An Argument for the Twins to NOT do too much to fix their 2017 rotation

[DocBauer]

OK...I know I'm going to get blasted for this idea, and I'll probably be accused of trolling even...but I'm really sane and serious about this thought as its been rolling over and over in my mind lately.

 

First, let me state I am NOT advocating the Twins do nothing. While I would prefer to keep Dozier's bat with the Twins in some capacity, I am on board now with finding the right deal with the right team for a top shelf, young, still controllable SP. Who that should be, and which team offers the best match, is obviously up for some debate, and has been here on TD.

 

But other than that big move, I'm going to argue the Twins stay mostly pat SP-wise the remainder of the offseason. And I have reasons that I believe are practical.

 

1] We have a new head of baseball operations in Falvey who has yet to hire a GM, but it would seem to me some of their biggest initial priorities are to examine the Twins coaching staff, and IMO, bring in a more experienced pitching coach that they feel comfortable with to work with the more established AND the young pitchers. Further, I firmly believe they will be implementing changes in development of said young pitchers in the Twins milb system. For a rebuilding team, this is pertinent stuff.

 

2] The FA market for SP is just not good at all. And unless there is someone Falvey or his new GM believes is a real steal, you're just throwing good money after bad and repeating the recent Ryan cycle of mediocre veteran FA pitchers.

 

3] Further, not only does Falvey and any new personel need time to implement changes as a priority, and need time to evaluate young talent on its way up...some of them close...but any new changes and said new pitching coach could allow for at least some immediate improvement, if not more, with what is already on hand. And the idea of trading or dumping Santana and/or Santiago immediately could leave the rotation short of just about anything other than the Albers and Deans of the world, and we've seen enough of that. (Again with the poor FA crop)

 

4] Young talent. Personally, I believe we have yet to see the best of Gibson. We've seen flashes, and with his missed time due to injury, we lost a full season of his career. But healthy, we've seen glimpses of a very solid SP. Berrios has a tremendous milb track history and has been a top 100 prospect for a couple years now. He needs to pitch at the ML level, preferably with a coach who relates and communicates well. May can and should move back to the rotation. Despite a waste of a full year of time in the pen, a healthy May has shown ability as a SP. Duffey has been inconsistent as can be this year, but showed glimpses of the pitcher we saw last year. Maybe he's best in the bullpen, but from what I have garnered this season, his biggest problem was not a still developing change but fastball control. There is a real chance that both Gonsalves and Mejia could be ready at some point in 2017, and projections for mid-season or sooner are not out of line. And there at least 4 other young prospects who could/should see Rochester at some point in '17 with some solid potential.

 

I am not going to include the addition of Hughes as a "point" in this discussion, and will refer to him later, but he is a potential dark horse candidate for the roster.

 

Our new, young, OF should provide some very good defense. Polanco to 2B should be a wash at worst vs Dozier defensively. Sano, healthy, a couple pounds lighter, and actually getting to concentrate on 3B should allow for some improvement there. (I'm a big believer in letting him play and develop instead of just deciding he's bad). A quality SS acquisition to compete with and possibly replace Escobar further sets and probably improves the infield defense.

 

In this scenario, preferably with a new, experienced and respected pitching coach, the Twins would enter ST with the following SP candidates:

 

Santana

Gibson

Santiago

NEW GUY from Dozier trade

Berrios

May

Wheeler (finally getting some kind of shot)

Duffey (better FB control and continuing to develop change)

Mejia (inexperienced enough to maybe need some AAA time)

Gonsalves (milb pitcher of year and building experience in the AFL, *see Mejia)

Hughes (BIG question mark, could end up in pen, could make it all the way back)

 

By the end of 2017, there is a good chance that at least one of Jay, Romero, Stewart or Jorge could be ready for an audition, along with the aforementioned Gonsalves and Mejia.

 

So in short, you bring in one top new SP via a Dozier trade, you bring in a new pitching coach, you have a mix of younger SP pitching candidates mixed with a couple under 30 veterans and one older veteran, plus a dark horse candidate. You implement changes, have promotional options at some point that could lead to trade options, have prospects developing for 2018 and beyond, and probably have a lot better FA class available to you before the 2018 season.

 

So there you have it, some thought by me. One big move, a new coach, and then stay pat. Let me have it!

[Mike Sixel]

I can endorse this. I wouldn't be mad if they also trade Ervin, but i would understand them not doing so.

[jimmer]

I think we should just kick back and wait for the farm system, with the help of world class minor league development personnel, to make us competitive again. Shouldn't take long.  Then when we are good, we can say, 'well, we don't need quality FAs or to trade for quality players cause we're already good'.

