least steer him towards some middle ground between being Joe Mauer and hacking at every thing.

[markos]

I am starting to think that there is a specific player development problem in the Twins organization. I need some more time to flesh out this idea fully, so it may be incomplete and/or incorrect, but hear me out:

 

There has been a disturbing pattern on the position player side, and it has to do with discipline and approach. In particular, many of the young guys brought up in the past 3 seasons have had the same general profile: aggressive free-swingers who don't make enough contact, and therefore don't walk enough and strikeout too much. Rosario, Santana, Vargas, Arcia, and Buxton to a varying extents all have this profile. Hicks and Sano aren't free-swingers, but they both have contact issues. I don't know if this approach is specific developed in the minors, or if it is just how these players play. But it has a few major drawbacks:

1) It works in the minors. Pitchers have worse stuff, and much worse control/command, so it is easier to have success with a free-swinging, aggressive approach. Similarly, they can get walks just by being passive.

2) It might work in the majors for a while. Rosario, Santana, Vargas and Arcia have all had stretches of really good hitting. But as big league pitchers adjust to them (or their luck changes), it is hard to maintain success without a solid plate-discipline foundation.

 

So you end up with young hitters that are achieving "success" in the minors, but aren't able to translate their skills into (sustainable) success in the majors. I think there is a disconnect there, and I think it might even point to a fundamental issue with the Twins player development. 

[twinsnorth49]

The Twins have a lot at stake in the development of their highly touted youth. It's an asset they need to invest as much as they can in and should be their number one priority at this stage. This of course starts with the people in charge of that development, who so far have not only  accomplished next to nothing with pretty much all of them but have arguably bungled and mismanaged them in a serious way. 

 

If the Pohlads care most about their assets, they should be looking for new people to manage and develop them. Time for a change.

[Blake]

 

This sounds so harsh and my instinct is to defend Terry Ryan from it... but... there is really no other conclusion to be drawn. 

I don't think Ryan and cohorts are terrible at evaluating talent. I think Ryan and company are terrible at developing talent.

[Jham]

We all might have the luxury of folding up tent and playing for next year. Molitor and Ryan may not.  We'll have plenty of season to get young guys extended looks.  But I'd rather see them come up prepared.  I don't think trying not to strike out is a viable approach to an at bat and is more likely to lead to bad habits and tentative swings.  

[nicksaviking]

 

I don't think Ryan and cohorts are terrible at evaluating talent. I think Ryan and company are terrible at developing talent.

 

I agree. Industry-wide people view the Twins system favorably, so either everyone is wrong, or the Twins just don't know what do with our how to use the talent they have.

[glanzer]

To me it's so obvious, although I know I'm in the vast minority here... there are no real veteran players on this team. No player in the organization is over 33 years old. These young pups get up to the Show and have no one to guide them on the field. Not to totally discount the coaches, but having a Torii or two out there as fellow teammates, regardless of their on-field performance, I believe does wonders. Dozier and Plouffe, said to be the new clubhouse leaders, are not veteran players. They have 3 and 4 full seasons experience, respectively. On some other teams THEY would be the young guys. The "older" players on this team aren't guys to serve as mentors, it seems. If I had been in charge, there would have been a couple veteran "character" signings this off-season.

[REPETE]

Anytime a team struggles, or completely falls apart so early, like this one, people are scrambling for reasons, and you end up with rants.  People saying "the young guys were mismanaged and need time in AAA" is 180 degrees opposite of last year's "Don't sign veterans, let the young kids come up".  

 

"We needed a veteran OFin the offseason" this year was written last year with gnashing of teeth  "Why did the team sign Hunter?  Terry Ryan must go!!!"  

 

"We've mismanaged the young kids by not letting them play through their struggles", yet we allowed Rosario to fumble through 1/4 of the season before his long awaited demotion.  

 

Last year, the call was "Bring up Buxton now!".  This year, the call is "Why didn't they sign a veteran OF?  They should've known Buxton wasn't ready!"  

 

Let's face it, this season is a disaster of major proportions, which I don't think ANY of us saw coming.  Some regression?  Sure.  Potential 120 losses?  No way!  Even if the roster had some regression, there is/was still enough talent on the roster to win 70 games.  

