Article: Only One Spot to Address for 2015?

[drjim]

Actually, last year at this time, Mauer was largely considered a "set" option at catcher, just temporarily shelved.

 

At that time, plenty of people here also thought Florimon was an asset going forward at SS.

 

And lots of people here also said we shouldn't bother getting a new OF for 2014, because we had guys in the corners and our CF of the future would be up by midseason (perhaps he was, just not the guy people were referring to ).

 

Last year at this time, people were also probably asking, how can we improve on ~105 OPS+ at 1B?  Sounds like this year too.

 

The rotation outlook was indeed worse -- god bless Phil Hughes! -- and I like our position player mix better now, but there are some similarities.

 

Fair enough, flip C and 1B, but the point still stands.

 

I don't think Florimon was ever thought of as a set answer, perhaps a body that was acceptable until a replacement was found, but not someone who couldn't be replaced. Just an overall lack of options.

 

Who was the other corner other than Arcia?

 

And yes, people (like me) were arguing against signing a long term CF but certainly weren't opposed to a stopgap, just acknowledged the fact that player didn't actually exist.

 

So yes, I think there is a misremembering of what people were saying at this time last year.

[Brock Beauchamp]

At that time, plenty of people here also thought Florimon was an asset going forward at SS.

*shudders*

[Mike Sixel]

Last year at this time, Rosario was a top what prospect? What could you have received for him and one of the veterans on the roster (or another medium prospect)? What could have Joe Benson received after his A ball season? What about Pinto, if they never believed in him as a catcher, why not deal him before his MLB defense is exposed?

 

Would you like to go back in time, and deal Rosario for a good SP or LF? 

 

All I'm saying is that if you have a system this deep, the prospects are worth less to you than they are to other teams. And, most prospects never produce more than a WAR or three over their career, if they even do that.

 

For a team that has this much money available, being unwilling to deal from a deep prospect pool seems like a limiting strategy. 

 

I understand that most do not agree with me on this. I'm ok with that. 

 

Good luck to the Twins in selling season tickets next year, with this record, returning the team mostly intact, and no All Star Game to coerce people with. I mean that sincerely, good luck to them.

[goulik]

Guilty but I saw him as a rookie with potential to play better as he grew accustomed to the league not regress horribly

[Mike Sixel]

Guilty but I saw him as a rookie with potential to play better as he grew accustomed to the league not regress horribly

 

We are all guilty of that sometimes, but we forget that many/most rookies don't actually get better, they are who they will become.....I know I am with other players.

[goulik]

Last year at this time, Rosario was a top what prospect? What could you have received for him and one of the veterans on the roster (or another medium prospect)? What could have Joe Benson received after his A ball season? What about Pinto, if they never believed in him as a catcher, why not deal him before his MLB defense is exposed?

 

Would you like to go back in time, and deal Rosario for a good SP or LF? 

 

All I'm saying is that if you have a system this deep, the prospects are worth less to you than they are to other teams. And, most prospects never produce more than a WAR or three over their career, if they even do that.

 

For a team that has this much money available, being unwilling to deal from a deep prospect pool seems like a limiting strategy. 

 

I understand that most do not agree with me on this. I'm ok with that. 

 

Good luck to the Twins in selling season tickets next year, with this record, returning the team mostly intact, and no All Star Game to coerce people with. I mean that sincerely, good luck to them.

Next years team already cannot be this years team mostly intact... The team has already been blown apart from a month ago

[SwainZag]

Last year at this time, Rosario was a top what prospect? What could you have received for him and one of the veterans on the roster (or another medium prospect)? What could have Joe Benson received after his A ball season? What about Pinto, if they never believed in him as a catcher, why not deal him before his MLB defense is exposed?

 

Would you like to go back in time, and deal Rosario for a good SP or LF? 

 

All I'm saying is that if you have a system this deep, the prospects are worth less to you than they are to other teams. And, most prospects never produce more than a WAR or three over their career, if they even do that.

 

For a team that has this much money available, being unwilling to deal from a deep prospect pool seems like a limiting strategy. 

 

I understand that most do not agree with me on this. I'm ok with that. 

 

Good luck to the Twins in selling season tickets next year, with this record, returning the team mostly intact, and no All Star Game to coerce people with. I mean that sincerely, good luck to them.

 

You could say this about any prospect though, not just look back at the ones who haven't progressed forward.  

