Kwak

Reading this thread brings tears--a mediocre 3B (who was miscast as a SS for 6+ years) is the regular--and there is essentially nothing behind him worthy of any trust. Plouffe is: over-rated, over 30, and will soon become way overpaid. It is likely that Sano wasn't installed at 3B (like Mauer replaced AJ) is that the Twins have learned their lessons (CF and the chronic pain at SS and 3B) because they strongly suspect (believe?) that Sano is a solution at 3B--he is a patch there. Sano really belongs elsewhere and because the Twins have not provided depth behind Plouffe at third they are forced to pay (overpay!) him. This is why trades need to be made to fix the chronic 3B problem (as well as catcher).

Oh my, how rosy are your glasses? Catcher and 3B are huge needs, Pitching is always a need. The rotation is filled with mediocrity. To say they don't have SP needs is blind--they always have had dozens of "pitchers"--unfortunately most weren't very good and the few that were ML were mostly mediocre and don't last all that long. Stars?--there was one. He soon became very expensive, and sadly needed help. Oh--and then they get "injured". Hmm, too bad--it seems as if SP is a chronic problem--for everyone! Before anyone says "Sano"--he has yet to play any position. Sano doesn't have that physique that screams "I can play anywhere". More like 1B if anywhere. True 1B is fine--but elsewhere?

If the Twins actually believe that the organization is truly solid in the middle, as this article claims, it decision-time for who actually represents the future and start trading prospects for help elsewhere. Goodness knows the rest of the team has plenty of needs and it's time to shuffle some of the excess to fill needs elsewhere.

The Twins are more likely to finish dead last than first in the division this season.

Sano wasn't mentioned (I did that), Vargas and Arcia don't hit as well as the "Cereal Box", and Park was the guy who they had to obtain--ergo, the point of the post!.

Reading this article makes it clear why the Twins were aggressive in bidding for Park--the cupboard is bare. I do believe that Sano should be added to this list due to the high probability that he may become the regular 1B.

"Defense-first"--management speak for "we really don't have catchers that can hit...". But, they keep trying. Maybe someday they will find someone.

Exactly what were these adjustments that you claim to have been made? When did the Twins admit to changing Meyer's form? I don't recall any statement to said "changing". Where does this "somebody 'fouled-up' Meyer" excuse come from?--rather than the more likely PHL "soured" on Meyer and sought a trade partner (sucker) to unload Meyer for someone "useful"?

The question isn't "whose to blame"?--because prospects fail frequently. The discussion is really about preconceived notion of what a starting pitcher should look like and throw like. The tall, lanky, flamethrower fits the "poster model" of a pitcher while the (roughly) average-sized finesse-style pitcher does not. When Meyer (and later) May were acquired they were anointed as future rotation saviors--and the type of pitcher that the Twins should have been acquiring all through the years. When those two struggled for consistent, good results as starting pitchers, that became a slap-in-the-face to the model. Since there wasn't success--there must be someone to blame. If there is any blame it is on the naive poster who believed that all who fit the poster model will/should succeed, despite the overwhelming evidence that most guys disappoint if not outright fail.

I decided to finish your point: 6.. Guys who don't belong in categories 1-5--Twins Pitchers.

No. Instead of: May really isn't better than Milone as a starting pitcher? Instead of braying "...only 25 starts...", consider most pitchers don't get that long of a leash--especially after the 2014 that May produced; May projects as a "shut-down" short-relief pitcher, maybe even future closer; Milone is likely best utilized exactly where is at--back of the rotation starter. If that concept yields a lower payroll?--so be it--it's not a bad outcome. Plus any saved money can be used elsewhere.

My memory of a "typical Glen Perkins start" is different--first two innings fine; nicked in the third, battled effectively in the 4th and 5th, gets hurt in the 6th and sees the 7th from the dugout.

Last year May started 14 games, he had 8 starts of 6 to 7 innings (none longer), but all were "quality starts". The point raised that the Twins "just discovered" the 6 inning start followed by 3 + RPs is bogus--it has been almost de regueur for the Twins for many years.

Much of the premise of this thread revolves around how TD posters latch onto a Twins prospect projecting him to reach the top. It goes beyond pom pom waving to shouting from the rafters. But, Milhone wasn't that guy. He came to the Twins as a MLB pitcher (who was pushed down) to make way for newly acquired pitched who were deemed "much better" by their new team (OAK). Whereas May (and others) came to the Twins as "saviors"--which unfortunately didn't happen. If Santana wasn't suspended we wouldn't be having this discussion--May would have been in the bullpen the entire 2015 season. So, no, Milhone isn't sexy (or great!)--but will (most likely) be dependable in taking the ball every 5th game and give the Twins a reasonable chance to win. Is Milhone blocking anyone? I'm not sure. But if the Twins place two (or three!) rookies in the rotation in April and things fall apart...Yikes! Especially if the OF contains has two unproven players.

He might get traded in July.

