Jim H

This is an interesting article. I have seen similar articles in the past but I like the way you laid it out. What it generally shows, is that franchises like the Twins that rely heavily on the draft are almost ineviatably going to have dry periods like they did in the late part of the last decade. The odds are basically against you always drafting well, even during the first couple of rounds. There are no good things about being bad, but it does increase the odds of getting an impact player.

2 quibbles, Liriano received more than $1M. Pelfrey isn't listed.

Quote from Riverbrian I agree with this. There also maybe some truth in the statements by several that Parmelee hasn't been handled ideally by the Twins. Parmelee and Plouffe were slow to develop former first round picks. They have been moved around to different positions and not really given a complete opportunity to settle in at one spot without having to look over their shoulders at who is coming next. Now that Plouffe has more or less been handed 3B and given a year or so to figure things out, he is looking like he could a servicable or even better major league 3B. Perhaps Parmelee needs the same opportunity although as some have pointed out, when the opportunity is there, he needs to take advantage of it. The Twins usually have a quite a bit of patience with prospects, particularly if they like their makeup. The Twins sort of did the same with Cuddyer, jerked him around a bit, gave him inconsistent playing time, etc. But they never really gave up on him, and eventually their patience was rewarded. With Parmelee it is a bit hard to tell. Cuddyer like numbers, seem a bit high as a ceiling for him. I think the Twins aren't going to give up on him, but exactly what his role will be eventually, is anybodys guess.

Quote from SETH When people talk about why someone isn't promoted, well often you need to look at the bigger picture. Seth probably captured the reason here. Walker is doing well, but it isn't like he is dominating that much. Plus moving him up probably means moving someone else, probably a couple of someone elses. Occasionally, you can't get everyone exactly where they should be, ideally. Someone is a level too high or too low. In many cases, just making sure the top prospects are playing everday is perhaps more important than getting everyone to exactly the right level. In this particular case, the difference between A- and A+ is probably not so great that it is imperative to move Walker up.

Quoted from the PUCK . Maybe this where my thinking is different than some of you. I can't see spending a bunch of on say an Edwin Jackson if he is likely not to be any better than say Sam Deduno. Which interestingly enough he hasn't been. So you end up keeping Deduno in the minors or not resigning him at all, in order to have a place for Jackson. How does this make the Twins better? Now, I am no expert but it is not a great surprise to me that Deduno is as good or perhaps better than Jackson. I wouldn't of necessarily predicted that, but given the fact that Jackson has never pitched to his promise I don't think it is a great surprise he isn't better than Deduno. This is kind of what I mean. I would be happy to see Ryan spend more money, but if spending more money doesn't gain you anything? The Twins have made plenty of poor decisions on where they have spent their money, (Nishi for example) and some have actually set the team back. I just don't agree with idea that you should spend more money just because you have it. How does signing Jackson and giving him a bunch of money for a few years help the team more than signing Pelfrey and Correia? I understand that many of you want to see the Twins take bigger risks to get better. I also understand that my definition of risk is different than many of yours. We can give counter examples all day. But there are a number of teams (Toronto, Baltimore, Cubs) and others who spent a large amount of money more than the Twins every year during the last decade, with virtually nothing to show for it. You have to spend your money wisely. Taking gambles that aren't really all that likely to pay off does hurt you in the long run.

