kab21

Pitching is a big problem and that is why I don't trade Ervin away now (unless blown away). I don't try to make the problem even worse.

So far this is true but I am just saying that Dozier is somewhat expendable to the Twins while Ervin is at a position of dire need. Alternatively they could trade Escobar to a team needing a SS. The potential for that trade isn't as high but maybe a team offers a Nunez/Mejia type of trade for him. I think Escobar is better than Nunez but I think the Giants overpayed for Nunez so maybe that balances it out.

Prospect promotion shouldn't be determined by MLB need. I would feel confident that neither has developed enough to be ready to promote. For example, neither Gonsalves nor Romero have pitched a full season in AA yet and they aren't elite so skipping AAA would likely be a setback this year AND next year. Optimistically they are the AAA pitchers that replace whichever injured/ineffective pitchers the Twins have next year. Promoting them doesn't really speed up that timetable. The Twins will likely have to look elsewhere to fill the rotation imo. But at least there is the prospect of a pair of pretty good prospects coming up at some point next season. I would like to see one or both brought up in the bullpen at the end of the season to get an MLB taste and potentially add a useful arm down the stretch. I wish they had done this with Berrios also.

Few people want to trade Dozier but when your rotation includes Gibson and Turley and your MI depth includes Escobar and Adrianza in addition to a top prospect in AA. If I can land a good SP'ing prospect or two for Dozier then I would seriously consider the deal.

Nobody is saying to trade the farm system for a rental. The argument is that you don't take an overachieving team and trade one of its most important pieces when they are competing. That is a horrible precedent for both the fans and the players. Are you saying that the Twins will only get back an alright prospect for Santana now? Why is that worth it? Additionally nearly everyone at the time of the Mejia/Nunez trade was like 'Wow, we got that for Nunez!' Using that trade to measure what could be offered for Santana is futile. The Twins also have new management at the top. In addition to that they have the core (mostly offense and Berrios) that looks like it is getting ready to compete (and currently is). For the last 5 years they were cellar dwellers without a young core. Usually teams (most teams) don't go out and sign top FA's at that point in a rebuild. Situations have changed so I wouldn't make a statement as definitive as yours (not going to spend on top FA's).

You're banking on the lottery ticket (prospect) that the Twins get back becoming part of the 1-2 punch. That is the definition of needing a lot of things to break the Twins way. In summary Nobody is against trading Santana if a GM puts a Francis Martes level prospect out there (upside and near MLB ready). Nobody is against trading Santana (for less than the above) if the Twins are 3 games under .500 due to a relapse in the next month and a half. But opinion is split on if to trade him when the Twins are winning.

Matt Belisle - ugh - When can this end?

As long as the team is winning this is something you don't do. Keeping a very good pitcher that is signed for next year is not mortgaging the future as some seem to be claiming. Perhaps Ervin falls off and isn't even a mid-rotation starter next season but that is just guesswork. Of note - Ervin should only be considered a very good 3 (or poor man's 2) that is enjoying a career season right now. The other GMs know his career and his age and that will be reflected in the package of prospects.

The Yankees as part of this discussion is a tired comparison and essentially meaningless. The Yankees have winning seasons almost every year and have a sold out stadium regardless. The Yankees also had 3+ elite rentals last trade deadline and brought back elite prospects. They also had replacements at some of the positions they traded. The Twins have zero rentals and negative depth at starting pitching. Trade Dozier for pitching (young MLB or prospects) if there is a deal since there is depth but don't knock a team down that is trying to turn the corner.

It isn't a comp. It is a performance level with a name. Lester (3.47 career ERA) is outside of the elite pitchers but still really, really good. That seems to be where the sentiment here and in the scouting reports seem to view his upside. That is pretty good imo. Greene however certainly has higher upside. I am not comping him to Kershaw but Greene's upside is that of a top 5 dominant pitcher (thus Kershaw). There is almost definitely a lower chance of Greene reaching this upside and a lower chance that he becomes a useful MLB pitcher in any role. That is the balancing of risk with this pick. It is great to go for broke (an ace) but completely missing on the 1-1 pick also really hurts. Scott continues to point out the downside (if he doesn't improve at all) then he is like Gibson or Pelfrey. That is fair to point out as the downside and that is ultimately (non-injury related) where the floor likely is. But that is only one part of the equation. I would not be upset if Greene was the pick FWIW. I can certainly see the argument of picking Wright and don't think some are giving credit that there is a fair amount of upside possible. It isn't like Minor, Leake or Nola who were safe top ten picks that come to mind in the last decade. Higher floors than Wright but not much upside either.

You do know that I wasn't comparing Wright to Santana nor Lester do you? I was putting a performance level target for them. By your analysis you don't seem to like Wright and I would conclude that you don't think he should be an option in the top 10 or perhaps even the first rd if that is where you project him. That is fair but that seems to be in disagreement with many others.

The Cubs went 73-89 that season and were terrible at the trade deadline. Few fans in that situation get angry about trading veterans for great prospects. Nearly everyone on here would be in favor of trading Santana in that situation. The problem is that the Twins are still contending for a playoff spot (and leading the division). You don't subtract the teams biggest need in that scenario for an alright prospect. Getting blown away by an offer is different but I think other teams know the same thing that this board does about Ervin. I would be surprised if any GM didn't know that Ervin was 34 and could decline at any moment. We aren't the only ones with this information. I am all for trading him for top prospects though if it is out there.

