Brock Beauchamp

Here's the list of available shortstops: 1. Stephen Drew 2. ... 3. Pedro Florimon? 4. Damn it!

Well, I think it's not quite *that* cut and dry. Drew has concerns surrounding him. He hasn't proven to be very durable. He has some ugly splits. He costs a draft pick (though I'm not terribly concerned with that, as it's a second round pick for the Twins). If the Twins like Drew as a player, money shouldn't be a hurdle. If they don't like Drew as a player, then signing him is a bad idea. And really, none of us have any idea of what they think of Drew as a player on a three year deal. I happen to think he's an acceptable risk because Florimon is bad at baseball and the Twins are unlikely to find anyone internally who can competently man the shortstop position. But it's not really a clear-cut case of "they HAVE to sign him".

If by "Chone Figgins workout", they really mean "a Twins representative walked into a Davanni's and Chone Figgins served him a chicken parmesan sub", then I'm okay with it.

It absolutely wins more games. It accounts for 2-3 wins a season, which is right where WAR pegs Drew over Florimon. Amazing how things tend to work out that way.

And this is why I want to see Paul Molitor become the next Twins manager. He is one of the few players who got better well into his 30s, indicating that he's open to new ideas and adapting to the environment. He just exudes baseball smarts and this comment just reinforces that opinion.

First, I don't do bets on the internet. Never have, never will. Second, here is a good article on player aging. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933 Hitters peak somewhere around age 29, which certain skills such as AVG/SLG peaking at age 28 and others, such as BB, peak in a player's 30s. Anyone in the 26-30 area is at or near their peak in most cases. A good summary of the article is this: In Florimon, we have a player who meets the following criteria: - He has been old-ish at every level of the high minors, not playing a full season at AA or above until age 24. - He has posted an OPS over .700 once, despite being an older player relative to competition. - In 601 MLB PAs, he has an OPS of .601. In his last 446 PAs as a 26 year old, he has a .611 OPS. - In his age 26 MLB season, he showed no progression as a hitter during the season. In fact, he actually regressed as the season went on, posting a first half OPS of .636 and a second half OPS of .576. - In his last MiLB season (2012), he posted a .652 OPS in Rochester. This is in line with his career .675 MiLB OPS. - It's not only me. Both Steamer and Oliver project 2014 Florimon to remain neutral to 2013 or actually regress as a player. Can Florimon improve? Sure, anyone can improve. Cuddyer improved in his 30s (but he's an awful comp, as Cuddyer had a long track record of success at every level he ever played). But baseball isn't about hopes and wishes, it's about playing the odds. And the odds say that Pedro Florimon will never be an acceptable MLB starter. Nothing (and I mean nothing) in his career has suggested that he is a capable hitter. He hasn't progressed in a meaningful way in two years, despite entering typical prime seasons for a player of his type. Players of his calibre are often out of baseball entirely by their late 20s (see Gardenhire, Ron) because, as the link above illustrates, bad players rarely get a chance to age in MLB. Florimon is hard to comp because it's hard to find a guy of his hitting ability who accumulated more than a few hundred MLB PAs. Hell, even no-hit guys like Adam Everett had Ruthian peaks compared to what we've seen from Florimon. With that said, I feel like I'm talking in circles. I'm going to bow out of this thread because there is nothing left to say.