I understand that the Twins are bad, Ryan is in charge, so it is all his fault. And largely, thats ok. He is in charge and things aren't good, so yes it is his responsibility to fix it. But throwing out things that aren't true, or are merely pandering to the"Its all Ryan's fault" crowd doesn't help, either. Ruesse has no idea whether spending a bunch a money on the Cuban pitcher is a good idea or not. Neither does hardly anybody on this board. Surprisingly, Ryan probably does. I suspect he has watched the guy pitch on multiple occasions. He probably has a filing box full of scouting reports on the guy. If he chooses not to get in a bidding war over the guy, he just might be right. Calling him timid, is just silly. Here is a guy who traded his 2 best centerfielders and leadoff hitters for 2 pitchers who haven't pitched above AA and a guy coming off injury. Then he largely sets it up so the new CF has to be a guy who hasn't played above AA either. What people seem to want is for Ryan to throw a bunch of money out there to "prove" he can take chances to make the team better. Ryan said in the offseason that the free agent starters were a weak group. Since almost all of them have pitched poorly, he must of been largely right. And still we have people claiming he should of spent more money, because he had the money to spend. Now, I expect that Ryan will have to take a big chance at some point, to help the Twins get to the next level. Whether he will or not is a legimate question. Spending money can help you get better. But you have to make good decisions, and history has shown that giving older free agent pitchers large multi year contracts is seldom a good decision. For all that people commend Detroit for taking "chances" and spending big money, they barely squeaked into the playoffs last year. They have a very small lead over Cleveland this year. They are pretty lucky that every team in their division is in a down phase, because it looks to me that this Detroit team would of had a hard beating almost any of the Central divison winners in the last decade. Rip Ryan if you must, but try have at a few facts on your side. Ripping him for not spending on the international market could at least wait until the signing period is close to over. It might even be useful to see how some of these signings do after they are signed. Although it amazes me that people can make definitive statements about who did well in the international signings, when we are talking about 16 year kids who won't play in majors (if they ever do) for at least 5 years. Here's the thing, it is Ryan's job to make the Twins competitive again. I think he will. But, he might not, he is not operating in a vacuum, he is competing with 29 other GM's with the same goal, and some of them probably have greater resources. He certainly can be criticized for any number of things, and probably should be. Unfortunately, Ruesse has largely made a career of of taking cheap shots and pandering to the lowest common denominator. To take anything he says about something like this and assume he has actually researched it and knows what he is talking about, is a huge reach.

I doubt if the defensive metrics mean much, even their most ardent defenders will tell you a half season is too small a sample size. Still, Florimon has been quite good. Not gold glove good, just good. He has good range, a strong arm, and the mistakes have been reduced. Dozier has been fine as well. The offense on these guys is still the question, although that has been encouraging at times, if still very inconsistent. I wouldn't worry about trades for awhile. The Twins will find a place for Rosario if he can hit at the major league level. One of the reasons the Twins move their prospects around to different positions in the minors, is so they can find a way to use them if you end up with, say, 2 second basemen.

I suspect that the recent moves are probably a short term thing. Likely, Ryan wouldn't mind trading Carroll, Doumit and Thomas. None can figure in the long term plans and might not even fit next year. In order to trade those guys, they need to play until the trade deadline or until they are traded. So you send down Arcia, Parmelee and Escobar and let these 3 play nearly everyday. These guys won't likely fetch much in a trade, but Ryan has found useful pieces in trades like this before. So, I would root for Thomas, Carroll and Doumit to have a hot couple of weeks and see if Ryan can make an interesting trade for a couple of these guys. Certainly, all three could be useful to a contender in the right circumstances.

I don't see Perkins being traded. Mostly, I don't because, despite everything, I don't think they are that far from contending. If you are going to contend without a very good rotation, you better have a deep, very strong bullpen. Much like the Twins managed to do in the early party of this century. You can argue that closers are overrated if you like, but if you remove Perkins, you shorten up the whole bullpen. Now the Twins as currently constructed are a pretty flawed team. But some of those flaws might be fixed with experience(Hicks, Dozier and others). Some of the other flaws will be fixed if some of the high end prospects fullfill their promise sooner than expected. The big problem is that it is tough to see the Twins coming up with 5 dominating starters real soon. A dominating bullpen that could cover up some for an average rotation would be easier for the Twins to come up with. Especially if they hang onto to Perkins for awhile.

