Jim H

I am very excited for what Arcia can become. I think that with all the talk about the phenoms Buxton and Sano we the fans, sort of overlook Arcia. He is still quite young, was promoted quite quickly through the upper minors and clearly has things to work on. But, it would be nice to see him intrench himself in right field(I think if they put him there and leave him there he will be OK). The power is clearly for real and the swing is good enough to eventually allow him to hit for a good average as well. If the discipline and pitch recognition come along(as Parker says) he will be a lot of fun to watch.

I don't really get worked about Hall of Fame votes, for a great many reasons. But one of the things to keep in mind with the Hall of Fame (in other sports as well) it is really the Hall of the Famous. There were contemparies of Brooks Robinson whose numbers are roughly comparable, they just didn't happen to play for as good of a team or put on an incredible World Series defensive performance just when TV was becoming big. In the case of Blyleven, he had no chance of getting into the Hall of Fame until he became a broadcaster and basically compaigned for it for 10 years. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve it necessarily, but he had never had a great series of peak years, he wasn't the ace on any of the playoff teams he played for, and spent some of his best years in Texas, Minnesota and Cleveland when nobody was paying any attention to those teams. To some degree, whether it is fair or not, all marginal candidates run into those sort of issues. You need something to set you apart from the crowd if your numbers don't clearly put you in the Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame voters are going to get ripped no matter what they do. Everyone has different standards for the Hall of Fame and virtually any marginal selection will be picked apart by someone. Even here, everyone is all over the place on Jack Morris.

I was never particularly high on Bartlett's defense when he was with the Twins. I know that others were, and his defense seemed to improve a bit with Tampa. I always did like his offense, considering that there was no power. Still he seems a long shot to me. I would think that the chances of him being more than a backup at this stage of his career are very high against, and I am not sure that he is likely to be any clear upgrade to Escobar. Whether there will be a need for a 2nd backup infielder kind of depends on how the roster plays out. I can't get much excited about the speculation concerning Sizemore, but clearly the interest in Rajah Davis shows that Ryan might be interested in adding some sort of outfielder who can play defense and has a little pop. Talk about Wieters is kind of silly, why would you want to block Pinto and I really can't see Ryan doing anything at catcher after he added Suzuki. The whole DH corner outfield thing is still pretty messy and unclear. The outfield would be a lot clearer if Hicks and Arcia prove they are ready.

Thank you, I do remember Mauch doing that after you gave the particulars. It would be interesting to see who came up with the idea, Mauch, Weaver or more probably some minor league guy we never heard of. Mauch had a reputation as a great in game manager during his time. His reputation was similar to Weaver but he never managed any World Series winners and the meltdown by the Phillie team he managed kind of hurt him. Mostly he didn't have the talent that Weaver did.

I agree with the option thing. It might be hard to keep all of Worley, Diamond and Deduno around because they are out of options. I am not so sure any of them are a big upgrade over Correia. I sure hope Gibson could be(a big upgrade over Correia). Part of the problem with the whole trade Correia thing is this, the only one of all the potential starters coming into spring training that actually pitched better than Correia in 2013, was Nolasco. With all the talk about potential and upside Correia was a pretty good pitcher 2013 and was healthy all year. Outside of Nolasco, you can't say that about Hughes, Pelfrey, Worley, Diamond, Deduno, or Gibson. I don't think you can even say that about Garza. So, I am not in any big hurry to see Correia traded. Until you are sure that at least some of the above guys can be healthy and capable of pitching to their "upside", I would like to see the Twins keep Correia around. There isn't likely any big market for him anyway. I think he is worth more to the Twins right now than any return is likely to be.

