Thread: Christensen: Minnesota Twins Pitching Hope Are On Horizon

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/166652456.html

Joe takes a look at five pitchers we've been talking about a lot on this board: Berrios, Gibson, Hendriks, Fernandez & Vasquez.

His description of Fernandez is underwhelming. I'm not sure why he included him with these others.

why are they talkin about limiting Gibson to 100IP next yr???? Gotta be a misprint, doesnt it??

If we are relying on Hernandez as guy to step up, we are in trouble, IMO.

PLEASE don't let them think that all the Twins need is for these five players to mature.

I thought this was interesting when they started with Berrios......and then I saw the rest of the list.

Berrios and Gibson are the only 2 on that list that have a chance to be above average big league pitchers. Hendriks could be average at best. The other two...meh.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

I thought this was interesting when they started with Berrios......and then I saw the rest of the list.

I agree with Gibson too, but the rest of the list? Yuck

Originally Posted by righty8383

Berrios and Gibson are the only 2 on that list that have a chance to be above average big league pitchers. Hendriks could be average at best. The other two...meh.

Disagree, Hendriks has the upside to be a solid #2 or a good #3.

Berrios and Gibson both have the ability to be great #2's or a poor mans #1.

I almost choked on my coffee this morning while reading this article. This list puts a gleam in Antony's eye??? There is just no reason to have faith in this FO or any of the key decision makers.

This team won't finish a season above .500 for another 4 or 5 years.

Few things:

The Twins never said they are counting on all 5 of those guys, their are just 5 potential options in the farm system.
If 2 of those 5 can become solid pitchers the rotation suddenly doesn't look as nasty as it does now.

Originally Posted by cr9617

I almost choked on my coffee this morning while reading this article. This list puts a gleam in Antony's eye??? There is just no reason to have faith in this FO or any of the key decision makers.

This team won't finish a season above .500 for another 4 or 5 years.

I am so bloody sick and tired of reading this line or something like it on the forums.

The Minnesota Twins were the most consistently successful small market team of the 2000s. They made the playoffs more often than not and while they struggled in the postseason, overall they posted one of the better records in all of baseball for the decade.

So why shouldn't we have a little faith in the front office? Because the team had two awful seasons? Because of that, we should ignore the entire decade the preceded it?

Jesus... People around here need to step off the ledge and take in a little perspective. Yes, the Twins are bad right now but their farm system is on the rebound and help is on the way. They have a solid core of young-ish players. They have money to spend. Stop cherry-picking the past two years of horrible baseball and ignoring the ten years that came before it.

The past is gone at last and the Twins will now stay in last. The F. O. don't care they get there money.

Originally Posted by Top Gun

The past is gone at last and the Twins will now stay in last. The F. O. don't care they get there money.

I didn't know the front office received profit-sharing.

You obviously hate the Twins; well over 90% of your posts are overwhelmingly negative and I never see you contribute anything substantive to the conversation. Why are you even here?

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by cr9617

I almost choked on my coffee this morning while reading this article. This list puts a gleam in Antony's eye??? There is just no reason to have faith in this FO or any of the key decision makers.

This team won't finish a season above .500 for another 4 or 5 years.

I am so bloody sick and tired of reading this line or something like it on the forums.

The Minnesota Twins were the most consistently successful small market team of the 2000s. They made the playoffs more often than not and while they struggled in the postseason, overall they posted one of the better records in all of baseball for the decade.

So why shouldn't we have a little faith in the front office? Because the team had two awful seasons? Because of that, we should ignore the entire decade the preceded it?

Jesus... People around here need to step off the ledge and take in a little perspective. Yes, the Twins are bad right now but their farm system is on the rebound and help is on the way. They have a solid core of young-ish players. They have money to spend. Stop cherry-picking the past two years of horrible baseball and ignoring the ten years that came before it.

Can argue that, but I would say its OAK & Tampa w/MN 3rd. 5 one & dones in playoffs dropps em for me. Oak had 5 series & won only one, but had a much lower payroll & couldnt keep their key players. Tampa making the Series gives is to them IMO

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by cr9617

I almost choked on my coffee this morning while reading this article. This list puts a gleam in Antony's eye??? There is just no reason to have faith in this FO or any of the key decision makers.

This team won't finish a season above .500 for another 4 or 5 years.

I am so bloody sick and tired of reading this line or something like it on the forums.

