Pedro Florimon

[twinsfan34]

Those projection systems basically just regress to the mean. At that low on the spectrum (and Florimon's 2013 was pretty low), basically every player's mean projection is going to be a slight improvement. The projection systems aren't "picking up on something" in Florimon's record or anything -- it's just that they figure it would be hard for a MLB player to be worse than that. (Or if he is worse, he won't be a MLB player much longer.) Oliver actually projects him to the exact same OPS, and Steamer gives him an extra 9 points in OPS, which might be worth ~2 extra points on his OPS+. Not statistically significant, and basically a repeat of 2013.

 

 

 

In addition to the above points about Gagne's age and MiLB numbers, Gagne had about half the MLB PAs at that point in his career as compared to Florimon.

 

Not at bats to be statistically relevant? 2900 PA's vs 2200 PA's isn't similar enough for you?

 

352 to 606. How much better was Gagne's next 4 months of baseball?

 

Here's the game logs for 1986....have at it. He hit pretty poorly in April and May.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=gagnegr01&t=b&year=1986

 

Splits...

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=gagnegr01&year=1986&t=b

 

You'd have to go about 2 weeks into Aug. You'll find Gagne near .240 AVG...

 

But again, the LG BA was 20 pts higher as a whole you want to take a little guess at how much higher it was at the dome?

 

Do a weighted average to Gagne's stats...

 

 

I would also encourage running a confidence interval (95%)/standard error to see if they're within range of each other statistically. You'll find you're likely splitting hairs.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Do you have some sort of statistic (medical records) to the physical age of Gagne's body versus Florimon's at 26 that would suggest they are different, other than the count of revolutions of the earth around the sun since they emerged from the whom?

 

Everybody ages differently. Natural age and birth age have been shown to vary greatly.

 

No, I don't have medical records... On the other hand, you don't have any evidence that Florimon is a late bloomer, either. What we do have is player models and those player models peg Florimon right at his peak performance age. If he was coming into his own as a player, why did he post a .652 OPS as a 25 year old in AAA? Why did he follow that up with a .611 OPS as a 26 year old in MLB?

 

Again, I'm using standard player models for Pedro Florimon, which is all we can use for players who haven't shown any great strides improving their play on the baseball field whereas you are hoping that Florimon gets better without any real evidence to suggest that he will do so. Which analysis sounds more likely to be accurate?

 

I personally find the MLB time to be more significant and projectionable.

 

To be frank, you are in the extreme minority in this viewpoint. The extreme minority.

[twinsfan34]

No, I don't have medical records... On the other hand, you don't have any evidence that Florimon is a late bloomer, either. What we do have is player models and those player models peg Florimon right at his peak performance age. If he was coming into his own as a player, why did he post a .652 OPS as a 25 year old in AAA? Why did he follow that up with a .611 OPS as a 26 year old in MLB?

 

Again, I'm using standard player models for Pedro Florimon, which is all we can use for players who haven't shown any great strides improving their play on the baseball field whereas you are hoping that Florimon gets better without any real evidence to suggest that he will do so. Which analysis sounds more likely to be accurate?

 

 

 

To be frank, you are in the extreme minority in this viewpoint. The extreme minority.

 

The hypothesis, can Florimon improve? Not by how much, but can he improve. If he hits .222 he improves over last year.

 

2nd, Gagne, the hypothesis, similar AVG/OBP/SLG, position and team. Can you find someone more similar?

 

I don't seem to be getting what questions you are stating.

 

For the subjective:

 

It's too early to give up on Florimon. He can get better. And I believe he will be better than he was last year.

 

 

I also said 'subjective' in my post - what part of subjective are you not getting?

 

--

To be frank, you are in the extreme minority in this viewpoint. The extreme minority.

 

Bill James talks a lot on the minor league projections and how removing various biases can really make them logical. You read his yearly abstracts from '84, '85 you really start to see him lay them out. His classic example is Tony Fernandez vs Dick Schofield.