 

The simple fact here is, in hindsight, better roster moves certainly could've been made;  Rookies & 2nd year guys should be playing better.  Handling of the young prospects could certainly be different.  However, NOBODY saw this collapse of epic proportion, so perhaps we need to step back and take a deep breath.  2 weeks ago, the season was too young to just throw in the towel.  If there's no change in the play by June, perhaps the roster will be handled differently. 

 

Blaming the FO/Manager for 10 wins takes a lot of focus away from the fact the kids we've all wanted to see playing, are simply not performing.  The veterans aren't performing.  Nothing is clicking at the same time.  Why?  I don't think there is a rational answer, just circular hand wringing arguments.    

[tobi0040]

 

I am starting to think that there is a specific player development problem in the Twins organization. I need some more time to flesh out this idea fully, so it may be incomplete and/or incorrect, but hear me out:

 

There has been a disturbing pattern on the position player side, and it has to do with discipline and approach. In particular, many of the young guys brought up in the past 3 seasons have had the same general profile: aggressive free-swingers who don't make enough contact, and therefore don't walk enough and strikeout too much. Rosario, Santana, Vargas, Arcia, and Buxton to a varying extents all have this profile. Hicks and Sano aren't free-swingers, but they both have contact issues. I don't know if this approach is specific developed in the minors, or if it is just how these players play. But it has a few major drawbacks:

1) It works in the minors. Pitchers have worse stuff, and much worse control/command, so it is easier to have success with a free-swinging, aggressive approach. Similarly, they can get walks just by being passive.

2) It might work in the majors for a while. Rosario, Santana, Vargas and Arcia have all had stretches of really good hitting. But as big league pitchers adjust to them (or their luck changes), it is hard to maintain success without a solid plate-discipline foundation.

 

So you end up with young hitters that are achieving "success" in the minors, but aren't able to translate their skills into (sustainable) success in the majors. I think there is a disconnect there, and I think it might even point to a fundamental issue with the Twins player development. 

 

I think this is likely the case. 

 

Trees - You had a .750 OPS in Single A.  You are promoted to AA.

 

Forest - You only walked 35 times this year. You swung at 40% of pitches out of the zone, and your 2.5 to 1 k to BB ratio will only grow as you progress.  You need to work on these things now in order to be a productive MLB player.  Your goal for next year is to get your swings at pitches out the zone down to x, your k to BB down to y, and average pitches per at bat up to z. 

 

The whole predictive analysis is a work in progress with this club.  The program and thought process could be fast tracked with new leadership.

[Riverbrian]

 

Anytime a team struggles, or completely falls apart so early, like this one, people are scrambling for reasons, and you end up with rants.  People saying "the young guys were mismanaged and need time in AAA" is 180 degrees opposite of last year's "Don't sign veterans, let the young kids come up".  

 

"We needed a veteran OFin the offseason" this year was written last year with gnashing of teeth  "Why did the team sign Hunter?  Terry Ryan must go!!!"  

 

"We've mismanaged the young kids by not letting them play through their struggles", yet we allowed Rosario to fumble through 1/4 of the season before his long awaited demotion.  

 

Last year, the call was "Bring up Buxton now!".  This year, the call is "Why didn't they sign a veteran OF?  They should've known Buxton wasn't ready!"  

 

Let's face it, this season is a disaster of major proportions, which I don't think ANY of us saw coming.  Some regression?  Sure.  Potential 120 losses?  No way!  Even if the roster had some regression, there is/was still enough talent on the roster to win 70 games.  

 

The simple fact here is, in hindsight, better roster moves certainly could've been made;  Rookies & 2nd year guys should be playing better.  Handling of the young prospects could certainly be different.  However, NOBODY saw this collapse of epic proportion, so perhaps we need to step back and take a deep breath.  2 weeks ago, the season was too young to just throw in the towel.  If there's no change in the play by June, perhaps the roster will be handled differently. 

 

Blaming the FO/Manager for 10 wins takes a lot of focus away from the fact the kids we've all wanted to see playing, are simply not performing.  The veterans aren't performing.  Nothing is clicking at the same time.  Why?  I don't think there is a rational answer, just circular hand wringing arguments.    

 

I can't argue with a lot of what you post here... it is very sensible.

 

However... A lot of different and contrary opinions are expressed here and it's important to note that some didn't complain about Hunter being signed last year and some didn't ask for a rushing of the kids.

 

There were plenty of expressions on all sides of the discussion.  

 

It's impossible to express Twins Daily as a United Voice. 

