Jim H

I don't actually recall the Twins saying that. What I remember reading is that he would continue to see time at shortstop which is an entirely different thing. That doesn't mean I am right here, but I am not too sure you are either. As far as his ability to play shortstop, well Seth says that Goodrum is the superior shortstop right now. Since there are questions about Goodrum being able to stay at the position, I am not really too sure what that says about Polanco. I have not seen either of these guys play shortstop, nor Santana either except the one time on TV last year, so I am in no position to judge. You have, which carries some weight with me. Since none are major league ready, it becomes a matter of tools and projection. I actually hope one of these guys becomes the next great Twins shortstop, though frankly, I don't know which if any of them is very likely to become that.

The biggest part of this thread is about Arcia, Pinto, Hicks and Gibson. While I would like to see all four start the year with the Twins, that isn't a given and probably shouldn't be. There is no "right" way to handle young or youngish prospects, it should be largely on an individual basis. Interestingly, if you look at all the young players the Twins brought up and established themselves as multiyear regulars since 2000, it would be hard to find one that didn't struggle at some point during their first 2 years, except Mauer. Often there was a lot of clamoring for the Twins to bring up the next hot prospect, very seldom did such prospect take off without struggling. Many times they were up and down between AAA and the majors before they did establish themselves. Sometimes they were able to play thru their struggles(or perhaps allowed to) generally though, they would be back to AAA for awhile. I am not sure there is any right way to do this. I expect that if prospect is good enough, he will eventually establish himself no matter how he is handled, but logically there is probably a best way for each prospect. While I try not to get too excited either way, the one thing I hate to see is for a promising young guy to be buried on a major league bench with inconsistent or eratic playing time. I would rather see them in the minors, then. I think that has happened with guys like Cuddyer, Parmelee and a few others. While it didn't ruin Cuddyer, it may have delayed his major league success.

I agree that the pitching surplus will work itself out this spring. I also think it a bit early to draw too many conclusions about any individual pitcher. There was an article that Worley had more velocity this spring than last. If true, that would be more important than struggles in his 2nd spring appearance. He, Diamond and Deduno, if healthy will get their chances this spring. So will Gibson. Along with the new guys. I just hope at least 5 are pitching well and are healthy come the end of spring training.

What really makes anybody think that Pinto is not getting a "fair shake"? It is clearly in the Twins best interest to give him every chance to become the starting catcher, soon if not immediately. He is the best near ready option in the Twins system, and they made no real effort to find a long term solution from outside the system. It seems fairly obvious the Twins want Pinto to establish himself as their starting catcher. The really question seems to be the best way for that to happen. Complaining about him not getting enough playing time during the first week of spring training seems a bit silly. I don't really know exactly the best way to get Pinto ready to be a starting big league catcher. I would assume that unless he struggles in some key areas this spring, he will likely have a good chance to start the year in some sort time share arrangement with Suzuki. That might not happen for any number of reasons.

I am interested in the group of pitching prospects who are relatively close to the majors but kind of flying under the radar. Like Melotakis on your list, maybe Darnell, and some of the other recent college pitchers who could move pretty quickly if they figure things out. Also guys like Wimmers and Salcedo who have been around awhile, who injuries have set back, but who were highly considered at one point. I would like to see a guy or two out of this group really challenge for a starting major league job within the next year. Combined with the higher profile guys like Meyer, Gibson and May, this could have the Twins looking pretty good over the next few years.

This is an interesting thread. While there are interesting points made on both sides of the issue, I would like to point out one thing. There will be consequences from changing the current structure of compensation in the minors. I suspect that major league organizations will either be forced to increase wages, etc. for minor leaguers or will choose to in order to avoid getting the courts involved in this. That doesn't mean however that major league organizations will increase their minor league budgets. The likely result could be fewer minor leaguers in each organization. Most teams could choose to sign fewer marginal prospects. They could choose to sign fewer non-drafted guys like the Anthony Slama's of the world. They could decide that signing lots of cheap foreign prospects that occasionally yields a Josmil Pinto, is no longer cost effective when they are no longer so cheap. Right now the Twins have a lot more players than places for then to play, because it doesn't cost them much to keep a bunch of kids in extended spring training. If that changes(I am not saying that it shouldn't) they may have to rethink that. It is even possible that some teams will eliminate one of their short season teams if the cost increases to keep so many marginal prospects. Increasing salaries may even more likely, effect older organizational type guys. Why keep guys who aren't too likely to play in the majors(like Beresford for example) if they get more expensive? This sort of thing has happened before in baseball. In the 50's and early 60's most major league teams had very extensive farm systems because it cost them virtually nothing. When that changed(many reasons including the major league TV exposure) most organizations eliminated up to half of their farm teams. While I think that some change concerning minor leaguer's salary should and will change, don't be to surprised if there are some unforseen consequences.

