Robinson's out-clause

[USAFChief]

I can't think of a greater indictment of our CF situation than debating the merits of keeping Shane Robinson and Jordan Schafer as our starting CF combo.

Concur...with that part.

 

Where I part ways is, distasteful as it is, I would give Hicks the CF job and let it play out until he proves worthy, or he proves incapable. He at least represents a prospect with a chance of being someone who will hold a big league position for a while and be a plus doing so. If he suddenly turns into an asset, great. If he fails yet again, hopefully by then Rosario or better yet, Buxton get a shot. Say, July first.

 

But there is no point in investing half a season in Shafer/Robinson, who will almost certainly never hold the position and might actually end up worse than Hicks anyway.

 

I doubt AAA time helps Hicks much at this point. He needs to play, and that might as well be at the highest level. He has enough years in professional baseball to sink or swim.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I doubt AAA time helps Hicks much at this point. He needs to play, and that might as well be at the highest level. He has enough years in professional baseball to sink or swim.

 

Here's the thing - he's sunk already.  Twice.  At rates that are among the worst in the history of baseball for anyone ever starting their career.  I know what you're saying, but people continue to talk about this guy like he needs more time to prove things.  If Aaron Hicks hasn't already proven - twice over - that he isn't ready to face big league pitching, I'm not sure it's physically possible for him to do so.  And when we sent him down he was pretty good against AA pitching but mediocre against AAA in limited at-bats.  (Power totally sapped after the promotion)

 

Hicks needs AAA for two reasons: 1) He's working on a new leg kick/step to generate more power from the left side and 2) Twins officials have publicly remarked about his lack of confidence.  If confidence is a known issue with him and he's about to embark on a revised approach at the plate....why not give it time to work?  Let him be successful with it for awhile in AAA before throwing him against competition we already know is too much for him?  

 

The problem here is that we have, for a third consecutive year, given ourselves crappy options that force our hand to play Hicks when his development might be better served to be in the minors.  

[Platoon]

Here's the thing - he's sunk already.  Twice.  At rates that are among the worst in the history of baseball for anyone ever starting their career.  I know what you're saying, but people continue to talk about this guy like he needs more time to prove things.  If Aaron Hicks hasn't already proven - twice over - that he isn't ready to face big league pitching, I'm not sure it's physically possible for him to do so.  And when we sent him down he was pretty good against AA pitching but mediocre against AAA in limited at-bats.  (Power totally sapped after the promotion)

 

Hicks needs AAA for two reasons: 1) He's working on a new leg kick/step to generate more power from the left side and 2) Twins officials have publicly remarked about his lack of confidence.  If confidence is a known issue with him and he's about to embark on a revised approach at the plate....why not give it time to work?  Let him be successful with it for awhile in AAA before throwing him against competition we already know is too much for him?  

 

The problem here is that we have, for a third consecutive year, given ourselves crappy options that force our hand to play Hicks when his development might be better served to be in the minors.

 

. While I agree with your last paragraph completely, and am fighting desperately not to drift into the lack of roster management, I debate the rest of your comments on Hicks thusly: He is getting to athe age where sending him again to AAA will leave you with an organizational player or at most a fourth outfielder. Which may be what he ends up as. With Buxton likely coming up late this year or next, his window is shrinking. It's time for him or make it or not. If he does, you know where you are at for next year, both on the field and trade wise. If not, you still have your AAA guy. It's just that I do not think that anymore minor league seasoning will improve his chances of success.

[USAFChief]

Here's the thing - he's sunk already.  Twice.  At rates that are among the worst in the history of baseball for anyone ever starting their career.  I know what you're saying, but people continue to talk about this guy like he needs more time to prove things.  If Aaron Hicks hasn't already proven - twice over - that he isn't ready to face big league pitching, I'm not sure it's physically possible for him to do so.  And when we sent him down he was pretty good against AA pitching but mediocre against AAA in limited at-bats.  (Power totally sapped after the promotion)

 

Hicks needs AAA for two reasons: 1) He's working on a new leg kick/step to generate more power from the left side and 2) Twins officials have publicly remarked about his lack of confidence.  If confidence is a known issue with him and he's about to embark on a revised approach at the plate....why not give it time to work?  Let him be successful with it for awhile in AAA before throwing him against competition we already know is too much for him?  