 

I'm actually in the major that believes Major league statistics correlate better than MiLB to future performance of major league peformance. I'm in the extreme majority. Fangraphs isn't using MiLB data for Mike Trout's projections for the 2014 season or anyone else with significant MLB experience. Neither is Baseball Prospectus or the Baseball Analyst. Zips, CAIRO, Bill James, etc. They all use MLB stats (if available) to project MLB stats, that's almost exclusively too. Again, if MLB data is available.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The hypothesis, can Florimon improve? Not by how much, but can he improve. If he hits .222 he improves over last year.

 

2nd, Gagne, the hypothesis, similar AVG/OBP/SLG, position and team. Can you find someone more similar?j

 

Pick a no-hit IF that was out of baseball by his late 20s. Ron Gardenhire, for example. He's a better comp than Greg Gagne, who has tracked 3-4 years younger at every level than Pedro Florimon (and outperformed Pedro with the bat at every level at a much younger age). Really, other than both being shortstops for the Twins, I don't see any reason to compare the two players. Different eras, different performance, different ages, different ballparks.

 

AVG/OBP/SLG are flawed stats across eras. A much safer, and more accurate, metric is something like OPS+. For example, Greg Gagne got to play in the SuperBall-era Metrodome. Is he a valuable player without that turf? Maybe, maybe not. In 1986 (the only year I looked), he OPSed about .080 higher at home than on the road.

 

What we do know is that Pedro Florimon doesn't get to play in a giant pinball machine 81 times a year and that he hasn't hit anywhere at any level.

 

I keep asking the question but what exactly makes you think that Florimon will improve?

 

Bill James talks a lot on the minor league projections and how removing various biases can really make them logical. You read his yearly abstracts from '84, '85 you really start to see him lay them out. His classic example is Tony Fernandez vs Dick Schofield.

 

I'm actually in the major that believes Major league statistics correlate to major league statistics. I'm in the extreme majority. Fangraphs isn't using MiLB data for Mike Trout's projections for the 2014 season or anyone else with significant MLB experience. Neither is Baseball Prospectus or the Baseball Analyst. Zips, CAIRO, Bill James, etc. They all use MLB stats (if available) to project MLB stats, that's almost exclusively too. Again, if MLB data is available.

 

Sure, when there is relevant data to use. In the case of Florimon, there isn't much MLB data to use so to supplement that data we fall back to his MiLB numbers, which support that he was a bad MiLB hitter and will continue to be a bad MLB hitter. If a 26 year old can't OPS much over .600 in MLB and didn't OPS much over .650 in AAA as a 25 year old, what basis is there to think that he will improve significantly enough to matter?

 

Also, both Steamer and Oliver project the 2014 version of Pedro Florimon to be worth more negative offensive runs than the 2013 version. Both also predict a decrease in overall WAR. AVG, OBP, and SLG are not consistent league-wide from year to year. An uptick in Florimon's performance could be more than offset by a larger uptick in league performance as a whole, making 2014 Florimon a net loss over the 2013 version.

[twinsfan34]

 

Again, I'm using standard player models for Pedro Florimon, which is all we can use for players who haven't shown any great strides improving their play on the baseball field whereas you are hoping that Florimon gets better without any real evidence to suggest that he will do so. Which analysis sounds more likely to be accurate?

 

1. Which model are you using? Can I see it. This isn't me debating this.

 

But please SHOW me the model, versus telling me what the model says. I was a research Scientist for 5 years in instrumental chemistry, I then taught AP Calculus (show me your proof!), and now I'm in analytics. I care very little for conclusions without statistical models to verify. It's no offense meant, but don't 'tell' me, 'show' me and be prepared for 30 "why" questions. And 'have you considered...' comments.