The problem I have with Pitch F/X has less to do with whether it is better than the umpires in determining balls and strikes, but the often unspoken assumption that it is perfect. Clearly people are using it to informally evaluate umpires, assuming I guess, that when they disagree on a call that Pitch F/X is right and the umpire is wrong. Much the same thing is happening with the pitch framing thing. If Pitch F/X says ball, the umpire says strike, it must be that the catcher "stole" a strike thru pitch framing. Since I believe Pitch F/X has limitations, and as a previous poster suggested, it is currently impossible to realisticly tell how many pitches Pitch F/X gets wrong, it certainly could be misleading to use it to evaluate umpires. Or for that matter, catchers either, though that is what the pitch framing metric is trying to do.

I agree, there are a lot of pitchers. In addition to Thrylos's points, I think there are several guys, if they are going to be around at all, belong at a level higher. Still, it will likely work itself out. There will be guys on the disabled list, and while I don't know who they are, there are guys who are on their last chance to remain in the organization. It does seem like there are more pitchers around than normal, though.

I like the idea of taking the BPA pretty much wherever you are drafting in the early rounds. The problem is BPA can be sort of a slippery thing. The Twins received a certain amount of crap for drafting Revere. Many did not consider him a first round talent. Perhaps they were right, but Revere has turned into a better player than most who were drafted near where he was. So, was he a bad pick because he didn't have as a high a perceived ceiling as some who were available when the Twins drafted? I think a good draft is when you end up with good players from that draft. A great draft is when you get an impact player, and maybe some other useful players. So, while I want the Twins to take the BPA and high ceiling players, sometimes I can understand why you might try to be a little safer.

I don't know that the first statement is accurate. There are 3 things about pitchF/X that make that statement doubtful. First, PitchF/X is 2 dimensional while the strike zone is 3 dimentional. The 16 inches of depth of the plate allows moving pitches to drop in or move in from the side. Since PitchF/X is set up at the front of the plate many pitches "called" balls by PitchF/X are often strikes according to the rule book. Second, Pitch F/X has a "standard" one size fits all strike zone. Major league ball players range in size from about 5' 5" to about 6' 9". According to the rule book there is no standard strike zone. Pitch F/X has to miss pitches both high and low depending on the height of the player. Finally, I think that all of us realize that as wonderful as modern technology is, it is far from perfect. Something as complex as Pitch F/X is going to need some very expert calibrating to actually have that window set up perfectly over the plate and being actually the exact same size in every ballpark. While I have no illusions about the perfection of the average big league umpire, there is no way given the limitations of Pitch F/X, that there will not be many, many cases where the umpire is right and Pitch F/X is wrong.

Certain things get repeated to the point that they are accepted as truths even when there are numerous counter examples. The Twins are often cited as promoting their prospects too slowly, but I don't believe that is particularly true. Since this thread is about pitching, I will confine my examples to them. I believe the Twins try to individualize their promotions to their prospects, there is no one plan fits all. Over the years many pitchers have been pushed very agressively. Radke reached the majors at 21 or 22 skipping AAA altogether. He wasn't even the best starting prospect, Hawkins was and they pitched together at AA. Milton was a very young starter for the Twins. Both Baker and Slowey were college pitchers who got to the majors quite quickly. Crain was a college shortstop who was promoted as a reliever and got to the majors quickly. Liriano was 21 when he got to the majors, Hendriks was 21 or 22. I think the perception that the Twins don't promote quickly is tied to the fact that many top prospects have had injury issues that have slowed their development, and some just haven't been good enough or didn't develop quickly enough to justify quicker promotions. A recent example of this Melotakis, a college pitcher who got to AA in last year in the first full season after being drafted, but then struggled. He was promoted quite aggressively and if he had pitched at AA the way pitched at High A, we would be talking about him pitching for the Twins this year.

I agree with the first part, the problem I have is, How is Drew anymore than a short term fix? While you might be right about the farm system, you might be wrong too. In any case Drew isn't all that much of a sure thing either. He also isn't very likely to actually stick at shortstop for more than a year or 2. So in 2 years you are back to looking for a shortstop. If you are looking for a long term fix at short, Drew isn't it. Florimon isn't likely a long term answer either, but at least he isn't blocking any such solution, which a couple of years of Drew at $10 plus mil per year, would.

This thread is kind of funny. After damning the Twins for not getting FA pitching, even before the FA season even started, now that the Twins signed free agent pitchers, a lot of the same people are damning them for not promoting the hot Twins prospects, even before spring training has started.