 

The problem here is that we have, for a third consecutive year, given ourselves crappy options that force our hand to play Hicks when his development might be better served to be in the minors.

 

You might be right.

 

But if it were me I'd do it differently.

 

I am also growing more doubtful either path would ultimately succeed, so there's that, too. Hope to be proven way wrong.

[ashbury]

Just to clarify, I'd install Hicks as my starter in CF. His days off would naturally be when a RHP is starting, but I wouldn't view it as a platoon strategy, and there would be few days off - just enough starts for Schafer to keep him sharp too.

 

The best upside for the Twins is for him to establish himself solidly, before Buxton comes up, and Hicks won't accomplish that if he's in AAA. All the other options discussed, except Rosario, have very little upside to them, in terms of what maneuvering can be done if and when Buxton becomes ready. And I'd rather have Rosario at Rochester than Hicks at this point.

[Thrylos]

 

If Schafer is the starting CF, Robinson is the 4th OF... 

If Hicks (or the long shot, Rosario) is the starting CF, Schafer is the 4th OF...

 

Absolutely.  If they get 4 OFs, Robinson is in only if Schafer is the starting CF.  Also, their a battle for the last spot on the bench, and I see that between Nunez, Herrmann and Robinson.  Robinson is probably behind the other 2 at this one because of versatility, but if Herrmann makes the backup catcher position, he could end up beating Nunez.  Still 2.5 weeks left. Long time.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Hicks is getting the short shrift here on TD, but on any other club, he would be the preferred option.  Young, switch-hits, takes walks, can run, excellent on defense, cannon arm -- dare I say "upside", even if for just trade value with BB waiting in the wings?

 

Put away the hickory switches is what I say.   Hicks did not do what the APs of the world wanted in his first two years in MLB.

 

But, other clubs are not impressed that the Twins would start their primary hope for CF in AAA and build value that way.  Hicks has been here now, knows the routine.   This year, if he fails to perform, a team can legitimately give up on him. 

 

But, handing CF to Shane Robinson or the kid from Atlanta, because, I don't know, Hicks is hitting over .300 and stealing bases and playing stellar D, but, once, when the scoreboard had the wrong outs, he didn't run on a popout.  Please understand:  Shane Robinson and the guy from Atlanta are, in fact, "filler" guys, who can hang around, shag balls, run the bases, but who have no real "upside".   Why would you keep them on the roster?  Ever?

 

Castoffs.

 

Well, Twins fans sometimes get what they deserve.  I suppose we deserve to see another former Twin go elsewhere and perform.

 

So far, in the majors, there is no evidence he's even league average on defense. none. He can get on base, but he can't hit. You can't just ignore that part. He should be in AAA, imo. He's already had two chances, this isn't like Meyer or May who haven't even had a chance, this is a guy that has completely failed so far. He doesn't steal all that well. He's not Gomez, just waiting to break out......

[TheLeviathan]

 

. While I agree with your last paragraph completely, and am fighting desperately not to drift into the lack of roster management, I debate the rest of your comments on Hicks thusly: He is getting to athe age where sending him again to AAA will leave you with an organizational player or at most a fourth outfielder. Which may be what he ends up as. With Buxton likely coming up late this year or next, his window is shrinking. It's time for him or make it or not. If he does, you know where you are at for next year, both on the field and trade wise. If not, you still have your AAA guy. It's just that I do not think that anymore minor league seasoning will improve his chances of success.

 

For me the AAA stint doesn't have to be for very long.  Call him back up in May or early June.  But give him a chance to experience consistent success.

