Why Didn't the Twins Unlock Yennier Cano's Talent?

[nicksaviking]

Lightning-in-a-bottle relievers happen all the time. I don't think there is anything deficient with the Twins here, most teams find at least one a year and lose one or two as well.

Except for the Rays, they find about five a year.

[Danchat]

2 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Didn't he last pitch for the Twins at age 27 in 2017, then left for Japan and spend how many years in the minors before making it back to the majors at age 33. I don't really think we can hold that against the Twins.

Me personally I am not a fan of holding it against any team when older relief pitchers do well for other teams. At some point any and all teams have to give up on pitcher (by give up I mean not have them on the 40 man) and this allows them to move to another team when they might have a better chance to get succeed.

Good point, it's simply lazy to criticize the team for the likes of Hendriks and Tonkin (Brent Rooker is a shorter example that still applies to me) when they went through several years of irrelevancy with other teams.

With the likes of Pressly and Cano who quickly flipped a switch with their next team, that's where I'm a bit concerned.

[nicksaviking]

4 hours ago, Danchat said:

Good point, it's simply lazy to criticize the team for the likes of Hendriks and Tonkin (Brent Rooker is a shorter example that still applies to me) when they went through several years of irrelevancy with other teams.

With the likes of Pressly and Cano who quickly flipped a switch with their next team, that's where I'm a bit concerned.

Seems to me Pressly flipped the switch with the Twins, which is why they got two well-regarded prospects for a reliever with only a year and a half of control left.

If anything, I think one could call into question the evaluation of the prospects (Alcala and Celestino).

[Mike Sixel]

8 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Seems to be  Pressly flipped the switch with the Twins, which is why they got two well-regarded prospects for a reliever with only a year and a half of control left.

If anything, I think one could call into question the evaluation of the prospects (Alcala and Celestino).

Alcala has been hurt. No idea how that's on the FO. Celestino was rushed because of other failures and every OF being hurt last year, and is injured. I'd partially count them wrong there. 

[Mike Sixel]

13 minutes ago, Danchat said:

Good point, it's simply lazy to criticize the team for the likes of Hendriks and Tonkin (Brent Rooker is a shorter example that still applies to me) when they went through several years of irrelevancy with other teams.

With the likes of Pressly and Cano who quickly flipped a switch with their next team, that's where I'm a bit concerned.

Rooker has been awful in May. He's a AAAA player. 

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, Danchat said:

Good point, it's simply lazy to criticize the team for the likes of Hendriks and Tonkin (Brent Rooker is a shorter example that still applies to me) when they went through several years of irrelevancy with other teams.

With the likes of Pressly and Cano who quickly flipped a switch with their next team, that's where I'm a bit concerned.

Brent Rooker crashed back to earth so hard he's working his way to the molten core at this point. He's a great example of SSS judgements. I don't expect Cano to come back as hard as Rooker did (he hit 2 HRs with a .198/.290/.327/.616 quad-slash in May), but let's give Cano more than 2 months before we crown him the next Mo.

Along the same lines, but not aimed at you, it's fascinating to see people complain about giving up the great Yennier Cano for the clearly flawed, half-season wonder Jorge Lopez. Cano is automatically great, and the Twins screwed up, because he's had 2 really good months, but it was crazy to think Lopez was any good after he had 4 good months.

[Danchat]

12 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Seems to be  Pressly flipped the switch with the Twins, which is why they got two well-regarded prospects for a reliever with only a year and a half of control left.

I was referring to how the Astros tweaked Pressly's pitch choice and quickly turned him from a good reliever to a great one.

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

Rooker has been awful in May. He's a AAAA player. 

Yeah, and that could also happen with Cano, but my point was that if Rooker did sustain his elite hitting, I wouldn't necessarily be mad at the Twins because the Padres couldn't figure him out, DFA'd him, then the Royals couldn't, and so on. 

[2wins87]

23 hours ago, FlyingFinn said:

There has to be some serious discussions in the Twins development department about Cano. If it wasn't just a case of Cano not listening to instruction, they have to ask 'how did we miss this and are we still missing it with guys.' Maybe it was an isolated incident but any more of this and someone could be fired. What is gold to teams like the Twins - players who perform great for the Twins at a low cost.

Sure they have to have those discussions, but we also have to discuss Joe Ryan, Brock Stewart, etc. at the same time.  If we cherry pick the guys that got away and had success it's going to be a bad look for the development team.  But they've had a lot of success doing the similar things with other scrap heap or minor trade guys.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

There are things that we agree on and there are things where we don't. 