I have no problem with trading Fien, but as others have said what are you getting back. The idea that you trade guys at their peak value is a good one, but there are 2 things that often keep that from happening. One is having a similar replacement. If the Twins have someone who can do what Fien is doing(and there is no reason to think he can't keep doing it for couple of seasons) well sure you can trade him. The 2nd thing is again, what are you getting back. In the Twins case, they maybe looking for a prospect, but if all he is going to be is Casey Fien in 3 years, do you really need that? You said it yourself, middle relievers are rather easy to replace. Nobody is going give anything but a rather flawed prospect with some upside, or maybe a AAAA guy, sort of what Fien was till this year. You may want to do a deal like that, but if you believe the Twins could contend in the next year or 2, you might want to keep Fien instead.

Quote from johnnydakota "Just remember when he got here to the Twins we tried to mold him into a player he isint... ,just saying " Just why are you saying that, I don't remember that anybody was trying to do that. I remember a very young, rather inexperienced player who hadn't harnessed his tools. It seemed that the Twins were trying to get him to use his speed better, take better AB's, make throws to the cutoff man, etc. All things that would help and probably did help make him a better player. Taking shots at the Twins organization over how they handled Gomez needs a little more specific examples than you provided.

I agree with most of what has been written here about Plouffe. I think the Twins went into the year hoping to get a good read on Plouffe. The wildcard here is the injury thing. He does seem to have had some trouble staying on the field. I don't remember that well and won't look it up, but I think he had a few injury issues in the minors as well. I assumed he might have trouble hitting for average but would probably have hot streaks where he hit well with a bunch of home runs. He is maintaining average better than I expected, but maybe he sacrificing power to do that. I don't know. His glove doesn't look that bad to me. I agree with the predictions about his future. A lot of it depends on others. When Sano is ready, if he can stay at 3B, Plouffe will likely be moved to a different position or traded. It is possible he could be used as sort of a super utility guy with AB's at 3B, DH corner OF and possibly 1B and 2B. Sort like Zobrist was used for a few years. The problem with that sort of thing is some guys have trouble with consistent AB's when moved around a lot. Like Cuddyer did when he was young. In any case I think he can stay at 3B at least until Sano is ready. If he does a little better with the bat than we think he probably will, he could bring a nice return in trade.

Sometimes you don't really know exactly how a pitcher might develop. Who would of predicted that a Rule 5 draft pick who generally threw in low 90's and only threw 2 pitches most of the time(fastball and change up) would be the best pitcher in baseball for 5 years? I think part of the fun of following prospects is to see what they can get out of their stuff. We all get a little to married to this number thing #1, #2 etc when in reality most pitchers are seldom any one number throughout their careers. Diamond certainly pitched better than a #5 last year, even though he is living down to #5 this year. I think Correia has pitched better than #5 so far this year, even though most would say that is what he has been through most of his career.

I remember Brito. He was in the Twins minor league system, seemingly forever. He always put up great numbers, especially power numbers and was never promoted. I always wondered why, until I realized that he really couldn't hit major league pitching. Oh, if you would leave him out there everyday, he would hit some home runs but his average would be worse than Adam Dunn's, there would be fewer home runs than Dunn and Brito might strike out more. Also, there was no way that Tom Kelly was going to have a player like that taking up space on his team.

One of the things people tend to ignore when they talk about their favorite hot prospect being promoted is that a coresponding move or more likely moves need to be made when that happens. Sometimes promotions occur when injuries happen, but even when that happens eventually some corresponding moves will have to be made. Sometimes players are just swapped, one is promoted, one is demoted. That really doesn't happen too often though. Usually when a hot prospect is promoted, a whole series of moves often happen around him, with someone often getting released. Another consideration is, you want your best prospects to be playing everyday, at their optimum position. Ideally you have 4 good shortstop prospects(for example) one each at every full season level. The problem comes in when one deserves/needs to be promoted and the others don't or can't be(It could be hard to promote your AAA shortstop if you have a good major league one). I think one of the reasons(but hardly the most important one) that the Twins have their players work at more than one position is to help resolve these promotion issues. Years ago, the Twins and probably many other teams, did few in season promotions. Mostly just in response to injuries. One year Tim Laudner was left in AA all year even though he had super year hitting 40 home runs. That likely wouldn't happen anymore. I have no problems with in season promotions myself, I was just trying to point out why promotions often don't happen as fast as fans think they should, sometimes. Often the various corresponding moves have to be worked out so that one or more of the affiliates is not left shorthanded or perhaps so some prospect is not rushed to a level he is not ready for.

