jay

I'd rather see the young guys than a 33 yr old who has never had a single season xFIP below 3.50. His numbers and pitch types look an awful lot like Casey Fien with an extra BB/9.

Not saying it was the right thing to do, but I don't recall any promise on how that contribution would be funded. Unfortunately, I'd guess using future revenues is a standard tactic across pro sports as it is across many other industries.

The Royals are an interesting example to use. Yes, the pen needs to be better. Signing a LOOGY or LH pitchers isn't the only way to do it, as evidenced by their top lefty being still available and on this list...

I think this is extremely valid. Some harp on public funding for the stadium, but imagine if the team had fully funded TF and where payroll would be as a result.... $80M?

This would seem to reflect how the Twins view themselves. DSP has used that exact range if I recall correctly.

Of course it doesn't prove anything. I can't speak for the original writer, but I'd say the funnier part is how big of a deal has been made about it. Expectations are so low, I don't see how he doesn't meet them in either corner.

Fairly even actually. You can find data to point slightly either way depending on how you qualify it (any ball in zone, catchable opportunities, etc.). Dave Cameron looked at this and basically found... it really doesn't matter. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/does-outfield-alignment-actually-matter/ Also, for all the consternation about putting Sano in the OF in the first place... this is kind of funny. http://www.sbnation.com/2011/8/19/2373025/joe-mauer-outfield-minnesota-twins

RF. Like others said, see Torii. And, see 70 grade arm. Interestingly, a Sano to RF and comps to Giancarlo from 2012: http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/10/21/3533532/miguel-sano-the-next-giancarlo-stanton

A bunch of one-sided hyperbole that purportedly represents the full story doesn't prove your point. #citypages

Hoping there's a big move with the Brewers or Rockies or someone yet to come. If not, we've seen the Twins shake out veterans and young players alike for the first month or two and then tap into the minors to backfill where needed. Plenty of candidates for that on this projected roster and plenty of backfill options as well: Duffey Milone Tonkin Nolasco Abad Rosario Buxton Sano Park Santana Arcia Berrios Meyer Rogers Melotakis Chargois Pressly Graham Kepler AB Walker Polanco Vargas

Yes, please. Defined enough describes it perfectly.

That's not very true. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/relationship-between-spending-winning-remains-low/ And, hi.

This has been a recurring issue at various times. For whatever reason, the end of spring training has created a firestorm of negativity. Practically every thread is devolving into how the front office is full of idiots and everything is horrible. The same thing... over. and. over. The mods have done a great job trying to keep threads on topic, but it's out of control right now. It's far less enjoyable to visit the site. I'm not sure if my occasional contributions are valuable here or not, but I wanted to make it clear that I'm taking a hiatus from visiting the site for this exact reason.

In direct response to the false binary question about the FO as a whole based solely on May and Meyer, maybe this part got missed..."The ability to evaluate talent is quite obviously based on a lot more than two prospects. Not starting the year with them on the MLB roster says little about their development capability either." And the rest of that argument is shifting further and further toward just stating the FO is inept. That's great. It'd be an even bigger mischaracterization of my position and colossal waste of time "defending" them or trying to convince some folks here of anything different.

I've seen this false binary statement elsewhere here and it's a load of complete garbage. There's plenty of middle ground on both sides of that question. The ability to evaluate talent is quite obviously based on a lot more than two prospects. Not starting the year with them on the MLB roster says little about their development capability either. I don't understand the idea some have that zero is gained by having them in AAA -- there's absolutely benefit to both the player and the team. I'd personally prefer they be on the MLB team now, but they aren't going to fail by starting 2015 in AAA. Either they'll be successful and get promoted (while also continuing to develop) or they won't. If they aren't successful in AAA, it's crazy to say they would have been successful in MLB by any fashion.

It's a sample size of 1, but I was pleasantly surprised by the HR he pulled down the line the other day. Only 4 of his 25 HRs the last 3 years have landed in that area (45-65 degrees on ESPN's home run tracker site). With most outfields shading him to LF, it'd be a great change in approach if he can generate more pull power.

Given their relative revenue position, doesn't this show that the Twins are outspending their peers?

The consistency "excuse" looks to be plenty valid based on the results. Consistency is still exactly what we're waiting to see from Gibson and is still talked about. May sure didn't show it last summer and Meyer is the furthest from it. If Gibson is the best case to disbelieve a "we'll see them in 2 months" viewpoint, I don't buy that there's an appreciable difference between calling a guy up in 2 months vs 3 months.

The case that I can see made is that the Twins haven't gone full head-first committal rebuild like the Astros and Marlins did. That's the far-end, extreme approach and it has positive and negative traits just the same as the local approach. There was a lot wrong by 2012 and I'd think reasonable folks both understand and believe that it takes some combination of time and luck to work back from that. It's also hard to believe the front office is full of the idiots they're made out to be every day with no plan, strategy, direction or concept of what they're doing. I still haven't seen anyone make a believeable case that real-life prospects with promotable MiLB performance have been blocked from MLB by these old guys that are still around.

Oh, add Stauffer to that last paragraph... and maybe make it four less instead of three.

This is precisely what I believe that study captures. I'm not foolish enough to think the Twins are hyper-aggressive, but I don't think anyone is saying that either. I see a case-by-case basis. I can't say I've seen prospects tearing it up in the minors for any remotely extended period of time that didn't get the shot they deserved. Yes, I'm frustrated that Milone, Pelfrey, Nunez, Boyer and Duensing are all on the roster. I could do with some combination of about three less. I also don't think it matters all that much and it will work itself out within a couple months. That feels like an eternity on the interwebs, but it really isn't...

And it has been used many a time before as the damning proof of the Twins inability to promote prospects. I personally think there's missing context in the study's timeframe, but I also wouldn't say the Twins are like the Mets. More importantly, the study also makes it extremely clear that no advantage has been found by using any one approach over the other.

Even if they were good moves at the time, was there ever a guarantee they were going to work out? Do we even know they aren't going to work out? No... These guys were some big bets and "absolve" is a bit strong (TR would own some blame if they actually do flop), but it's about more than these two guys.

Possibly true. And also not nearly unique to the hometown club.

I sure hope it had more to do with that. Certainly for May and Meyer. Not sure where Hicks is at in relation to service time and Super 2.