Dantes929

No one seemed to care about his on base skills in 2014 even when I pointed out his OBP was better than Revere's despite Revere's average being 90 points better than HIcks. I think Hicks took the lack of value placed on OBP to heart because he improved his BA in 2015 by 41 points but his OBP went down 18 points and the result was considered to have turned the corner. I expect him to get more aggressive as a result.

Average starting pitching, slightly above average position players and a good measure of luck. Are you talking about the World Series Champion Royals? Kind of by definition average at every position will get you to 81-81. Having slightly above anything added to that will get you more wins and contention for playoffs. There are no great teams out there. It takes varying degrees of good luck for any team to win it all.

Is it a terrible move though? Just your opinion which is probably pretty much 50/50 like everyone else's. Would not surprise me to look at posts from three years ago by people hating this move saying that Hicks should never see a major league field again. Of course in three years this could look like a terrible move but right now from my viewpoint it makes some sense. Looking at the other pages it looks like a split of opinion on this trade. Going to the Yankees pages it looks like a split of opinion. Quick check of catchers with 150+ at bats in 2015 shows Murphy at #6 in batting ahead of Wieters and Lucroy btw, A quick look at centerfielders show Hicks turning the corner at #20 among centerfielders. I am not down on Hicks but his splits from the left side just aren't that good. I always thought he would make the ideal platoon candidate with Arcia and would have a lot of value in that capacity. His OBP actually went down from 2014. As a full timer he is a plus hitter against lefties and a minus hitter against righties which would be fine except we face a lot more right handers. Maybe he will continue to improve but there is no real basis to expect it. "Terrible move" "Huge step backwards"? We just supplemented a guy with a 67 OPS+ last year in Suzuki with a guy that had a 103 OPS+ in Murphy. Likely Hicks 95 is supplanted by Sano's 146 and Sano's 146 by whatever Park can do. So often I read about proven players being needed but now in this trade upside is king? ( No I am not saying Murphy is proven in anything but the short term but Hicks has very little proof of any kind from the left side). In short this trade looks reasonable. Of course Hicks could turn the corner and be a perennial all star but there are those on the Yankee pages that really liked Murphy and are afraid of him being a solid starter for years to come in exchange for a 4th outfielder. Huge step backwards? Not based on what they did in 2015.

I love articles that say stop comparing two players that then goes on to compare the two players with the objective to elicit comments comparing the two players. I'm not going to say hypocritical but rather ironic and not a little bit funny. It would be more honest if someone just posted a headline saying "Don't compare Park to Nishioka" or "Stop comparing Mauer to Oliva" or "Don't compare Escobar to Punto", then write nothing in the content about the two and did not allow comments to be made. I don't like to be told what to do so I will proceed to discuss the two. First of all I never had a problem with signing Nishioka and I am guessing most of you did not either at the time. Japan was riding a wave of respect based on good performance in world championships and guys like Ichiro having success here. Nishioka led his league in hitting. That was a good thing. The criticism I had was getting rid of Hardy, therefore relying on Valencia who wildly outperformed his minor league numbers in a SSS in 2010, Casilla who was similarly unproven and a foreign guy with no MLB experience. I am not taking a stance against unproven guys being given spots because they have to get proven somewhere at some time to be considered proven but to have all three infield spots be suspect was just too much. So here is the very reasonable comparison, IMO anyway. I was ok with signing Nishioka since we had middle infielder need and depth but the problem was letting Hardy go. We have depth at spots Park is likely to play so it actually makes a little less sense but I am still ok with the signing. It is the moves made from here that might call this move into question. Anyone saying there is no comparison will likely change their tune if Plouffe is traded and does well at the same time Park is a bust. I hope that doesn't play out like that.

Its not what I dream of for Mauer. I dream of .320/.400/.440 but would put him in the 2 spot (which is where I would have put him his entire career) and love his .380 OBP on an OBP starved team in a heartbeat. Seemed like nearly every homer Sano had was with Mauer on base. Having power in the middle of the order is great but it means a lot less with no one on board. I don't really care where he plays if he gets on base nearly 40% of the time.