[bird]

Now is not the time to trade prospects. It might take Buxton or Sano 1-2 years to get up to speed. One of them might fail. One of them might get injured.

 

You trade prospects when you're an 80 win team pushing for the playoffs, not when you're a 73 win team trying to get its feet back under itself.

 

Any veterans traded for today might be gone and/or ineffective by the time the Twins are ready to compete. It's a mistake to give up prospects you might need later when there are still so many question marks in the near future.

I agree with this in general, but with the caveat that it can make sense to trade from any surplus. Even prospect surplus.

[Mike Sixel]

You could say this about any prospect though, not just look back at the ones who haven't progressed forward.  

 

That is precisely what I am saying, yes. Most prospects are not as good as proven MLB players.

[bird]

Yeah I agree. I think a lot of assumptions are being made that these guys will come back roaring. Given Buxtons brain injury, and the Twins history with mauer, Morneau, span, I think it is entirely possible things move much slower and we don't see them until the end of the season if at all next year.

Probably a topic for a different thread, but I don't get the level of angst and pessimism about Sano and Buxton. One prediction of almost a zero chance they contribute at all next year. Really? I mean, last time I looked, Morneausie, Spansie, and General Soreness were all playing at very high levels, and Buxton is already ripping it in the batting cage and slated for the AZL, and Sano is recovering very well too.

 

We have to remember that both of these guys are being talked about with superlatives never uttered about Gaetti and Puckett, and yet, reading some of the comments here, you'd think they're the second coming of Scott Stahoviak and Rich Becker.

[Mike Sixel]

How many examples do you want of players not putting up better numbers and getting better beyond their rookie year?  Like I said there are 100's of examples.  If a player isn't making it into year 3, IMO he isn't worth talking about.

 

Again, that is my point......there are lots of players that come up, and then literally disappear from the majors. What percent of players that appear in, say, 20 games, even play more than 50 games or 100 games or 300 games? I'd guess, not having the data, it is pretty low actually.

 

Or are like Parmalee and compile WAR that means nothing good to a team.....but stick around because there are lots of bad teams in MLB?

Edited August 27, 2014 by mike wants wins

[Mike Sixel]

Probably a topic for a different thread, but I don't get the level of angst and pessimism about Sano and Buxton. One prediction of almost a zero chance they contribute at all next year. Really? I mean, last time I looked, Morneausie, Spansie, and General Soreness were all playing at very high levels, and Buxton is already ripping it in the batting cage and slated for the AZL, and Sano is recovering very well too.

 

We have to remember that both of these guys are being talked about with superlatives never uttered about Gaetti and Puckett, and yet, reading some of the comments here, you'd think they're the second coming of Scott Stahoviak and Rich Becker.

 

good one, I don't read anyone saying they'll turn out bad.....not one person.

 

I just am not counting on them being here more than a month or so next year....not until we see either healthy and playing for more than a week in a row. But that's just me, maybe they will go from out for an entire year, and then playing more than half the games next year in MN. Makes you wonder, then, why Meyer isn't up, if it isn't about making sure he's healthy.....

[cmb0252]

I consider myself to be a bigger than most prospect/draft guy and the last three years I defended the slow build because this team had a ton of holes. The team has finally built a solid (cheap) big league frame for future success so why not trade from our biggest strength to try and help the team? While the Cubs have the most top heavy prospect system, stupid Buxton/Sano/Stewart injuries, we have the deepest. Why not use some of that depth? Heck, even if we traded both Meyer and Berrios we would still be a top 5 system. It's not like we don't have another top 100 prospect coming to us in next years draft.

 

Even if prospects didn't bust, which they definitely do, we wouldn't have enough roster spots for all our prospects anyways.

[TheDean]

On the additions to the club topic, I really come around to the idea that the team needs another solid corner.  I think Schafer will be fine as a 4th, but obviously doesn't have a bat to be a starting LF.

 

I think it's time that players on the roster have two of three qualities:

• major-league appropriate bat for his position
• defensively solid (slightly below ML-average or better)
• developing player (let's say 26 and under).

I would argue that Parmelee is therefore not part of the solution.  He no longer fits any of the categories, 0/3.  Day 1, they had better field a better solution at position 7.

 

Putting Plouffe in LF without Sano at 3B on opening day means there's the same void there as in LF, besides I'm only willing to give 2/3 if he's at 3B.  Quite possibly could be 0/3 at LF.

