Jim H

This is silly at best and counterproductive. I understand the frustration many feel, especially when the Twins best prospects seem to be dropping like flys. Surgery, rightly, should be a last resort. There are way too many things that can go wrong with any surgery, especiially complicated ones like TJ surgeries.

Liriano can be impressive and he pitched a good a game against the Twins. Of course Blackburn pitched a better one against the White Sox. Which sort of got lost since the Twins lost and the focus was on Liriano. I understand the phrases high risk-high reward as associated with Liriano. I rather suspect the high risk is the important part. The chance of a high reward is likely pretty small. Which, afterall is why the return for Liriano in the trade was considered disappointing by some. No one was going to give up much for someone with Liriano's track record. Having major league stuff, good velocity and a great arm are important for a pitcher. But, you need to hold your mechanics together, understand how to pitch and be able to recover when things go wrong. Maybe all of that will come together for Liriano but if it hasn't happened by now it probably won't.

Regarding picking up starting pitching in the off season. Certainly the Brewers added 2 quality pitchers 2 years ago. The Phillies did something similar. The problem is having quality pitchers available. I don't see where the Edwin Jacksons of this world are any kind of answer. He is no better than a bottom of rotation guy being paid for his "potential" to be better. As I write this, the trading deadline is over and the Twins did not make a trade, except Liriano. That is probably ok. I thought they needed to add a solid starter last winter. Now they probably need to add 2. And probably figure out a way to keep Baker. I don't think anybody from the farm except perhaps Henriks figures to be a solid consistent starter any time real soon.

"Debating whether or not they should have traded Liriano is fair. Given what they received, I honestly would have probably preferred to just hold him and make the qualifying offer during the offseason. I think it's a risk a team like the Twins should be able to take" I don't really think that holding on to Liriano makes a whole lot of sense. It is pretty darn likely that he will be available for a lot less than that this off-season. Largely I agree with your earlier argument, that the Twins got what they could for Liriano and that is about all he is worth given his history. I also think there is some chance that one or the other of the 2 prospects received in this trade may turn out to be rather useful. A lot of "high ceiling" prospects don't ever get anywhere near their ceilings. A couple of 23 year olds who may have been rushed a bit through the White Sox organization may have a little more ceiling than is readily apparent. Ryan actually has a bit of a track record of picking up useful players in what are basically player dumps.

I enjoy John's posts. He is also good at getting reactions, which this and the other Liriano post does in spades. Still, I wish he was more realistic or at least accurate. Liriano, over the last 4 years, has been the equivilant of Blackburn. One could make a convincing argument that Blackburn has been better. When both have been healthy, Blackburn has probably been better over the last 4 years. So, he is complaining that the Liriano trade netted a return that would have him and most everyone else dancing in the street if the trade had been for Blackburn. Now, it will be too bad if Liriano figures it out and he becomes the pitcher that some Twins fans think he could be. There is no way that this is a bad trade based on Liriano's actual production. Even his good stretches haven't actually produced that many wins. He seems to always pitch just well enough to lose. Complaining that Ryan didn't get a good return for what has been largely a bad pitcher, is stupid. Even more stupid is trying to guess how valuable fairly young, likely pretty talented players will turn out to be. Ecspecially if you are basing those guesses on Baseball America's rating of a year ago.

I enjoy these prospect threads, but it always amazes me how certain everyone is about their opinions. Let's face it, at this point Wilison Ramos hasn't proven he is any more than a backup major league catcher. Sure the tools are there to be more, but there is a pretty good chance his career numbers aren't any better than Benji Molina with probably poorer defense. The idea that the Twins traded a future all star for Matt Capps is just an idea. It might happen, it might not. The same thing is largely true of most of these prospects. I am high on Hendriks, but pretty soon he has to prove he can pitch in the majors. People on these threads still talk about Revere as if he will be a 4th OF. I believe his speed and hitting ability make him a major league regular. Despite their tools, none of the near ready and not so near ready prospects have proved they can hit in the majors. Until they do, Revere is ahead of them. I am pretty high on the Twins farm system right now. There are a lot of potential sticks in the system and many appear to have a good chance to be elite defenders as well. I like the pitching more than most people seem to as well. If some of the guys like Gibson, Wimmers, Salcedo, Bromberg can get and stay healthy along with some of the upper level relief arms, the Twins will have some potential help within the next 2 years. Some of the lower level guys could move fast, given good health and a little luck. I am just not as sure as some of you seem to be, who is going to be good and who is going to suck.

Even if Willingham is not being "shopped", it doesn't mean the Twins won't listen to offers for him. Your points are true enough, but there is not obvious replacement in system for his bat. Parmalee, Benson, Arcia, and even Hicks may be ready pretty soon. But if righthanded power is important to you, none of these guys will replace Willingham.