This is one where we don't agree and I don't think we can change each other's mind. 😎

If you are in first place... you are in contention. Being in first place... is in contention... there is no other way to define it.    

The strongest team on paper doesn't automatically win in the playoffs. There are teams that advance in the playoffs with flaws. 

I don't want any front office thinking that they know better. 

They don't know better. 

 

.  

 

There is no questioning they had a shot at the playoffs.  It's entirely another thing as to if they can compete in the playoffs which is how I would define contending.  This year the AL central could possibly be won at under 500.  That's not a contender.  Anything can happen but that's a poor management mantra. The results last year speak for themselves.  That team was in 1st place but it was not a contender.   Would they have been better off had they not invested in that team?  The answer is very obvious.  We can't rewrite history because as fans we want them to go all in at every opportunity.  Baltimore ended up closer to a playoff spot than the twins.  Yet, they chose to manage their assets for the long-term.  Their result was much better.

[Mike Sixel]

31 minutes ago, Danchat said:

I was referring to how the Astros tweaked Pressly's pitch choice and quickly turned him from a good reliever to a great one.

Yeah, and that could also happen with Cano, but my point was that if Rooker did sustain his elite hitting, I wouldn't necessarily be mad at the Twins because the Padres couldn't figure him out, DFA'd him, then the Royals couldn't, and so on. 

Ah, got it.

Ya, the game is littered with these kinds of stories, players that have a bit of luck....players that multiple teams move on from, but then have success (even long term). Players that aren't the center piece of a trade, but that turn out great. 

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, Major League Ready said:

There is no questioning they had a shot at the playoffs.  It's entirely another thing as to if they can compete in the playoffs which is how I would define contending.  This year the AL central could possibly be won at under 500.  That's not a contender.  The results last year speak for themselves.  That team was in 1st place but it was not a contender.   Would they have been better off had they not invested in that team?  The answer is very obvious.  We can't rewrite history because as fans we want them to go all in at every opportunity.  Baltimore ended up closer to a playoff spot than the twins.  Yet, they chose to manage their assets for the long-term.  Their result was much better.

Teams can get hot/lucky in short series. We'll never agree on this. If you are in position to win your division, you should be a buyer, IMO. 

[Major League Ready]

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

Teams can get hot/lucky in short series. We'll never agree on this. If you are in position to win your division, you should be a buyer, IMO. 

That can be done with pure rentals that don't cost as much and you don't have to give up on talented players.  The Rays have clearly demonstrated the value giving players the appropriate opportunity.  Look at the number of players contributing for several years on winning teams that were acquired at the deadline.  How many of the players that brought big returns actually had an impact on playoff success.  It's a suckers bet unless you are very close or you get lucky like Atlanta did and trade away nothing for players that got hot.  Then look at Ryan and Duran which we got for a couple rentals that did absolutely nothing to improve the chances of the teams that traded them a way.

[h2oface]

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

Lightning-in-a-bottle relievers happen all the time. I don't think there is anything deficient with the Twins here, most teams find at least one a year and lose one or two as well.

Except for the Rays, they find about five a year.

Exactly. That is why it is not worth the time being an apologist for the plethora of bad trades by our FO. The ho hum, that's baseball, oh well, it happens training is working it appears. If the Rays can do it, (and Baltimore is doing it now, and they were got rid of Lopez to go to their better option, Bautista, because they apparently didn't buy into the fools gold and tried to fleece the suckers) so can they all, if they were good enough execs. Our FO is like our team now, they all tell us how good they are without acutal results to back it up. And many of our fan base are OK with that. So be it.

[JD-TWINS]

21 hours ago, Whitey333 said:

Great article.  And we got "stuck" with Lopez who was doing well with Baltimore.  He comes here and regressed immensely.   Coaching?  Just saying

I think it may be coaching…… coaching guys between the ears. Subtle mental/confidence stuff. …………. Lopez had good stuff when he made the All-Star game staff last summer and he looked great in April in ‘23 in MN. He still throws hard and his pitches move well - he just has lapses in his Focus & throws pitches that end up middle/middle & gets rocked!??