 

2. Also, what are you defining as 'success'... for Florimon, if you are at all defining success for him.

 

3. How accurate have these models you've been using correct? Do you go back to the Zips, CAIRO, Bill James, etc or whatever you're using to see if they're successful? To what degree? Maybe run a confidence interval on them for standard error? Some run higher on the projections, some run lower. Is your projection system (or the one you use), historically high or low? I know it's not exact - or you'd be making money left and right and wouldn't be here. Forget Nate Silver...but which is it? Have you taken account for this into the projections? I guess the one you may be referencing is an age one...is it changing at all year to year? Humans are maturing at different ages...body sizes are different, e.g. WW2 average American male at age 18 was 5'7'' 145 lbs. Now it's close to 5'10'' and 178 lbs.

It's fine to live and die on something, but say what it says, but don't argue for it as Bible truth without acknowledging all projection systems are flawed at best.

 

The projections say...." "

 

If you have a confidence of 95% (2 standard deviations) on that projection, well then it's something you got a 19/20 shot of happening. I'll take it, even with that 1 occurrence landing outside the expected value.

 

One guy was getting attacked by personal agendas in 2 different forums. And he wasn't wrong in either case. A lot of this is grey, not black and white.

 

Will you put a year's worth of beer consumption on your projection model for Florimon for next year? And I get any instance where he doesn't exactly meet that? what about 2 SD's within that number? Btw, I can drink a keg-ton of beer. I have more alcohol dehydrogenase in my system than mitochondria...and it's not even close.

 

I like your posts, you're [brock] one of my favorite contributors. You seem to have a good sense of numbers and baseball.

 

But there are late bloomers. Michael Cuddyer was 25 before he really became a regular in MLB. He won a batting title at age 34, hitting .331.

 

Who could have predicted that? Not me. Not in a million years. Which projection system had Cuddyer hitting even .300 in his age 34 season?

 

He hit .311 on the road btw. In 2006, he hit .302 at home (the Dome) but otherwise, he'd never hit .300 at any home/away split. Pretty crazy. The stars aligned I guess?

 

Age projections are about 60% correct? That is, about 3 in 5 guys fall in line with those curves. Others are more linear or more exponential.

 

What do those age projections do to Stephen Drew? For his next 3 years?

 

What's the WAR/$ ratio of ROI for Drew vs. Florimon?

[Linus]

I don't think this is that complicated. Nobody knows what Florimon will do at the plate this year; no person or model can accurately predict this. Based on his track record, its not likely that he improves greatly with the bat but improvement is possible. This discussion is even possible because he is an elite defender. Seems clear to me the Twins are giving him one more chance to see if he gets better at the plate. If he does, they have a plus player at a position where plus players are hard to find. If he does not improve, someone else will be playing shortstop for the Twins next year, or maybe even this August.

[twinsfan34]

I don't think this is that complicated. Nobody knows what Florimon will do at the plate this year; no person or model can accurately predict this. Based on his track record, its not likely that he improves greatly with the bat but improvement is possible. This discussion is even possible because he is an elite defender. Seems clear to me the Twins are giving him one more chance to see if he gets better at the plate. If he does, they have a plus player at a position where plus players are hard to find. If he does not improve, someone else will be playing shortstop for the Twins next year, or maybe even this August.

 

Double like.

[Brock Beauchamp]

First, I don't do bets on the internet. Never have, never will.

 

Second, here is a good article on player aging.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933

 

Hitters peak somewhere around age 29, which certain skills such as AVG/SLG peaking at age 28 and others, such as BB, peak in a player's 30s. Anyone in the 26-30 area is at or near their peak in most cases.

 

A good summary of the article is this:

 

Good hitters stay around, weak hitters don't. Most players are declining by age 30; all players are declining by age 33. There are difference in rates of decline, but those differences are far less significant for the assessment of future value than are the differing levels of ability (James, 1982, p. 205).

 

In Florimon, we have a player who meets the following criteria:

 

- He has been old-ish at every level of the high minors, not playing a full season at AA or above until age 24.

 

- He has posted an OPS over .700 once, despite being an older player relative to competition.

 

- In 601 MLB PAs, he has an OPS of .601. In his last 446 PAs as a 26 year old, he has a .611 OPS.

