ewen21

The term "ace" in baseball doesn't have a definition, but I define an ace as a guy who can take the ball and give you seven or eight solid innings a whole bunch of times. An ace tends to take you to the set up guy then the closer quite often, so a true ace, in my opinion, is rare. Some guys have good stuff, but labor a lot. That isn't an ace to me.

I get it, but we have not hit in the postseason 2010 7 runs in 3 games 2009 7 runs in 3 games 2006 7 runs in 3 games Those are the facts, ugly as they are. Ace or not, we ain't winning if we don't do some hitting in these pressure games and the fact is we have not. Scoring just over 2 runs a game isn't winning you anything. YES, it would be nice to have an "elite pitcher" but can we for once raise some decent starting pitching? Other organizations do it and those tend to be the teams that go places.

"An ace" pitches every five days. There are only about five or six true aces in the league and Darvish sure as heck isn't one of them. Neither is Archer and I don't think Arrietta is now. He said a "balanced rotation" I would rather have that than an ace and a couple of question marks at the bottom of the rotation. I believe that is what he meant.

I wonder if he's gotten an offer from a Japanese organization and is just going to say CYA!

I would love nothing more than to do that. Thank you for not insulting me

Yes, he is fast and that is a fact. His OPS is still under .600 (also a fact) Let's hope he continues to hit. Let's hope he is figuring it out with the bat, otherwise his speed is only a novelty. Hate to take this slant on it, but we have seen a number of "Byron Buxton is fast" articles. I want to see a "Byron Buxton can HIT" article someday.

He deserved the criticism for being an awful hitter for almost 700 at bats. I will not apologize for the criticisms I made a little over a week ago. Nor should anyone else. He has been one of the worst hitters in the major leagues over the last three seasons. That is not a take. It is a fact and it isn't mean spirited or wrong to point it out

The common rebuttal I have been given for sending him back to AAA is, "he won't learn anything down there" Oh really? Like he's learning anything up here? One thing anyone should notice with Buxton if you watch his game and listen to his quotes on hitting is that he is not confident and he has literally no though process behind his at bats. He also has tinkered and messed with mechanics over and over. Currently we have a player who is deserving of a promotion even though his name doesn't have the cache Buxton does. What are we really trying to do here? Can we at some point as fans admit that he just is not ready to step into a major league batter's box? I will admit I was part of a large crew of folks who thought it was best to call him up in 2015 even though he was rushed. I felt that way at the time because I hoped he would show flashes and that he would fill in bad spots with more flashes of goodness until he eventually became solid. Well, it's now three shots he has had and he is not even close. In my opinion, he has to go down. NOW. In the name of his development AND accountability this cannot go on any longer. The team has surprised us this year and we are near the top of the division in July. Why not send him down and call up Granite? Too "kneejerk"?? Please. Maybe Granite can prove he belongs and now we have another outfielder to consider. It's best to set up some competition. I don't think it is a good thing to give one guy special treatment (coddling) it is starting to become that with Buxton. Send him down like you would any other player and hopefully he goes to Rochester and picks up the pace. You cannot let a guy experience this much failure and pretend it won't have long term implications on the mental part of his game. You also cannot give one guy endless rope while another deserving player stays down. It is not a good thing for an organization, Most of all, confidence seems to be an issue with Buxton. The mental part of the game is something that can prevent a guy from becoming a major leaguer and he isn't going to get it by continually failing at the major league level.

Buxton has 16 defensive runs saved this year, but he has just 32 runs produced this year with his offense and that is flat out terrible. I am not saying defense does not matter. It certainly does. However, compared to pitching and offense defense is a distant third

This. So this. He is a liability as far as I am concerned. Yeah, yeah....I know he is fast and I know he is a good center fielder, but as much as people keep saying his defense makes him worth it that simply is not the case. No way is he saving as many runs as his bat subtracts. He has a WAR (according to fangraphs) of 0.2 and that is terrible. We are almost in Nick Punto 2007 territory where you have people looking at the sizzle (those diving catches) without even looking for the steak. And you are right. This is in no way on any coach. At some point, this comes down to the player and that point is now. He's gotten a free pass to be a terrible hitter and people are providing reinforcement for him not to fret much about it. This notion that so long as he is fast and covers a lot of ground in the field and "the hitting will come" really is beginning to become a problem. People I know and respect think he needs to spend the rest of the year up here even if he doesn't get another hit. I'm so against that school of thought it isn't even funny. If we are trying to build a culture that applies accountability and gives players their place based on merit, you can't do that. No way, no how. It costs the team games and it costs the player mentally. It holds back players who are deserving. It isn't fair and it isn't necessarily the right way to develop THIS PLAYER. Buxton simply is not mentally ready to step into a major league batters box. Still! We are supposed to overlook that? I understand his talents and athleticism allows him more of a leash, but this is starting to become absurd.

Brant Alyea and Chris Colabello were all world for a little over a month. I'm concerned about Buxton.

Pretty much this. We as Twins are grossly overrating Dozier and have not accepted that the market for second baseman is not wide open. The Dodgers weren't sweating us at all. They found a solution in Forsythe and will probably make more moves to improve their club. Our guys? They seemed stuck on this one to the point where they couldn't do anything else. They could not come up with a single trade this winter? Hard to explain that one away.

That was supposed to show us that those guys were leaders. The favored veterans taking in the new guy The culture needs to change.

