Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Store

Photo

How Long of a Leash...

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 mudcat14

mudcat14

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 08:07 PM

...do Willingham & Kubel get in the #4-#5 holes before we try anyone with even the slightest possibility of a future? Honestly, I'd much rather take our lumps with Colabello & Parmelee and have hope for improvement. I'd gladly eat my words, but I think the spring has proven that the veterans are as dead as Julius Caesar.

#2 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,632 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 08:31 PM

I doubt Kubel has much of a leash at all. There's not a ton invested in him. The only issue will be if he makes the roster and the Twins lose Parmelee, there may not be much behind him in the way of competition. Chris Herrmann maybe? He's nice depth but probably won't get too many people excited.

#3 mudcat14

mudcat14

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 09:32 PM

My ample gut tells me that Parm makes the team due to his lack of options. Cola deserves to stay, but will fall victim to his ability to be optioned. Hopefully he plays in the OF exclusively with the Red Wings.

Edited by mudcat14, 26 March 2014 - 09:36 PM.


#4 drock2190

drock2190

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 213 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 09:42 PM

Should of signed Bobby Abreu instead of Kubel if they needed a veteran presence. At least Abreu has a decent bat this far in his career.

Edited by drock2190, 26 March 2014 - 09:46 PM.


#5 TKGuy

TKGuy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 09:44 PM

You can't let Kubel play against lefties, so I guess Pinto will be DH/C a lot if Colabello is not here

#6 old nurse

old nurse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,675 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 10:34 PM

Kubel, hopefully only a couple of weeks, unless 98% of the universe is wrong on anticipating his production.
Willingham, Aug 31.

#7 Paul Pleiss

Paul Pleiss

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 447 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 04:08 AM

Kubel has a long leash. He's having a bad spring, but he's only a season removed from a successful year in Arizona. I don't expect Gardy to give up on him quickly. Hammer has all the leash he needs and then some. If he doesn't hit early the Twins will give him time to rebound. You can't trade him if he's not hitting. I don't think the Twins will be taking lumps wil Colobello. I think he stays hot and figures out MLB pitching this season. We've all seem Parm. He's a busted first round talent. He's really good at baseball, but it seems his bat just isn't quite good enough for the big leagues. I'd like to see him get claimed and catch on with another team where maybe he can find success.

#8 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,446 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 06:19 AM

The only mistake I see is that Parmelee didn't get 500+ PA in 2013 so we'd know for sure whether he was a bust or not. It was a lot season, we all could see it... So you figure out what you have instead of putting yourself in the difficult position of deciding what to do with the likes of Chris Parmelee in a 2014 roster crunch.

#9 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,469 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 27 March 2014 - 07:19 AM

The only mistake I see is that Parmelee didn't get 500+ PA in 2013 so we'd know for sure whether he was a bust or not. It was a lot season, we all could see it... So you figure out what you have instead of putting yourself in the difficult position of deciding what to do with the likes of Chris Parmelee in a 2014 roster crunch.


I think Paul Pleiss is right ... both Kubel and Willingham have fairly long leashes.

But since I think 2014 is also a lost season, I hope that the Twins try to make it worthwhile by making sure that Hicks, Arcia, Pinto (and Parmelee if they don't get rid of him) get at least 500 PA's so we can fairly judge them for next year.

#10 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 5,783 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 07:22 AM

Brock and JB could not be more right if they had offered me money.......in lost seasons, you need to figure out what you have or don't have in older prospects. Playing Doumit last year was mind boggling. I hope they don't repeat that mistake this year.

I think Hammer has as much time as he wants. They don't have an alternative. Kubel, I have no idea.
Lighten up Francis....

#11 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,724 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 07:33 AM

The only mistake I see is that Parmelee didn't get 500+ PA in 2013 so we'd know for sure whether he was a bust or not. It was a lot season, we all could see it... So you figure out what you have instead of putting yourself in the difficult position of deciding what to do with the likes of Chris Parmelee in a 2014 roster crunch.


He actually got 531 PA last year. Even his 198 PA in AAA produced a .688 OPS.

He's looked so lost the past two years, outside of those 62 AAA games in 2012, that I really doubt that playing time is the primary issue with him.

That's not to excuse the Twins handling of him, just shift it: he's not the first recent Twins prospect to see a drop in BB rate, a spike in K rate, and a general lack of positive offensive outcomes in his transition to MLB.

#12 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 2,810 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:07 AM

Thank god Twins coaches don't play every failing prospect until they reach absolute proof positive statistical significance. That's what options and coaches and the minor leagues are for, use them.

#13 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:39 AM

Thank god Twins coaches don't play every failing prospect until they reach absolute proof positive statistical significance. That's what options and coaches and the minor leagues are for, use them.


Sometimes the guy just needs the ball to run with. Perkins was all but cast aside for similar bouncing around. I'm a big fan of giving the guy a role and a lengthy opportunity and then judging. If you didn't give them a certain role and enough opportunity you leave open the possibility of being mistaken.

#14 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,446 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:40 AM

Thank god Twins coaches don't play every failing prospect until they reach absolute proof positive statistical significance. That's what options and coaches and the minor leagues are for, use them.


Given the other options the Twins had in the outfield last season, very little would have been lost by playing Parmelee. That's my point.

It'd be nice to have 550 MLB PAs (of regular playing time, not herky-jerky "one game in, two games out" play) from Chris at this point to say "you're not good enough, we're going to cut you" instead of vacillating on whether he's still a prospect or not.

The Twins gained all of .050 OPS points by playing guys like Doumit instead of Parmelee on the way to losing 96 games. At some point, you just ignore your record and play the guys who will force roster decisions the following spring.