I suppose it is possible. Seems unlikely though. He has been inconsistent this year, which may mean he isn't quite ready to move up. It appears New Britian is in a pennant race, another reason to leave him there. Unless Span or Revere were traded before the trade deadline, then maybe the Twins might bring Hicks up for a look see. It would more likely be Benson or Parmalee, I would think.

I think the Twins system is a bit weaker at the top than it might be. A number of highly drafted prospects from the mid 2000's crapped out for various reasons, mostly injuries. Kelly and Thompsn could of helped in the middle infield, Sanchez for power. Hunt, Bashore and number of other pitching prospects, some still in the system could be ready to help by now. This could be an indictment of the Twins drafting for several years. Or it could be mostly bad luck. But, there is no doubt that there could be a few more prospects knocking on the door.

I don't know if Butera is a better defensive catcher than Mauer. I doubt if that is the point. He is clearly a solid defensive catcher with a good arm. Since he doesn't hit well, if he is going to stay in the majors, he must do the little things well. One of those little things is perhaps to spend a little more time preparing for his limited catching opportunities. His legs are likely fresher than either Doumit or Mauer so he bounces around back there, maybe blocks a few more pitches in the dirt, perhaps runs out to talk to his pitcher a little more often. It is what backups do. I suspect it is a good thing if he can help Liriano with his mechanics or his confidence. None of this is or should be a knock on Mauer. He has to be an anchor in the middle of the lineup. While I doubt if he neglects his catching duties, he certainly can't devote as much time to them as Butera likely does. While there is a lot thought and blog space spent on what a waste it is to have a Butera on your 25 man roster, I believe most people have that wrong. Butera is exactly the kind of player you need on the bench. Since benches are so short nowadays because of the extra pitchers, it is important to select your bench people carefully. You are never going to have backups as good as starters so what you do is select guys with specialized skills. When one of your backups has to play, at least then there won't be a drop off across the board at that position. Usually that skill will be defense, though you can justify a left handed masher like Thome or even the ability to play many positions. Right now as pointed out by a previous poster, Butera is not blocking a potentionally more useful backup from being in the majors. He also appears to be doing well in his limited appearances. Perfect.

Some people treat 1987 and 1991 as special magical years, where the the GM went all in and everything went according to some great plan. Neither year was like that. The 87 team was flawed with 2 starting pitchers and a decent closer and set up man. The line up was strong in the middle (3-6) and weak at the top and the bottom. They spent all year trying to fill out the rotation and ended up with Les Steckel as the #3 guy. Even their signature late season move, trading for Don Baylor didn't really help much. They were a mediocre team who lucked into the postseason and got hot once they got there. They are the poster team for getting to the post season anyway you can and then getting hot and lucky. As far as current planning goes, getting superior talent is the key. I believe if you make trades at the deadline, you go for the best talent you can get. Chances are the best talent available for what the Twins will be willing to trade, will be a ways from the majors. It will be difficult to build a rotation for next year, but the Twins will have some money available and may even go after some of the top free agent pitchers. So, if the Twins decide to trade Liriano, get the best guy or guys you can. If they are a ways away from the majors, thats ok.

I actually expect that the budget will go up, at least slightly. Some of the extra money allotted to the draft this year will likely go back to the payroll. Besides, just because the money is available, doesn't mean you should spend it. Last year, the free agent crop wasn't exceptionally strong. It appears it could be stronger and deeper this year. A 2nd consideration is that many of these free agents can't be signed to one year contracts. If you are going to lose some of your current players because of a long term free agent signing, you better be pretty sure your farm system can cover that.

Sometimes these threads kind of confuse me. It especially seems to happen when Fanatic Jack is involved. First of all, some people believe the Twins are in the middle of a rebuilding project. If you believe that, then, no, do not go out spend big money on free agent pitchers. If on the other hand, you believe that the Twins are maybe one or two starting pitchers from being a legimate contender for postseason next year, then going after a Grienke or Hamels might very well make sense. You have to be aware that doing so may very well limit keeping certain current players, will limit signing other free agents and requires that the Twins farm system produce useful players over the next 5 years. One of the problems with these threads, is no one really agrees on way too many things, such as the current state of the Twins, the likely usefulness of young players such as Plouffe, Revere, Dozier, and Henricks, how soon if ever the farm system will produce more useful players, and whether money can really solve some of the Twins current problems.