I don't want Sano in the outfield but I kind of wanted him to be DH. People see his weight and height stats and think Vargas, Dave Ortiz and Cecil Fielder but look at his picture above. If a guy can be 6'5 and weigh 250 but still look lean and athletic it is this guy. I think he can be an outfielder based on his speed down the line but I want him to mash and he can do that from the DH spot or fill in for Plouffe or Mauer. I am also fine with him at 3rd in case of a Plouffe trade.

Trading for the unknown in Park is really what botches things up. You can't have it both ways with Sano though. You either say he is an asset defensively because of his athleticism or you say he is best suited for stationary 1st base. I was impressed with how fast he got down the line and can imagine that what made him a short stop in the first place can translate into him being a fair outfielder but I don't really want him there unless he can be much better than Arcia. Hicks, Rosario, Buxton and Kepler should be our mid and long range guys. I loved having outfield defense and do not want to go backwards now when there is a chance to have it become elite. I am reasonably sure the pitching staff would back me up on that assessment. If you are saying Sano is a stationary defender then really his value isn't increased greatly by being out there on defense. In that case just make him a DH until Mauer is done (no, I don't think he is already done). That is what makes the Park signing more baffling.

If you are right, and I don't think you are or should be if Kepler continues to develop, the outfield is set. Ok, you are and should be mostly correct. As described above I could see Hicks as a 4th outfielder in a mostly platoon situation. If that is the case, you now have Plouffe, Sano, Mauer and Ho manning 1b, 3b, and DH. I think Ho is suspect but if they sign him they are going to play him. That leaves Plouffe as the odd man out until Mauer is gone.

Hicks has shown himself to be a pretty good outfielder and a very good hitter from the right side. Major improvement from the left side this year but that only means he went from below .200 to above .200. Maybe he improves some more but I have always thought of him as a platoon player. A valuable platoon player. If he sticks with the Twins I hope I am proved wrong. If he doesn't I guess I don't care. I would keep him until it is proven we don't need him or we get a good offer for him.

Not against power but the Twins were middle of the pack in homers even with Sano for half a year and pretty high in triples but way at the bottom in OBP. Homers are great but solo homers don't add up very fast. KC showed what little power but tough to get out can accomplish. Ideally, you have a lineup of both like Toronto. I am nonplussed by this signing but at least they have depth in case he fizzles. I didn't mind the Nishioka deal either except for the fact we got rid of Hardy because of it.

Wasn't it known that he was going to take a year off which makes that list a bit misleading? If Green was hired last that meant he was passed up by 11 organizations before that so it only takes one to change everything.. Gardy was 2nd in the MOY voting 5 times and MOY once. Not coincidentally it coincides with when the Twins won pennants. I don't think the game has passed him by. Royals didn't win the WS with perfect lineups or defensive shifts or advanced metrics. Or did they? I really didn't research it. I often defended Gardy because he was not the reason they won when they won and he was not the reason they lost when they lost. I would still defend him but no I wouldn't hire him. I just don't like him that much.

Its not guys like this that surprise me. Its picking guys like Sano and Kepler at such young ages that do work out (ok too early so might work out is probably more accurate) that surprises me.

For several years I saw posters whine about how no decent playoff team would ever have Punto or Butera on their 40 man much less see any playing time. I always thought they were contributors and that fans had an inflated sense of what other teams had as backups. Anyway, I would love to see an upgrade at catcher but did not really sense that other teams ran wild on Suzuki even though he didn't throw out that many guys. I didn't think he framed pitches well but he was certainly tough and a good leader. He didn't hit well but he seemed to do well in clutch situations. All in all, I would like to see an upgrade but I don't think he really cost us as much as some think.