[Dantes929]

 

I think we should just kick back and wait for the farm system, with the help of world class minor league development personnel, to make us competitive again. Shouldn't take long.  Then when we are good, we can say, 'well, we don't need quality FAs or to trade for quality players cause we're already good'.

I can't tell if you really believe that or if it is sarcasm.    I agree with Doc (and you?) in almost everything but would not be opposed to keeping Dozier if we don't get enough for him and keeping Polanco at short.   I know a lot of people want Mauer gone but I still like him in the lineup.    Vargas at DH and you are still left with catcher question marks and kind of writing on the wall that Plouffe is gone.   Some people don't want to rely on unproven talent but I am fine with it.    I have always said that the pitching and hitting coaches probably have more impact on a season than does a manager so player development personnel really is a big thing.

[GMinTraining]

 

I can't tell if you really believe that or if it is sarcasm.    I agree with Doc (and you?) in almost everything but would not be opposed to keeping Dozier if we don't get enough for him and keeping Polanco at short.   I know a lot of people want Mauer gone but I still like him in the lineup.    Vargas at DH and you are still left with catcher question marks and kind of writing on the wall that Plouffe is gone.   Some people don't want to rely on unproven talent but I am fine with it.    I have always said that the pitching and hitting coaches probably have more impact on a season than does a manager so player development personnel really is a big thing.

What about PARK?

[Thrylos]

Here is the thing:

 

It is not about 2016 and it is not about 2011-2016. It is about the last 25 years of "good enoughness".

 

Nah.  This is not good enough.  They need to target excellence.  If any of the above names mentioned does not say "excellence" or "great potential for excellence", they need to go sooner than later.

 

About time minds change.

[nicksaviking]

Seeing as we never did settle the question about whether it was drafting or developing talent that was causing the problems (we were so close!), I'm all for bringing in new coaches/instructors to try that development angle again.

 

We have to wait until June for that whole draft part anyway.

[Kwak]

 

Seeing as we never did settle the question about whether it was drafting or developing talent that was causing the problems (we were so close!), I'm all for bringing in new coaches/instructors to try that development angle again.

We have to wait until June for that whole draft part anyway.

Refer to the "Allen comments" published in the PP. It appears that development was the worse. The original "pitching theory", P2C, didn't require superior talent and development was focused on two things--no walks, and lots of infield ground balls in order to limit the damage. The adage "aim down the middle and trust in 'stuff'...", separated those who advanced from those who were cut. Such was the "development" of pitchers. Eliminating P2C from the lingo meant "change speeds often" to serve as the new theory of pitching. That's not working very well either.

[Blake]

It's hard for me to disagree with what was posted.

 

As of right now, the Twins situation is very muddied. It is going to take some time to sort through the mess and figure out what the Twins have done right (short list) and what the Twins have done wrong (Think "War and Peace" and you'll probably be close to the length of that list)

 

[Jham]

First off, if we trade Dozier for a pitcher slightly worse than divan but maybe better than Santiago,i may quit following the team. If we trade him for a pucker better than Santana, then we're not really just sitting are we?

[beckmt]

The Pioneer Press article also changed my thinking. Need to get these pitchers to control their fastball and go from there.

This may well be more development time for the top Twins pitching prospects.

Gibson still has to go, too old and not enough stuff.

[kab21]

the key is that the Twins can't panic and make stupid moves trying to fix the entire rotation in one year.

 

Step 1 is find decent enough pitching to get through next season while not being awful.

 

Step 2 is to find ways to add legit good young arms that can be there long term. Maybe that is through a significant Dozier trade if the match is there. Maybe that is identifying a failed prospect that can be had for very little and taking a chance. Maybe there are lesser trade for lower level upside prospects that can be made.

[Kwak]

Basically, "Stay the course. Same old,same old?"  I think acquiring some bona fide starting pitching talent is a much better plan.

[TheLeviathan]

The best reason for not trying too hard on the rotation is that the market is just so terrible there isn't any reasonable way to do so.

 

So trade assets at their peak, patch the ship, and hope through trades in the next calendar year or so you can build a functional to even good 2018 rotation.

 

Forcing things will only make it worse in the long run.

[gil4]

 

Can I use your magic wand to do anything else?

 

Or are we just talking about some fantasy world in which it rains nachos?

Mmmm, nachos.

[kab21]

 

Basically, "Stay the course. Same old,same old?"  I think acquiring some bona fide starting pitching talent is a much better plan.

Ways to acquire bona fide starting pitching talent

 

1) sign the best starting pitcher in the FA class (which sucks)

 

2) hope that another team matches up in a Brian Dozier trade and trades top talent - this could happen but this could also result in a forced trade where the Twins lose a lot on value - this is the only one with a realistic chance of acquiring a bona fide starting pitcher for next season

 

3) Magic

 

4) Draft the best pitcher available and hope he is up in 2-3 years

 

5) make panic moves so that people won't say 'same old, same old'

 

Which route to bona fide starting pitching were you talking about?