A couple of things, Seaver never pitched for the Orioles. The Orioles actually had a lot holes in their typical lineups. Blair, Dempsey and Belanger were all well below average offensive players for their positions. Having Palmer and 3 other 20 game winners as your 4 starting pitchers covered up a lot of hitting weaknesses. Also the middle of the Orioles lineup was among the league best. Part of the reason Weaver liked the 3 run home run was because they didn't have a lineup of high average guys. The Twins of that era had a much better overall lineup most years, they just never had comparable pitching or defense. I like the story about essentially using a pinch hitter to start the game for Belanger in road games. It kind of has to be a September thing though. You probably couldn't afford to use up a quality pinch hitter during the regular season with a 25 man roster. Also I sort of remember the Twins doing something like this as well. Maybe under Gene Mauch?

Of course he won't be sent to the bullpen early on. He has earned the opportunity to start. The difference this year(hopefully) is that whoever begins the year in the starting rotation will not stay there if he isn't pitching well. That shouldn't mean he will be removed after one or two bad starts, but there should be depth and hopefully guys pitching well at AAA that a series of poor starts will lead to a different and hopefully better starter. I also think that the idea that Hughes represents some sort of great upside is overrated. In his best season as a starter he was a mid-rotation starter. I expect he has a better chance to reach that upside consistently in Minnesota than he did in New York. I am not so sure that upside is much greater than that of Worley or Deduno. The key for any of them is good health or durability and few, really none of the candidates have demonstrated that. I am not so sure I understand the idea of filling the rotation with the highest "upside" guys and just leaving them there whether they are struggling or not. Let's put the guys into the rotation who are pitching the best and force the rest to earn their opportunities.

One further point about Hughes. He has been at best, a back of the rotation starter for 3 years now. He couldn't hold a rotation spot in a relatively weak Yankee rotation last year. The Twins know this. They signed him because of his "upside" and all the other reasons that have been talked about on this site. Still, if he doesn't deserve to be in the rotation at the beginning of the year, they won't put him there. They have choices, and they can still work with him in the bullpen and eventually move back to the rotation. I don't think the 3 year contract or the money should be a factor in that kind of decision. I rather expect that it won't be, either.

I understand your reasoning, and I do think Pelfrey and Hughes were signed to be starters. But if either struggles this spring, while say Diamond and Worley shine, I can't imagine why the Twins wouldn't put either into the bullpen, at least temporarily. You can't win a division in April and May, but you can pretty well lose it then. You put your best team on the field at whatever point of the season it is. The Twins probably don't have a great chance to be a contender, but if either Hughes or Pelfrey don't show themselves ready to start, to begin the year, well you know what the Twins should do. I assume really, that is the reason the Twins went for overkill in starters this year. So that if somebody struggles they have reasonable alternatives rather than resorting to Pedro Hernandez or P. J. Walter. So, yes, given the right set of circumstances I expect that if either Pelfrey or Hughes struggle even in ST, they might begin the year in the bullpen. I also expect the Twins would prefer them to start. So there would have to be clear differences in performance for them not to.

Nick suggests the Twins have a sensible plan in place to start the season. I am not sure that the "plan" is in place, yet. They seem to be still looking around for some more help, if the interest in Davis was genuine. In any case, I am not sure what the plan is for Kubel. Is he to be the primary DH? Perhaps a platoon OF, or some complicated arrangement involving both corner positions and DH? Or maybe he is more of a hedge against the likiehood that both Arcia and Hicks may not be ready for the majors to start the season? Personally, I can't imagine that at this point of his career, Kubel would block full time playing time for Arcia or Hicks either for that matter, when the Twins decide they are ready for that. So I expect that there should be a move or two before ST starts and quite likely another move or so to begin the season, if the Twins decide to roll the dice and play both Arcia and Hicks full time right out of ST. The situation is complicated by the status of Plouffe, who is likely an outfielder when Sano arrives, if Plouffe shows he can hit enough to warrant a corner spot. I am not sure the Twins are quite ready to give up on Parmelee yet, either. He is clearly direct competition for whatever role Kubel might get. I appreciate the fact that the Twins don't want to be caught short in the outfield, and end playing the likes of Clete Thomas or the Rene Tosoni's of the AAAA world for extended periods. But, at this point I don't see a clear plan.