[Rod Carews Birthday]

23 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

There is no questioning they had a shot at the playoffs.  It's entirely another thing as to if they can compete in the playoffs which is how I would define contending.  This year the AL central could possibly be won at under 500.  That's not a contender.  Anything can happen but that's a poor management mantra. The results last year speak for themselves.  That team was in 1st place but it was not a contender.   Would they have been better off had they not invested in that team?  The answer is very obvious.  We can't rewrite history because as fans we want them to go all in at every opportunity.  Baltimore ended up closer to a playoff spot than the twins.  Yet, they chose to manage their assets for the long-term.  Their result was much better.

Was the 1987 Twins team a juggernaut?  They won the World Series that year.  Remember this is the team that had Les Straker as their third starter.  They had three hitters with really good years, Hrbek, Puckett, and Brunansky. Everyone else was league average or much worse -- Laudner at catcher was a 65 OPS+, Lombardozzi at 2nd was a 70, and Gladden in CF was a 76.   By the standards set for last year's (and presumably this year's) team, they should have sold off pieces and rebuilt.  At some point, you have to go for it.  Only one team wins it all and 29 will have guessed wrong, so it's easy to be critical in hindsight.  I'm glad they stuck with that 1987 team, because not only did they win with it, the foundation was set for the 1991 team that was definitely better. If I recall, they won the World Series that year as well. 

[nicksaviking]

27 minutes ago, h2oface said:

Exactly. That is why it is not worth the time being an apologist for the plethora of bad trades by our FO. The ho hum, that's baseball, oh well, it happens training is working it appears. If the Rays can do it, (and Baltimore is doing it now, and they were got rid of Lopez to go to their better option, Bautista, because they apparently didn't buy into the fools gold and tried to fleece the suckers) so can they all, if they were good enough execs. Our FO is like our team now, they all tell us how good they are without acutal results to back it up. And many of our fan base are OK with that. So be it.

****Moderator Note******

No, many of our fanbase will latch on to any crumb to complain about because they're miserable, irrational people who think the internet is only here for them to air their grievances to try to make others as miserable as they are. We're complaining about a 29-year-old reliever? The Twins have found more flash in the pan bullpen arms than Baltimore recently. Way more. Boo hoo, the Twins haven't figured out the Rays secret sauce, just like the other 28 teams in the league. 

Enough. If all you're going to do is bellyache about the Twins, find another site to do it on. This is not the site for you. Everyone has been warned enough about the tone of this site. Stop the incessant complaining, or stop posting.

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Was the 1987 Twins team a juggernaut?  They won the World Series that year.  Remember this is the team that had Les Straker as their third starter.  They had three hitters with really good years, Hrbek, Puckett, and Brunansky. Everyone else was league average or much worse -- Laudner at catcher was a 65 OPS+, Lombardozzi at 2nd was a 70, and Gladden in CF was a 76.   By the standards set for last year's (and presumably this year's) team, they should have sold off pieces and rebuilt.  At some point, you have to go for it.  Only one team wins it all and 29 will have guessed wrong, so it's easy to be critical in hindsight.  I'm glad they stuck with that 1987 team, because not only did they win with it, the foundation was set for the 1991 team that was definitely better. If I recall, they won the World Series that year as well. 

Who did they trade for at the deadline in 87?   I honestly don't recall.  Was that a team an example of success through deadline trades or are they an example of winning without additions?

[LastOnePicked]

18 hours ago, DocBauer said:

Remember when the Tigers grabbed a young, inexperienced A ball Badoo and the Twins were fools for not protecting him? What is he doing now?

He's playing solid defensively in LF and CF for the surprising Detroit Tigers. And he has a higher BA and OBP than Byron Buxton. Not a superstar yet, sure, but not sure he makes your point here. He was certainly a tradable asset.

[Riverbrian]

4 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

There is no questioning they had a shot at the playoffs.  It's entirely another thing as to if they can compete in the playoffs which is how I would define contending.  This year the AL central could possibly be won at under 500.  That's not a contender.  Anything can happen but that's a poor management mantra. The results last year speak for themselves.  That team was in 1st place but it was not a contender.   Would they have been better off had they not invested in that team?  The answer is very obvious.  We can't rewrite history because as fans we want them to go all in at every opportunity.  Baltimore ended up closer to a playoff spot than the twins.  Yet, they chose to manage their assets for the long-term.  Their result was much better.

You got my respect... I know that you are one of the posters that is always researched and researched beyond the Twins. There is no point discussing what the Orioles, Twins, Braves and other teams did at trade deadlines past because I know you are aware of what everyone did and I assume you know that I am as well.