[Kwak]

 

Ways to acquire bona fide starting pitching talent

 

1) sign the best starting pitcher in the FA class (which sucks)

 

2) hope that another team matches up in a Brian Dozier trade and trades top talent - this could happen but this could also result in a forced trade where the Twins lose a lot on value - this is the only one with a realistic chance of acquiring a bona fide starting pitcher for next season

 

3) Magic

 

4) Draft the best pitcher available and hope he is up in 2-3 years

 

5) make panic moves so that people won't say 'same old, same old'

 

Which route to bona fide starting pitching were you talking about?

Let's see? Do what other teams that built solid pitching did for starters. Trades--of course. Only a rube expects to get to a top rotation all-in-one move. But good teams are built one player at a time.

 

The previous management din't believe in a top rotation--starting pitchers were considered too expensive relative to position players--hence P2C. What we saw in 2016 is "difficult" to explain, so I won't bother to make that attempt. But, to sit back and "hope"? Not good enough for me. The Twins can afford to put some bona fide major league talent on the field. A veteran pitcher? He can be traded mid-season. This turn-around won't just happen like growing grass. 

[Vanimal46]

Depends on if they trade Dozier, and what they get in return. If the return is an established SP such as Kenta Maeda, then yes, go with this plan. If it's another near ready prospect, then I wouldn't advocate signing a FA flyer or 2 on a 1 year deal. Too many question marks and inexperience to rely on IMO.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Let's see? Do what other teams that built solid pitching did for starters. Trades--of course. Only a rube expects to get to a top rotation all-in-one move. But good teams are built one player at a time.

 

The previous management din't believe in a top rotation--starting pitchers were considered too expensive relative to position players--hence P2C. What we saw in 2016 is "difficult" to explain, so I won't bother to make that attempt. But, to sit back and "hope"? Not good enough for me. The Twins can afford to put some bona fide major league talent on the field. A veteran pitcher? He can be traded mid-season. This turn-around won't just happen like growing grass. 

 

With a FA class this putrid, the trade market is going to be ridiculous for any pitcher on the market.  Buying in this market is going to be the definition of poor planning and buying high.

 

If we're one pitcher away?  Ok, maybe.  We're like 6 pitchers away.

 

We're not good enough to flush that kind of value.

[kab21]

 

Let's see? Do what other teams that built solid pitching did for starters. Trades--of course. Only a rube expects to get to a top rotation all-in-one move. But good teams are built one player at a time.

 

The previous management din't believe in a top rotation--starting pitchers were considered too expensive relative to position players--hence P2C. What we saw in 2016 is "difficult" to explain, so I won't bother to make that attempt. But, to sit back and "hope"? Not good enough for me. The Twins can afford to put some bona fide major league talent on the field. A veteran pitcher? He can be traded mid-season. This turn-around won't just happen like growing grass. 

The Twins have one legit trade chip (Dozier) and I included him in the plan above. 

 

Or are you advocating trading a player like Kepler or Sano to get back a bona fide starter. Hint - trading Rosario or Vargas won't bring back the starter you want. Trading Plouffe won't bring back anything. Trading Ervin might bring back an A Mejia level prospect so that is one longer term option. But you have to have players worth trading to pull off the trades that you want to pull off.

[Cory Engelhardt]

No reason to think the Twins will work same old/same old. That hasn't gotten them anywhere, really, over the last 6 years, and arguably more. I don't know if they will blow it up, or ride the course, or some of both. I'm excited because I think Falvey can come in and help bring the front office up to speed (and hopefully ahead, eventually) of other major league front offices.

At that point, if they deem any of the players on the roster to be assets worth keeping around, they will keep them. If they see value in flipping them for undervalued players elsewhere, I hope they do that.

[Old Twins Cap]

To the extent that Falvey was involved in putting the Indians' staff together, up 3-0 on Toronto, averaging 1 earned run a game, after sweeping the Red Sox and Royals and not trailing in a game in like 50 innings, after having lost Salazar and Carrasco, let's get him in here and see what he can do.

 

Of course, on the flip, it didn't take a genius to know that trading for Andrew Miller would be a good move.

[Major League Ready]

 

Here is the thing:

 

It is not about 2016 and it is not about 2011-2016. It is about the last 25 years of "good enoughness".

 

Nah.  This is not good enough.  They need to target excellence.  If any of the above names mentioned does not say "excellence" or "great potential for excellence", they need to go sooner than later.

