Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

From MinnCentric


Photo

Article: Minnesota-bound Prospects for 2013

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 Physics Guy

Physics Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 758 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 08:21 AM

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.co...spects-for-2013

#2 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,772 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:24 AM

I disagree with everyone about Hicks, and will be pissed if the Twins actually do start him out of ST. All he needs is to stay at AAA for a month (which would actually help his development IMO) to avoid losing a year of team control. The Twins would be ****ing idiots to not do this on a team that has no chance.... especially if the Twins feel he is the CF of the future. All this talk now is to avoid the truth about why he doesn't go North with the Twins.
Do or do not. There is no try.

#3 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,392 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:30 AM

I disagree with everyone about Hicks, and will be pissed if the Twins actually do start him out of ST. All he needs is to stay at AAA for a month (which would actually help his development IMO) to avoid losing a year of team control. The Twins would be ****ing idiots to not do this on a team that has no chance.... especially if the Twins feel he is the CF of the future. All this talk now is to avoid the truth about why he doesn't go North with the Twins.


Like Smerf, I'd rather see Hicks get a few reps at AAA. There's no reason to spend that year of control on what is probably a lost season.

Plus, it wouldn't kill the team to see what they have in Benson. He's far less of a sure thing prospect-wise. Even Mastro could hold down CF for a month.

#4 ericchri

ericchri

    Generally Clueless

  • Members
  • 388 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:41 AM

The talk has certainly made it seem like Gardenhire especially wants Hicks as his CF for some reason. I'm truly excited about the prospect of him playing CF for us, but I agree that the more reasonable decision would be giving him the time in AAA for that extra year of team control. The Twins really need to get off to a decent start this year instead of burying themselves in the standings by the end of April, and while I think Hicks will be a better player, if I had to choose who plays better to start the year to help that goal, I'm going with Mastroianni. Benson can back up all three OF spots adequately for now.

#5 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 3,993 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:47 AM

I disagree with everyone about Hicks, and will be pissed if the Twins actually do start him out of ST. All he needs is to stay at AAA for a month (which would actually help his development IMO) to avoid losing a year of team control. The Twins would be ****ing idiots to not do this on a team that has no chance.... especially if the Twins feel he is the CF of the future. All this talk now is to avoid the truth about why he doesn't go North with the Twins.


This is such a no brainer, anyway you look at it.

#6 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 3,993 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:48 AM

I think Pressley is going to be given a better chance than both Thielbar and unfortunately, Slama, JMHO.

#7 Physics Guy

Physics Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 758 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:53 AM

I can't say I disagree with any of you regarding Hicks. The smart move would be to delay his arrival to keep him an extra year. Ryan should step in and tell Gardy he is going to have to wait. Worst case scenario has Matro keeping his seat warm for a month or so. On the other hand, I hate that the system influences when guys are brought up. The best player should play.

#8 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,772 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:56 AM

The Twins really need to get off to a decent start this year instead of burying themselves in the standings by the end of April


Apparently JR doesn't agree with you, or he would have done more this offseason to help the big league club.
Do or do not. There is no try.

#9 Oldgoat_MN

Oldgoat_MN

    Ancient Member

  • Members
  • 699 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:08 AM

Fun stuff.
Still think the growing pains would be significant for Hicks. Time in AAA would be good for him.
We shall soon see.

#10 MWLFan

MWLFan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 197 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:35 AM

Odds are this year will top out at in the 70-73 win plateau if things all right. (If you want to talk about 80+ wins, I suppose you are in the anything can happen mindfram. True enough, but unlikely.) Give Hicks some time in AAA. He has always been a work in progress and one good season n AA does not change this. He won't be there for long if he deserves to come up. By September will it be a Benson-Hicks-Arcia outfield with Parmalee at 1st?

#11 fairweather

fairweather

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 253 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:43 AM

From what I've read it leads me to believe that Gardy was promised he could have Hicks from day 1 if the FO traded away both Span and Revere. I understand that the Twins aren't going anywhere this season but Gardy will be fired if the team starts poorly. So it's hard to tell him to wait a month or 2 for Hicks when Gardy's tenure could be over by then. Will Having Hicks over Mastrioni make that much of a difference? I doubt it but the point is that the team needs to start off playing respectable ball or the fans will be calling for heads and Gardy's will be the first to roll.