Come on. There has to be no disagreement that Wright provides a better bet to be a good MLB pitcher than Greene? The question that could be debated is how much of a better chance he has. Of course there is a chance that someone in the top 5 ends up with a superstar and you merely got Jon Lester (upside) or Ervin Santana (middle ground) but it is also guaranteed a couple of teams got a complete bust. Wright is definitely not a lock (not just to due to TJ risk) to be a good pitcher but the chances are significantly higher than Greene.

I still maintain that unless the Twins are REALLY blown away with an offer (top 25 and top 100 prospect) for Ervin that they won't and shouldn't trade him. This also depends on being +/- 2 games of the division at the deadline. Still a long time until then. This team has been so bad for so long that this would be an AWFUL PR move just to pick up an average-ish prospect. It doesn't matter if you don't think the team can make a deep run in the playoffs. Trade Dozier or Escobar (a position of surplus) - okay Trade Grossman for a position of need - okay Trade a trivial prospect for a Santiago type - okay Trade a SP when you don't have enough decent ones - silly Trade good prospects for a rental - silly Trade good prospects for a longer term contract - thinking outside of the box

The part of the equation that you haven't included in this is what the upside gap is and the likelihood of hitting each of their upsides. Random #'s assigned Greene Upside = top 5 starter (Kershaw) but <10% chance. And he has a 30% chance of being an average starter Wright Upside = top 20 starter (Lester) and 25% chance. 60% chance of being an average starter I pulled those numbers out of thin air but the downside argument isn't that at worst he is Pelfrey. The downside argument is that he has a much better chance at being average or better (let's say Ervin Santana). And the upside is still really good (Lester).

The question is whether or not Greene is a generational player or if that is media hype? Indications are that he isn't at the same level of previous generational players or generational players come along every couple of years.

Wright has moved to #1 for me based on his strong finish and the strong(er) secondary pitches. He might not have the ultimate upside of Greene but he could be a borderline all-star (near elite level) and I will take it.

I think everybody is aware that Santana is old and at some point will fall off. That doesn't mean that you trade him when your team is above .500 and lacking anything resembling a 5th starter with additional uncertainty in the rotation. Trade a MI for prospects if you want but don't make a bad rotation worse. With that being said if a team offered the Twins a top 25 pitching prospect and a high upside borderline top 100 pitching prospect then I probably take that deal since it is a significant overpay but I don't shop Santana since it is difficult to see his market value as a top 50 prospect for exactly the reasons that people want to trade him. Other people are aware that he is old also.

I don't like anything about this Romero suggestion. You want to take a prospect that has a history of arm trouble and move him to the bullpen for the middle part of the season and then move him back to the rotation? This sounds like a really bad idea imo.

The Twins don't necessarily need to put rookies in the 8th inning setup role. They need a bullpen that is 5-6+ good pitchers deep. Right now they have 3 although Breslow has gotten good results thus far. And this is absolutely where Melotakis, Busenitz, Hildengarder, Rosario, Bard or possibly a few others. Get a couple of these guys up and see how they do in the 6th inning and then move from there. Swapping Duffey and Kintzler does nothing. The Twins need more quality innings from the bullpen. Swapping roles doesn't increase quality innings. Hughes to the bullpen might happen but he isn't remotely close to the same pitcher he was with the Yankees. I don't hold out much optimism for this as a fix. Romero is a good option Aug 1st (give or take). Let him get most of a season in as a starter so he is ready next year and then bring him up to solidify the bullpen. I doubt anyone expects him to throw 150+ innings in the minors and then come up as a starter in September so this should happen. Of course the Twins declined to do this with Berrios two years ago but there is different management now.

The interesting part here will be how pitchers are adjusting to him. He has a 42% strike zone rate (pitches thrown inside) which is lower than average but not anywhere near the top of the list. He also has a 24% swing rate on pitches outside of the strike zone. What will happen as he sees fewer and fewer strikes? Does he chase more or does he continue to lay off like he has? My prediction - BAPIP comes down a bunch (let's say .360). K rate edges down to the low 30's while the walk rate edges up close to 20%. Part of the basis is that there little protection in the Twins lineup. Many hitters having solid seasons but nothing great. It also requires him to stay disciplined and not try to do too much. I could see him hit (perhaps optimistic) .260/.390/.560 for the rest of the season This doesn't take into consideration an inevitable slump which typically happens to every player and especially younger players.

The Twins are more Real than they were 2 weeks ago. Partly due to Berrios looking like a solid or better pitcher for the season and partly due to solid (or continued excellent) play throughout the lineup. Still need a lot of pitching though.

A player won't have a BAPIP as high as .472 regardless of how hard he hits line drives. That number will regress and he will still be awesome.

I feel the same way. Leaning Greene but I like Wright's upside and would be happy with either right now.

The problem with this is that numerous 'safe' players drafted in the top 10 busted. Top 10 picks bust all the time. College picks might be safer but that is usually balanced by the higher upside of HS pick. I am undecided between Wright and Greene myself.