Steve_h

Seth. I've been wondering about something. How comparable do you see Jorge Polanco & Danny Santana. Both are young primarily SS-types -- at least in the minors. We obviously got to see a lot of Santana at Target Field and he was mostly in centerfield. If I told you only one would be with the Twins four of five years from now, would you guess it to be Polanco or Santana. Obviously they could both be with the Twins and one at another position.

The first question should be whether the Twins want to move forward with Gardy? If that answer is "no" the next question has to be "from within" or "from outside" rather than just picking our favorite from the presently anointed group. For Twins fans who like what the Twins have been and stand for in the Kelly-Gardy era and want to continue that track from within, Mientkiewicz makes sense, probably more than Molitor/Steinbach, because of the age and having managerial experience. On the other hand, if you want a whole new direction don't assume that cadre is the answer. Then we need to look at a totally new group.

Let's not give up on May quite yet after four MLB starts. Sure, he's got adjustments to make, but let's not give up on him. He had a great year at AAA and has shown all kinds of improvement. It takes patience. Sure, we've seen Santana and Vargas do well right off the bat. So May struggled early, let's give him a chance to turn it around.

Yes, this team has been overestimated and will lose 90 games for a fourth straight year. It's been a bad four-year run and I think we can all recognize that. However, it doesn't mean everything we've seen is bad though. Sometimes when you're in a run like this, like the Twins in the latter '90s, good seems so far away. But that's not always the case. In 2000, the Twins had their fourth straight 90-loss team at 69-93. A year later with many of the same players and a few minor league reinforcements, there was contention and an 85-77 record and then a string of division titles. We all loved the Twins '87 championship, but '86 was a disaster and a 71-91 finish that was made better only by a Tom Kelly hiring and strong finish in September. The line between bad-mediocre-good is pretty narrow. A couple new faces (maybe Sano, a full season from Vargas, and a more consistent rotation that might include improvements from Gibson and May, along with an established Hughes and a new face like Meyer, could go a long way toward contention in the era of two wildcards. Even look at the Red Sox. The 2012 version went 69-93 before winning the WS in 2013 with 97 wins in the regular season. The hum-drum of 90-loss seasons is mesmerizing and makes fans think anything good is a long ways away. It doesn't have to be. The right kind of retooling is the key and accurately making the call on who is part of that regeneration is what makes a FO or manager/coaches valuable. That's also where advanced metrics need to be used.

It's bad business to trade Hughes just three months into a three-year deal. Same thing on Morales just two weeks after signing him. If you want your team to be a destination for sought-after free agents, you cannot do that kind of thing. It's different for Willingham, whose deal is just about up after two-and-a-half years here and for Suzuki, whose stay is likely short anyway. Moving Hughes would be inexcusable in the world of agents.

It's hard to gauge what kind of value the Cards really expect for Jay. But here's the question — where do the Twins think they are? If they legitimately think they can go over .500 in 2014, they should consider Jay (but it will cost more than we think it should). If the Twins are a year away from contending, then you wait. If Jay is a corner OF with Buxton around, the Twins don't need him.

I was a 10 year old in 1978. It was my first year as a Twins fan. Memorable year and listened to almost every game. My impressions, looking back, were how much Gene Mauch loved platoons. I think there were four regular platoons, 2B, 3B, LF, RF, and sometimes at catcher but that wasn't a true platoon. I loved the goofy looking Roger Erickson, who was close to the staff ace that Like the other better remembered Erickson, Roger's best year was as a rookie.

Do we know Gardy has made this call? I think it's quite likely that FO listens to Gardy's recommendation but doesn't always make the call he wants. Several of these cuts, IMO, don't look like a Gardy call.

It's good news for Gibson. I wonder if this means Diamond will be DFA'd. Is there room in the pen for both Diamond and Deduno?

I'm not sure I'm ready to give up on Plouffe. Sure there's areas of his game I'm not crazy about. Defensive lapses are concerning and so is his inability to drive in runs. In 2012, his 24 HRs had to drive in the fewest runs had to be as inconsequential as anyone with 24 HRs could have. However, I like that his OPS has climbed in each year, except for 2013. Maybe that has to do with decreasing walks as much as anything. With no Sano this year, I'm ok with another heavy dose of him at 3B in 2014, but we need to see the OPS climb again.

I love these kinds of stories. It keeps me coming back. There is always a role for role players on successful teams. Colabello, Thielbar, Albers could all be part of a successful team — maybe not fulltime everyday players. The comments are right -- they won't be stars, but look at the '87 team. Joe Klink relieved for 12 games. Billy Beane (yes, that's right) played 12 games. Roy Smith started one game and relieved in six others. Even a WS team cannot have 25 Buxtons. You need all kinds of players, even role players who will never get more than a cup of tea.

Great column. Out of all of the 2013's unanswered questions, Plouffe's lack of development and stagnation ranks the highest for the Twins. Coming into '13 I head high hopes. His OPS had climbed from .697 in '11 to .756 in '12. I thought there was an outside chance of a Pedro Alvarez-type ascension offensively. Obviously that hasn't happened. The Twins need to keep him and play him at least as a platoon-typle player, even with Sano knocking on the door. Ideally, you could play him somewhere and bat him 7th or 8th and let him go. His versatility to play 1B or an OF spot is a must, especially after Sano arrives.

Certainly, Morneau's value has fallen significantly since the pre-concussion days. One question I have is if the Twins were to trade Morneau, (probably for a low-level prospect) would there be a chance he would be interested in signing with Twins for 2014, like Rick Aguilera did after being dealt to the Red Sox in 1995. Other thoughts are how much money should it cost to sign Morneau for 2014? How many years would you have to commit? It would probably be more costly to do this as an extension, rather than let him become a free agent right?

It's absurd to think Plouffe would block Sano, one of the organization's crown jewels. If Sano is ready next spring, he'll come north and they'll find another spot for Plouffe, whether its at 1B, an OF spot or some kind of utility role. He can be useful somewhere. Sure you listen to offers for Plouffe now but you don't have to do anything. Most likely you hang on to him because the return won't be spectacular, and see what happens next spring.

Realistically, a MLB team, even a rebuilding one, can only roll the dice on one or two of these low-risk, high-reward guys per year. The Twins rolled with Pelfrey and it hasn't been terrible -- but also not successful. We've seen improvements in recent starts. The Marlins tried Slowey (and others) and the Pirates Liriano. Let's not drool over Liriano or Slowey too much. Liriano has exactly 8 starts and we can all remember 8 consecutive good starts with the Twins too. It's just that those 8 good starts are usually followed by 5 bad ones. He's just inconsistent.