#12 Physics Guy

Physics Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 758 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:46 AM

By September will it be a Benson-Hicks-Arcia outfield with Parmalee at 1st?


I personally would love to see it, as long as we aren't just dumping Willingham and Morneau.

#13 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,772 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:56 AM

From what I've read it leads me to believe that Gardy was promised he could have Hicks from day 1 if the FO traded away both Span and Revere. I understand that the Twins aren't going anywhere this season but Gardy will be fired if the team starts poorly. So it's hard to tell him to wait a month or 2 for Hicks when Gardy's tenure could be over by then. Will Having Hicks over Mastrioni make that much of a difference? I doubt it but the point is that the team needs to start off playing respectable ball or the fans will be calling for heads and Gardy's will be the first to roll.


Long overdue. A few talentless season bad seasons aren't Gardy's fault. JR has a team to run and if that influences his decision shame on him. Keeping Hicks in AAA will benefit this team in a big way, while letting Benson (who could easily be better anyway) showcase and earn a spot.
Do or do not. There is no try.

#14 LoganJones

LoganJones

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 172 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:21 PM

If Hicks is the best CF the Twins have, he better be starting in CF on April 1. If during spring it looks like playing in a league half full of guys who can't hack it in the bigs would be good for him, then do that. Team control is foolish to worry over about a 23 year old. You get 6 years. He'll be 29 when he's entering his first FA season. A guy with all the tools that Hicks has can actually add quite a few wins in early season match-ups when balls aren't jumping as far and pitchers are still shaking off the rust.

#15 SweetOne69

SweetOne69

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 496 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:48 PM

While I agree with most of you that Hicks should spend some time @ AAA, your argument regarding the extra year of team control is based on the assumption that he spends the entire year with the Twins. He could start the year with Minnesota and show that he isn't ready (like Dozier and Parmelee) and get sent down for a month or two and they would still gain that extra year of control.

#16 Ultima Ratio

Ultima Ratio

    Super Friend

  • Members
  • 1,749 posts
  • LocationAt my computer

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:47 PM

I have a bad feeling that the Hicks will suffer a Benson-like regression this year. Starting in AAA and having to go back to AA.
Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

#17 terencemann

terencemann

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:59 PM

I have a bad feeling that the Hicks will suffer a Benson-like regression this year. Starting in AAA and having to go back to AA.


I wouldn't worry too much. They are two very different prospects. Hicks has a lot more going for him than Benson.

I think it's a lot better to start Hicks in AAA, let him see some borderline major league pitching, and then bring him up later if he's successful and still looks like he can help the team. It's better to give the non-prospects a chance to show what they can do at the major league level and not mess with the development path of Hicks.

Edited by terencemann, 14 February 2013 - 02:02 PM.


#18 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 04:27 PM

In the scheme of things, an extra year of team control is no big deal. By the time it becomes an issue, he'll be trade bait to make room for Buxton.

#19 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,339 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 14 February 2013 - 04:35 PM

Trade bait becomes much more valuable when there's additional control to go with it.

#20 James

James

    Sideburns Specialist

  • Members
  • 1,553 posts
  • LocationThe dive bars of NE Minneapolis

Posted 14 February 2013 - 04:42 PM

In the scheme of things, an extra year of team control is no big deal. By the time it becomes an issue, he'll be trade bait to make room for Buxton.

Or Hicks will be a bust... or he'll be really good and he can move to LF and have an amazing outfield... Or Buxton won't pan out... or that extra year of team control will allow the Twins to trade him for a better player than they would have gotten without the team control (one of the reasons both Span and Revere brought the return that they did).

Any way about it, an extra year of team control for a potential impact player is a good thing to have.

You can come up with statistics to prove anything. Forty percent of all people know that.


#21 specialiststeve

specialiststeve

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 15 February 2013 - 09:34 AM

Unless Hicks bats about .400 in the spring he will start in AAA. Mastrioni should be able to handle the job and who knows if he can do the job that opens up some trade opportunities. It's a long season and Hicks WILL be her just when. Always fun seeing a top prospect until they struggle.