My general thought here is that the front office is actually doing pretty much what everyone thinks they should, they just don't do it exactly the way many want them to. In a general sense they are finding out what they have. Florimon and Dozier are getting a chance to prove whether they are major league regulars or not. Some people were complaining when Escobar wasn't moved into a regular role when he was hot early in the year. When he started playing more, well maybe we saw why the Twins want an extended look at Dozier and Florimon. Plouffe, if he can stay healthy, is getting his look. Arcia is getting his looks. Even Parmelee is getting his chances to show what he can do. It is the same with the starting staff. They are gradually working their way through the viable candidates giving each enough starts to show strengths and weaknesses. They are rewarding minor league performance(like Walters) and looking at those with perhaps higher upsides (like now Gibson). There has been plenty of complaining about what free agents were signed and sticking with one too long(Pelfrey) but largely what the Twins are doing is mostly what most thought they should be doing. It might take a huge nose dive my the Tigers, but it is not impossible that the Twins could edge their way into the Central Division race during the 2nd half. Nobody expected or realistically expects them to do that, but they are in a position to possibly do that despite all the "mistakes" the front office makes and Gardy makes. So. I think the complaining could be toned down. Let's give the Twins organization some credit for trying to get it right, even if we are sure they could be doing it much better.

I don't expect to much in trades to happen this summer. Most of the young prospects you named will probably never make the majors. If they make the majors, they will likely have little impact. If that is the kind of return you are going to get, why make the trade? I think the Twins are trying to figure out who, on the current roster, and some of the AAA roster, figure into the short and long term plans. Ideally, you trade the ones who don't, but of course, you have to find someone who wants them. Willingham might go, but if all you are going to get is a single A pitcher with the possible future of a major league middle reliever, why make the trade? The Twins have guys like that. You either need to get more or someone that is closer to the majors. Perhaps Melotakis has higher upside than that, but still. Last year the Twins traded Liriano for Hernandez and Escobar. They are both useful players and maybe quite useful to the Twins for a few years. Still, I think I would rather keep Willingham if you can't get a better return than that for him. To some degree, I would rather keep Morneau as well, unless you can get higher upside talent. Morneau is different because he will likely be gone at the end of the year. Still, trading him for marginal talent, doesn't make much sense to me. Trading Perkins, Plouffe, Burton and even Parmelee doesn't make much sense until/unless you have a comparable or better talent to replace them. You really have to be blown away which doesn't really happen to often.

My question is, actually what difference does it make if Buxton is in low A or high A? I doubt it will ultimately make any real difference to when he reaches the majors. There is some difference in the level of competition but difference between 3 levels from the majors and 4 levels from the majors, but it isn't that profound. It is possible that Twins feel that "promoting" him to High A where he gets to play in high heat and high humidity in front of tiny crowds, isn't that much of a promotion. I think a few of the critics are largely looking for excuses to beat on the Twins organization. Look for some real issues. Let's let the Twins move propects who should be at least a couple of years away from the majors at their own rates. If Buxton turns out to be ready to play in majors sooner than that, the Twins will get him there.

Quote from nicksaviking I'd just like to point out that with a 7 K/9 a pitcher is still getting 74% of his outs some other way than a strikeout. As opposed to getting 80% of your outs some other way with a 5 K/9 rate. It is nice to get a strikeout when you need it, but even for guys with strikeout rates at 9 K/9 rates, you get 67% of your outs some other way. It may be a more satisfactory chance but it really is not that high a chance.