 

Hicks and Santana as a LF/CF duo is semi-palatable to me, but I'm not sure that the club should be leaning on more than one of those two, and I think we're all ready to see Hicks earn his way into the everyday lineup.

 

I agree with some that there could be room for a SS, but that's based on Danny in the OF.  Eddie E is part of the solution (2/3), but that doesn't mean he's not solid as a utility.

[Boom Boom]

I'm in the "wake me up when they get here" camp regarding Buxton and Sano.  Throw around all the superlatives you like, I guess I'll believe that they're the next Trout and Cabrera when I see it happen against major league competition.

[Mike Sixel]

You could go to fangraphs, look at the rookies every year, then click on them, and see if they got better the next year.....that's a lot of people though.....

[nicksaviking]

The Twins have put in the time and developed a terrific core of prospects. We saw Santana, Vargas, and now May. Arcia's had more time to go through some ups and downs. Next year, with health, we could see another wave in Meyer, Sano, possibly Buxton and even Berrios, along with Burdi, Jones, etc. 

 

I'm of the opinion that you let these guys play and see what you have, what sticks. Hopefully a nice, solid core of players will come out of that. If you noticed one thing about those 87 and 91 teams, the key players were the guys who came up together and developed that core. When they were ready, they complemented the roster with pieces. When the Yankees won 4 WS in a row, it was because of their core four (remember they have only one once since they started spending in free agency). 

 

For me, I want to see which of these guys turn into that next core. 

 

And, the idea of signing a 30+ year old #1 starter should be about 20 times more scary than the Nolasco signing has been.

 

The core prospects are most important but we can't pretend the Twins would have still won the WS in 1991 had they not signed the top free agent pitcher in the offseason, a pitcher who happened to be 36.  I'm not saying it's the right move now, but the move was essential last time they won it all.

[goulik]

I found this

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?92837-How-Long-Does-the-Average-Baseball-Career-Last

Showing 10 percent of rookies play only one year... You can view the rest of the info there including avg length of career

[bird]

I consider myself to be a bigger than most prospect/draft guy and the last three years I defended the slow build because this team had a ton of holes. The team has finally built a solid (cheap) big league frame for future success so why not trade from our biggest strength to try and help the team? While the Cubs have the most top heavy prospect system, stupid Buxton/Sano/Stewart injuries, we have the deepest. Why not use some of that depth? Heck, even if we traded both Meyer and Berrios we would still be a top 5 system. It's not like we don't have another top 100 prospect coming to us in next years draft.

Even if prospects didn't bust, which they definitely do, we wouldn't have enough roster spots for all our prospects anyways.

I agree with this, but I'd point out that we wouldn't necessarily HAVE to give up a Berrios or Meyer in a trade to solve say, the corner OF problem. Jason Adams was KC's 16th best overall prospect, down 10 spots from the beginning of the year. For the Twins, he isn't even our 16th best PITCHING prospect. We might be able to bundle lesser (to us) prospects and not mortgage our most optimal future at all. May alone might now fetch better than what he and Vanihole fetched a year ago.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

I think it would be interesting to look at the ROY ballots from the last 20 years or so... Sure, there are players like Mike Trout that are awesome from day one and Superstars forever, but then there are guys like Bobby Crosby, Dontrelle Willis, Bob Hamelin, etc etc etc that are flashes in the pan... I think there are lots of examples of players that have just one good year, and lots of examples of players that are slower to develop but become great players over time...

 

Being a prospect doesn't really come with any promises of future success, hopefully the longer a player is in a team's system, the better that team is at predicting which guy that player will turn out to be. From there you can make a call regarding trading or retaining a guy....

[kab21]

I consider myself to be a bigger than most prospect/draft guy and the last three years I defended the slow build because this team had a ton of holes. The team has finally built a solid (cheap) big league frame for future success so why not trade from our biggest strength to try and help the team? While the Cubs have the most top heavy prospect system, stupid Buxton/Sano/Stewart injuries, we have the deepest. Why not use some of that depth? Heck, even if we traded both Meyer and Berrios we would still be a top 5 system. It's not like we don't have another top 100 prospect coming to us in next years draft.

 

Even if prospects didn't bust, which they definitely do, we wouldn't have enough roster spots for all our prospects anyways.