This is an interesting topic. I believe that the Twins will almost certainly make a play for a major free agent pitcher this winter. It seems likely that they will be able to fit a large sum of money for pitching into the budget for 2013. The problem of course is that a Grienke or Hamels is going to require a large sum of money annually for at least 4 or 5 years. Ryan will have to consider whether such a move will make it impossible to keep guys like Morneau or Span(assuming you want/need to). I believe the Twins may go after a top of the line free agent pitcher IF they believe the farm system can/will fill the gaps that will appear over the next few years. It is also likely that Ryan will/may look to trade spare parts like Valencia, Casilla, and others at the trading deadline. While this is likely a good idea, any return is unlikely to provide much if any immediate help. When Mays, Lohse, Ortiz and others were acquired, it took years for these guys to get to the majors. Then once they were there, it often took years for them to be more than replacement level.

"Williams said that he "does not believe in the slide step" - the abbreviated leg kick in which a pitcher expedites his throw home in order to keep the runner from stealing a base. His reasoning behind that was that it "leads to injuries"." I heard Williams say this as well. I sort of wish he had expanded on this, a bit. As 3-Dog said it certainly could throw your mechanics off. I could also see where the slide step may put more pressure on your arm, that is, perhaps you might not use your legs as much as with the more normal stretch deliivery. Unfortunately, this is mostly speculation with me. So, there may be something to Williams theory,and I wish he would of explained it a bit more throughly.

I can't imagine why the Twins would trade for Grienke, that makes little sense. Trying to sign him in the off season however, does make sense. There are some serious risks involved, and probably means that certain other rather good players won't be retained because of budget, in coming years. Having a genuine ace at the top of rotation would be a very good thing, and any such player developed in the Twins organization is at least 3 and probably more like 5 years away if there are any in the organization right now. Whether signing a Grienke is a good idea depends on whether you think there will be enough good young players in the Twins organization to give the Twins enough cheap productive players during the next 5 years to help make them consistently competitive. Having Mauer and Grienke eating a big chunk of the budget means that you can't cover your holes with money. You have to have good young players filling those holes.

OK John, your post now makes more sense, not that I necessarily agree with your reasoning. The thing is Burton and/or Perkins could indeed potentially yield someone eventually useful. But, whoever the return is, he won't likely contribute anything for the next 3 years and maybe longer. Ryan has always been able to identify potentially useful players in trades, but the more useful a player potentially is, the farther away from the big leagues he is going to be. Neither Burton or Perkins is going to get you an immediate impact guy. In fact if you want a guy who might help you soon, he won't be much more valuable than Burton or Perkins. I think you probably hang on to both Perkins and Burton if you believe that adding 1 or 2 FA starters could make you a contender next year, and you are willing to pony up for some quality starters. I don't think the Twins are aiming 4-5 years down the road. They want to be competitive next year and probably strongly competitive the year after(2014). Trading useful parts for guys who won't/can't help till 2016 doesn't seem like the right plan to me.

Sometimes I wonder about the point of some your posts. This is one of them. Of course Perkins and or Burton are available, if someone blows you away. But, your post asumes that the Twins can't be competitive next year, or if they can be, there are replacements readily available for either or both. Neither, of these undiscussed but pertinent issues are addressed. So what if Perkins and Burton are tradeable, the question is whether trading either or both is a good idea, and you really don't address this. Clearly, in your mind, it is a good idea, but you don't explain why it is. Personally, I don't think quality late inning relievers are that readily available. Oh, there are a lot of guys who throw hard, and some have impressive strikeout numbers but there are too many 37 year olds plus with declining stuff, finding work in late innings, for me to believe that you just trade cheap quality guys, UNLESS, you've got someone to replace them.

This looks and sounds like cherry picking to prove a point. Many of the pitchers on this list had very good years for the Twins, having injury plagued years that skewed their overall numbers, or like LaTroy found their roles with the Twins after struggling as young pitchers. I also note that you don't mention any pitchers who pitched worse after they left or pitched better for the Twins than they did previously for anyone else. I suspect because pitchers are so inconsistent throughout their careers, you could do this kind of thing to just about any team.

The Twins do seem to follow some patterns in their drafts. Often they will take perceived high ceiling high school bats early, often in the first round. Within the first 10 rounds there is usually a lot of college pitchers. They often mix in college bats after the 4th round or so. After the 10th round or so they will or have often mixed in high ceiling high school arms, often kids they don't necessarily expect to sign but sometimes kids who don't want to go to college. Mostly after the 10th round they will be looking for guys to fill out the minor league rosters. Sometimes you might see a lot of middle infielders, occasionally catchers. Most of these guys will be college grads. As noted by Seth, there are a lot of misses, but you can see the logic in what they do. Most of the high ceiling players available after the first half of the first round are usually high school bats. You have to be patient and because they often are very raw, the failure rate is a bit high. Still, your best chance of getting an impact bat is usually to draft high school kids. You can have good luck drafting college pitchers during the early rounds of the draft. Many decent starters are drafted there. Later in the draft it is even more of a crap shoot, but occasionally the Twins have found guys like Valencia, Dozier, Kubel, and many others after the 5th round. A lot of those guys were college guys with good but not outstanding track records. Most of those guys are minor league filler but clearly a few can develop a lot after college.