 

- In his age 26 MLB season, he showed no progression as a hitter during the season. In fact, he actually regressed as the season went on, posting a first half OPS of .636 and a second half OPS of .576.

 

- In his last MiLB season (2012), he posted a .652 OPS in Rochester. This is in line with his career .675 MiLB OPS.

 

- It's not only me. Both Steamer and Oliver project 2014 Florimon to remain neutral to 2013 or actually regress as a player.

 

Can Florimon improve? Sure, anyone can improve. Cuddyer improved in his 30s (but he's an awful comp, as Cuddyer had a long track record of success at every level he ever played).

 

But baseball isn't about hopes and wishes, it's about playing the odds. And the odds say that Pedro Florimon will never be an acceptable MLB starter. Nothing (and I mean nothing) in his career has suggested that he is a capable hitter. He hasn't progressed in a meaningful way in two years, despite entering typical prime seasons for a player of his type. Players of his calibre are often out of baseball entirely by their late 20s (see Gardenhire, Ron) because, as the link above illustrates, bad players rarely get a chance to age in MLB. Florimon is hard to comp because it's hard to find a guy of his hitting ability who accumulated more than a few hundred MLB PAs. Hell, even no-hit guys like Adam Everett had Ruthian peaks compared to what we've seen from Florimon.

 

With that said, I feel like I'm talking in circles. I'm going to bow out of this thread because there is nothing left to say.

[Guest USAFChief]

Here's what I'd put a year's worth of beer consumption on: Drew will outhit Florimon by a good margin over the remainder of their MLB careers, and will approximate the same defensive value.

 

The rest isn't relevant to winning more baseball games, which seems to me the goal of all this.

[DJL44]

"A defensive whiz SS that can hit 230-240 with some pop and steal some bags would be a nice player to have around"

 

Yes, as a utility infielder. I think Florimon just had his career year offensively - he's never hit 9 HR before at any level. He has a little room for improvement defensively that comes with experience but his tools are not going to improve. His bat is likely to be sub .600 OPS again. He's not a great base stealer though I think a couple of his CS are failed hit-and-runs. He's a good guy to have on a bench but not the guy I want as a starter.

[Guest USAFChief]

Do you have some sort of statistic (medical records) to the physical age of Gagne's body versus Florimon's at 26 that would suggest they are different, other than the count of revolutions of the earth around the sun since they emerged from the whom?

 

Everybody ages differently. Natural age and birth age have been shown to vary greatly.

 

I personally find the MLB time to be more significant and projectionable.

So, theoretically, Drew might be "naturally" younger than Florimon, right?

[Brock Beauchamp]

So, theoretically, Drew might be "naturally" younger than Florimon, right?

 

[Reider]

Yes, as a utility infielder. I think Florimon just had his career year offensively - he's never hit 9 HR before at any level.

Florimon hit 9 HR's in 2009 and 8 in 2011. Hitting 9 last year wasn't unrealistic for him.

[jokin]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6337[/ATTACH]

 

With that said, I feel like I'm talking in circles. I'm going to bow out of this thread because there is nothing left to say.

 

Maybe nothing left to say, but certainly NOT nothing left to meme....

[Brock Beauchamp]

Maybe nothing left to say, but certainly NOT nothing left to meme....

 

There are ALWAYS things to meme.

[stringer bell]

To summarize this thread: Florimon supporters think he is very good defensively and can improve offensively. The detractors think he's pretty much what he is. Drew supporters point out his outstanding 2013 season on a championship team and note his good defensive metrics.

 

I am not a Florimon backer, but I really think Drew will decline significantly and isn't worth the investment. While I don't buy a lot of projections, I don't trust 30+ shortstops and I don't like guys leaving Fenway for a lesser hitter's park.

[jokin]

To summarize this thread: Florimon supporters think he is very good defensively and can improve offensively. The detractors think he's pretty much what he is. Drew supporters point out his outstanding 2013 season on a championship team and note his good defensive metrics.

