Major League Ready

When I think of athleticism for a baseball player, I include arm and raw power to the other things we would think of in terms of athleticism. Sano has incredible raw power and one of the best arms of any position player in MLB. What if he were in "Winfield" like shape?

I don't think that's a fair assessment. People with far greater credentials than most of us believe that it is a good practice as evidenced by the frequency it is done. In other words, it should be done. Your premise suggests that the people critiquing this practice on the internet understand what should or should not be done better than the people making these decisions. That is highly unlikely, IMO.

No problem. The only point was that many summarily dismissed Sano and this experiment because he was 270 lbs. I used Schwaber as an example for a couple reasons. One, Maddon is highly regarded. Two, Schwaber, while not completely untested, was far from proven. Point being , Sano is faster even at 270 than Schwaber so why was the Schwaber experiment OK and the Sano experiment not worthy of the experiment. As I said from the beginning, I thought they should have just put him at 3B and rode it out but I was ok with the experiment in a season that never had a chance from day 1. The thing that really floors me is that so many people said he could not play there because he weighed 270 lbs. as if there was no correcting the problem. He is 270 because you can get away with being out of shape in baseball. I will be thrilled if he shows up in great shape not just for the obvious reasons but it would also suggest a higher level of commitment. Koske went from being a bad 3B defensively to quite good with determination and commitment. Would love to see that from Sano. BTW ... I agree with Mike. The execution still sucked. That's where the criticism belongs IMO but Sano's size, given his athleticism should not have been an issue. It appeared the experiment was condemned because guys his size are generally far to slow to play the position. While this is true, it's pretty backward logic when he had already demonstrated significantly better speed than others who have played the position.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make here. My point is that both players were unproven in the OF. Their bats warranted a shot. If Sano is more athletic than Schwaber, especially if Sano lost 30 lbs, why should Sano to the OF be dismissed because he is bigger? I think Jimmer hit the nail on the head. Their execution sucked but his size was not the problem.

So, are you saying that Sano was no athletic enough to play the position. Nobody though tit was insane to suggest Plouffe or Mauer in the outfield. Sano at 270 is far more athletic than Plouffe and quite a bit faster than Mauer. He certainly is faster and more athletic than alot of guys that played the position because of their bat. Point is that size is not nearly as relevant a question as does he have the athleticism to play OF. He failed because he could not make the adaption. Size was not the primary problem. Also, to focus on the fact that he was 270lbs has to be the worst assessment of the core problem I have ever seen on this site. How much problem solving skill does it take to recognize he is 30 lbs over weight. I think a better assessment of the problem was that he should lose 30 lbs, not that he cant play the position because he weighs 270.

Maddon puts people in new positions on a regular basis. The article suggests Cleveland was smart to move Santana not once but twice. However, the Twins are incompetent fools when they use out fo the box thinking. Which player is more athletic, Sano or Schwarber? I would say Sano so difference does it make if Sano is bigger. Let's also remember the Twins and Sano had agreed that Sano would shed some weight. Some of you seem to forget that Sano's size is something that could have been relatively easily adjusted to better fix the position. There are a bunch of NFL players who would be much more athletic than alot of MLB corner outfielders so I just dont get how Sano's size should have disqualified him as a candidate to play a corner OF position. What's even more weird is the number of people who think Mauer or Plouffe who are both much slower than Sano should play OF. Somehow really slow is ok if you are not really big.

Yes, The Cubs have done several things well that the Twins could and should emulate. However, to discount the impact of their revenue because some of the FAs are not contributing fails to recognize that these failures are normal. In other words, it should be expected that some free agents will perform and others will not, This strategy requires deep enough pockets to absorb the failures. The Cubs are spending just shy of $115M this year on free agents. The Indians and the Twins could not possibly follow this model so to say there is not a a material difference is conceptually flawed. The Twins and Indians only hope of competing is to excel at drafting, development, and asset management. The core of their problem was they did not embrace and invest in the practices crucial to excelling in these areas.

