Mike Sixel

Then we aren't talking about the same thing. I'm talking about every rookie that plays, you are not. So, I guess we can stop disagreeing.

You keep picking players that have been around for more than 3 years. What about all those that don't play three years? Your samples need to be much broader.

You could go to fangraphs, look at the rookies every year, then click on them, and see if they got better the next year.....that's a lot of people though.....

good one, I don't read anyone saying they'll turn out bad.....not one person. I just am not counting on them being here more than a month or so next year....not until we see either healthy and playing for more than a week in a row. But that's just me, maybe they will go from out for an entire year, and then playing more than half the games next year in MN. Makes you wonder, then, why Meyer isn't up, if it isn't about making sure he's healthy.....

Again, that is my point......there are lots of players that come up, and then literally disappear from the majors. What percent of players that appear in, say, 20 games, even play more than 50 games or 100 games or 300 games? I'd guess, not having the data, it is pretty low actually. Or are like Parmalee and compile WAR that means nothing good to a team.....but stick around because there are lots of bad teams in MLB?

That is precisely what I am saying, yes. Most prospects are not as good as proven MLB players.

We are all guilty of that sometimes, but we forget that many/most rookies don't actually get better, they are who they will become.....I know I am with other players.

I agree with Seth, they know what Burdi is, and more work won't develop some new pitch for him. Save that golden arm. Michael and/or Wimmers.....they need more data on them.

Last year at this time, Rosario was a top what prospect? What could you have received for him and one of the veterans on the roster (or another medium prospect)? What could have Joe Benson received after his A ball season? What about Pinto, if they never believed in him as a catcher, why not deal him before his MLB defense is exposed? Would you like to go back in time, and deal Rosario for a good SP or LF? All I'm saying is that if you have a system this deep, the prospects are worth less to you than they are to other teams. And, most prospects never produce more than a WAR or three over their career, if they even do that. For a team that has this much money available, being unwilling to deal from a deep prospect pool seems like a limiting strategy. I understand that most do not agree with me on this. I'm ok with that. Good luck to the Twins in selling season tickets next year, with this record, returning the team mostly intact, and no All Star Game to coerce people with. I mean that sincerely, good luck to them.

Thanks, understand now. I'm of the opinion that prospects are now OVER valued in MLB (since they were under valued before) and that the pendulum has swung pretty far that way. I think the new inefficiency is dealing prospects for proven MLB players.

Ha, knew my 2nd thought was right......

Brock, what does this line mean, if not "I don't think they are winning 80 games next year, or probably the year after"..... "You trade prospects when you're an 80 win team pushing for the playoffs" I am trying to understand that part of your statement, and align that with not making a trade of prospects. And, since most prospects don't work out, and the team is flush with money, why not trade for a more certain thing in a MLB player? If the system is really 15+ good prospects deep, I'd think they have an excess they can deal from.

so, punt next year and the year after on being over 80 wins? I'm just trying to understand....you are saying they will not be ready to compete in 2015 or 2016, correct?

only 90% now.....for some reason I just thought maybe it was 6 months, I'll look if I get a chance.

My point on Shields is that I'd not go lower than him, I thought that was clear, apparently not, so to be more clear....... that is as low as I'd go in terms of "how elite" a SP I'd sign. Not sure what more to say on the trade part, I think I made it clear that I don't have any interest in spending hours of time looking at every system out there....but if I was actually the GM, I'd do that, and I'd target those areas as areas of improvement for sure.

Ah, I forgot Tomas.....I'd go hard after him also. No idea what it would take to get him......

I'm 99% sure a PTBNL needs to be named in 90 days.

this made me laugh out loud in pleasure, thank you..... Again, I was responding to someone saying "it can't be as bad as last year", as did two others, I note.... I have not spent hours researching minor leaguers and rosters, so I can't really offer a good trade scenario.....but I'd certainly consider dealing for a SS, LF, CF (shorter term), 3B, C (I don't believe in Suzuki), SP. With the information I have: I'd probably actually roll with the starters they have, IF I knew more about Meyer and his readiness. Since we have no actual clue if he's ready for the majors (if only there was a way to gather that data this year.......), I'd sign someone at least as good as Shields. I'd prefer to go more elite, but I'd settle for Shields or better. I'd offer 3-5 years, depending on which guy it is, and I'd offer the going rate for that quality. I'd sign Melky Cabrera to play LF. I'd gut the bullpen other than Perkins and, um, not sure 2 others, your choice, and replace them with guys from the minors, or players from other teams that HAVE OPTIONS so I can manipulate my roster better. Frankly, it is time to see Guerra, Tonkin, Oliverous (sp?), Acther, and???? up here in the pen. I'd certainly hope Burdi is ready next year. I'd promote Alex Meyer day 1. Day 1 rotation: New guy, Gibson, Hughes, Meyer, Nolasco (alphabetical listing) I'd see if Boston wants to deal one of their spare OF for a minor league pitcher in the Twins system (not Stewart or Berrios). The only reason to collect excess pieces is to deal them ......and prospects are worth more before they have their warts exposed. I'd promote Pinto and have him catch 40-50% of the time. I'd decide if Santana is a SS or CF this year, and play him AT THAT POSITION now, and next year. I'd either cut, trade, or move Pelfrey to long relief or another BP spot. with what I don't know: If they think Sano or Buxton is not here next year.......I'd probably roll with Plouffe, but not be thrilled about it. I'd keep Santana in CF, and when Buxton does come up (if Danny has been good or better) move him to LF. i'd promote Hicks ASAP, and see if this improvement looks real, I don't care about the minor league playoffs If Meyer is not ready in their mind, I'd consider signing another SP in addition to the really good one. That's off the top of my head....I am at work and all......and, if I really had control, I'd probably do more, but I was trying to be somewhat realistic....as if it was the Twins, and not the Twins with Mike in charge (which would likely be a disaster).

I've been told not to post my thoughts in multiple threads, so my ideas on improving the team are found all over the forums.....I was discussing the topic at hand, that not having better options is not the same as not having problems that need to be fixed.

Resignation is pretty much my state, yes.

"there's no way the SP can be as bad as last year".....this is the now the third off season (since this is an off season thread) I've read that.....so far, it has been as bad two years in a row (not relative to the Twins, but to the league) give or take the margin of error.

Are they? Buxton missed the year, as did Sano. Neither has played above AA. Are we so sure they will play here next year?

I'd also like half the bullpen turned over.....that gives them roster flexibility to move guys up and down to AAA, which they NEED given the youth and question marks.

Needing to see young guys play, and saying they have no holes, are two very different things, imo. There being few good outside options, and having no holes, are two very different things, imo.

I'd also like it to be Wimmers.....since they need to figure out where he really is and gather more data.