I am not a Florimon backer, but I really think Drew will decline significantly and isn't worth the investment. While I don't buy a lot of projections, I don't trust 30+ shortstops and I don't like guys leaving Fenway for a lesser hitter's park.

 

 

I think supporters also noted Drew's outstanding career and debunked the health issues, as his outstanding 2013 season was after coming back from a harrowing injury. Moreover, Drew got stronger as the season progressed, while Florimon got worse.

 

Drew's OPS+ of 111 confirms that his production numbers would have been good, even out of Fenway, as does his 136 OPS+ against RHP.. If used properly and especially against RHP, he would be a sorely missing bat from what looks to be a very anemic Twins offense in 2014.

 

While agreeing with you and acknowledging that Drew may very well decline, especially by a 3rd year in a contract (And I'm not sure that 3rd year is even going to be necessary- 2 will probably get it done), Pedro Florimon is also projected to decline. And again, if you use Drew primarily against RHP, his numbers will not decline, but increase.

[Reider]

To summarize this thread: Florimon supporters think he is very good defensively and can improve offensively. The detractors think he's pretty much what he is.

That's not entirely true. I'm a huge fan of Florimon, but I don't think he will improve significantly (e.g. become a .300 hitter or hit 25 home runs in a season). I've already stated as much on this message board. My belief is that he deserves a second season (or at least the opportunity to start 2014) at SS. I believe he earned it with his defense last year more than anything. I believe that he's already a top 5 SS and can be #2 if he can limit his mistakes. The type of mistakes that can be limited.

 

I believe that this type of defensive talent only comes around every so often (it's been a long time since the Twins have had a dominant defensive SS) and SS is one of those positions where you want to have someone who can help pitchers out, especially on a team like the Twins where the team relies on getting a lot of ground ball outs.

 

If Florimon can can limit his strike out ratio (not an unrealistic goal), he could be "good enough" offensively to go along with his fantastic defense. If you factor in that he's only being paid $500,000/season, he could be of really good value. Obviously if he doesn't show any improvement whatsoever, I'd be more than happy to see the Twins consider their options.

 

I was content with JJ Hardy playing SS and I'd be just fine if they brought him back or signed someone like him down the road. However, given Florimon's defensive abilities and price tag, I also like giving him another opportunity in 2014.

 

I also understand the issue that non-supporters take. I understand that the Twins need to improve offensively, and SS is a position they could upgrade offensively in the short term by signing Drew or someone like him. I'm not necessarily against this. I just believe Florimon should get the start in 2014 @ SS unless the Twins want to go "all-in" this off season and sign a few more players (Garza, Drew, and a good DH etc), in which case I could understand and would be supportive.

 

However, it does not appear that the Twins are being very aggressive on the offensive side of things, so it would not surprise me if they go with Florimon in 2014.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

That's not entirely true. I'm a huge fan of Florimon, but I don't think he will improve significantly (e.g. become a .300 hitter or hit 25 home runs in a season).

 

If Florimon can can limit his strike out ratio (not an unrealistic goal), he could be "good enough" offensively to go along with his fantastic defense. If you factor in that he's only being paid $500,000/season, he could be of really good value. Obviously if he doesn't show any improvement whatsoever, I'd be more than happy to see the Twins consider their options.

Great synopsis, Reider. I think of this as a payroll management move too. Florimon's fantastic defense arrives on a budget--Drew's added production will not.

 

I also would like to see a rangy shortstop next to Sano on the left side of the infield. Reports are that Sano has soft hands and a cannon arm, but he's a big guy, without the lateral movement of other third basemen--and he's still growing. The Twins will need a vacuum at short who can go deep into the hole and make plays on balls that Sano might not get a glove on.

[Otto von Ballpark]

That's not entirely true. I'm a huge fan of Florimon, but I don't think he will improve significantly (e.g. become a .300 hitter or hit 25 home runs in a season). I've already stated as much on this message board. My belief is that he deserves a second season (or at least the opportunity to start 2014) at SS. I believe he earned it with his defense last year more than anything. I believe that he's already a top 5 SS and can be #2 if he can limit his mistakes. The type of mistakes that can be limited.

