I don't have a strong opinion either way - my question was genuine and I'd love to see some kind of careful study. My approach would be to look at highly successful pitchers, since it's by developing those that you really help build your organization (filler is always available cheaply), and see what their BB/9 numbers looked like coming up through the minors. So, as a very quick and dirty cut at the question, I looked at the top 5 AL ERA (with enough innings to qualify): Aaron Sanchez, Verlander, Tanaka, Kluber, and Porcello. Tanaka is a special case with his years in Japan. Verlander never had control problems in his short time coming up, likewise Porcello. That leaves only two to look at (some study!). Sanchez had BB/9 in the 4 to 5 range, not too far off from Landa, and yet the Blue Jays didn't have him repeat levels after he was 18; he had good ERAs and was promoted. Finally, Kluber was a relatively late bloomer, and his BB/9 was measurably better than Landa but not masterful, in the 3 to 4 range. Again, his team(s) didn't leave him languishing. FWIW, both have had much better BB/9 once they reached the majors. Far from a statistically valid study (duh!), and I don't propose to undertake one. But these are two pitchers who helped their teams a lot this year. Moving them up even when their control wasn't yet pinpoint didn't seem to stunt their development. I'm not saying Landa projects to be like them. But if sink-or-swim at each succeeding level works for other organizations, maybe the Twins have been overthinking it. Move them up, and if they flounder (due to control issues, or just getting hit hard) either demote them if you think a second chance is warranted, or else flush them. And now *I* am guilty of overthinking. But you asked.