 

Only hitting him against lefties is giving up on him.  I don't want to give up on him and, for me, the best chance he has to still be a factor is to get his stuff straight in AAA (ala Hunter - here is where he could actually mentor) and come back actually ready.

 

We have thrust this unready kid into the lineup over and over again and putting him into a part-time position in the big leagues is basically declaring him a fourth outfielder.  I wouldn't give up just yet, not before I've at least tried to get him right once.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

From Mike Berardino's article today:

 

As for Hicks, Molitor suggested the 25-year-old would probably need to reclaim the starting role he held the past two Opening Days in order to break camp with the club. A platoon option would not be as palatable.

"I have to be a little careful on that," Molitor said. "My opinion would be that he's young enough to where he probably should be playing on a regular basis somewhere. It's not in stone -- there's not a lot of things in stone. I think for him to play on a regular basis would be important."

 

Link to full article

[jokin]

 

From Mike Berardino's article today:

 

As for Hicks, Molitor suggested the 25-year-old would probably need to reclaim the starting role he held the past two Opening Days in order to break camp with the club. A platoon option would not be as palatable.

"I have to be a little careful on that," Molitor said. "My opinion would be that he's young enough to where he probably should be playing on a regular basis somewhere. It's not in stone -- there's not a lot of things in stone. I think for him to play on a regular basis would be important."

 

Link to full article

 

Not the most ringing endorsement that he's your opening day CFer, is it.  I smell more veteraniness come April 6.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

The three (or four if you count Eddie Rosario) candidates for the starting job in CF have not really distanced themselves from one another.

 

Hicks still has an option, Schafer does not. Robinson can opt out of his contract if he's not on the ML roster, Hicks cannot.

 

The Twins can keep all three players if they start the season with Hicks in AAA and Schafer/Robinson in the OF (hopefully with Santana starting in CF against lefties).

 

Platooning Schafer and Robinson would be great, except they are both terrible against lefties (and Robinson isn't too hot against righties, either.)

 

Platooning Hicks and Schafer would be great, except Hicks still has the chance to improve his hitting against righties, so ideally he's getting more at bats from both sides than he'd get in a platoon.

 

I think someone is going to either get hot the last couple weeks and win the job outright or (more likely) someone is going to slump and end up kicked to the curb.

 

The only reason I would lean towards having Robinson make the team is that he can't be stashed in AAA. The out-clause forces the Twins to either play the lesser talent (Robinson) or risk losing that guy entirely, meaning they have less depth in case of injury or unacceptably poor play from Hicks.

 

But maybe Rosario will be ready to jump in if HIcks fails again? I think the ideal group with the players available is Hicks/Schafer up north, with Shane Robinson convinced to stay with the org in AAA. Even if Robinson is let go, the Twins could still go with Rosario and/or give Santana some starts in CF.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The only reason I would lean towards having Robinson make the team is that he can't be stashed in AAA. The out-clause forces the Twins to either play the lesser talent (Robinson) or risk losing that guy entirely, meaning they have less depth in case of injury or unacceptably poor play from Hicks.

That is counterbalanced slightly by the fact that Robinson would need to bump someone from the 40-man roster in order to make the team.  Oliveros and Thompson seem like the most likely candidates (although those spots might also be needed by a new reliever like Boyer, Hamburger, etc.).

[jokin]

 

The only reason I would lean towards having Robinson make the team is that he can't be stashed in AAA. The out-clause forces the Twins to either play the lesser talent (Robinson) or risk losing that guy entirely, meaning they have less depth in case of injury or unacceptably poor play from Hicks.

 

Does anyone really think the Twins are going to put themselves in the exact same laughably laughingstock position they were in last March/April in terms of losing practically all of their CF depth with poor roster management?  AND/OR- put themselves yet again in the possible position where Hicks does a Three-Peat and they are forced to put their career MiLB SS back into CF?

[Mike Sixel]

i don't care if they lose out on a guy I don't think has much value, and wont' be on the team next year. If they are worried about losing Robinson, they are worried about the wrong things.