'I'm sorry, but Revere was not a valuable asset." I'm sorry, but that is not true either. Revere has a track record as a good hitter. His weaknesses in terms of plate discipline, bunting and even gap power are areas that a young player could improve on. He had trade value, the trade to the Phillies largely proved that. As others have said, it is too early to evaluate this trade. Worley could and probably will bounce back to what he was in the National League. The sky is the limit for May, and though he may not reach his potential, he was and is a good gamble. I largely liked this trade at the time, although I thought many Twins fans undervalued Revere. I still think it will be a good trade for the Twins, but time will tell.

Like many who like baseball, I like and appreciate stats. I also have problems with many of the so-called advanced stats. WAR isn't really a stat, but more a tool using stats that may let you compare players. The idea that higher WAR means that one player is better than another, is akin to saying that a player with a higher BA is better than another. There is so much left out in both situations that it renders a statement like that meaningless. Leaving advanced stats out of broadcasts is probably the right move because the people who will be using those stats don't really understand them. They can't give context, really explain them, or use them in a way that iluminates the real differences between certain players.

Plouffe and Parmelee are a bit like Cuddyer. Rather slow developing 1st round picks who have struggled at times in the majors. Sometimes their versatility works against them. Gardy likes to move people around, sometimes he doesn't have to much choice but he does seem to take advantage of versatile players. With younger guys, maybe you just need to pick a position, put them there and then play them. The flip side of course, is that you don't want to reward poor play/poor approaches either. And the goal is to win games. But, yes I think Parmelee needs to play. Hopefully, the bat gets going well enough that Gardy will just let him play. As to the fastball thing, yes there are major league players who have trouble catching up to high 90's fastballs. Matt LeCroy was one. Many older players have that problem(Even Thome). I think with Parmelee it is more of a timing or mechanical issue rather than not having a quick enough bat. But if he really can't catch up to good fastballs, he will have trouble being a full time major league player.

I have a little problem with this labeling of pitchers as 1 through 5. Realistically, even very good pitchers, often vary from year to year. In truth, Carlos Silva was actually a number 3 almost a 2 a couple of years with the Twins. He also had a year where he wasn't even a 5. As good as Bert was he really only had one year where he was a 1. Very few pitchers are like Johan Santana who had 5 or 6 straight years where you could really call him a 1. What you are really saying about most of the "potential no. 1" pitchers, whether they are draftees or minor leaguers, is that if they are lucky and healthy and figure things out, they may be a number 1 some year in their career. You hope they will fill the rotation year after year as a "good" pitcher. Very few are Verlanders.

I don't know if I quite agree with this. It would be possible for the umps to rule he never had control of the ball. He flipped the ball so quickly that the umps could rule that. They probably wouldn't, but they could. In addition, it was a hotdog play. I think Gardy had some reason to be upset. Also, if the cameras don't catch Gardy's reaction, it is all a non issue. Even if the cameras see Gardy talking to Hicks afterward, it wouldn't have been a big deal without everyone knowing his reaction earlier. To some degree, what happens in the dugout should be considered off limits, especially since no one actually knows what was said. It is all speculation by many who are looking for reasons to dislike Gardy even more than they do now.

My question is why should we believe that? Are the cameras exactly in the same place in each park? Does pitch f/x accurately reflect the depth of the plate? How exactly is the data interpreted, by computer, by a guy sitting there entering each pitch into a data base? Does anybody really know the answer to those questions? Sometimes we all assume that modern technology is much better than the way things have been done in the past. Sometimes it is. But sometimes we just assume it is better and don't investigate any further. I tend to be at least a little sceptical of things that aren't very well explained and are just accepted as being "better". Like pitch f/x, UZR and most new stats.