 

 

[troyhobbs]

 

I am starting to think that there is a specific player development problem in the Twins organization. I need some more time to flesh out this idea fully, so it may be incomplete and/or incorrect, but hear me out:

 

There has been a disturbing pattern on the position player side, and it has to do with discipline and approach. In particular, many of the young guys brought up in the past 3 seasons have had the same general profile: aggressive free-swingers who don't make enough contact, and therefore don't walk enough and strikeout too much. Rosario, Santana, Vargas, Arcia, and Buxton to a varying extents all have this profile. Hicks and Sano aren't free-swingers, but they both have contact issues. I don't know if this approach is specific developed in the minors, or if it is just how these players play. But it has a few major drawbacks:

1) It works in the minors. Pitchers have worse stuff, and much worse control/command, so it is easier to have success with a free-swinging, aggressive approach. Similarly, they can get walks just by being passive.

2) It might work in the majors for a while. Rosario, Santana, Vargas and Arcia have all had stretches of really good hitting. But as big league pitchers adjust to them (or their luck changes), it is hard to maintain success without a solid plate-discipline foundation.

 

So you end up with young hitters that are achieving "success" in the minors, but aren't able to translate their skills into (sustainable) success in the majors. I think there is a disconnect there, and I think it might even point to a fundamental issue with the Twins player development. 

Speaking of fundamental issues, why can no one on this roster lay down a decent bunt? I've been slow to criticize the coaching staff because they're a likable cast, some of which I was a fan of when they themselves were players, but, there are so many things this teams is awful at.... 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

"We needed a veteran OFin the offseason" this year was written last year with gnashing of teeth  "Why did the team sign Hunter?  Terry Ryan must go!!!"

Last year, the call was "Bring up Buxton now!".  This year, the call is "Why didn't they sign a veteran OF?  They should've known Buxton wasn't ready!"

Brian stated it more simply and eloquently, but this just isn't true.

 

Almost everyone advocated signing a veteran outfielder in the 2014-2015 offseason -- no one wanted Hicks penciled in as the opening day CF again.  The general disagreement was with signing a corner OF on his last legs in Hunter, which meant the only alternative to Hicks as opening day CF was Schafer, which wasn't really a move for the present or the future.

 

And once Buxton struggled in MLB last year and Hicks was traded, there were a lot of sensible arguments this past winter for similarly signing a veteran outfielder so we'd have an alternative to Buxton/Santana/Rosario as opening day CF.

 

The rest of your examples are similarly distorted.  Folks may have wanted Buxton up to get a look last year, but that doesn't mean they wanted him to be the opening day CF this year after he struggled last year, etc.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Brian stated it more simply and eloquently, but this just isn't true.

 

Almost everyone advocated signing a veteran outfielder in the 2014-2015 offseason -- no one wanted Hicks penciled in as the opening day CF again.  The general disagreement was with signing a corner OF on his last legs in Hunter, which meant the only alternative to Hicks as opening day CF was Schafer, which wasn't really a move for the present or the future.

 

And once Buxton struggled in MLB last year and Hicks was traded, there were a lot of sensible arguments this past winter for similarly signing a veteran outfielder so we'd have an alternative to Buxton/Santana/Rosario as opening day CF.

 

The rest of your examples are similarly distorted.  Folks may have wanted Buxton up to get a look last year, but that doesn't mean they wanted him to be the opening day CF this year after he struggled last year, etc.

 

Agreed, that post was very slanted and does not, imo, accurately reflect the feelings of the board.

 

The team is bad. It has been bad for years. It has largely failed to draft and develop players. The players they traded for have not worked out. For years, I was told that was because they drafted so darn late that no one could expect them to develop good players. Well.....now what? What has caused them to be wrong about Meyer and May? What has caused them to have almost nothing to show for their early picks (so far)? Other teams in the same situation have some playerS that they have drafted come up and be good/great. Multiple players. The Twins have Duffey and ???? 

 

Not all is lost. Not all of the guys that have failed to be good so far are lost. I believe in Buxton, Berrios (picked after round 1, but still good, which I was told was not possible), and others.

 

What I don't believe in is the Twins' ability to develop them, and to put them in a position to succeed once they get here.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't think you have to give a guy a shot by completely decimating the 40 roster of guys that play the same position.  This is the second time we rolled with a very young CF and had virtually nothing in line to help should he struggle.