Riverbrian

This is a fantastic post.

Take it easy on Gopherguy.

Right now I'm only worried about if Molitor "doesn't" use him. He's here... someone likes him. Lets see what he can do for us.

I'm not so sure I agree that the Twins "handled Darvish well" but I agree with your overall point. If you want the player... You have to pay the price. It's how free agency works. It's really that simple. If you want the player, you got to get serious about it and go pay the price it takes. You have to acknowledge the risk and that risk has to be baked into the process. Every team by now is fully aware of the possibility of large chunks of dead money on the payroll when you offer multi year deals and no GM is going to put all their eggs into a one free agent basket. The cost it took to sign Darvish is the cost you have to pay if you want Darvish. I wanted Darvish... I admit it and his season this year hasn't made me hide from that wish.

Thanks. If that’s the case. Give him a little more cushion and then call him up.

I have no idea why Austin reported to Rochester. He is a time sensitive decision.

Instead of my wish list... I'd rather discuss yours. 1. I'd like to see them find a way to win some games but I'm not going to lose sleep over it. 2. They better not call up Buxton this year... We get an extra year of control if they don't. He has already wasted nearly 3 years of his control not being the Buxton we want him to be. Get the extra year and hope that he improves to the point where we can enjoy that extra year. If you call him up, you run the risk of him struggling right up to year 5... becoming the Buxton we want in year 6 and hitting FA the year after. I don't want the Twins to trade him and I don't want the Twins to depend on him until he proves that we can depend on him. 3. I love Sano Bombs and I also think he does and that might be part of the problem. Right Now... I enjoy watching him not swing at crap. I'd be happy if he simply keeps doing that. 4. I think that would be awesome for Joe but right now the guy I want to see play is Tyler Austin... I'd love to see him in the OF and 1B and if Joe loses some AB's because of it... I'm ok with that. If this is Joe's last year... let him make the announcement. If he doesn't... carry on with plans for 2019. Get Austin up here and let him swing. 5. Totally agree... I just want Max to get on the type of roll that can carry over to 2019 with new found confidence. 6. Take out Romero and I'm with you... I think he is special and worth being careful of his Super Two Status in case he is indeed special. Leave him in the minors and he can join us opening day with no concerns and be terrific forever. The club needs to plan for failure but... it also needs to plan for success. Not bringing Romero back this year is planning for possible success. Mejia needs to start every 5 days from here on out so we can determine if he can help us in 2019 and I'd love to see Gonsalves... I've been waiting for him to arrive. I want to see some Trevor May as well. My wish list is pretty concise. Audition talent for 2019. If the front office or Molitor can't pull that off because Mauer and Forsythe need to play instead then i'm gonna be disappointed because it will be Trevor Plouffe in 2016 all over again and they will have learned nothing from it.

I absolutely believe in chemistry. However... I don't know which players are the chemists and I'm not sure how anyone else would know. That includes the players themselves.

I've been doing what I call an "autopsy" on what went wrong this season since I've walked from the game threads and I've been posting a lot of opinion lately on what I'm running across with the hope of others taking similar notice for discussion. I've been doing this without inside information and it should also be noted what I'm looking for is very tainted by my own personal opinion. With that said... I try my best to stop at the waters edge when it comes to assessing blame toward anyone since I don't know the dynamic of the decision making rooms today and yesterday. Basically, as I started looking at the issues of this season, it naturally led me to the issues of past season. In other words, "what went wrong" didn't just happen under the eye of Falvey and Lavine. In my opinion "what went wrong" has been a culmination of mistakes made in the past decade in all avenues of talent acquisition, playing time allocation, along with assessment and development. Since this is a Brian Dozier thread... I believe that there were things that could have been done to increase Brian Dozier's trade value which may be laid at the feet of the past regime and there are things that could have done to minimize the damage of his pro-longed slumps.that can laid at the feet of the current regime. Getting back prospects that may or may not pan out for a player about to hit free agency... I have no problem with that and feel like it should mandatory in consideration of the current situation. I just want to make a notation that the Twins were more active during this trade deadline then I have ever seen in all my years of Twins obsession and am encouraged about the future if that is how they will handle things. As for the prospects in return... I will wait until they (if they) ripen to MLB status before I pass judgement on the acquisitions received in return.

It all came crashing down in 2011. Next year will be 2019. When you look back at each way talent can be acquired. I'm not so sure we can check any boxes in the satisfactory column for the organization. Including talent acquired at the trade deadline during what has been a long stretch of out of contention at the trade deadline seasons. Falvey and Lavine are clearly a different animal at the trade deadline then what we had before.