What I think is this: Nolasco and Correia are basically locks for the rotation to begin the year, if healthy. Based on what they did last year and the money in Nolasco's case. Many of you seem to consider Hughes and Pelfrey locks as well, but I doubt if that is the case. Neither pitched well enough last year to earn that status. While they may have a leg up based on the money they will be earning, I think either could be forced to the bullpen to begin the year given the right set of circumstances. If they are all on the roster at the beginning of spring training and healthy, I would expect Deduno, Diamond and Worley to be given reasonable chances to begin the year in the rotation. That could be possibly true of Gibson as well, but you can only stretch so many guys out during ST. Either Hughes or Pelfrey could be considered reasonable fits in the bullpen to begin the year, so if a couple of the above guys outperform them during ST, it wouldn't surprise me to see Hughes or Pelfrey in the bullpen to begin the year. No matter what happens to begin the year, it is pretty likely that things will change as the season goes along. We all expect/hope that Gibson will force himself into the rotation early in the year. Depending on how things go, it wouldn't be surprising for Meyer to do the same. Certainly, whoever starts the year in the bullpen among the group of Deduno, Worley, Diamond, Hughes and Pelfrey could get moved back to the rotation pretty easily. I realize that the financial committment to Hughes and to some degree Pelfrey, means that that the Twins view them as starters. But I expect that is long term. In the short term other considerations might enter in. I expect these two will have to "earn" starter jobs in spring training.

I agree with your 2nd paragraph, I am not so sure about your 3rd. I don't think Ryan was much interested in most of the high priced free agents last year. Since a lot of them actually pitched worst than Correia in the first year of their contracts, he may of been right.

There are several of you prospect guru's that make statements like this about Romero. What do you see that I don't? He has never dominated any level, is not considered a good defender, and even as he has gotten closer to the majors, has been consistently outperformed by guys like Colabello and Parmelee. To me, he looks like he isn't even a AAAA kind of player. This doesn't mean I am right. I am curious what you guys are seeing that I am not.

I think the idea of Terry Ryan changing his stripes is silly. He has gotten to where he is by being what he is and that isn't going to change. Signing Drew isn't out of the realm of possibility but it would have to be on Ryan's terms. Which would likely be a short term contract. Drew isn't enough better than Florimon to justify the likely cost coupled with the loss of a draft pick plus the resulting lack of flexibility that might result. Morales is interesting but I don't see it happening. It looks to me that Ryan is trying to manuever his roster so that Willingham becomes the full time DH and that there will be a couple of real defenders in the outfield everyday. Morales doesn't help that plan.(If that is the plan) The difficultity of course is that nobody knows if Hicks can hit enough to be a full time outfielder or when Buxton will actually arrive. Or for that matter whether Arcia can be acceptable in RF, whether Plouffe could hold down LF when Sano arrives, or Rosario could. Most everybody else on the roster look like backups, bit players or perhaps some sort of situational/platoon guys.

Neither Vargas or D.J. Hicks has played above A Ball. I doubt if either will begin the year at Rochester. They won't block anyone at AAA to begin the year. One of the problems for older, largely non-prospect guys like Colabello is that if you get a major league opportunity, like Colabello did, you have to take advantage of it. It may have been a short one, and he may have been jerked around a bit, but it was likely the only major league opportunity he is going to get. He has holes in his swing, is position challenged and when he didn't hit that well in his major league chance, ah well. At least he got a chance.

Albers won't be moved, but his best chance to make the Twins roster is as a long reliever. Which makes some sense. There might not be any left handed starters, Swarzak might get more meaningful innings, Pressey could start the year in AAA, so there might be an opening for a left handed long reliever who could swing to starter in an emergency. A lot depends on how many relievers the Twins decide to carry in 2014, and whether any get traded this winter.