[Shane Wahl]

Rosario is not going to make the team, and neither is Robinson. Robinson is obviously wildly expendable so maybe his ST performance can get him a job elsewhere. 

 

Hopefully Hunter performs well this year, or that move is going to be silly. Rosario-Hicks-Schafer late inning OF is pretty ideal. Just imagine a Rosario-Buxton-Hicks OF.

[jokin]

 

That is counterbalanced slightly by the fact that Robinson would need to bump someone from the 40-man roster in order to make the team.  Oliveros and Thompson seem like the most likely candidates (although those spots might also be needed by a new reliever like Boyer, Hamburger, etc.).

 

Nunez, Pryor

[Mike Sixel]

 

Rosario is not going to make the team, and neither is Robinson. Robinson is obviously wildly expendable so maybe his ST performance can get him a job elsewhere. 

 

Hopefully Hunter performs well this year, or that move is going to be silly. Rosario-Hicks-Schafer late inning OF is pretty ideal. Just imagine a Rosario-Buxton-Hicks OF.

 

I prefer to imagine a Rosario, Buxton, Arcia OF, but I get your point completely.

[jokin]

 

i don't care if they lose out on a guy I don't think has much value, and wont' be on the team next year. If they are worried about losing Robinson, they are worried about the wrong things.

 

It seems like they're worried about the wrong things as often as not.  They obviously promised Kubel and Bartlett roster spots last year, and went with Florimon at SS when it was obvious he couldn't play.  The decision on Hicks in 2013 was spectacularly wrong and has resulted in a series of bad decisions ever since.

[jimmer]

 

I prefer to imagine a Rosario, Buxton, Arcia OF, but I get your point completely.

As long as we are dreaming, can I prefer getting Dyson (or Cain) in a trade and having it be Buxton, Rosario and Cain/Dyson? :-)

[USAFChief]

Trading Arcia for 30 year old, .650 OPS, never been a full time everyday player Jerrod Dyson sounds more like a nightmare than a dream to me.

 

I bet KC would be up for that trade.

[jimmer]

 

Trading Arcia for 30 year old, .650 OPS, never been a full time everyday player Jerrod Dyson sounds more like a nightmare than a dream to me.

I bet KC would be up for that trade.

Well, if I had actually suggested trading Arcia for Dyson, I could maybe see your point.  But I didn't.  

 

In any event, I like a guy who can manage to produce a WAR around 3.0 in only half a season's worth of PAs due to his defense and speed on the bases and I'll see what an increase in playing time will do. I'd give him the lion's share in a platoon and bring him into the games in the late innings for defense on the games he doesn't play.. 

[USAFChief]

Well, if I had actually suggested trading Arcia for Dyson, I could maybe see your point.  But I didn't.  

 

 

 

I'm not sure how else to read your post above.

 

So what becomes of Arcia then?

[jimmer]

 

I'm not sure how else to read your post above.

So what becomes of Arcia then?

Four players (Rosario, Dyson, Vargas, Arcia) three positions, LF, RF, DH (not to mention Varags' occassional 1B time).  Plenty of playing time and enough playing time to see who can actually perform at the MLB level between Arcia, Rosario and Vargas past short sample size. I believe it's highly unlikely all of our prospects turn out to be MLB starter material.

[USAFChief]

Four players (Rosario, Dyson, Vargas, Arcia) three positions, LF, RF, DH (not to mention Varags' occassional 1B time).  Plenty of playing time and enough playing time to see who can actually perform at the MLB level between Arcia, Rosario and Vargas past short sample size. I believe it's highly unlikely all of our prospects turn out to be MLB starter material.

I am probably misreading your post...are you proposing Vargas share playing time in the OF?

 

And Dyson at DH?

[jimmer]

 

I am probably misreading your post...are you proposing Vargas share playing time in the OF?

And Dyson at DH?