Not saying Plouffe definitely is a top 100 guy but 100 is a lot and I was actually surprised at the quality of the last 100 on the list. When I consider intuitively that most starters are around for several years that the roster of starters probably has only had about a dozen cycles where only about a dozen players should be considered you are only talking about a 144 guys. Obviously it is a quicker cycle than my intuition but it is still reasonable that a guy that led the team in RBI twice would be in the top 100 no matter how bad the team. Its a fine list and I am guessing that if you had 100 fans here create the list you would get 100 very different lists with maybe 200 different players making one of the top 100 lists. In fact I am guessing that if Nate Tubb Rules created the list from scratch every week of the year there would be 52 different lists with well over a 100 different players making at least one of his top 100 lists.

As long as we are making these kinds of propositions how about this. Gardy was manager of the year in 2010 and was then the worst manager ever for the next 4 years. Molitor was manager of the year in 2015. Obviously he needs to be replaced now before it is too late.

Again? Mauer will never catch again. Get over it. 51 years old. How about Pete Rose?

Next year. Is that too obvious. In 1989 next year meant last place in 1990 but in 1990 next year meant a WS championship in 1991. What I can't stand is having a bad team and bad prospects (2011). Decent team with good young prospects is drama I enjoy seeing. I am looking forward to next year. And the year after that. I think our all star closer getting hurt and or tanking might have cost us a playoff spot. I don't think Suzuki had as much impact.

. He and Suzuki could be a decent – if unexciting – combo for 2016. I think we would all accept that. AJ is actually still a good hitter and would be playing most of the time in a platoon. Much like Hunter was a defensive and offensive upgrade over Willingham, imo the object is to upgrade which will make us better next year. AJ hits right handed pitching very well. This would be an upgrade. I am just fine with trading prospects. I would have been fine with trading Sano the prospect for Posey type prospect. Probably tough to do though given the general lack of good catchers.

I really hope you are wrong. I was as high on May as I was on Meyer and don't see why May wasn't considered to have nearly as high a ceiling. Pretty good heat along with a good change and curveball. I think his command has been what has separated him into higher end potential I still think a full season of May will beat a full season of Duffey but really, really want them both to get every chance possible. While I think May has shown he can be that kind of starter I also think he has shown he can be more than average out of the bullpen which isn't all bad either.

Of course the Nats got the better end of the deal thus far but I for one thought it was a good trade at the time so am not going to criticize it now. If he never makes it to the Bigs at all I will not criticize it. I will not be happy if he becomes an average bullpen arm. Either something will click or it won't but on him I would take the gamble that it will. Do not trade him the next two years for sure because it would be the definition of selling low.

Ok, I thought maybe it meant another team can pick up them and their contract since they are not releasing them but taking them off the 40 man.

Just out of curiosity who are the new guys coming up that we have to protect and is there any downside to taking Mauer or Nolasco off the 40 man as a short term fix if needed.

While one player can make a difference the best path to improvement is usually to improve at more positions and make no mistake. This can be done by current players getting better. After the rather dismal 2007 many asked how the Twins can expect to get better when losing one of their best hitters and by far their best pitcher. My answer was for more than 2 guys to step up and have better seasons. This happened and 2008 was way better than 2007. Of course not every year has a good likelihood of that happening. 2016 looks to me like a very good chance of improvement from within. Santana for a full year. May and Duffey and possibly Berrios into the rotation. Escobar and Sano for a full year just to name a few possibilities. Of course some guys may not pan out but if those that do outnumber those that don't the team will be better and hopefully the results as well. Doesn't mean I wouldn't like improvement at catcher and the pen with different personnel but I can easily imagine a better year with the guys we have.. .

BTW, please explain how you came up with the stats because a quick look at baseball reference shows Rosario, Escobar and Sano as being regulars. Rosario and Sano had one month each batting under .250 and Escobar had 2. Its actually more accurate to say EVERY starter had fewer than 3 months where they hit less than .250 except for Mauer, Dozier, Hunter, Suzuki, Plouffe and Hicks. Less concerned with guys having months under .250 since baseball is pretty streaky and am even ok with the fact that only 5 guys had season long averages over .250. That fact that the top hitter was under .270 underscores the poor OBP as a team. .

Or have the hitters in there hit better.