It would help mitigate some of the "second verse, same as the first" feeling we've had over the past three seasons. Give a guy a legit shot and move on if it's not working.

#15 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 2,810 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:46 AM

Given the other options the Twins had in the outfield last season, very little would have been lost by playing Parmelee. That's my point.

It'd be nice to have 550 MLB PAs (of regular playing time, not herky-jerky "one game in, two games out" play) from Chris at this point to say "you're not good enough, we're going to cut you" instead of vacillating on whether he's still a prospect or not.

The Twins gained all of .050 OPS points by playing guys like Doumit instead of Parmelee on the way to losing 96 games. At some point, you just ignore your record and play the guys who will force roster decisions the following spring.

It would help mitigate some of the "second verse, same as the first" feeling we've had over the past three seasons. Give a guy a legit shot and move on if it's not working.


For better or worse the Twins have identified Parmelee as a bench talent. They've said all along that he is competing for a bench spot. Which would make sense considering that he can't get on top of a high fastball to save his life. Its only here where people are still vacillating on whether he is still a prospect or not.

#16 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 5,783 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:58 AM

Let's see what happens with Pinto and Arcia this year, to see if they are more worried about veteranness, or about playing a guy that dominated the minors to see what they have. Given how Gibson was handled last year, I was not impressed by the process.

Either way, on topick, Hammer has an infinite leash. Kubel probably has a long leash.
Lighten up Francis....

#17 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,724 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 09:19 AM

It'd be nice to have 550 MLB PAs (of regular playing time, not herky-jerky "one game in, two games out" play) from Chris at this point to say "you're not good enough, we're going to cut you" instead of vacillating on whether he's still a prospect or not.


Problem is, when a guy's not going well, when he's got big hole in his swing, when for whatever reason he's not finding solutions with the coaching... you're not gaining much with a little more playing time. And Parmelee was on a 114 GS, 488 PA pace when he was sent down struggling last July (1-22, 12 K in his previous week). That's 2.5 PA per week difference from your "regular playing time" estimate. And if anything, his playing time was trending up at the time (started 15 of last 17 games). It's not like he was parked on the bench.

And I don't think there is much vacillating from the Twins about Parmelee. Despite being a first round pick years back, he was a pretty slight prospect until his suprise September 2011 audition, and his 2012 Rochester campaign. He's gone the wrong way since then, both at MLB and in AAA. He's the kind of guy who, when you lack for better options, you keep him around, keep tinkering as needed, give him regular (although not necessarily "everyday") reps, either at AAA or in MLB, as opposed to parking him on the bench, and hope he turns it around. And that's exactly what they've done with him. Any vacillating is probably mostly from fans.

And frankly, the above description could apply to a lot of Twins the past few years. It's a little frustrating as a fan sometimes, but this organization is clearly comfortable taking a few years to sort things out with marginal players.

#18 TheDean

TheDean

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 10:08 AM

Given the other options the Twins had in the outfield last season, very little would have been lost by playing Parmelee. That's my point.

It'd be nice to have 550 MLB PAs (of regular playing time, not herky-jerky "one game in, two games out" play) from Chris at this point to say "you're not good enough, we're going to cut you" instead of vacillating on whether he's still a prospect or not.


One thing that I've been curious about is whether Presley deserves a similar opportunity at consistent at bats. The thing going against him most seems to be that he's got a couple years of age on Parmelee. Interestingly, they've both had up-and-down inconsistent experience in the majors, they've posted the same career OPS+ (98), they have a similar number of MLB PAs, they similarly crushed minors pitching, they're both lefty bats, they're both probably best suited at a corner OF spot, they have similar batting lines this spring, and (to bring it back to the thread subject) they are both easier on the eyes in the OF than Willingham/Kubel.

My guess is that Willingham and Kubel get long leashes since there are few other middle-of-the-order bats on the roster with significant MLB experience. However, I definitely would rather see them get more DH time with Parmelee and Presley patrolling the corner opposite of Arcia. I understand that might not be what actually happens, especially if Pinto needs ABs at the DH slot.

#19 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,216 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 10:25 AM

Given the other options the Twins had in the outfield last season, very little would have been lost by playing Parmelee. That's my point.

It'd be nice to have 550 MLB PAs (of regular playing time, not herky-jerky "one game in, two games out" play) from Chris at this point to say "you're not good enough, we're going to cut you" instead of vacillating on whether he's still a prospect or not.

The Twins gained all of .050 OPS points by playing guys like Doumit instead of Parmelee on the way to losing 96 games. At some point, you just ignore your record and play the guys who will force roster decisions the following spring.

It would help mitigate some of the "second verse, same as the first" feeling we've had over the past three seasons. Give a guy a legit shot and move on if it's not working.


Doumit was mostly a DH. I would rather see them play Arcia more than Parmelee at RF where he belonged because Arcia is a better player. I would love to see Parmelee over Willingham but for that to happen he would have needed to be traded and that ship sailed 2 off-seasons ago.

#20 TheDean

TheDean

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 01:33 PM

Interestingly, they've both had up-and-down inconsistent experience in the majors, they've posted the same career OPS+ (98), they have a similar number of MLB PAs, they similarly crushed minors pitching, they're both lefty bats, they're both probably best suited at a corner OF spot, they have similar batting lines this spring, and (to bring it back to the thread subject) they are both easier on the eyes in the OF than Willingham/Kubel.


... and now they've both been waived. Hmm, I guess I wasn't the only one assessing them to be of similar value (or non-value) to the organization. Given the low opinion of the FO around here, maybe I shouldn't be proud of that...