You and I both know that not all trade deadline acquisitions work out and you and I both can find examples where teams that did nothing did better. 

To me it seems like the crux of our disagreement is going to reside in the thought that you can build a World Series Winner and simply roster yourself to 12 victories or so out of 20 or so games in the playoff

I have long given up on the predictive powers of myself, all front offices and all fans and will never support a front office looking at a contending team and saying... No Chance I don't know why we are here so let's sell. You buy at the trade deadline for the stretch run... to get into the playoffs to get through August and September so your team can compete in the playoffs.   

For the purpose of this discussion, as long as we both recognize that there are degrees to "how much you go in or all in as you put it... meaning... sensibility is always required and I wouldn't suggest burning down the entire farm system to improve your situation for the stretch run.  

I won't speak for the Orioles but I didn't agree with their approach last year however, I can see that they traded an expiring contract and their closer in a loaded bullpen so the potential damage was somewhat limited but I would have added because they had areas that needed improvement... Starting Pitching for example. 

The Twins... They may have been trying to please both of us at the same time. Fulmer was the only rental. The acquisition of Mahle and Lopez came with another year attached. So they attempted to improve the team for the playoffs and next year. Should have made us both happy to a degree. however, that extra year comes with a higher price tag.   

 This year... I fully expect the Twins to buy... and I fully expect them to buy a hitter and a good one. If they don't... I'll be bummed, pissed, disappointed. A rental will be just fine because we got young talent coming up. 

A weak division is just an easier door to open. Teams in the AL and NL Central have won the world series before and they will again. Once you reach the playoffs it doesn't matter if you had a hard or easy door to walk through... it only matters if you got through the door because they all end up in the same room.  

[Major League Ready]

7 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

You got my respect... I know that you are one of the posters that is always researched and researched beyond the Twins. There is no point discussing what the Orioles, Twins, Braves and other teams did at trade deadlines past because I know you are aware of what everyone did and I assume you know that I am as well.

You and I both know that not all trade deadline acquisitions work out and you and I both can find examples where teams that did nothing did better. 

To me it seems like the crux of our disagreement is going to reside in the thought that you can build a World Series Winner and simply roster yourself to 12 victories or so out of 20 or so games in the playoff

I have long given up on the predictive powers of myself, all front offices and all fans and will never support a front office looking at a contending team and saying... No Chance I don't know why we are here so let's sell. You buy at the trade deadline for the stretch run... to get into the playoffs to get through August and September so your team can compete in the playoffs.   

For the purpose of this discussion, as we long as we both recognize that there are degrees to "how much you go in or all in as you put it... meaning... sensibility is always required and I wouldn't suggest burning down the entire farm system to improve your situation for the stretch run.  

I won't speak for the Orioles but I didn't agree with their approach last year however, I can see that they traded an expiring contract and their closer in a loaded bullpen so the potential damage was somewhat limited but I would have added because they had areas that needed improvement... Starting Pitching for example. 

The Twins... They may have been trying to please both of us at the same time. Fulmer was the only rental. The acquisition of Mahle and Lopez came with another year attached. So they attempted to improve the team for the playoffs and next year. Should have made us both happy to a degree. however, that extra year comes with a higher price tag.   

 This year... I fully expect the Twins to buy... and I fully expect them to buy a hitter and a good one. If they don't... I'll be bummed, pissed, disappointed. A rental will be just fine because we got young talent coming up. 

A weak division is just an easier door to open. Teams in the AL and NL Central have won the world series before and they will again. Once you reach the playoffs it doesn't matter if you had a hard or easy door to walk through... it only matters if you got through the door because they all end up in the same room.  

We are not that far apart.  I am not suggesting a team should never add at the deadline.  Far from it.  Where we differ is that the investment should be made when a team has a reasonable chance at post season success.  Of course, we have to define reasonable, and I did not think last year's team had a reasonable chance.   Outside/national sources and betting lines would support their chances were not good.

They were deep in decent but not great prospects that were going to make managing the 40 man difficult.  Between that and the "there is always a chance" once you get in approach, I supported them adding last year just not how they did it.  There were others here who supported rental RPs and not Mahle.

