Mr. Brooks Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 I'm not on board with trading Ervin Santana. I think it's a good idea to have at least one veteran in the rotation.He has Gibson in the rotation.
mazeville Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 Those are the same people who said that: Nishioka is a better SS option than JJ HardyThe team is better with Sano at RF and Plouffe at 3BFlorimon is a better SS option than EscobarSantana is a better SS option than EscobarMastroianni and Santana are better CF options than Buxtonetc etc etc One at some point needs to quit taking what they say as gospel. You bring up a good point. And for what it's worth, I've long avoided taking this regime's word as gospel. But, that said, entering this year, Escobar was a serviceable shortstop. My thought is to trade Dozier mostly to get some sort of return. I'm assuming he'd bring something, given his years of team control at a relatively reasonable rate. And he's improved at the plate of late ...
Platoon Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 To steal, and embellish a point Brian made: LOOK for reasons to promote, trade, and balance the roster, instead of LOOKING for reasons to hang unto mediocre vets. That single change in philosophy would be a move in the right direction.
DocBauer Old-Timey Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 1) Hughes to the pen absolutely. Nolasco gone in whatever manner works best, hopefully with a small return at least. I'd keep Santana for now, and think you'd have to. Despite his successful and solid career, I just don't know that his contract is tradeable at this point. I'm not saying don't trade him, just not sure you can. Duffey and Berrios stay in the rotation and are joined by May and/or Meyer. (Assuming the good Meyer that began the season keeps performing that way) 2) Beresford deserved his first cup of Joe last year. But I don't think he brings any real value over Nunez, who is solid, not old, and won't bring back a big return. Can Polanco play an adequate SS or not? Time to find out! We have solid, move able options in the infield. If SS doesn't look good, are we a better team with Polanco at 2B than Dozier? I just don't have the answer to that one. 3) Time for Plouffe to be moved somewhere, for something. It's not about a big return, it's clearing necessary space for Sano to go back to 3B. You know, his natural position that he plays OK and will get better at 4) Buxton and Kepler eventually, but not yet. July maybe? Play Arcia, see what you've got now that he's working harder than before and seems to be maturing. Yes to sending Rosario down, but there's really nobody to replace him at the moment. 5) I still believe Suzuki may be moved for a bag of balls and some bubblegum at some point to a team that has an injury/depth issue. Regardless, hope Murphy gets it together and then get him in the lineup and STARTING. 6) I just don't about the bullpen. Would Jepsen have any value at this point? Would Abad bring enough in return to make it pay off to trade him? Or is here valuable being kept. I guess, roll with Hughes and everyone else currently in place for the next month or so. By then, Chargois will hopefully be ready, perhaps someone else. And who knows, maybe we actually pick up a useful arm from one of the trades mentioned.
Loosey Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 Tell me if I am completely wrong on this thought, but right now doesn't it make more sense to have Beresford up instead of Polanco for the Escobar DL stint? First of all Polanco is probably a better overall prospect who once completely up will be a starter. Beresford not being the level of prospect Polanco is will be more of a bench player, utility guy. He should be up getting used to sitting coming in cold, playing every 4-5 days etc. Polanco needs to play daily in my opinion.
bluechipper Provisional Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 He has Gibson in the rotation.I don't see Kyle Gibson as a veteran that Duffey and Berrios could lean on. Kyle hasn't shown he's much more than a back end starter up to this point.
nicksaviking Community Moderator Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 Why? The 1993 Braves did not have anyone older than 27 and turned up ok. Gibson is the veteran Personally I don't care if the rotation has a veteran, I'd get rid of each of them to make room forthe young guys. However the 1993 Braves staff had decades of experience. Maddox had already finished his first contract and had been up seven years, Glavine and Pete Smith were six years in, Smoltz had five. Baby Steve Avery at the age of 22, had three years and 542.3 innings of experience under his belt, which is 118 innings more than Kyle Gibson has right now.
Mr. Brooks Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 I don't see Kyle Gibson as a veteran that Duffey and Berrios could lean on. Kyle hasn't shown he's much more than a back end starter up to this point.So you are not looking for veteran, you are looking for quality.I think we can all agree on that.
Hosken Bombo Disco Community Moderator Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 1) Hughes to the pen absolutely. Nolasco gone in whatever manner works bestAgree completely, though perhaps we are safer talking about this* in the Simpsons thread: http://cigarcitymagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/fat-tony-joe-mantegna.jpg *it's a joke, people
Hosken Bombo Disco Community Moderator Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 I've been seeing shots in the dugout of Berrios and Ervin Santana together. Maybe that's a mentoring relationship, to leave in tact for a little while to see what comes of it. Santana is also the best of the three of Santana, Hughes, Nolasco.
mnfireman Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 I did this last year (or the year before) also. Minnesota Twins AL rankings by position: C - .168(12)/.213(15)/.221(14) - OPS .434(14) - Only AL team without a HR at C.1B - .230(8)/.345(5)/.377(10) - OPS .722(9) - Mauer @ 1B .250/.379/.3452B - .229(13)/.318(11)/.382(12) - OPS .699(12) - Not Dozier .286/.375/.4293B - .311(3)/.352(6)/.485(5) - OPS .837(5) - Not Plouffe .354/.420/..516 (Sano .357/.500/.571)SS - .266(6)/.304(7)/.352(10) - OPS .655(8) - Not Escobar .343/.363/.531LF - .224(12)/.274(14)/.368(10) - OPS .642(12) - Arcia .293/408/.585CF - .202(13)/.250(13)/.331(12) - OPS .581(13) - Not Buxton .228/.273/.354RF - .205(14)/.282(13)/.323(14) - OPS .605(13) - Not Sano .189/.230/.189 (Sano .211/.301/.378)DH - ..313(4)/.407(3)/.521(3) - OPS .928(3) - Mauer .444/.559/.556 - Park .273/.349/.582 Team - .236(12)/.304(13)/.369(14) - OPS .673(15) And this is just the batters!
curt1965 Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 This particular team up there looks way too much like the existing team. Not enough change. Changes that need to happen (in this order) : 1. Hire a president of baseball operations from outside the organization2. Fire Brunansky3. Trade: Both Santanas, Dozier (I am not convinced that he is not part of the problem here), Plouffe, Nolasco, Perkins, Jepsen, Abad, Nunez 4. Demote/Cut: Mastroianni, Suzuki, Kintzler, Anyone above who is not traded and has less than $10M owed 5. Move to the Pen: Hughes Rotation: Meyer, Berrios, Gibson, May, Wheeler Pen: Hughes, Pressly, Chargois, Rogers, Darnell (*Melotakis when healthy) , Tonkin (*Burdi when healthy), Duffey C: Murphy, 1B: Park, 2B: Rosario, SS: Polanco, 3B: Sano, LF: Palka/Kepler, CF Buxton/Kepler, RF Arcia/Kepler Bench: Kepler, Escobar, Centeno, BeresfordAh- what are your plans for Mauer? Just disappear?
mnfireman Verified Member Posted May 13, 2016 Posted May 13, 2016 2016 Twins pitching splits Starter - ERA 5.20(14), IP 173.0(15), WHIP 1.45 (10), SO 150(14T)Reliever - ERA 4.34(14), IP 118.1(3T), WHIP 1.49(14), SO 117(4T) Team - ERA 4.85(14), WHIP 1.47(15), SO 267(9) Not much help here!
Marek Houston Wichita Wind Surge - AA SS Houston went 3-for-4. He's hitting .333/.415/.505 (.920) since joining the Kernels. He added his fifth and sixth doubles. Explore Marek Houston News >
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.