 

I don't understand why or what we are trading guys like Meyer or Berrios.  If it were me I would almost all of next years FA chips into Lester/Scherzer to go with Hughes/Gibson and possibly a healthy Nolasco and then add Meyer and/or Berrios to that.  This is what STL has been doing.  They had a good rotation but whenever they have an injury/disappointment they have a Miller/Wacha/Lynn/Kelly/etc to call up from the minors. 

 

I doubt this will happen but I think just like the last several years we will see that the Twins rotation still has holes next year.  The goal shouldn't be to simply put a rotation together of average pitchers with a couple good but not great pitchers.  And imo that is what a Nolasco/Hughes/Gibson/Milone/May/Meyer rotation is.  That rotation is risky and is two steps away from cycling AAAA pitchers through it for some/most of the season.

[Dantes929]

First of all I don't know if Sano, Meyer or Buxton will make an impact next year but I am certainly willing to roll the dice on it. Certainly I don't put prospects ranked that highly in the "There's almost no chance Sano or Buxton are productive major leaguers next year, and not a whole lot more hope foe Meyer, IMO" category. That is not to devalue anyone's opinion but Santana probably would have been legitimately in that category at the beginning of the year and his prospect status did not rate with those guys. One thing that is overlooked in all of this is that the Twins have scored the 6th most runs in all of baseball. Hard to believe but I think it underscores my belief that the fans think every team that is any good has 9 established hitters who all hit at least .270 and average about 20 homers a game and that is just not true. Those same fans repeatedly have said no contending team would ever have guys like Pnt or Butera on their rosters. Keep in mind that the Twins hitters don't even get to face Twins pitching. Now I don't expect such great production from Suzuki, Santana or Vargas next year but factor in a better year from Mauer and the fact that we will have Santana and Vargas all year along with possible contributions from Hicks, Polanco, Buxton and Sano makes me think the offense will be ok. I have not minded the lineup the Twins have put out there the last month and let me say again the Twins have scored the 6th most runs out of 30 teams. That leaves us with pitching and I can make the case that they should expect better with Gibson, Hughes, Meyer, May and Nolasco than with Hughes, Gibson, Nolasco, Pelfrey and Correia but as has been pointed out one can make the case that they will not be much better. I have never advocated spending big on free agency with the one exception of Thome in his prime. In this case though I think going after a guy like Shields makes a lot of sense. Hard to deny that Shields, Hughes, Gibson, Meyer and May or Nolasco wouldn't be better than what we put out there this year.

[SwainZag]

You could go to fangraphs, look at the rookies every year, then click on them, and see if they got better the next year.....that's a lot of people though.....

 

It wouldn't even just be in Year 2 though, they could have a down sophomore season and break out in year 3 or 4.  If I had time I would gladly do a study, but unfortunately I don't.  I'm working on something though. 

[goulik]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/436001-sophomore-slump-truth-or-cliche

This article found 56% of sophmores have "similar" stats in year two as rookie year, 22% improved, 22% slumped

[bird]

I'm in the "wake me up when they get here" camp regarding Buxton and Sano.  Throw around all the superlatives you like, I guess I'll believe that they're the next Trout and Cabrera when I see it happen against major league competition.

that's cool, but if you're the GM, you gotta make a few predictions and place a couple bets here about 2015. you can't just go outside the system to find sure fire guys to play while relegating all the youngsters who still have something to prove to the minors.

 

No guts, no glory: put these guys on the left side if you bet they would be plus contributors in 2015 and on the right side of the line otherwise. Arcia, Santana, Vargas, Meyer, May, Pinto, Sano, Buxton, Hicks, Rosario, Polanco, Berrios, Pressly, Tonkin, Oliveros, Milone, Pelfrey, Parmelee, Achter, Guerra, Pryor....you gotta make the call, and then you gotta fill the holes, and you gotta guess which holes are temporary and fill them accordingly. So, Ryan just can't ask for a wake up call when Buxton and Sano get there, he has to make a projection about it and live with it. And then be tarred and feathered by all the meanies at TD when a result goes bad.