Pretty spot on. Getting to the world series is a poor measure of the impact of revenue. There are many variables and its a small sample size. Regular season records offer a much better statistical measure of the impact of revenue. The Yankees won 1592 games since 2000. Yes, the Royals won a WS. They also won 359 games less since 2000. The bottom 12 teams with the exception of Oakland have averaged 16 less wins/year. (94 vs 78). I think the correlation to revenue is very clear. BTW ... Market is often used as a proxy from revenue but market size does not necessarily reflect revenue (ie.St. Louis)

I see where you are coming from now. A little context always helps.

The point was I thought the reason he is here had nothing to do with the point you were making.. He has modest offensive numbers in 127 games at AA. Why would you think he is a guy to jump right from AA. It makes absolutely no sense and you were complaining about "if the reason" when it should be very clear that is not the reason.

126 games at AA with a .729 OPS and 347 OBP AA hardly screams that the guy should be here right now. Plus, he is not a good replacement for Grossman given he is a LHH. Grossman may suck defensively but that bat should be in the linepup vs LHP. He is really a better replacement for Rosario. IMO Rosario has a higher ceiling than Granite. If Rosario can develop his approach, he could be a very good MLB player. Personally, I am not too optimistic but why would you take ABs away from Rosario next year for a guy who is not ready to play at the ML level? At a minimum, give Rosario / Grossman the 1st half of the season with Granite, Palka and Walker at AAA. Hope that you end up with several OFers that can play at the ML level and trade from that position of strength.

Well Chief, you do have a point. In the first paragraph I was simply trying to point out this premise is unreasonable in that it assumes we can just outbid every other team for premier agents and that they all want to come here. The 2nd and 3rd paragraphs do not take the extreme example of the first paragraph literally. Free agency is a tool this team should use. They just need to be very smart and timing is part of the equation. The answer is there is no way the twins could afford 3 premier free agents. However, I do think they could afford a front of the rotation starter plus whatever other hole needs the most attention. They can do this and still extend a couple of their key young players if they are patient and let this core come together. That includes all of the SP prospects (Berrios / Gonsalves / Jay / Romeo / Stewart / Meija and perhaps their pick nexct June. Of course, the reason for this is that would have a large portion of their 25 man roster in their cost controlled years. I say this recognizing that there are only two instances of teams this century with equal or less revenue than the Twins that have landed this type of SP. The Rookies in 2002 (Hampton) and Grienke last year. I am not sure we can count Grient given Arizona had just received a billion dollar TV deal. Plus, while some here advocated for going after Grienke, most posters here would agree that contract was a very bad idea for Arizona. I would also concede the over pay is indicative of the difficulty of landing these players for a team that is not in a major market.

If you are talking about the NY, LA or Bos, this is a good point. It's ridiculous if you are talking about the twins. You are suggesting that a team at a revenue disadvantage of $150-250M/yr as compared to those teams should be able to outbid them for the best free agents three years in a row. There are 30 teams but we should get the best FAs. You and others also advocate just do it now. You have asked me several times how long should we wait as if after a certain number of years this must be done. It should be done when the core has matured and the final pieces are needed. How many years we have sucked is not relevant to when a team should pursue a premier FA. Did the Mets, Royals or Pirates go out and spend on FAs during their extended period of losing? The reality of the strategy you advocate is that those players are very likely good for about half of the contract. This team would be better for sure but certainly not a contender. Then, when our young core grows up, we have $80-90M/yr in players well below their prime that could have been invested in productive players. In other words, you have opted to add these FAs when we suck instead of when we have the team around them to contend.

I would agree there were no advocates here of exactly what Arizona did last year. However, on a more conceptual level, many people here wanted a win now approach. There was support for trading Buxton, Kepler, and Berrios for players with 2-3 years remaining. Shelby Miller was not seen as an ace here but he was seen as a very good pitcher and rightfully so. Many people would have done back-flips for Grienke. I recall a few people complaining because they knew the FO would not consider Grienke or Price. I would not go so far as to say they should never consider a free agent top of the rotation guy but last year was certainly not the time and I said the exact same thing then. Grienke and Price are under contract for 5 and 6 years respectively for $30M+ and they are already showing regression, especially Grienke. What a disaster it would have been to bring them in. Lucroy received a lot of support. He would have been here through next year and there were those who supported Kepler + others for LuCroy. That would have been a disaster! Several people had a fit because they would not sign RPs to as long-term deal. I recall very specifically, that this move and these players was not consistent with a contender. No kidding, there was no way we were contending and nearly every national media source predicted a last source place finish. Yet, there were many here who were furious because they were not making moves that were consistent with a win now or all in mentality. So, while Nick’s article may not have been exactly what anyone here had in mind, the win now and spend big on FAs was definitely promoted here.