The Twins have signed a number of effective relievers off of waivers or as minor league free agents. Guerrier was one and so were Fein and Burton. There have also been a number of not so effective ones as well. I don't have any problem with this proccess and I am not so sure why some do. I don't think it some random thing the Twins do or lets get even with the Cubs for signing our guy. I think one thing the Twins do as well or better than most clubs is scout the minors and majors and pay attention to guys on the margins. I remember with Guerrier the Twins liked his curve, thought he was miscast as a starter and eventually developed or found a good reliever in him. It sure doesn't work every time. Most of the guys the Twins sign through waivers or as minor league free agents are just what they appear to be, marginal guys who are somewhat interchangeable. Which is why I don't get very excited about these kind of signings. But, since the Twins are patient, they pay attention, and work through the system, occasionally they "find" a guy that turns into somebody more than a little useful.

The Twins do have a fair number of lefties that are AAA-AAAA-fringe major leaguers. Just how they view all of them, I don't know. Some like Thielbar are clearly short relievers/LOOGY, some probably need seasoning like Ibarra. It seemed like Ryan wasn't real excited about letting Albers go to Korea. Maybe he looked for Albers to fill a specific role this year that Raley might be able to do. Like CMath suggested maybe Raley is Thielbar insurance, more likely he might be viewed as a swingman type. Like many have said, I don't get too excited about this kind of pickup. Once in awhile you find a Guerrier, usually you just find out why somebody else put that player on waivers.

The Twins bought, potentially, about 270 or 9 seasons worth of starts this off season. They have spread them out over 4 seasons with 3 pitchers, Nolasco, Hughes and Pelfrey. I don't expect the Twins to get anywhere near 270 starts out of these 3 guys and ideally at least 2 of them will be replaced by better young emerging talent before they make all their starts. Assuming they all stay healthy, which they likely won't. I think I expect that if the Twins get 150 to 180 starts out of these guys, that would be pretty good. Especially if the reason they are replaced is that the Twins have better options rather than total ineffectiveness. This year I would just like the 3 of them to be healthy and for all 3 to pitch in the range of a mid-rotation starter, which is pretty much their upside anyway. If that happens, well the sky isn't the limit, but the Twins could have a pretty good year. There will still be room for young guys like Meyer and May, if they show they are ready. Decent pitching might allow some of the young hitters to develop without the need to try to hit 5 run home runs. It is really hard to guess what the offense will do this year. There are so many youngish guys who haven't quite shown themselves to be big regulars yet, but still might. There is the very young talent that might start arriving this year, but may or may not be ready to really help yet. I am fairly optomistic about this team, but what I want to really see is some progress.

I think that I would avoid talking too much about about ethics in any of this. We have very wealthy organizations throwing what is chump change for them, (but is incredible amounts of money for these kids that might set up their families as for at least a generation) at 16 year kids with the intention of tieing them up for at the next ten years IF they prove to be good. All of the advantages are for the organizations. I would prefer that the various teams would follow the "rules" that they all agreed to and negotiated on. Clearly, that won't happen. The wealthier organizations will look for loopholes in the rules that will give them advantages over their competitors. I expect that when we are talking about 16 year kids here, the ones that look much, much better at 16, might not look so much better at 18 or 21. Lets face it, Arcia, Polanco, and several pitchers who are looking very promising right now for the Twins, were signed to relatively modest contracts. It is almost impossible to make any predictions on how good signings of 16 year kids are going to look in 3/5/10 years from now. At this point, I am not going to worry very much if various teams bend the rules to sign 16 year old kids to huge contracts. The chances are much better that those signings will prove to be poor investments for those teams than they will come away with incredible talents.

Are you the Twins won't spend the amount allowed? I don't believe the signing period is over yet. More importantly, I think the talent pool in the Dominican Republic gets over estimated, quite a bit. There has been some incredible talent from DR, but it doesn't appear every year. For every Cabrera there are a lot of guys who get very good money but never amount to much. Remember that one of the best pitchers for DR last year in the International Series was Sam Deduno, can you a imagine how far down on the list he would of been if he were an American citizen? The kids from the Domincan are so young when they are signed, that it mostly a guess which will develop into something and which won't. There are obvious exceptions such as Sano, but spending a lot less money might get you a Polanco, if you guess right. Largely, I have no problem with the Twins playing by the rules. You have to be pretty sure the 16 year old kid you are investing big bucks in, has a darn good chance to be extra special to justify going way over the cap.

