89 replies to this topic

[ewen21]

 

Since Hrbek?

Puckett, Knoblauch.

Puckett did get some time in AAA and Knoblauch spent a full year in AA, but OK.

 

Still not on the same level as penciling in KIriloff and Lewis as starters in 2019

 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Puckett did get some time in AAA and Knoblauch spent a full year in AA, but OK.
 
Still not on the same level as penciling in KIriloff and Lewis as starters in 2019

no, but Lewis might be closer than he appears (if he stays healthy, of course). The Lewis comps with Correa and Lindor are pretty good. We should see Rooker in 2019.

[ewen21]

 

no, but Lewis might be closer than he appears (if he stays healthy, of course). The Lewis comps with Correa and Lindor are pretty good. We should see Rooker in 2019.

Too soon for me.

[Major Leauge Ready]

 

Then why not trade Gibson at this point? I don't know what you mean by moderate, but he's a top 20-30 starting pitcher right now....that has real value.

 

And, go big for some of us is add 1 legit player this year, to a longer than 1 year deal.....then see what happens next year.

 

Mike, I might be under estimating the return on Gibson. He only has one year of control and he produced 2.8 WAR. That’s not the kind of difference maker that teams are willing to give up top type prospects to acquire. With everyone clamoring (me included) for difference makers I don’t see the point. It makes more sense to extend him. If they are unable, ok, go ahead and test the trade waters.

 

I also don’t see this team as being positioned to rebuild. We don’t have the types of veteran players that would allow us to acquire top talent. It just does not make sense to give up on the guys we have just yet. They have too much potential and waiting a year is not going to have any impact on the duration of the rebuild.

 

What do you or anyone else think Gibson would bring on the trade market? I prefer an extension but I can see your point if they were able to get a great return.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I'd like to see Gibson stick around. He is not only a viable starter now, but with the other guys gone he has become the union rep and De facto clubhouse leader (at least for now).

[Mike Sixel]

 

Mike, I might be under estimating the return on Gibson. He only has one year of control and he produced 2.8 WAR. That’s not the kind of difference maker that teams are willing to give up top type prospects to acquire. With everyone clamoring (me included) for difference makers I don’t see the point. It makes more sense to extend him. If they are unable, ok, go ahead and test the trade waters.

 

I also don’t see this team as being positioned to rebuild. We don’t have the types of veteran players that would allow us to acquire top talent. It just does not make sense to give up on the guys we have just yet. They have too much potential and waiting a year is not going to have any impact on the duration of the rebuild.

 

What do you or anyone else think Gibson would bring on the trade market? I prefer an extension but I can see your point if they were able to get a great return.

 

I also prefer an extension at this point.....but if they can't do that and they don't add a big time bat and SP, I'd deal him. I'd guess he returns a top 50 - 75 talent, give or take. Kind of depends on who signs who this off season.

 

I'd be aiming for C, 3B, starting pitcher type (who clearly has to be more than a year or two away).

[Jham]

Then I either read it 100% wrong, or your post isn't as clear as you think...because it read like don't promote guys faster.....at least to me.

That's not incorrect. We're looking at the same issue from separate views. I see your argument as a little too "get younger just for the sake of getting younger" for my taste.

I happen to think, regardless of league trends, the age aspect, on both ends, is really about maximizing each player's productive window under their rookie contract. This would lend itself to some players, flame throwers, wipe out sliders, elite speed guys to debut sooner. It might also lend itself to a patient approach with fringier types who may develop late. The Twins have just had an abundance of fringe types. The goal is to have the player under control for as many peak years as possible.

Edited by Jham, Yesterday, 01:53 PM.

[mlhouse]

 

Puckett did get some time in AAA and Knoblauch spent a full year in AA, but OK.

 

Still not on the same level as penciling in KIriloff and Lewis as starters in 2019

 

Basically.Kent Hrbek was a 17th round draft pick in 1978.He got 79 Rookie level plate appearances in 1979.One full year of A in 1980 and one full year of A+ in 1981.He was promoted directly from A+ to the Twins late in 1981 and played the entire season in 1982 as a major league player.At 24 years of age he had 1,881 plate appearances and was the runner up for the 1984 MVP award. Using the "Twins Way" logic, he might have just been given his initial chance in 1984.  

 

Puckett had some time in AAA, but he was drafted in the 1982 January phase of the draft. He played that draft year in Rookie, 1983 in A+, and started 1984 in AAA before starting his iconic career with the Twins (I can still recall listening to that game on the radio in my dorm room).Again, using the Twins approach of today, Puckett would have been no where near the majors by 1984.

 

Knoblauch pretty much the same story.Drafted in 1989 and played draft year in A and A+.Then first full season in AA for 1990.Then, started with the Twins in 1991.Again, if Knoblauch was a current Twins prospect he would have started at Elizabethton and probably got promoted to A near end of season.Then he would have repeated A with a call up to A+.Then a season of AA, and at least a partial season in AAA.  

 

I guess being rushed through the minors killed these players career. 

[yarnivek1972]

Of course, part of the reason why Hrbek wasn’t promoted to AA was because they had this stud hitter that they were transitioning to first baseman there.

Surely you remember Scott Ullger.

1981 was his THIRD FULL season in AA.

[DocBauer]

Basically.Kent Hrbek was a 17th round draft pick in 1978.He got 79 Rookie level plate appearances in 1979.One full year of A in 1980 and one full year of A+ in 1981.He was promoted directly from A+ to the Twins late in 1981 and played the entire season in 1982 as a major league player.At 24 years of age he had 1,881 plate appearances and was the runner up for the 1984 MVP award. Using the "Twins Way" logic, he might have just been given his initial chance in 1984.  
 
Puckett had some time in AAA, but he was drafted in the 1982 January phase of the draft. He played that draft year in Rookie, 1983 in A+, and started 1984 in AAA before starting his iconic career with the Twins (I can still recall listening to that game on the radio in my dorm room).Again, using the Twins approach of today, Puckett would have been no where near the majors by 1984.
 
Knoblauch pretty much the same story.Drafted in 1989 and played draft year in A and A+.Then first full season in AA for 1990.Then, started with the Twins in 1991.Again, if Knoblauch was a current Twins prospect he would have started at Elizabethton and probably got promoted to A near end of season.Then he would have repeated A with a call up to A+.Then a season of AA, and at least a partial season in AAA.  
 
I guess being rushed through the minors killed these players career.

Puckett turned out to be a special player. A HOF player. Hrbek, and I'll include Gaetti here as well, turned out to be outstanding players. Launder was good, but not great. Same with Engle and Bush. Viola, who you also previously mentioned, stunk initially before turning out to be outstanding. There was also mention of Faedo. I'd even throw in Reed, and I believe there was a catcher by name of Baker, if I can trust my memory.

Regardless, some top players were promoted aggressively. Agreed. Some turned out. Some didn't. And they took 5 years to achieve a winning record, with trades and signings to do so. And the second WS team was built on some of these players, plus Knoblauch and other outside additions. Knoblauch was moved aggressively, no doubt.

But help me here, I'm really trying to understand your point. Sano, Rosario, Buxton, Kepler, Polanco and Berrios were promoted pretty aggressively throughout the system. Despite some time in AAA, most notably Berrios, most jumped almost completely from AA. Most recently, Rooker spent his first professional season at AA and is ticketed for the AFL when healthy. Lewis and Khiriloff spent half their first full pro season's at high A ball.

I guess I'm just trying to understand your point. Are the Twins still not being aggressive enough with these prospects?