Arcia would spend time between playing in the OF and DH, Vargas would DH a good portion and spell Mauer at 1B.  Rosario and Dyson, when they played, would be in the OF.  Again, there would be plenty of playing time for all of them and since Arcia, Vargas and Rosario haven't proven they are MLB starter material, this kind of shared time could help us decide who amongst them has it and who doesn't. Dyson is a cheaper option to put with them who we know can play awesome defense, create havoc on the bases, and can get on base at an acceptable level for a lower lineup guy. He's a valuable player.

 

 

[USAFChief]

I guess I would rather Arcia and Vargas get full time jobs, or nearly full time jobs, so they get the best chance to develop into something, or play themselves out of the picture. Same with Rosario...wherever he's at, he needs to be playing every day. Mauer would be at first base 155 games, so not much room for Vargas there, either.

 

And Dyson....I think Dyson would be an acceptable 4th outfielder, but he's not someone I'd pursue, nor would he ever take playing time away from any of Rosario, Vargas or Arcia. Or Hicks, for that matter, if Hicks is on the team.

 

He's 30. Can't hit, won't run as fast in the near future.

[jimmer]

It's not like I'm suggesting we drop 10M to sign and start an almost 40 year old who can't play defense and had a WAR barely above replacement level last year even though he played a whole season.  THAT would be crazy.

 

Dyson's 30 not 39, he's still in great shape and runs like the wind. He's also a FA in 2018. With his body type, those skills won't start going significantly downhill anywhere near as soon as you are saying and will be fine for the time we had him. 

 

And while he isn't going to hit for power, he can get on base some, and his wRC+ in the high 80s low 90s is fine if he's providing awesome defense and doing damage when he does get on base.

 

He had a 3.1 WAR in half a season's worth of playing time last year and a 2.6 WAR in roughly the same amount in 2013. Last year we only had three position players with a better WAR than Dyson had in both 2014 and 2013 and all of them with significantly more than Dyson.  It's important to note the playing time because WAR is a cumulative stat.

[jimmer]

Great article on Dyson:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/free-jarrod-dyson/

 

'Over the past two seasons, there have only been 29 outfielders in baseball more valuable than Dyson. Of those 29, only one of them had as few plate appearances as did Dyson. Most of them have double the plate appearances, and some have 2.5 times Dyson’s 529 PAs. Dyson is particularly adept afield. Over the past two seasons, only three outfielders have been worth more defensively per our Def statistic, and only 15 position players in general.

And it’s not just UZR where Dyson ranks well. He also scores well via DRS as well as our Inside Edge fielding numbers. They all paint him as one of the very best defensive center fielders in the game.'

[USAFChief]

Great article on Dyson:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/free-jarrod-dyson/

 

'Over the past two seasons, there have only been 29 outfielders in baseball more valuable than Dyson. Of those 29, only one of them had as few plate appearances as did Dyson. Most of them have double the plate appearances, and some have 2.5 times Dyson’s 529 PAs. Dyson is particularly adept afield. Over the past two seasons, only three outfielders have been worth more defensively per our Def statistic, and only 15 position players in general.

And it’s not just UZR where Dyson ranks well. He also scores well via DRS as well as our Inside Edge fielding numbers. They all paint him as one of the very best defensive center fielders in the game.'

I don't like to compare players using WAR, because I don't think it's very useful, but since you brought it up...as I understand it, about 1/3 of Dyson's WAR is solely due to him standing in CF, right?

 

You don't have him in CF in your above scenario.

 

So wouldn't you need to lop off a good portion of that WAR were he a Twin and standing in LF or RF?

[jimmer]

 

I don't like to compare players using WAR, because I don't think it's very useful, but since you brought it up...as I understand it, about 1/3 of Dyson's WAR is solely due to him standing in CF, right?

You don't have him in CF in your above scenario.

So wouldn't you need to lop off a good portion of that WAR were he a Twin and standing in LF or RF?

Yeah, his defensive contribution of WAR would get even better because then his defense would be compared to other RFs as opposed to CFs and CFs are normally better fielders than your corner guys.  Kind of like how Revere's defensive contributions are better as a RF as opposed to CF.