Pick a no-hit IF that was out of baseball by his late 20s. Ron Gardenhire, for example. He's a better comp than Greg Gagne, who has tracked 3-4 years younger at every level than Pedro Florimon (and outperformed Pedro with the bat at every level at a much younger age). Really, other than both being shortstops for the Twins, I don't see any reason to compare the two players. Different eras, different performance, different ages, different ballparks. AVG/OBP/SLG are flawed stats across eras. A much safer, and more accurate, metric is something like OPS+. For example, Greg Gagne got to play in the SuperBall-era Metrodome. Is he a valuable player without that turf? Maybe, maybe not. In 1986 (the only year I looked), he OPSed about .080 higher at home than on the road. What we do know is that Pedro Florimon doesn't get to play in a giant pinball machine 81 times a year and that he hasn't hit anywhere at any level. I keep asking the question but what exactly makes you think that Florimon will improve? Sure, when there is relevant data to use. In the case of Florimon, there isn't much MLB data to use so to supplement that data we fall back to his MiLB numbers, which support that he was a bad MiLB hitter and will continue to be a bad MLB hitter. If a 26 year old can't OPS much over .600 in MLB and didn't OPS much over .650 in AAA as a 25 year old, what basis is there to think that he will improve significantly enough to matter? Also, both Steamer and Oliver project the 2014 version of Pedro Florimon to be worth more negative offensive runs than the 2013 version. Both also predict a decrease in overall WAR. AVG, OBP, and SLG are not consistent league-wide from year to year. An uptick in Florimon's performance could be more than offset by a larger uptick in league performance as a whole, making 2014 Florimon a net loss over the 2013 version.

No, I don't have medical records... On the other hand, you don't have any evidence that Florimon is a late bloomer, either. What we do have is player models and those player models peg Florimon right at his peak performance age. If he was coming into his own as a player, why did he post a .652 OPS as a 25 year old in AAA? Why did he follow that up with a .611 OPS as a 26 year old in MLB? Again, I'm using standard player models for Pedro Florimon, which is all we can use for players who haven't shown any great strides improving their play on the baseball field whereas you are hoping that Florimon gets better without any real evidence to suggest that he will do so. Which analysis sounds more likely to be accurate? To be frank, you are in the extreme minority in this viewpoint. The extreme minority.

God, I hope not. Hicks hasn't had success anywhere since the 2012 season. Let the kid get his feet under him in the minors before exposing him to MLB pitching again. Please.

If we have to use the ugliness already on the roster, I think a platoon makes the most sense. Escobar faces lefties and Florimon gets most of the righties, with Escobar getting a few PAs against RHP to see if he can improve. Overall, Escobar has some room for growth so he should be given a bit of a longer leash but when you get right down to it, both Escobar and Florimon are pretty bad options as starters.

It's a bit unfair to call Aaron Hicks a scrub. Or really unfair, actually.

I'd argue that players don't even replicate their MiLB numbers in MLB. My lazy observations over the years noticed that the average player generally matures into a MLB player at -.050 to .000 OPS compared to their MiLB numbers. And that does not bode well for a 27 year old Pedro Florimon, whose 2013 OPS was ~.065 below his MiLB career numbers. He might become a .630 OPS player. That still makes him a bad MLB starter. He could also fall off the map entirely and post a sub-.600 OPS, which is often what happens to marginal MiLB players upon entering the show. Another thing you have to factor into MiLB numbers is relative age to competition. For example, Miguel Cabrera routinely outperforms his MiLB numbers. He was also extremely young at every level so that's not terribly surprising. Pedro Florimon, on the other hand, is on the opposite side of that spectrum. He has been older at every level, which means that his MiLB numbers should be well over what you expect from him as a mature MLB player. Again, this looks bad for Pedro Florimon as a hitter.

Greg Gagne was 23 years old in 1985. Greg Gagne also posted an OPS of .800 in ~700 AAA plate appearances. Way too many bad comparisons are being thrown around in this thread. Players of Florimon's age and MiLB track record do not have a history of significant improvement entering their late 20s. They just don't, which leaves many Florimon supporters basically hanging their analysis on hopes and prayers, which isn't the most sound reasoning to argue a player's worth. That doesn't mean Florimon can't improve. He could buck the trend and become a .700+ OPS player. But that's rare. Extremely rare and not the sort of thing you bank on when crafting a MLB roster.

I assumed Pinto was missing because of his MLB experience. There's no way he drops off the list after his September call-up unless they have a 50 PA cutoff for prospects.