You know you are in trouble when Santana is your most trusted SP. Heck, he is the only proven SP we have unless you count Hughes and he might be the most questionable of all of the SPs now. Can we say we know what to expect from Gibson?

I see your point in terms of Dozier plus another asset for the right player(s) in return but we would be selling very low on Buxton right now. I am not sure who would be the addition but Buxton does not make sense to me.

I have to agree but our rotation is so wide open I would give it a shot. We have Santana, Gibson, and Berrios that I would say have to be in the rotation. It does not seem like a stretch that Rogers could be as good or better than Gibson. May is certainly more deserving of a shot but that still leaves the 5th spot open. Hughes seems doubtful. We could put Meija in that spot but would it hurt to start Meija at AAA or even in the pen and give Rogers a shot? Here is a question for everyone. I know we have a very small sample size with Meija but how would you compare Rogers and Meija?

May and Rogers in the rotation next year. Start the season with Santana / Berrios / Gibson / May / Rogers. Duffey & Hughes start in the BP. Hopefully, they earn a rotation spot and replace whoever falters or is injured. Gonsalves up in June. It would be great if the rotation was doing so well we can’t find a spot for him. Stewart might be ready by the middle of 2017 as well. Gibson is a placeholder unless he somehow gets it together. Hopefully, the rest of our staff performs well enough that Santana and Gibson become deadline trades. Meija / Gonsalves / Stewart are candidates to take their places. Hughes and/or Duffey certainly could round back into form and also be potential mid-season additions to the rotation. Hughes might be a candidate to start the season if he is in impressive form during spring training. Jay, Romero, and Thorpe in the wings. That’s a lot of pitching but there are question marks with everyone, even Santana given his history. Next year is going to be a bumpy but interesting ride. It will be worth it if the exit 2017 with 5 or 6 good starters. . I am hoping it ends up Berrios / Gonsalves / May / Rogers / Meija with Stewart and Jay pressing for a spot. It would be a nice bonus if the picked up some assets trading Santana and Gibson. That leaves a decent mix of RH options in the pen. Pressly / Kinzler / Chargois / Tonkin / Light. LHRP is up for grabs. Perkins may or may not be back. Miija could start next year in the pen. They should get Wheeler up an audition him for a spot in the BP next year. Add on quality LHRP in the off-season should be adequate if Perkins is back. He probably won’t be a closer but hopefully he can be a set-up guy. If one of Hughes/Perkins rounds back into form it would be a big plus. If we could add a top SP prospect to this mix by trading Dozier and also add a top college arm next June, we might just build a contender here.

These deals for an "ace" are usually a situation where the player has no more than 2 years of control. Even Kershaw would not make this team good enough to win the division. The team needs to grow up so this type of trade right now would relieve us of the very players who will hopefully make this team a contender. This might make sense in a couple years but it makes no sense right now.

Has it worked out? No, but when you say worked out, I think you mean did it make them competitors. I don’t know the logic of those moves but anyone in that FO who believed Nolasco, Santana, and Hughes was going to makes them competitors should be tested for banned substances. Personally, I think those moves were designed to not suck. They had absolutely no pitching and those moves were designed to put a respectable product on the field during a rebuild regardless of if they admitted it was a rebuild. Granted, had they gone out and signed Scherzer or Lester and they would have been more fun to watch 1 out of 5 games but they would have had just as bad a record and maybe worse. They also would have had huge commitments to a SP well past their prime about the time this club will be ready to compete. Scherzer is under contract through his age 36 season and Lester through his age 37 season. Maybe they hold up but if they are likely very expensive boat anchors about the time this team will be ready to contend. It’s also very easy to say they should have gotten a top SP but who specifically? In 2014 when they really needed to do something, the only Ace type free agent SPs was Tanaka. Were we going to outbid the Yankees? The year before in 2013 it was Grienke and Sanchez. Grienke signed through his age 38 season. Would that have been wise? Were we going to outbid the Dodgers? Sanchez had a career year in 2013, a very good year in 2014, was bad in 2015 and terrible in 2016. Would that have “worked out”. It’s a lot easier to say they should have just signed a legit Ace than it is to actually get it done. Who specifically should they have signed in 2013,14, or 15? We can go all the way back to 2012. CJ Wilson and Mark Buehrle were the top free agent SPs in 2012. Would they have made this terrible team good?