 

I assume you mean top 5 SS defensively, not overall. Outside of Simmons, I don't think there is that much separation among MLB SS defensively, so a higher ranking there means a lot less than a higher offensive ranking or overall ranking.

 

Another way to look at it: even if you are fine with Florimon's defense and giving him another year, do you still think the Twins should make a competitive offer for Drew? If his market truly has thinned out, and we could steal him for less than widely reported (2/24, 3/30, maybe even another 1 year deal?), would you be willing to shelve the Florimon experiment?

[stringer bell]

Rieder, what in my statement wasn't "entirely true"? You support Florimon and think that you he can improve his strikeouts so that he can improve his overall offense. My statement didn't say supporters thought he could win a Silver Slugger, just that he could improve with the bat.

[DJL44]

I think of this as a payroll management move too.

 

The Twins are swimming in cash and the projections show the team getting cheaper.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

The Twins are swimming in cash and the projections show the team getting cheaper.

 

To what projections do you refer? The Twins have spent a ton of money in the offseason on free agent pitchers. How does that fit into your projections?

 

To be fair, I agree that the Twins have some more money to spend. I'm not opposed to seeing the Pohlad family spend more money, but I'd like to see them spend the right money on the right players. Spycake thinks that a competitive offer for Drew would be 2 yrs/$24m or 3/30. I just don't think that's the right upgrade for a player that seems to be willing to admit that his skills are waning--as he's willing to take on a utility role: http://www.gammonsdaily.com/gammons-notes-gregory-polanco-toronto-pitching-stephen-drew-and-braves-payroll/

 

In the meantime, we have a second-year shortstop locked in at $500k. He's an above average to excellent talent in the field. He and Dozier play well together. Let's not break up the band yet.

 

The team should improve by leaps and bounds when players like Buxton and Sano arrive. It can also improve incrementally if players like Hicks and Florimon can raise their OBP to over .300. Is that too much to ask?

[stringer bell]

The story that Drew is willing to play other positions gets my attention. The Twins really need a LH bat to counterbalance the splits that Dozier and Plouffe have put up. If Drew were willing and able and the Twins concurred, perhaps he could play 60-80 games at third, another 20 or so at second, and twenty to thirty at short. If someone got hurt or quite hitting, Drew could claim that spot. I still don't think that Drew will be worth anywhere near the numbers being bandied about, but I don't deny that he is a far better hitter than two of the Twins starting infielders.

[Boom Boom]

I believe the Drew willing to play other positions story is just Drew and Boras trying to drum up interest and competition in what has been a quiet market for him. Nobody is going to sign him to an 8-figure deal to be a utility player.

[DJL44]

Even with the new pitchers the projection is next year's payroll goes down (Willingham, Burton and Correia replaced with minor league talent). The current payroll is about the same as last year despite the increased revenue. By keeping payroll flat the Twins are spending about $40M a season below what they could be spending.

 

If they aren't going to spend on Stephen Drew I'd like to see them go after Aledmys Diaz.

[Reider]

I assume you mean top 5 SS defensively, not overall. Outside of Simmons, I don't think there is that much separation among MLB SS defensively, so a higher ranking there means a lot less than a higher offensive ranking or overall ranking.

Of course I mean defensively.

Another way to look at it: even if you are fine with Florimon's defense and giving him another year, do you still think the Twins should make a competitive offer for Drew? If his market truly has thinned out, and we could steal him for less than widely reported (2/24, 3/30, maybe even another 1 year deal?), would you be willing to shelve the Florimon experiment?

I think the Twins should persue any player who could help improve the team, but I don't think Drew is worth $10m+/year + a 2nd round draft pick for 3 years. I just wouldn't do it unless it was an "all-in" situation. I like Drew better on a 1 or 2 year deal and 7 figures instead of 8. Reality is the Twins have been sitting on their hands since the end of 2010 and they improved the starting rotation this off season because they had to. I really can't see them signing Drew or all of a sudden becoming aggressive on the offensive side of things.