[wabene]

3 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

There is no questioning they had a shot at the playoffs.  It's entirely another thing as to if they can compete in the playoffs which is how I would define contending.  This year the AL central could possibly be won at under 500.  That's not a contender.  Anything can happen but that's a poor management mantra. The results last year speak for themselves.  That team was in 1st place but it was not a contender.   Would they have been better off had they not invested in that team?  The answer is very obvious.  We can't rewrite history because as fans we want them to go all in at every opportunity.  Baltimore ended up closer to a playoff spot than the twins.  Yet, they chose to manage their assets for the long-term.  Their result was much better.

Consider the Twins record against teams like the Yankees and Astros this year. Looks like they are competing.

[nicksaviking]

27 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

 This year... I fully expect the Twins to buy... and I fully expect them to buy a hitter and a good one. If they don't... I'll be bummed, pissed, disappointed. A rental will be just fine because we got young talent coming up. 

A weak division is just an easier door to open. Teams in the AL and NL Central have won the world series before and they will again. Once you reach the playoffs it doesn't matter if you had a hard or easy door to walk through... it only matters if you got through the door because they all end up in the same room.  

I agree that last year's deal to get Mahle and Lopez were the right moves because they could be controlled this year too. And those two should have been good.

But I don't know about buying a hitter this year at the deadline. Do they need hitters? Yes, clearly. But every time they bring in a shiny new vet, they block the young hitters who repeatedly show they were the better option all along. I think the ONLY shot this team has, and I don't think they have a real shot this year at all, is to say screw it, and let the young guys take Kepler, Vazquez, Gallo, Solano, Castro and maybe even Polanco's jobs. They need more than Kirilloff, Lewis and Jeffers to step up, they're going to need a solid five or so young guys to take charge and embarrass the vets, and obviously that's a long shot. But I don't see bringing in more vets as the answer.

And I'm with MLR. I don't think winning a weak division makes you more likely to win the World Series. I think you need to be an actual good team. I think an iffy WC team from a tough division is way more likely to win it all.

[Riverbrian]

7 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

We are not that far apart.  I am not suggesting a team should never add at the deadline.  Far from it.  Where we differ is that the investment should be made when a team has a reasonable chance at post season success.  Of course, we have to define reasonable, and I did not think last year's team had a reasonable chance.   Outside/national sources and betting lines would support their chances were not good.

They were deep in decent but not great prospects that were going to make managing the 40 man difficult.  Between that and the "there is always a chance" once you get in approach, I supported them adding last year just not how they did it.  There were others here who supported rental RPs and not Mahle.

I agree we are not that far apart. I'm just trying to figure out exactly where we are apart because we seem to be apart on the subject. 😉  

We both understand that adding can be Grichuk or Blackmon for our 16th best prospect and it doesn't have to be our entire top 5 prospects for Juan Soto.  

 

[Rod Carews Birthday]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

Who did they trade for at the deadline in 87?   I honestly don't recall.  Was that a team an example of success through deadline trades or are they an example of winning without additions?

Mid tier reliever Dan Schatzader, washed up Steve Carlton, and very useful Don Baylor.  They weren’t swinging for the fences but they were actively engaged.  

[Major League Ready]

26 minutes ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Mid tier reliever Dan Schatzader, washed up Steve Carlton, and very useful Don Baylor.  They weren’t swinging for the fences but they were actively engaged.  

What they did in 87 is an example of what I was advocating.  Modest investment based on a very modest chance of success.  Doing something and giving up 10 prospects or whatever the number was last year are two VERY different things.  

[Riverbrian]

59 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

I agree that last year's deal to get Mahle and Lopez were the right moves because they could be controlled this year too. And those two should have been good.

But I don't know about buying a hitter this year at the deadline. Do they need hitters? Yes, clearly. But every time they bring in a shiny new vet, they block the young hitters who repeatedly show they were the better option all along. I think the ONLY shot this team has, and I don't think they have a real shot this year at all, is to say screw it, and let the young guys take Kepler, Vazquez, Gallo, Solano, Castro and maybe even Polanco's jobs. They need more than Kirilloff, Lewis and Jeffers to step up, they're going to need a solid five or so young guys to take charge and embarrass the vets, and obviously that's a long shot. But I don't see bringing in more vets as the answer.

And I'm with MLR. I don't think winning a weak division makes you more likely to win the World Series. I think you need to be an actual good team. I think an iffy WC team from a tough division is way more likely to win it all.

I'm with you right up to the trade deadline and then we will part company. 

If this pitching staff keeps us in contention into late July... Support them.   