I've also been pretty down on Santana but if his glove plays as advertised, he could easily supplant Florimon. I've probably been a bit unfair to the kid, as he's only going into his age 23 season in 2014. Honestly, it wouldn't take much. Santana's 2013 in AA is virtually identical to Florimon's 2012 in AA... Except that Santana did it as a 22 year old, not a 25 year old. I don't expect much from Santana but I expect nothing from Florimon. He's a bad MLB starter. Florimon should be AAAA injury filler in the minors, not a MLB shortstop. Santana probably won't end up being more than a futility bat but still, that's better than Pedro Florimon. His bat simply doesn't carry in today's game. I don't care how well he fields (and he's still too sloppy to be considered an all-glove, no bat starter). As for Florimon improving, I created a handy meme image to explain my thoughts on the subject.

I don't see how Stewart can be ranked above Meyer at this point. Meyer just finished his age 23 season at AA striking out almost 11 batters per 9 innings. Stewart has all of 20 professional innings under his belt. If Meyer doesn't graduate to the Majors for whatever reason, it wouldn't surprise me if those slots are flipped going into next offseason but right now, Stewart's talent doesn't outweigh his lack of experience.

That is one dead sexy list of shortstops. Combine them into one and you'd have a player slightly better than Mario Mendoza.

We all want an ace but I think it's a mistake to pin those hopes on a 24 year old that has already pitched 1300 professional innings and barely K'ed 7 per 9 in Japan last season... Not when that player is going to run over $100m to sign. Sure, he could rebound and start missing bats again... Or he might not. And at that money, the guy better be as close to a sure thing as there is in baseball. The Twins simply cannot afford to pay a guy over 1/5th of their total payroll and not get premium performance out of him. Darvish K'ed over 11 per 9 innings in his last season in Japan. He was trending the opposite direction when he came to MLB.

None. Closest I ever came was a Griffey line drive home run during batting practice at the 1992 All Star Game. It went between me and my cousin at about 120mph. Barely missed my hand and took out some poor bastard's beer directly behind us. I am so glad I didn't touch that ball. I don't know if I've ever seen anything that small moving that quickly. It probably would have just kept going into the stands with my hand attached to it. I've been really close to at least a dozen foul tips (I rarely sit in the OF) but nothing within reach.

No, Kepler isn't a huge surprise, just noting that he's not on the list. Berrios is definitely a top ten prospect, I was merely surprised that they had him at #5, right behind Stewart. Then again, with the Rosario suspension, maybe that isn't such a surprise.

They're certainly bullish on Thorpe and Berrios. Also, no Kepler.

To be fair, fantasy stats give no weight to the one skill that Florimon excels at in baseball. But overall, he's still a pretty bad MLB player.

I think the choice is pretty easy.... Stephen Drew, maybe Michael Young. The Twins need short-term infielders. Drew is more of a middle-of-the-road piece but Young can probably be had on a one year deal. The Twins don't need a DH. They already have five of that guy, though it'd be nice if one of them was actually good. Still, they need to clear out some warm bodies and make room for Arcia, Buxton, and Hicks relatively soon and DH is the logical spot to slide Willingham when that happens (not to mention that Plouffe is going to added to the shuffle sometime by mid-season). If none of it pans out, find a DH next offseason. The Twins shouldn't be looking at more starting pitchers, IMO. They already signed three and have one spot open for four guys with a fifth coming at some point in the season. They need to see how that shakes out before they commit more money to the position. And the more I look into Tanaka, the more my brain yells "DO NOT WANT". The dude didn't miss bats in Japan last year. Sure, he might be a fine pitcher but not at the money he's going to get from an overeager team. If the Twins absolutely must give money to another pitcher, I'd take Garza at 50-60% of Tanaka's overall contract value in a heartbeat. I think the guy is going to be an awful value. He could easily be a league average guy sucking up $20m+ a year. No thanks.

Yeesh, that is selling not one but two players when they're at the low water mark. No thanks.