When he was healthy, Pelfrey was a mid-rotation starter. That is really all Garza has been. Arroyo is nearing 40 and Kazmir has had all sort of health issues. It would not be too farfetched if Pelfrey pitches better than these 3 over the next 2 years. Even if he doesn't, if the Twins are going to have a strong rotation soon, it will likely be because of Meyer, Gibson, and maybe May, Darnell and Worley. Not likely all of them, but some 2 or 3 that figure it out pitch well in the majors within the next 2 to 3 years. Pelfrey is at best, a placeholder for what we hope will be a wave of young talent working its way to the majors. In fact that is what Correia, Hughes and Nolasco are, hopefully. I am not going to get very worked up over which mid-rotation starters the Twins have signed this winter. Hopefully, the young talent can begin to replace them as soon as this year.

You have a fun list. Exact rankings probably don't matter, and I haven't seen any of these guys play like you have, but Vargas seems pretty high. I would think him and D. J. Hicks are about the same till they get to AA. I expect at least one of them will have a lot of trouble with advanced pitching. I like Polanco too, but I wonder if he really will end up at short. It sounds like both Santana and Goodrum have better shortstop tools. It is just wether either can develop them and hit enough. I like the fact you have different young pitchers than others that do these lists. I consider that a good thing. If the Twins really have that many young pitchers that merit some consideration, well maybe some them will develop into something good. It is a lot better than a few years ago when the only young pitcher getting much steam was Salcedo.(other than high draft choices) Thanks for your list. I still don't think Deb Romero belongs, he has never dominated any level and even at AAA now, the numbers are not that good. I don't see another Casey Blake here. And yes, I am ribbing you a bit.

Sure there are guys out there who are more likely to be better in 2014 than the group of semi-prospects you listed. On the other hand incremental improvement isn't going to do the Twins much good in 2014. Also there is some chance that Hicks and perhaps Plouffe and Parmelee could provide more than incremental improvement at some point. I think Nolasco will provide some help. Who knows what Hughes might do. If the Twins pitching is significantly better in 2014 it will likely because guys like Gibson, Meyer and maybe May get to the majors and pitch to their preceived talent, quickly. Alternatively, perhaps Worley, Deduno and Diamond might build on their somewhat limited major league success. But counting on Nolasco and Hughes to be more than what they have been at their best, mid rotation starters is not realistic. So what is realistic? Let's find out about guys like Hicks and Pinto. Maybe Plouffe and couple of the other slow developing guys as well. Maybe we see Sano and Buxton at some point as well. The starting pitching is unlikely to be good enough in 2014 to carry even an average offense. So lets look at some guys who might be above average someday, and hopefully some who have a good chance to be well above average. If some small improvements are out there maybe you take them, but I want to see the guys who have at least some chance of being better than that. Finally comparing what the A's did last year to what the Twins should do now isn't really that useful. Small improvements for a good A's team in 2012 made a lot of sense. Small improvements for a bad 2013 Twins team aren't going to turn the 2014 Twins into anything. Maybe some large improvements by some existing Twins and soon to be Twins will move the Twins in the right direction.

I am enjoying your list, so far. You make some interesting comments on the guys you have chosen. I don't place much value on the actual rankings on these lists, but I enjoy the facts about them and who appears on the lists and who is left off. I think some of your young pitchers are so far away that being on your list is interesting only in I didn't really know anything about them before. I also don't know why Deibison Romero is on your list, I would think he is largely a non-prospect at this point. Still, a fun list. Be interesting to see what you do with the last 15.

I agree with this. The Twins have always drafted and tried to acquire guys who throw hard and miss bats. They drafted Shooter Hunt, Jesse Crain, and a number of other hard throwers not mentioned above. They traded for Nathan and Liriano. They often draft high school kids late in the draft who might develop velocity like Hermsen. Some of these draft choices work out, some do not. They also draft guys or sign international guys with a good feel for pitching like Slowey, Hendriks and Radke. Some work out, some do not. Right now, it looks maybe, the Twins are in a bit of up cycle where there are a number of hard throwing kids who miss bats in the system. Some are progressing thru the system and might work out. There are also some who don't throw so hard moving thru the system and some of them might work out as well. I don't think the Twins are just looking for one type of pitcher when they are drafting, signing international kids, or trading.