I think not making a single trade after losing 103 games is absolutely ridiculous. I think the problem here is that Dozier is being overrated here. He isn't as good as a lot of people want think due to natural homer bias. That's all it is. I say let it not be forgotten how brutal he was the second half of 2015 and the first part of last season. Suddenly, after a few months of playing the best baseball he's ever played, he's considered a star or "the face of the franchise"? I'm not buying. The Twins are trying to finagle way too much. The market has spoken and unfortunately it's not giving us exactly what we want. So what? You trade Dozier for myriad reasons: 1. Even if he does play near an all star level (and next year) he will be 32 when that contract is up. It's highly unlikely we are contenders these next two seasons. What's the benefit? 2. His value will never be greater. His marketability is based on his team friendly 2 years, his power and the fact that he's got two or three prime years left. Extend that timeline forward and his value almost automatically drops. All of those favorable factors diminish with each game plays 3. Playing Polanco out of position might compromise his development. That kid should replace Dozier.at 2B. He's ready now. I'm so sick and tired of the Twins plugging young players into different positions all the time. Let Polanco develop in his NATURAL position. Gordon will be our SS someday soon anyway. Think two years forward for Gods sake 4. Dozier is a NOW player and by the time this team is good again his moment will be over, his contract will be up, see ya 5. He's been called a leader. I'm not so sure about that. He flew south rather badly when this team was contending in 2015. I thought Dozier was being goofball in spring training last year and was supposed to be leader. His surge came long after the season was over and to me that is too little too late This isn't about trading him just to trade him. I just gave a bunch of solid reasons why you do it. I'd say if you don't agree please don't mischaracterize me as someone wants to trade for the sake of making a trade. moving a very capable young player (Polanco) to his actual position. It's about selling a guy at his peak value after a 103 loss season. Quite frankly, I have no idea why Dozier wants to even remain a twin. He's been playing for a loser his entire career. That right there says something. Time to turn the page on this guy. As Branch Rickey once told Ralph Kiner....I came in last with you and I came in last without you. Dozier has little to do with the young ecenucleus of 22 and 23 year old players I said my piece

Polanco will be a player and he's a second baseman. Goodbye Dozier As you said, make room for younger players and bring a couple more for Dozier. We are keeping Dozier and I this is non move we might regret. I felt the same way in 2013 when we extended our "elite closer" instead of trading him

Leviathan, your three points are iron clad. Without any emotional attachment those three facts cannot be altered. On top of that, Twins fans need to also think about what do with Dozier after the 2018 season if we do hold him. Do we sign a 32 year old to a multi year deal? And what about Polanco? Isn't he better suited for second? We will have Gordon up eventually. I think there is an emotional attachment to Dozier. This is streaky player who never played in a big game in is major league career and yet some people want to say "face of the franchise"??? I'd much rather have a young nucleus like we did in the early 2000s. A team identity, rather than labeling one guy the face. We could probably fortify what already have by dealing Dozier. It is not that complicated.

Hello?

Oh please. This is an opportunity for the Twins. They had one with Perkins a few years ago and they extended him in a move that was tone deaf. I think the push back on the Twins is the market. Dozier had 3 amazing months. Have we forgotten how terrible was during the two half seasons prior? Dozier is no sure thing and this 103 loss team stands to gain nothing by having him stick around for two years. Get the best deal you can without the silly posturing

Who ever said that? All I'm saying is that if what Dave is telling us is true the Twins are being silly

You agree with me

So the Dodgers should just give the Twins more than market value?

Agreed. If this were a major league forum with fans from around the country then there would be a whole lot more objectivity as to what his worth is. We are only an isolated minority. The harsh reality is teams know the Twins situation. They understand (as you sat) the Twins benefit very little by holding Dozier. The Twins and a lot Twins fans really need to get over it and move on. We become far too attached to "our guys". I hear the tag "face of the franchise" being thrown around. Seriously? A face of the franchise on a 103 loss team? Did we not see the second half of 2015 and the first half of last year? Dozier is so damn streaky. The second half of last year could be a mirage, but I see a lot of Twins fans thinking Dozier is Josh Donaldson 2.0. He isn't. I like him, but come on....where is he in the big picture? Anyone seriously thinking he needs a multi year deal after the 2018 is up? Unless we are totally of that--and there is no way to be sure--he should not be held. Which is why I think this "get your final offers on the table" power play is a joke. Reminds me of Bill Smith during the Johan negotiations. Any team could wait the Twins out and see what happens this year. We are not in a position of strength here, I'm sad to say. As far as what the Sox got for Eaton, we really need to stop prentending that we could get that kind of haul. The market for second baseman is tiny. There are so many good ones now all of a sudden. For some odd reason these factors aren't being considered nearly enough. And please.... Don't anyone go saying I want to get rid of Dozier for a bag of peanuts. The market has spoken for better or worse. Two highly prospects seems to be the going rate. After much consideration I take that

He isn't saying that at all

Really? He's more in line with Oliva, imo

I disagree. I don't see many similarities between the two at all. First of all, Mattingly has only 239 more plate appearances than Mauer going into tonight's game, but managed to drive in nearly 300 more runs. He drove in over 110 runs in five different seasons. That matters. Joe's big thing is he walks. Mattingly hit for average and slugged up until his back injury. I saw plenty of Mattingly being that I am a 50-year-old dude living in upstate NY (lived in Oneonta where Mattingly played in '79). I have seen plenty of Mauer. I am not partial to either, and although it would be impossible to exaggerate how much I hate the Yankees I have to say... Mattingly did damage for about six or seven seasons. Joe did damage for one season in my mind. In just 239 more plate appearances Mattingly has 676 more total bases. Of course, Joe has 226 more walks in 239 LESS plate appearances. If you want to bring up positional value during Mauer's best years and put it up against Mattingly's best years. OK. I would say advantage Mauer for that moment in time. Looking back in their careers? Mattingly is the better hitter in my mind. And no....Mauer will not get in the Hall. Not the way he cratered at age 30.