[pierre75275]

I think there are positions the Twins can improve on. As far as starting rotation goes they should only target one top of the line starter, and it should be a lefthander given all the quality right handed options. That leaves Jon Lester. They should decided what they would be willing to pay him and make the offer. If he signs for less somewhere else so be it. The also should be an upgrade at back up catcher. Could that be pinto? Maybe but it needs to be somebody other then freyer. It could be AJ Piersznyski. As for the outfield I think the twins should sign two of Melky, Torii, Nelson Cruz, Nick Markakias or Denard Span. If they really want to make a splash sign Jed Lowrie or Hhanly Rameriz

[SwainZag]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/436001-sophomore-slump-truth-or-cliche

This article found 56% of sophmores have "similar" stats in year two as rookie year, 22% improved, 22% slumped

 

But that doesn't mean guys didn't improve.  How about in year 3 or year 4?  

 

2014 Minnesota Twins hitters who have played in 3 or more seasons:

 

Susuki rookie year: .249/.327/.408    best year (8th) : .292/.354/.381  career: .257/.314/.376

Mauer rookie year: .294/.372/.411    best year (5th): .365/.444/.587  career:  .319/.401/.462

Dozier rookie year:  .234/.271/332    best year (3rd): .236/.342/.417  career:  .239/.314/.396

Plouffe rookie year:  .238/.305/.392   best year(2nd): .235/.301.455  career:  .243/.304/.412

Willingham rookie yr:  .277/.356/.496  best year(7th): .260/.366/.524  career:  .253/.359/.467

Morales rookie year:  .234/.293/.371  best year(4th): .306/.355/.569   career:  .274/.326/.464

Kubel rookie year:      .241/.279/.386  best year(4th):  .300/.369/.539  career:  .262/.330/.448

Bartlett rookie year:    .241/.316/.335  best year(5th):  .320/.389/.490   career:  .270/.336/.366

 

Only Willingham, Plouffe and Susuki had rookie years which were even close to their overall career numbers, and most players had their best years between their 3rd and 5th seasons.  Yes, another SSS I know.

[Mike Sixel]

You keep picking players that have been around for more than 3 years. What about all those that don't play three years? Your samples need to be much broader.

[SwainZag]

You keep picking players that have been around for more than 3 years. What about all those that don't play three years? Your samples need to be much broader.

 

I have nothing to compare to then.  How do I compare a guy who only had 50 AB in one season?  Most players who have less than 3 years in the majors are generally role players who have little statistics to compare anyways. If you want to say that most players who get a shot at the big leagues have less than a 3 year career then OK, but I think that's a different study. Your statement was: 

 

"but we forget that many/most rookies don't actually get better, they are who they will become"

 

and I'm using major leaguers who have a career do generally show that they generally do in fact get better.  

[drjim]

Last year at this time, Rosario was a top what prospect? What could you have received for him and one of the veterans on the roster (or another medium prospect)? What could have Joe Benson received after his A ball season? What about Pinto, if they never believed in him as a catcher, why not deal him before his MLB defense is exposed?

 

Would you like to go back in time, and deal Rosario for a good SP or LF? 

 

All I'm saying is that if you have a system this deep, the prospects are worth less to you than they are to other teams. And, most prospects never produce more than a WAR or three over their career, if they even do that.

 

For a team that has this much money available, being unwilling to deal from a deep prospect pool seems like a limiting strategy. 

 

I understand that most do not agree with me on this. I'm ok with that. 

 

Good luck to the Twins in selling season tickets next year, with this record, returning the team mostly intact, and no All Star Game to coerce people with. I mean that sincerely, good luck to them.

 

I'll take these in order.

 

Rosario was barely a top 100 guy on some lists, not top 100 on others and had barely reached AA and not done a ton there while still not really having a position. Nice prospect but really not going to get you a whole lot. Maybe a year or two or a corner that is priced too high. Depending on what veteran or other piece, I would argue not nearly as much as you think.

 

Benson also would have gotten you very little. Guys like him (and Rosario) are the second or third piece of a big trade, or can get moved for a year of a non elite player. Are you really lamenting that the Twins did not do that? For a Twins comparison, you couldn't trade Rosario or Benson at that point and even get a player like Plouffe - slightly above average about to hit arb 2. You would barely get a half year of Suzuki.

 

I would like to go back in time and deal Rosario for a player you mentioned, but it would not have been possible. He isn't worth that (of course depending on your definition of "good").

 

You can't on the one hand claim that prospects are overrated and then on the other hand demand that they are traded and expect them to bring back more than is possible, and then call out Terry Ryan for not doing what is actually, in fact, impossible.  If anyone is overrating prospects here, it is you.