The Twins aren't gonna contend for quite a few years. Morneau is a 31 year old 1B with the injury history of a world war 2 veteran. He's expensive, he's injury-prone and he's not getting any younger. Morneau isn't part of the future for this team, but Parmelee potentially is. You dump Morneau, you get the arms in here that won't make you a laughing stock around the league and you hope to dig yourself outta being one of the worst teams in the league.
Bad teams get rid of expensive players, it's what you do. Especially when you have a MLB ready 1B waiting in the wings who makes 400K a season.
The problem is the extremism of your position. I have NO problem with replacing Morneau with a younger, cheaper player (presumably Parmelee). You don't want to extend Morneau, I have no problem with that -- I'm not in favor of it either.
The problem is that he IS signed for 2013 and the Twins will have to pay him $14 million (unless he retires but I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen). So the question is how do you maximize your return?
It seems to me that if you can't find a trade for him this winter (even if it is a salary dump) then you have to hope and pray that he stays healthy and that you can trade him next summer.
But the other problem is that I'm not at all sure that the Twins would actually spend the savings from moving Morneau's contract. So it seems to me that you have to think about whether you want them reducing payroll by getting rid of salary -- maybe it's better to have Morneau's pay in the salary total even though payroll isn't allocated the way you want. I think we all have to be concerned about whether the savings created by moving a contract some how become permanent payroll reductions.