 

I really like giving Florimon another year at his current salary and I am getting the impression that a lot of fans feel strongly about signing Drew. So strongly that it comes across as "Drew or bust." I don't see it that way. Hardy is available on trade and he could very well be available next off season as a free agent. I'd rather go after or wait for Hardy than sign Drew. That way it's a win win. You give Florimon his well earned opportunity and then improve the offense @ SS if / when he doesn't show any improvement.

 

And Hardy is only one example. The Twins will likely have at least a couple of years to find a replacement, there's no need to panic. Most of the Twins' young prospects are still developing in the minors. It will be a couple/few years before they are established MLB players (if they ever are).

 

Lastly, I don't call Florimon an experiment. I think he brings a lot to the table defensively and has something to work with offensively. He has value at $500,000/year for the time being.

[oldguy10]

I agree 100% on having Florimon over Drew at shortstop this year and perhaps in 2015 as well. As stated this is not the year to panic, not even a tiny bit, let's do that if and when the young prospects in the minors do not develop into MLB players.

[jokin]

The story that Drew is willing to play other positions gets my attention. The Twins really need a LH bat to counterbalance the splits that Dozier and Plouffe have put up. If Drew were willing and able and the Twins concurred, perhaps he could play 60-80 games at third, another 20 or so at second, and twenty to thirty at short. If someone got hurt or quite hitting, Drew could claim that spot. I still don't think that Drew will be worth anywhere near the numbers being bandied about, but I don't deny that he is a far better hitter than two of the Twins starting infielders.

 

I agree 100% on having Florimon over Drew at shortstop this year and perhaps in 2015 as well. As stated this is not the year to panic, not even a tiny bit, let's do that if and when the young prospects in the minors do not develop into MLB players.

 

 

 

Perhaps this development in willing position flexibility on Drew's part is why the Twins have blinked (if not "panicked") and apparently have moved off of their previously obstinate stance on Drew and finally come to the realization how desperately they need another LH bat (well, that development, and this Epic Mega-Pedro Florimon thread might be swaying opinion at One Twins Way, as well ):

 

The Twins would take Stephen Drew and surrender that second round draft pick if he fell into the Twins lap, according to Wolfson. Wolfson threw out the numbers of 3-years and $30 million to when the Twins would bite.

 

It is just Doogie, but this is the first acknowledgement that the Twins are even considering the possibility. Of course, it could all be just Boras stirring the pot to get the Mets to ante up.

[johnnydakota]

To what projections do you refer? The Twins have spent a ton of money in the offseason on free agent pitchers. How does that fit into your projections?

 

To be fair' date=' I agree that the Twins have some more money to spend. I'm not opposed to seeing the Pohlad family spend more money, but I'd like to see them spend the [i']right[/i] money on the right players. Spycake thinks that a competitive offer for Drew would be 2 yrs/$24m or 3/30. I just don't think that's the right upgrade for a player that seems to be willing to admit that his skills are waning--as he's willing to take on a utility role: http://www.gammonsdaily.com/gammons-notes-gregory-polanco-toronto-pitching-stephen-drew-and-braves-payroll/

 

In the meantime, we have a second-year shortstop locked in at $500k. He's an above average to excellent talent in the field. He and Dozier play well together. Let's not break up the band yet.

 

The team should improve by leaps and bounds when players like Buxton and Sano arrive. It can also improve incrementally if players like Hicks and Florimon can raise their OBP to over .300. Is that too much to ask?

 

Twins sit today at about 4 million more then the 79 million they spent in 2009.

According to 2 different money Mags the Twins projected to earned 214 and 215 million last

year , now add in the national TV increase of 26 million and the all star bump of 30 million , (also im guessing we will see an increase in attendence this season +300,000) so even without the attendence increase the Twins are projected to earn 270 million in 2014