Bonifacio could also take AB's from Escobar and perhaps Hicks if he can win the CF job. Plus hopefully, Sano gets to the majors fairly soon and pushes Plouffe to another position or backup. I have nothing really, against the idea of Bonifacio, but I don't really see how he helps a building team. He will be taking AB's from someone, even if the someone is only Escobar. I really don't see the point of having him in the lineup at this point on a team unlikely to contend. If somehow, the Twins are in contention in July/August well, a Bonifacio is probably available if you need one.

I can't really figure out what posters really want, for the team to be the best possible this year, even marginally so. Or rather, whether it is more important to find out about the pieces we already have and whether they fit into the future. Since I am a bit split on that question myself, I understand the confusion. In this particular case, I am not so sure Bonifacio brings enough to the table to justify the at bats he will likely take from others. I am pretty sure Escobar can play at least 5 positions himself, not counting catcher. He doesn't run as well as Bonifacio and probably won't have as good as OBP. His defense is better, and he may be able to hit better with a little more pop. Maybe the at bats that Bonifacio would get should go to Escobar, this year. If only to find out what we really have in him. I really wouldn't want Bonifacio to be taking at bats from Arcia, Dozier or even Plouffe. I want to see what these guys can do this year.

A couple of thoughts. First in regard to promotions and how soon prospects should get to class A. I would think this should be on an individual basis. There should be no one size fits all. There are all sorts of things that could keep Thorpe from A ball this year. Maturity, innings limits based in part from pitching during the winter, competition(kids slightly older, with somewhat similar ceilings who maybe a bit "ahead" of Thorpe right now), minor injuries, and probably a number of other things. I would like to believe the Twins organization is trying to do what is best for the top prospects while balancing that with what is best for the organization. Secondly, about the comments concerning Gooden and Koufax. Both were in the majors at a young age and both had relatively short careers as dominating pitchers, but otherwise they were quite different. Gooden was incredibly effective at a very young age(sort of like Liriano without the TJ). Gooden was even youger than Liriano and was dominant for several years. One has to wonder if the workload at such a young age took a toll on Gooden. Koufax was different. When he got to the majors, he was so wild, he just wasn't very effective. Once he harnessed his stuff he was maybe the best pitcher ever, if only for a short period of time. Again workloads in the 60's were a lot different than now. How any of that might compare to Thorpe, I don't know. If he is as dominating as Gooden, he won't be in the minors very long. What I think will happen, is that the Twins won't allow his workload to be nearly as high as some other young pitchers received in the past.

I haven't seen Goodrum play, but if he is a Florimon type defender at short, that is pretty good. Cuddyer and Plouffe were never that good defensively, really anywhere, but certainly not at short. Cuddyer was up and down offensively in the minors, but largely he was pretty good offensively, his bat is what got him to the majors. Plouffe managed to stay at short till he got to the majors, but his bat was very inconsistent, he really hasn't shown yet that his bat will be consistent enough for him to be an everyday player at either corner infielder or corner outfielder. I believe Goodrum is one of those toolsy type players, who could develop into a good hitter but like a Benson, might not. The thing he has going for him is he can play defense and if he can stay at shortstop(doesn't outgrow the position) he has a very good chance of being a big league regular.

Oh, I don't expect anything all that great from Correia, I just don't expect much of anything from most of the other candidates either. At least until Gibson, Meyer and perhaps others from the farm system get established. Also, I don't believe there is any "sell high" on Correia. All big league clubs are as aware of his track record as we are. There are somewhat comparable guys still available as free agents. Why would anyone trade for Correia at this time? I am certainly not advocating an extention for Correia either. Just keep him around until you are sure you have 5 better starters and some minor league guys trending upward.

My question is: what is an acceptable performance by the FA pitcher signings made by the Twins this winter? Most of the posters were excited by the signings, but what is the minimum performances that you are looking for from these guys. If I use Correia's performance in 2013 as sort of a standard, I would be happy with the following. If Nolasco can average somewhere in the high 20's for starts over the next 4 years, have 2 years slightly above the Correia Standard, 1 year near an Ace, and perhaps 1 year slightly below the Correia Standard, I will be happy. If Pelfrey can stay in the rotation all year in 2014 and pitch near 200 innings at anything above the Correia Standard and perhaps gets forced into the bullpen or on the trading in year 2 by emerging talent; I will be happy. If Hughes can remain in the rotation for 2 years, pitch above 160 innings each year, and is forced to the bullpen or the trade block by year 3, again by emerging young talent; I will be happy.

I said it on another thread and I will say it here as well. Trading Correia makes little sense. He is the 2nd best pitcher on the staff going into ST, he has limited trade value at this point, and he is as likely to be one of your top 5 pitchers during the coming season as anyone not named Nolasco. He may or may not pitch well during the coming season, but trading him now(if you even could) makes little sense.