Thanks for the article, Seth. I am not sure how you came up with idea to interview the Kentucky baseball coach, but it was a good one. These kind of articles are indeed a good reason to come to Twins Daily.

I think you may have missed the biggest reason the Twins limit pitchers to around 100 pitches. I remember Tom Kelly saying (when he was still manager-probably on his Sunday show) that the Twins believed that when a pitcher went over significantly over 100 pitches, his next start was usually short and poor. He implied that the Twins had studied this, and it was more than just the Twins pitchers but applied to most major league starting pitchers. Apparently the correlation between the 2 was very strong. Obviously, there were outliers, Verlander being a current one who often throws well over 100 pitches and does not follow up with bad starts. Now, a couple of qualifiers. I believe I heard this from Kelly more than once, but I cannot remember other Twins officals stating this. Even if it was once one of the reasons the Twins tended to limit pitchers to around 100 pitches, it doesn't mean it is a current reason. Given how often Bert knocks pitch limits and how often the Twins officals get asked about, this reason doesn't seem to come out in the discussions. Still, the Twins tend to be close mouthed about many of their policies. This could be an important reason why the Twins tend to limit their starters to around 100 pitches. I do agree with some of your points about pitch limits. 100 pitches is certainly an abritrary limit and there are many factors that should factor into how many pitches a pitcher should throw in a particular game. I suspect that sometimes major league organizations don't want to leave the judgement of when to pull pitchers entirely up to their managers. Certainly in the minors there reasons to have limits and to avoid giving too much leeway to the managers. It is also true that certain managers had bad reputations for the way they handled their pitchers. Billy Martin was often given credit for ruining a whole staff of young starting pitchers in Oakland, by overusing them. One thing that I think it possibly true, if you limit your young pitchers in the minors to 100 pitches per start(I suspect there are often good reason to do this) it has to be rather hard to stretch them out to say 120 in the majors. They have been conditioned to that 100 pitch limit and it is likely to affect them in some way to throw more pitches. By the way, interesting article.

I think calling Garza a #2 starter is giving him the benefit of the doubt. He has seldom pitched that well. Giving a mid-rotation starter the money per year and the years he is likely to get is(I think) a mistake. If the Twins are going to have a top of the rotation guy, it will most likely be from recent trades(Meyers or May), high draft choices(Gibson, Berrios, Stewart) or one of the international signings. You can get a top of the rotation starter in free agency but it doesn't happen every year and good share(most) of them aren't top of the rotation throughout the length of the contract. It will also cost you huge money. I think going after Garza is not a particularly good idea.

I guess if you need to believe this is some new and improved Terry Ryan, nobody can stop you. To me, this is the way he has always done things. I expect they had scouted Nolasco for years, and had probably identified him has a guy who was "better than his numbers". To me, Nolasco is a better version of Correia. He has been durable, pitched reasonably well for mostly poor teams, and might benefit from better team defense than what he got in Florida. He is past his so-called prime, just like Correia, but his durability suggests that he should continue to pitch as he has for at least a couple of more seasons. I don't see a whole lot of upside here, but there is no question he could,throw a pretty darn good year out there. Just like Correia, Ryan probably gave him an extra year he didn't really want to give, but probably couldn't of signed him without it. I expect Ryan and his staff identified Nolasco as a better target then E. Santana or anybody else who is likely to land a bigger contract, because they feel Nolasco is more likely to pitch to his previous performance levels, has some small chance of being better than that, and will be more likely to still be worth something at the end of his contract. The only difference from what Ryan is doing now to what he did in the past, is the money he has to spend. I don't think his approach as changed at all.