I have no idea what is happening in the clubhouse and I'm not going to trust any reporter who may have talked to one guy (Maybe it was Brandon Kintzler). It doesn't matter the industry. If you don't hit your goals. Good chemistry is going to become bad chemistry. People start pointing fingers and it happens consistently.

I still believe that Sano and Buxton being sent down was when they assumed they would be pulling the plug. When Romero was sent down... that was when they actually pulled the plug. They then held the plug in their hand for while while the team went on a little winning streak before the all-star break and they thought about plugging it back in. But decided to drop it on the floor and walk away after Kansas City swept us out the all star break. The team has been kinda plugged up this year. Belisle... If I had to guess was the answer to the question. Paul is there anyone you would trust so you don't turn Pressly, Hildenberger and Reed into cinders and that is why Belisle is here. I have no proof of anything I'm saying.

Maybe 20 are

Great idea... It wouldn't hurt to experiment a little.

Sano I agree with you. Getting him right is huge. His plate discipline has been better since his return which is encouraging but if he starts chasing crap again, Paul has got to sit him down for a game and say "take a seat, you are chasing crap again". By no means have I given up on the guy, nor will I, but we still need a safety net because of how he looked this year. Start him at both 3B and 1B throughout the rest of the season. Mitch Garver Unless we are planning on Wilson for 2019... Mitch Garver should be starting 7 out of the remaining 10 games. Hire a catcher coach that can quiet him down... make Garver stay after school. If pitchers are requesting Wilson as a personal catcher, let Garver hear that. Have a come to jesus meeting with the pitching staff, let them all work together on the problem. Let the pitchers invest in Garver and his development. Byron Buxton We better not see Buxton the rest of the year. He should remain in Rochester so we can get the lost year of service time back in case he figures it out. Max Kepler I agree... continue working with Rowson so he gets better handling pitches up in the zone. Addison Reed I'm not worried yet. He is back next year... how he performs in the next couple of months is not critical in my opinion. Players have up and down years all the time. If he has had a drop in velocity maybe decrease his role in the pen and let him coast to a finish this year. Fernando Romero I think he is going to be critical to our future and therefore not critical at all in the next two months. People disagree with me but I would rather prepare for the possibility that he might be the above average arm I think he could be. Keep him down in Rochester for the rest of the year and keep him out of Super Two status... that decision made right now could be worth a lot of money and that money could be worth a player when we are clicking. Let's see Gonsalves instead. Michael Pineda Disagree with critical... I'll like to see him throw in September if he is ready but his first performances might be rough and I don't think we should be judging him or labeling his starts as critical. Just call it step one. The names I'll add are: Tyler Austin - Get him up here and give him a run and please give him a healthy dose of Outfield Play. Jake Cave - Give him a run... Give him a chance to show something sustainable. Ervin Santana - Got to make a decision on him for next year. Aldelberto Mejia - Got to make a decision on him for next year Trevor May - Got to make a decision on him for next year.

First... Let me put on my plastic whatever thing before I say this. I'd pick up his option for 2019. OK... Throw your tomatoes at me... I'm ready for them.

You either make him better or you stop and try somebody else. The whole concept falls apart if you try to jam Kennys Vargas into the SS position.

I've been focusing on the frequency like the Dodgers are doing. How often has Plouffe played an alternate position? Plouffe came up as a SS in 2010. In 2011 he made the team as a utility player and he played all the positions you list as a utility player which continued to 2012 until he became the everyday 3B. Once that happened he became a fixture at the position and his position flexibility was gone. Other than 26 starts at 1B in 2015 and 2016 which I acknowledge. I have no ability to assess his capability at 2B or RF once he was solidified as a 3B but he made the team in 2012 with position flexibility and that potential value or skill came to an end. BTW... he has made a start in RF for the Phillies this year.

While reading your well thought out response, it has occurred to me that I really don't disagree with your overall point. I have used a cute less professional term "willy nilly" in this thread to say what you are saying. I don't think the execution should be reckless. The player can't be a defensive mess when playing a different position and must at least meet a certain standard that will be hard to define on paper in a forum like this, other than to say "somewhat capable". I think we are in agreement and not far off in our opinions. I'm believing that the you can gain more by getting your best bats in the lineup than you would potentially lose with what could be a slight down tick in defense. We might disagree on one small thing that neither you or I can prove or refute. I still believe that there are many positional flexible players on rosters across MLB that have not been identified as candidate because of (I assume) outdated conventions leading to the unwillingness to fully try to identify. I hate going back to Brian Dozier as the example because it is quite possible that Brian Dozier is indeed a 2B only based on his particular skills but... Brian Dozier has never been tried in the OF so how do we know? Again, I don't want to focus on Dozier but I do want to focus on the idea that this hasn't been explored to all the potential possibilities due outdated conventions that may be unnecessarily limiting. Chris Taylor was never tried in the OF before until he was tried in the OF last year and ended up starting in CF during the world series. Ian Desmond played maybe 1 game in the OF before signing with the Rangers to become their starting CF. The Angels slammed Howie Kendrick into the OF after significant time of never playing past the dirt. Also Dee Gordon, Ryan Braun just off the top of my head. I believe there are others but I absolutely respect what you are saying. P.S. I will be watching the Dodgers like a hawk. If Brian Dozier starts 1 game at a position besides 2B... I'm gonna be standing on a table shouting and pointing.