The Minnesota Twins were the most consistently successful small market team of the 2000s. They made the playoffs more often than not and while they struggled in the postseason, overall they posted one of the better records in all of baseball for the decade.

So why shouldn't we have a little faith in the front office? Because the team had two awful seasons? Because of that, we should ignore the entire decade the preceded it?

Jesus... People around here need to step off the ledge and take in a little perspective. Yes, the Twins are bad right now but their farm system is on the rebound and help is on the way. They have a solid core of young-ish players. They have money to spend. Stop cherry-picking the past two years of horrible baseball and ignoring the ten years that came before it.

+1.

Originally Posted by Roaddog

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

I thought this was interesting when they started with Berrios......and then I saw the rest of the list.

I agree with Gibson too, but the rest of the list? Yuck

It wasn't just that. If you were playing the "Which one of these guys is not like the others?" it's CLEARLY Berrios. So I started reading an article, flipped a few pages, and it's like the damn author changed.

Originally Posted by greengoblinrulz

Can argue that, but I would say its OAK & Tampa w/MN 3rd. 5 one & dones in playoffs dropps em for me. Oak had 5 series & won only one, but had a much lower payroll & couldnt keep their key players. Tampa making the Series gives is to them IMO

Tampa was awful until the ninth year of the decade. Oakland didn't do much after the third year of the decade (2006 was their lone postseason run after 2002).

Minnesota, on the other hand, didn't have as many flashy teams but they were competitive almost every year and made the playoffs more often than any other small market team.

Either way, we're splitting hairs. The Twins were a very competitive team for an entire decade, something no other small market team achieved. Ignoring that because they've had two truly awful seasons is ridiculous, especially when their farm system is coming on as strong as it has over the past 12 months. The organization still needs pitching (and lots of it) but this team has a lot of bats on the way and few of them are fading as they reach the high minors (Arcia has turned into a monster, Hicks has started to turn into the guy we all hoped he'd become).

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by cr9617

I almost choked on my coffee this morning while reading this article. This list puts a gleam in Antony's eye??? There is just no reason to have faith in this FO or any of the key decision makers.

This team won't finish a season above .500 for another 4 or 5 years.

I am so bloody sick and tired of reading this line or something like it on the forums.

The Minnesota Twins were the most consistently successful small market team of the 2000s. They made the playoffs more often than not and while they struggled in the postseason, overall they posted one of the better records in all of baseball for the decade.

So why shouldn't we have a little faith in the front office? Because the team had two awful seasons? Because of that, we should ignore the entire decade the preceded it?

Jesus... People around here need to step off the ledge and take in a little perspective. Yes, the Twins are bad right now but their farm system is on the rebound and help is on the way. They have a solid core of young-ish players. They have money to spend. Stop cherry-picking the past two years of horrible baseball and ignoring the ten years that came before it.

I think the Twins will be better in the next couple years, but you have to also point out how hard and long the fall from grace has been. They have more money to spend than they ever did during the Metrodome years, so they should be able to put a representative product on the field. Last year's team was not. This year's team has no starting pitching to speak of.

Originally Posted by stringer bell

I think the Twins will be better in the next couple years, but you have to also point out how hard and long the fall from grace has been. They have more money to spend than they ever did during the Metrodome years, so they should be able to put a representative product on the field. Last year's team was not. This year's team has no starting pitching to speak of.

It's been bad, there's no denying that.

But to say "there's no reason to have confidence in the FO" is just dumb. I don't know how else to respond to that kind of thinking. The front office made a bunch of mistakes from 2006-2010 and that led to some of the mess we're dealing with today but they also had a healthy dose of bad luck and a general manager who made moves to the ML roster seemingly at random. That GM is now gone and the guy who built the first two waves of successful Twins prospects is back at the helm.

Will he succeed? Dunno. But I'm going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. He hasn't been back on the job for even 12 months yet.

Mr vodkadave, you really see Hendricks as a #2. A #2 starter has 2 plus pitches...Hendricks has none..his FB is below avg at 87-91 with little movement and not as much sink as everyone says (same as Blackburn)..curve is average at best,change is below avg, so how do you come up with a #2 starter...#5 or long reliever maybe....Gibson has a shot at possibly being. A good #3.. this is why I said they should have gotten lower level high upside proects for liriano & span...because they don't have a #1 or 2 in the system...