 

[nicksaviking]

49 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

I'm with you right up to the trade deadline and then we will part company. 

If this pitching staff keeps us in contention into late July... Support them.   

 

Yeah, they're offensively frustrating, but winning as much or more than most of us expected. The starters' effectiveness has been a welcome change.

I'm always open to trades, but I'm at the point that it should come at the expense of the players I don't want to watch swing a bat anymore. Though admittedly, I'm bidding my time until natural selection comes and rips San Diego's throat out. That's going to be a bonkers fire sale which ever year they finally waive the white flag.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

If anyone can give a truly honest answer to this question, they would be the highest paid coach in all of baseball.  The MLB landscape is littered with players that were either bad or middling in multiple locations before showing up somewhere and killing it.

Most top players can transcend organizations as their skills are strong.  Many players need to be in the right culture, with the right attitude, and the right voices in their ear to be successful.  Some AAA coach tells them to throw a new pitch that becomes electric or to change their hand placement on the bat to swing smoother.

Hindsight is always 20/20 in these situations.  Turn the page and move on.

[Riverbrian]

20 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Yeah, they're offensively frustrating, but winning as much or more than most of us expected. The starters' effectiveness has been a welcome change.

I'm always open to trades, but I'm at the point that it should come at the expense of the players I don't want to watch swing a bat anymore. Though admittedly, I'm bidding my time until natural selection comes and rips San Diego's throat out. That's going to be a bonkers fire sale which ever year they finally waive the white flag.

I know they are if's - But...

If Buxton and Correa become what they should be. 

If Royce Lewis and Alex Kirilloff are what they are.

If they can add a decent rental and I mean decent rental to Jorge Polanco... The offensive outlook can change significantly and now the pitching staff has support. If you got those 6 and add Gallo hitting the occasional dinger will give him some base runners to drive in and his below .200 BA doesn't seem as bad.  

Right now... It's bad and I'm screaming about the badness. Buxton and Correa are not what they are supposed to be which makes Gallo almost pointless and the team seems to stubbornly play and play again other vets who just are not capable of making up the difference that Buxton and Correa should be providing.

The team doesn't seem to be adjusting quick enough to this for my tastes and I'm filtering my frustration into the minor league incarceration of Matt Wallner.  

What I want to see right now until late July... is an open and fair competition for the the playing time being assigned and a serious search for players who might be better than what the vets are providing... which isn't enough.   

Like I said... I'm right with ya right now... But at the trade deadline... I'm adding because I'm not letting my May get in the way of my August.  

[nicksaviking]

16 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

I know they are if's - But...

If Buxton and Correa become what they should be. 

If Royce Lewis and Alex Kirilloff are what they are supposed to be. 

If they can add a decent rental and I mean decent rental to Jorge Polanco... The offensive outlook can change significantly and now the pitching staff has support. If you got those 6 and add Gallo hitting the occasional dinger will give him some base runners to drive in and his below .200 BA doesn't seem as bad.  

Right now... It's bad and I'm screaming about the badness. Buxton and Correa are not what they are supposed to be which makes Gallo almost pointless and the team seems to stubbornly play and play again other vets who just are not capable of making up the difference that Buxton and Correa should be providing.

The team doesn't seem to be adjusting quick enough to this for my tastes and I'm filtering my frustration into the minor league incarceration of Matt Wallner.  

What I want to see right now until late July... is an open and fair competition for the the playing time being assigned and a serious search for players who might be better than what the vets are providing... which isn't enough.   

Like I said... I'm right with ya right now... But at the trade deadline... I'm adding because I'm not letting my May get in the way of my August.  

Yeah, I never liked the experience > unproven talent angle. I was thrilled with the Correa signing (still am, it was always partially about the principle of making a serious commitment anyway), but rolled my eyes at the other free agents. To be fair, the offensive free agents available this year were atrocious, but I didn't like the sign-guys-just-to-sign guys or fill the roster with defensive first players approach. If the bats they signed after Correa were the best they could do, they should have stood pat other than a nice filler piece or two. (Farmer and a Taylor OR a Gallo for the bench) Every sustained competitive team this organization has ever built, was built almost exclusively of home-grown players. They should have thrown the tykes in the deep end at the beginning of the season to see which ones would swim.

And then at midseason, it would have been easier to see where the holes actually are. We haven't a clue at this point because we've been wasting time with a bunch of guys who'll still be free agents when spring training opens next year.