Thank you Jack! You have provided a lot of substance to this discussion and I appreciate it. This report you provided was published in March, 2013, which was actually before the arrival of Friedman in LA and the arrival of Maddon in Chicago, I always assumed they were the main reason why the Dodgers and Cubs shifted this direction as hard as they did but... maybe not? I'm sure that there were details that went straight over my head but based on what I was reading, it sure seems to reflect most everything that I've been trying to express lately. I don't have the ability to build a statistical model to present my opinions better but "Roster Construction" and "Playing Time Allocation" have been a couple of things that I have been driving everybody crazy with around here.. I find myself repeating over and over again in search of answers. Ultimately, I want to be fair to all in my opinions. As time as gone by from the date of this report, it sure looks like the Dodgers haven't turned away from the ideology and have actually increased the application of and it doesn't look like they are not going to stop either. You were with the Twins from 2009 to 2017 in a variety of roles, including the position of director of research. You were the pioneer of statistical research and functional analytics within the organization, you were the guy responsible for contributing new thinking to what (I assume) was a more traditional operational model. Basically... I assume you were the guy who had to walk into a room full of people and open some eyes to things they hadn't thought about before. You were in your position during the time of Freidman, Maddon in Tampa and when they took their new approaches with them to the Cubs and Dodgers. I know you had to be aware of it while it was happening and I assume it must have been discussed. What was your opinion as it was happening and your opinion today? What was the opinion of the others in the room? Was there resistance? Open mindedness? Indifference? Were the discussions difficult or frustrating?Or Curious and Intriguing? Or was it something that was just stashed away for further study in anticipation of more data? Thanks Again Jack... I can't tell you how much I appreciate your contributions to the discussion.

Thank You. I will be reading it all tonight.

Yes he did. And if capable he could have played them more. However he was a by all practical purposes a fixture at 3B. Hey Jack, do you have any defensive metric findings that would apply to the conversation?

Garver has his visable defensive issues that Wilson doesn't have. However, The team was starved for offense, the team died from that starvation and are currently donating the organs. Garver OPS .760 Wilson OPS .480 Garver provided more calories. Now Garver is getting playing time? I question the decisions.

Addition by subtraction I don't have time to do the research this morning but I know: There are examples of selling teams that became winning teams after selling. There are examples of buying teams that become losing teams after buying.

I appreciate the well thought out post. Although I'm not so sure I agree. I've experienced a lot of things in life that fall under careful what you wish for. I do agree that the hit tool is the trump card but I admit that I don't understand how the search for hitters compromises the development of future multi-positional players as you suggest. Hitting is hitting and defense is defense. When you find a hitter he will need a place to play in the field. Are you saying that defense has already been compromised because its already a secondary consideration? Hopefully you can clarify this a little because I'm interested. It seems to me that the drive to find hitters as a primary function of advancement, should in theory increase it. Multi Positions opens more doors so you can find them landing spots easier. When you say that it requires an innate skill and athleticism. I believe that skill and athleticism is already there. You will find some Victor Martinez types in dugouts but the majority of the rest are athletic and drafted because they are athletic. The first thing a scout does is whip out the stopwatch and radar gun. I don't think the ability to play multi positions is a rare gift you are born with. I believe the athleticism to be drafted is the rare gift you are born with. Position switches happen all the time at the major league level and the simple fact that it happens all the time shows that it doesn't take innate skill. The reason players switch positions is usually out of the necessity of keeping a bat in the lineup like I think you are suggesting. The problem is that the position switch becomes permanent when the addition of a 2nd position should mean flexible. Nick Castellanos is a 3B one day and then an OF the next day, and all traces of prior 3B is wastefully dumped into the bottom of the sea like it never existed. That is the standard way a position switch is conducted by the old school teams. The Dodgers and Cubs said screw that. The Dodgers say Manny Machado can play both SS and 3B... The Orioles say he can only play one or the other. The Dodgers are able to get their best bats in the lineup every day. The Orioles live and die with a chosen 9.