Mike, I really liked Turner, partially just because I sway toward the great athletes. I thought he was less risk too and of course he was going to get to the majors earlier. I wanted them to take him but if we are fair, every mock draft had Gordon several spots ahead of Turner. The other point you made was basically the very old argument …. Why don’t the Twins just sign an ace? If you want to be correct here, the appropriate context is why is this type of signing almost non-existent among teams in the same revenue class or lower? To put this particular act of omission on the Twins is absolute bulls%!%. There has been two such signings by teams with equal or less revenue than the Twins in the past 20 years. Hampton by Colorado which was around 2002 and Grienke last year. It a BIG stretch to include the Grienke signing because they just signed a billion dollar TV contract. Having said this, I think they actually good manage their payroll to make it feasible to sign an Ace or “near Ace” once Mauer is gone given the number of young players on the roster. I think it is feasible but to call out the Twins for not doing it requires that one ignore how rare this is among small or mid-market teams.

I am not sure what Dozier would bring back in prospects. I have been of the opinion that we should not trade him unless the return is big. The standard for “big return” is changing for me because Dozier will be gone by the time we are legit contenders. Do we want Dozier for the next two years when we will be decent or do we want the assets we can get for him for 6+ years during a period we should be contending? Dozier does not need to bring an ace for the trade to be impactful. If he netted us a 2 or a strong 3, I would think that would be a good trade. There is a possibility we get even more than a SP if the trade works out. Big IF for sure but we wont anything to show for Dozier when we are actually contending. I guess we might be able to make a qualifying offer and get a pick. I was actually hoping for a nice surprise at the deadline with Dozier bringing a nice haul that included a strong SP prospect. Perhaps that could still happen next year.

I would be very happy with Polanco being almost as good as Dozier if trading Dozier could net us a front of the rotation starter. Obviously, there is some risk to this type of move because that front of the rotation arm is likely a high A or AA SP. However, the Twins are not likely to be serious contenders until they get some legit $1 and #2 types. I am not sure there is a legit ceiling of a #1 starter among Gonsalves, Jay or Stewart. To be fair KC, Boston, and Baltimore have proven in the past few years that you can contend with solid but unspectacular SP. I just think we need more legit front of the rotation SP prospects. Maybe they can get a college arm next June but I think they will end up picking a little too low to get a front of the rotation prospect out of college if they are picking 8 or 9. I also don't know how valuable Dozier is as a leader. I am not in that clubhouse and this should not be dismissed. It's all pretty unlikely with Dozier. Plouffe on the other hand is possible. Try him first on revocable waiver and see if someone will give us something/anything. If he does not get traded, pass him through again and hope someone takes him off our hands. I would take one more shot with E. Santana too. I just don't see us contending next year so trade him if the return is right.

Agree. This all hinges on Sano being able to stick at 3B but that's something IMO that should be given time. He is too valuable at 3B to give up on without giving him a long look. Its time to part ways with Plouffe regardless. If Vargas continues to hit, I fail to see how that's a problem. Park will have to play in AAA. If Park tears it up at AAA, that's hardly a problem either. He is then the back-up plan to Vargas or could be traded. His contract is $3M/yr. which should help make him tradeable. If he sits in AAA for awhile, he likely works out a deal to go back to Korea.

As I said, I am inclined to believe that I am in full agreement with h2oface. We will just have to agree to disagree on the nature of this debate. After 16 pages of discussion, there are two potential conclusions, IMO. There is either more to it than two bad SPs being swapped or there is the usual complaining going on that once again the Twins did not get a good player in return for a bad one.