 

About time minds change.

They have sucked since 2011.  Prior to 2011, The Twins record was 2nd only to Oakland for teams outside the top 10 in revenue and they were better than some of the teams in the top 10 in revenue.  If you don't think revenue is relevant, you are welcome to that opinion but the correlation between revenue and winning is very difficult to deny. 

 

Having said this ... what they did in the last 25 years is irrelevant to what action they should take.  Falvey's job should be to take the actions necessary and most likely to produce a contender.  It is really easy to say get rid of anyone that does not likely to be excellent.  Where do they get all of these excellent players to replace our mediocre players?   Give us some specifics.  The SP is not available via free agency even if they had the Yankees revenue. 

 

Trade for it?  We would need three excellent SPs.  I am not sure if you could get that done even if you gave up Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Gordon, Berrios, Jay and Gonsalves.  

 

How do you propose Falvey acquire the excellence you suggest in a short time frame?

 

 

[HitInAPinch]

Still don't understand the anger against Neil Allen. 

 

He became a pitching coach almost immediately after retiring as a player.  Worked in the Independent Leagues for a while then became the Columbus Clippers pitching coach, introduced Chien-Ming Wang's sinker, which became his signature pitch. 

 

With the Twins, Allen has had to change Jose Berrios' windup.  Now we read the story that Twins MiLB pitcher don't know how to use a fastball.  I don't see a problem with Allen.  Add in the MLB hitting adventures of Buxton, I seem more of a MiLB coaching problem.

 

OK back to the article....

 

I sort of agree.  There are many, young, players on the 25 man roster.  Patience is needed before you find out what you really have i.e.  Berrios,  Buxton, Kepler, Rogers, Chargois, Light, Sano, et el. 

Starting pitching:  If there is a good deal in trading Dozier, I wouldn't stick my nose up at it.  Until someone develops quickly in the MiLB, I'd stick with what we have until something better is available.  Shouldn't be a long wait.

[Dantes929]

 

What about PARK?

.224 BA and .297 OBP at Rochester doesn't cut it.   If he pushes the issue with his performance in the minors I am all for him being in the discussion but I will wait until it actually happens.

[Mr. Brooks]

They have sucked since 2011. Prior to 2011, The Twins record was 2nd only to Oakland for teams outside the top 10 in revenue and they were better than some of the teams in the top 10 in revenue. If you don't think revenue is relevant, you are welcome to that opinion but the correlation between revenue and winning is very difficult to deny.

 

Having said this ... what they did in the last 25 years is irrelevant to what action they should take. Falvey's job should be to take the actions necessary and most likely to produce a contender. It is really easy to say get rid of anyone that does not likely to be excellent. Where do they get all of these excellent players to replace our mediocre players? Give us some specifics. The SP is not available via free agency even if they had the Yankees revenue.

 

Trade for it? We would need three excellent SPs. I am not sure if you could get that done even if you gave up Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Gordon, Berrios, Jay and Gonsalves.

 

How do you propose Falvey acquire the excellence you suggest in a short time frame?

And they won exactly 1 playoff series in that time.

I realize I'm in the minority, and I completely respect the opposite opinion, but to me there is zero difference between 2nd place and 30th place. None. The goal, to me, is a title. This isn't the Olympics where you get a medal for 2nd and 3rd. You either win a title or you don't.

[Mike Sixel]

 

And they won exactly 1 playoff series in that time.
I realize I'm in the minority, and I completely respect the opposite opinion, but to me there is zero difference between 2nd place and 30th place. None. The goal, to me, is a title. This isn't the Olympics where you get a medal for 2nd and 3rd. You either win a title or you don't.

 

Wow. That must make being a sports even harder for you than others. 

 

I mean, I get the general sentiment, but "you had no success if you don't luck into the WS title" is a pretty high bar, imo.

[Mr. Brooks]

Wow. That must make being a sports even harder for you than others.

 

I mean, I get the general sentiment, but "you had no success if you don't luck into the WS title" is a pretty high bar, imo.

I'd say it would be harder to watch a sport that I thought was only luck.

 

Also, the Twins getting swept out every year they were in it is actually an argument AGAINST it being a crapshoot.

If it were only luck, they would have had an even mix of possible outcomes.

 

That's not to say I don't enjoy a good team over an awful one. It's certainly more fun to watch a competitive team.

Just that at the end of the year, to me, you either won a title or didn't.

[Mike Sixel]

I didn't say it was only luck....but the Cubs are clearly the best team in the majors this year. They are actually historically one of the best teams ever. But, if they don't win, the entire season was a failure?

[Loosey]

I would agree with the OP if the only alternative is signing middling veteran FA's.  If there is young top of rotation talent available go get it.