May is likely (and I think correctly) viewed as the future closer. Perkins is almost through in that role. Jepson is: already $5MM, not as dependable as he used to be (why he was available!), and will be a free agent. After '06, May will be: under Twins control, inexpensive (to downright cheap), likely just as dependable, and perhaps still improving. As a starter, he's mid 20's and is nothing special, and there's better on the way. Bullpen is correct for May.

Amazing how people get so worked-up about guys they hope they never see play--yet they pant at the prospect of Arcia in the Twins OF!

Then...there's the possibility that NY wasn't interested in Rosario...

The Twins have an army of RPs in the organization--use them. The cream will rise. After all, how many times have we heard "...the best minor league system..." and "..this guy has got huge upside...". These guys are only asked to pitch ONE inning. The rubrik is not walks, or pitches thrown, it is opponents' runs scored. The rest is just stats for bar talk--analogous to football's "time of possession", or "hang time of punts".

Do the Twins have a plan? Yes. But it probably isn't: the same as yours, the one you think it is, or much different than previous plans. I think they still view pitching as a luxury, bargain-basement veterans as a security blanket, and that additional minor league "experience" is a blessing. The plan? Control the budget and somehow repeat 1987.

I think some of the confusion about Fien, a tendered contract, and free agency stem from the "Ortiz situation". Ryan tendered Ortiz a contract for a fixed amount and the threat that if he [Ortiz] didn't accept the offer [counter-offer to begin a negotiation potentially leading to an arbitrator's decision] that Ryan would withdraw the offer--making Ortiz a free agent. There has been no indication that Fien's offer is contingent on him accepting the original offer. As has been posted earlier, the Twins can take Fien (with a signed contract) to Spring training, cut him, and not be liable for the full value of the contract.

Compare: Santana IP of each game started 8.0; 4.0; 7.2; 8.0; 5.2; 6.0; 2.1; 6.0; 7.2; 2.2; 7.0; 8.0; 7.0;7.0; 7.0; 7.0; 7.0 (2) games of 8.0; 92) games of 7+; (6) of 7.0; (2) of 6.0; and (4) games of <6.0 These are stats of a real Starting Pitcher. May: 5.1; 6.0; 5.2; 4.0; 6.2; 7.0; 6.0; 7.0; 6.0; 5.0; 6.0; 0.1; 6.1; 3.0 No games beyond 7.0; (2) games 7.0; (2) games 6+; (4) games 6.0; (6) games >6.0 In short May isn't dependable. He generally has to be removed after 5 innings--or else the roof caves--which tears apart the bullpen. Every pitcher has some clunkers, Santana had 4/17 less than 6.0 (one was 5.2). But May had 6/14 <6.0 innings--nearly half of his starts. May was basically the same as Pelfrey (who started in August and September when arguably a bit more tired than in the first half of the season) and Hughes--who had a "regression season". Basically every starter (except Nolasco) outpitched May as a starter. Citing K/9 only emphasizes that May belongs in the pen not in the rotation. Face it this guy is not a quality starter--he is a RP. he will serve best as either a "set-up"/future closer, or as the long guy/spot starter for an injured SP.

A few thoughts: 1) I gleaned the pitching data from Yahoo sports--removing the relief innings pitched data--and have compiled this Table. Name IP (starter only) ER ERA (starter only) GS QS May 74.1 38 4.60 14 8 Duffey 58 20 3.10 10 7 Santana 108 48 4.00 17 11 Gibson 194.2 83 3.84 32 17 Hughes 152.1 75 4.43 25 14 Milhone 127.2 56 3.95 23 10 Nolasco 36.1 26 6.44 8 1 Pelfrey 164.2 78 4.26 30 13 These numbers don't place May in the rotation. Plus, there is Berrios to consider--but he has NO major league experience to compare with the aforementioned pitchers. 2) I remember a fact not yet presented in this discussion about the KC Royals (both 2014 and 2015 playoffs)--they came from behind frequently. This point is above and beyond a "bullpen discussion"--but it does illustrate a difference between KC and the Twins. KC also displayed a tendency to "add-on" to leads--the Twins not so much. It seems that the Twins need to "score more" outweighs the "bullpen need"--and is consistent with the changes made this off-season. Bullpen isn't/wasn't the biggest problem last year. Two issues outweigh the bullpen--improve scoring and get more quality starts (see Table above). The QS stat might be off a bit but the table indicated QS only amounted to about 50% of all starts. Also, there were a rather high proportion of QS where the SP did not complete 7 or more innings. It's simple math--fewer SP innings, more RP innings with the concomitant wear/tear on the entire bullpen as well a "a search for the RP who fails".

Well, 1 out of 3 isn't bad.

Let's see: 4 LH pitchers, 2 RH pitchers and a power hitting OF. It seems that there is little in organization near the majors that isn't already on the 40-man roster. It also seems that there is much more emphasis on pitchers than before. Also, I conclude there won't be a FA pitcher added soon.