Heyman: The Twins made a 3-year offer to Ervin Santana

[jokin]

Fair enough. I didn't see that comment. I don't really agree with not putting Gibson in the fray but it's not the type of thing I'm going to get too upset about, either.

 

If it's late May and Gibson is dominating the minors while Correia is throwing batting practice, then I'll get angry about it.

 

Sounds like May 2013, redux.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Buxton entirely depends on Hicks. If Aaron stumbles again, Buxton might be in line to start CF on Opening Day 2015. If Hicks rebounds, then it makes sense to consider Buxton's service time and push him back to June.

 

I can see your point about Meyer, I just don't see a reason to get up in arms about one week of Spring Training experience. Ultimately, I think it's a non-issue because the Twins have more pressing concerns in the 8-9 guys in front of Alex.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Sounds like May 2013, redux.

 

Except this time, Gibson isn't coming back from TJS.

 

It's pretty hard to argue that the Twins handled Gibson badly last season. He obviously wasn't ready for an MLB rotation. We were all confused at their statements about him not being ready yet but after we got to see him for ten starts, it was pretty obvious that they were speaking from a position of knowledge and we were not.

[TheLeviathan]

Fair enough. I didn't see that comment. I don't really agree with not putting Gibson in the fray but it's not the type of thing I'm going to get too upset about, either.

 

If it's late May and Gibson is dominating the minors while Correia is throwing batting practice, then I'll get angry about it.

 

Im generally with you on that. I want Gibson up now but I won't be irate about it until June. But I strongly disagree with the notion that a guy gets blocked only if the options in front of him are superior and that teams always swap out veterans for young guys when it's been earned/deserved.

 

We have a ton of evidence to the contrary and any more arms added are only going to further muddy the opportunities.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I count Worley, Diamond, and Deduno... one of which will probably be cut out of Spring Training.

 

So really, I count two guys before Gibson.

 

One of those guys will get the fifth starting spot out of Spring Training.

 

So there's one guy before Gibson.

 

I have the feeling we'll see Kyle Gibson in Minnesota relatively soon.

 

Agreed. And of those three, whoever isn't cut or claimed might well be removed from the 40-man, meaning Gibson would have a leg up on them too.

[Otto von Ballpark]

But I strongly disagree with the notion that a guy gets blocked only if the options in front of him are superior and that teams always swap out veterans for young guys when it's been earned/deserved.

 

I'm with you there. And with the modest staff the Twins have assembled, there is a chance that we could end up with 4 or 5 starters chugging along at ~90 ERA+, not good enough to really help us contend, but not bad enough to cut.

 

But a few of these guys still have to prove they can even hit that ~90 ERA+ mark, or sustain it, so I'm not too worried about that scenario quite yet.

[Kwak]

I remember all of the posts last year exclaiming the need to promote Gibson to the Twins. I was skeptical but hopeful--then I watched him pitch! I'm more skeptical and less hopeful--but I would very much like to be wrong about Gibson. My point: I think the Twins held a similar view last year and again this year. Four veteran pitchers are under contract to man the five-man rotation. It is clear to me that the Twins are skeptical! If we believe that the Twins were serious about adding a fifth veteran (and not trading any of the other four) what more evidence do people need that the Twins are very skeptical of this bunch of "starting pitcher candidates"? Gardenhire has shown his preferences (bias) and no one should be surprised that Gibson isn't one of them.

[TheLeviathan]

I'm with you there. And with the modest staff the Twins have assembled, there is a chance that we could end up with 4 or 5 starters chugging along at ~90 ERA+, not good enough to really help us contend, but not bad enough to cut.

 

But a few of these guys still have to prove they can even hit that ~90 ERA+ mark, or sustain it, so I'm not too worried about that scenario quite yet.

 

You're right that clarity with the 5th spot is going to go a long way, but I'd caution something else. The Twins know that Hughes, Pelfrey, and even Correia have a lot to prove yet to be cemented in a spot, but they're going to be tough to dig out of the rotation because of their contracts.(anyone pretending the Twins are just going to ignore what they signed those men to do based on even two months of poor performances are being really naive. Hell, it may be unfair for the Twins to give up on them at that point even if they are horrible.)

 

Even still, the Twins know that they are a precarious bunch, which may lead them to keep more of those guys without options than any of us would like to see, just as insurance against collapses. I really have to see how this shakes out before I have ANY confidence in seeing Gibson before June - even if there are injuries or horrid performances.

[Mike Sixel]

I remember all of the posts last year exclaiming the need to promote Gibson to the Twins. I was skeptical but hopeful--then I watched him pitch! I'm more skeptical and less hopeful--but I would very much like to be wrong about Gibson. My point: I think the Twins held a similar view last year and again this year. Four veteran pitchers are under contract to man the five-man rotation. It is clear to me that the Twins are skeptical! If we believe that the Twins were serious about adding a fifth veteran (and not trading any of the other four) what more evidence do people need that the Twins are very skeptical of this bunch of "starting pitcher candidates"? Gardenhire has shown his preferences (bias) and no one should be surprised that Gibson isn't one of them.

 

What does that last part mean? Why don't you think he likes Gibson? I have a snarky thing I'd say, but I"m trying harder to be nice about Gardy.....

[Kwak]

What does that last part mean? Why don't you think he likes Gibson? I have a snarky thing I'd say, but I"m trying harder to be nice about Gardy.....

 

Gardenhire has stated: "I want players 'won before'." He has, over time, shown preference for veteran players over rookies. Gibson, hasn't "won before", hasn't even proved himself successful for a full season at the majors--so it is easy for me to understand Gardenhire's comment about Deduno, and silence with respect to Gibson. I fully expect Gibson to start this season in Rochester.