#22 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 922 posts

Posted 15 February 2013 - 09:52 AM

Hicks should start in Minnesota if they think he is ready. Benson will probably never make it and why hurt Gardenhire my giving him a player who is not that good. Hicks draws enough walks to have a respectable OBP even if his BA is not great. A extra year of control is only an issue if you are not going to pay Hicks after 6 years. That is a small market team issue not a mid market which the Twins are.

#23 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:52 AM

I'm not arguing that the extra year is not good to have. But it's relatively minor when compared to his development. And, as some have said, it's way to early to be counting arbitration years on a guy who hasn't played an inning at the majors.

If I'm the Twins, I want him working with the major league staff and learning major league pitchers right away, if he doesn't have obvious stuff to work on. A two-month stint at AAA won't hurt him that much (it's not without risks, think Cuddyer), but I believe he'll develop faster at the majors. And that really is the key. The extra year means nothing if he washes out because we didn't handle him right.

I also think the Twins need to get off to a good start, and should take the best guy north for that reason. He's the only lead-off guy of the three vying for the job. If winning is at all important, Hicks is the clear choice.

#24 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,339 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 15 February 2013 - 11:07 AM

If one month in AAA is enough to mysteriously ruin his development, then he never stood a chance in the first place.

#25 Physics Guy

Physics Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 758 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:23 PM

From Phil Miller's Chat yesterday on StarTrib:

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Comment From Shadow of Kirby:

What are the chances of Aaron Hicks being ready to play center?

Phil Miller:

Very good. It's clear the Twins desperately want him to seize the job this spring, to add some excitement and intrigue to the team. That said, if he's not quite ready, sending him to Rochester for 6 weeks means they would control him for an extra season, which wouldn't be bad either. [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


I think I am going to like Miller. I didn't read the PP when he was there.[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: chatmsgtime"][/TD]
[TD="class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Edited by Physics Guy, 16 February 2013 - 01:25 PM.
formatting


#26 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,339 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:26 PM

Miller has always been my favorite among the TC media.

#27 LaBombo

LaBombo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,309 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 02:41 PM

I'm not arguing that the extra year is not good to have. But it's relatively minor when compared to his development. And, as some have said, it's way to early to be counting arbitration years on a guy who hasn't played an inning at the majors.

If I'm the Twins, I want him working with the major league staff and learning major league pitchers right away, if he doesn't have obvious stuff to work on. A two-month stint at AAA won't hurt him that much (it's not without risks, think Cuddyer), but I believe he'll develop faster at the majors. And that really is the key. The extra year means nothing if he washes out because we didn't handle him right.

I also think the Twins need to get off to a good start, and should take the best guy north for that reason. He's the only lead-off guy of the three vying for the job. If winning is at all important, Hicks is the clear choice.


Winning is not important to the Twins (nor should it be, imo); the offseason moves made that clear. Money, and therefore service time, obviously are.

And it's absurd to think that spending two months at triple A is a bigger risk than skipping a level, especially for a guy who has needed a full season at every level and who until last season has had a consistent, gaping hole in his game.

#28 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,546 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 16 February 2013 - 05:48 PM

While I agree with most of you that Hicks should spend some time @ AAA, your argument regarding the extra year of team control is based on the assumption that he spends the entire year with the Twins. He could start the year with Minnesota and show that he isn't ready (like Dozier and Parmelee) and get sent down for a month or two and they would still gain that extra year of control.


This is exactly right and precisely the reason that if Hicks is the best player in the spring there is no reason to send him out.

If he is good enough to stay the whole year I would assume the team would want to lock him up long before he reaches free agency. If they do this all the machinations to get an extra year of control would have been pointless.
Papers...business papers.

#29 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,339 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:09 PM

Assumptions make for great long-term plans.

I'm sold.

#30 The Wise One

The Wise One

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 821 posts

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:21 PM

If either Hicks or Benson are to be future trade bait I supose a month in Rochester is not the end of the world. As spring training has barely started, speculation as to where either will play is just a pasttime. There are no definative indicators either is ready for mlb level competion with a bat.