1 hour ago, RpR said:

Technically Garlick is still a rookie, 

Garlick has almost three years of MLB service time. He’ll be 31 in January. Most assuredly not a rookie despite only 345 career plate appearances. 

2 hours ago, stringer bell said:

The 40-man spot is much more important than the salary. 

If they find someone better they can put Garlick on waivers.

2 hours ago, RpR said:

Technically Garlick is still a rookie, so what is  your point; it was not turning the Twins into a AAA team that made the team a winner in 2019.

The teams you mentioned were not built on  -- Bring up so and so and so and so, cause maybe... wishful thinking -- that permeates this site.

We will see next Spring Training who looks good and who still belongs in St.Paul.

The point is that you are consistently against the utilization of young talent.  You apparently don't realize you are complaining they might follow the path that is by far the most likely path to success.  

3 hours ago, stringer bell said:

Garlick will be 31 when Spring Training starts. He missed time with not one, not two, not three, but four injuries. I guess the Twins think he’ll be healthier this coming year. I thought that the Twins could find a better higher-upside option. The 40-man spot is much more important than the salary. 

I also would have been fine with them moving on from Garlick and pursuing a higher upside option. Maybe they do that anyway, hopefully after a Kepler trade.

22 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

The point is that you are consistently against the utilization of young talent.  You apparently don't realize you are complaining they might follow the path that is by far the most likely path to success.  

They had a winning team in 2019 with newer guys and veterans, they need some veterans who are known quantity, not become just an extended AAA club, the fans in the stands deserve better and their attendance shows how happy they are with the curren here today, gone tomorrow rookie squad.

None of the rookies has been repeatedly reliable, and just bringing more every year to replace the washouts is a certain formula for failure.

Gordon is OK, Arraez had a very good year and is a better fielder than Polanco but Jeffers, Miranda, Conteras, Palacio etc. were mediocre , good at one aspect but not good at the other, hitting or fielding.

Some seem to view the rookies as if they were their children being taught how to function the the adult world, with all the taking time from X, Y or Z on the 40 man BS.

If they should be there, they will be there or get there, other wise they are where they belong.

3 hours ago, RpR said:

Technically Garlick is still a rookie

Garlick exceeded his rookie designation way back in 2019.

3 hours ago, RpR said:

Technically Garlick is still a rookie

I mean this is just flat out incorrect.

1 hour ago, RpR said:

They had a winning team in 2019 with newer guys and veterans, they need some veterans who are known quantity, not become just an extended AAA club, the fans in the stands deserve better and their attendance shows how happy they are with the curren here today, gone tomorrow rookie squad.

None of the rookies has been repeatedly reliable, and just bringing more every year to replace the washouts is a certain formula for failure.

Gordon is OK, Arraez had a very good year and is a better fielder than Polanco but Jeffers, Miranda, Conteras, Palacio etc. were mediocre , good at one aspect but not good at the other, hitting or fielding.

Some seem to view the rookies as if they were their children being taught how to function the the adult world, with all the taking time from X, Y or Z on the 40 man BS.

If they should be there, they will be there or get there, other wise they are where they belong.

While I disagree with most of your takes, there is a grain of truth in what you are saying. Here is how I would put it: the hardest step for rookies is to establish themselves as major league players. To one degree or another, the Twins have a lot of guys stuck between prospect and established major leaguer and the club continues to count on many/most of them establishing themselves and hopefully thriving. Among the position players, I would include Jeffers, Kirilloff, Miranda, Larnach and Celestino. Much of the reason for not establishing themselves has been injury. 
Counting on all of them to be healthy and flourish is repeating a flawed plan, but assuming they are all busts is giving up too early and is the waste of considerable talent. 

17 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

While I disagree with most of your takes, there is a grain of truth in what you are saying. Here is how I would put it: the hardest step for rookies is to establish themselves as major league players. To one degree or another, the Twins have a lot of guys stuck between prospect and established major leaguer and the club continues to count on many/most of them establishing themselves and hopefully thriving. Among the position players, I would include Jeffers, Kirilloff, Miranda, Larnach and Celestino. Much of the reason for not establishing themselves has been injury. 
Counting on all of them to be healthy and flourish is repeating a flawed plan, but assuming they are all busts is giving up too early is the waste of considerable talent. 

This is a very accurate summation in my book. There is clearly upside there and if the pitching ever develops we might have something. The flip side is that we are moving away from the prior core and if the new crop doesn’t produce we are looking at a complete rebuild for a while. 

5 hours ago, stringer bell said:

Cave wasn't on the 40-man roster when they signed him. As I said above, the $ investment isn't important, but the 40-man spot has value.

And they removed him pretty soon after. It's no big deal. He won't take up a spot when someone better comes along