There are examples of what John is talking about, Wade Boggs come to mind. But, part of the reason is because of the special demands of the position and that it is sort of a transition position. Playing 3B well, requires a strong arm, good hands and a certain amount of quickness, if not outright speed. Also since there aren't necessarily as many chances at 3b but a higher percent of difficult chances, errors often appear more glaring. Many times players start out as middle infielders and are moved to 3B if they don't have enough range for short or 2b but have some power or strong contact skills. A number of very good 3B over the years started at catcher, often again because their bat skills were stronger than their defensive skills. I think all of these things seem to contribute to longer development time for 3rd baseman. It is also interesting how many very good ballplayers, play at 3rd for a while but ultimately end up in the OF or at 1B. Thome, Killebrew and Shefield are 3 who come immediately to mind. Cuddyer also.

I suppose Hughes could land somewhere and do a Casey Blake, but I don't think that is very likely. I think he is more limited than Valencia as a potential starting 3B, both offensively and defensively. Not, that I am holding out a lot of hope for Valencia, either. Actually the best hope for a medium term answer at 3B is probably Plouffe, though I am not too sure he will get much of an opportunity. I am not sure I agree with John's take on what the Twins focus is. It kind of looks to me, that the Twins are flipping cards over, hoping one or more will play. I don't see where they have much choice, but I doubt if it has much to do with develpment of individual players.

I think that acquiring a truly impactfull starting pitcher is a lot more dependent on luck than most would like to believe. Most impactfull starters are acquired in the first round of the draft. But over a ten period (say 2001-2010) something like 150 pitchers are drafted during the first rounds of those drafts. While a good per cent will eventualy appear in the majors, how many have much of an impact? I know people have done studies on this, but I would be surprised if you could find even 10%(15 over a 10 year period) who were very impactful and you may have to include one year wonders or guys like Mark Redman or Rick Helling, useful big leaguers but never really stars. To get a true ace, you have to be a little lucky. Just like the Twins were with Santana. They had to have a high Rule 5 pick, the Astros had to make him available, the Twins had to be willing to keep him on the major league roster even though he didn't contribute much, they had to eventually send him to AAA were he happened to learn a change up that was a big part of his success. There are probably a half a dozen left handers in the Twins system right now, not much different than Santana was when the Twins took him in the Rule 5 draft. About the only thing you can be sure of, is there isn't much chance that any of them will end up even half as good as Santana.

I don't know how many teams have built solid farm systems without a string of losing seasons, but it is probably fewer than you suggest. Most of the top rated systems right now and in the recent past are teams that did get a string of high draft choices because of losing records. The Twins "dismal" record of drafting pitchers in high rounds seems pretty close to major league averages. The fail rate for highly drafted pitchers is pretty high. There are so few truly dominant pitchers, especially dominant pitchers who remain dominant for more than a year or two. If you manage to draft or acquire several young dominant pitchers like Tampa Bay, San Francisco or Washington did, you have had a certain amont of good fortune. Even franchises like Kansas City and Pittsburg who picked high in the draft year after don't usually end up with more than one dominant pitcher at any one time on their staff. I am not making excuses for the Twins. This year the Twins will almost certainly take at least 3 college pitchers in their first 6 picks. These will all be highly scouted picks, and most "experts" will likely congratulate the Twins on a good job. It probably will be a good job too, if those picks just stay healthy.

A couple of points. The Twins still have a nice core of everyday players, if they are healthy. Rebuilding does not have to take years if the starting pitching can be fixed. That could take years but sometimes you add a Jack Morris, Scott Erickson has a career year, Tapani does more than most experts ever suspected he could and you win. Of course you might lose for the next ten years after that. Mostly, I think trading out the management team would be a mistake. These guys have won before, they have a number of pieces in place that should contribute to winning and changing management doesn't guarantee anything but change. Even if they find people who are good, that doesn't guarantee much. Cleveland arguably did as good a job assembling teams during the 2000's as did the Twins they just weren't as lucky. Right now the Twins haven't been too lucky. Injuries both to key major league regulars, and to many, many pitching prospects have derailed the Twins for now. If the Twins stay derailed for the next year or so, then yes serious changes need to be made. Now, a bit of patience is needed.