SwainZag

I think when most team's decide they are going to rebuild, it isn't coming off a division title. I will say there are probably very little people who will point to the off season after 2010 and say.....well great run guys, let's rebuild this thing. The 2011 team had a $112.7M payroll. I could go into how everyone regressed and only 3 regulars played in 100+ games or how Mauer and Morneau both missed more than half the season or how the bad Liriano showed up and Pavano aged quickly. Nishi was a bust. Nathan wasn't the same coming off of injury and Baker would only start 21 games. 2011 was a complete disaster in every way. So much hope...turned to rubble. High payroll, terrible results, a bad farm club. Not a great starting point 2012 going forward. You cite they have signed 1 solid free agent. How about Josh Willingham? Kurt Susuki? Ricky Nolasco? What players have they lost in the last 3 seasons for nothing? You can go back to Gomez and Hardy, everyone will agree those were mistakes, everyone will admit it. Every player you listed was a 2013 player. Instead of adding them they added Phil Hughes, Ricky Nolasco and Kurt Susuki. 2 of 3 of those were excellent signings. Was it a mistake not to grab an OF? Probably. Comparing waiting for prospects to bloom as "magic beans into a beanstalk" is pretty laughable. I think the fact that people think the position they were in after the 2011 season should be some magical turn around in 1-2 seasons back into a contender is funny to me. They put themselves into that position, but a lot things along they way didn't bounce their way for us to get to this point.

Iwakuma is interesting. Very good season last year. He will be 34 on opening day and has a $7M option for 2015. While he would be a very nice in our rotation, do you believe he would be anything more than a 1 year rental? If the M's did execute his option and trade him, would the Twins be willing to give a guy who will be 35 opening day 2016 a 3-4 year deal?

I agree very much so. Bourjos could also probably be had on a small, short term contract which is easily displaced when Buxton shows he is ready. With the way the Twins offense scored runs this year, especially in the August/Sept months, they could probably sacrifice a little to have a light hitting CF if they play defense like Bourjos.

Gore also was never a big prospect, hasn't hit above .250 since Rookie ball and is on the Royals specifically for defense and his pinch running abilities. He has played in 13 games with Kansas City and has two official plate appearances, zero hits but has stolen 8 bases. He isn't a future cornerstone for the franchise, he is a role player. There's a huge difference between him and Buxton.

I don't think anyone here thinks that a rebuild absolutely has to take being bad for multiple years, but at the place this franchise was after the 2011 season, I don't see how that team bounces back any quicker. I think many teams have proved that tossing money at free agents isn't how you build a sustained winner. This goes back to a point that has been beaten into ground that the drafting failures of the Twins between 2005-2009. Missed 1st round picks, not many gems found in later rounds, etc left the team lacking at the upper levels for young talent. I think there are just as many people who think you can instantly rebuild a winner than there are people who think it takes a few years to rebuild. I for one like the way they are rebuilding. You could argue that the Twins could have spent an extra 15M per year for the last 3 years and had 5-8 more wins. It would leave us with 3 straight 80+ loss seasons without the the high draft picks. A team who still lost more than they won, fans still bitching and the quality of draft prospects not as good.

I wasn't saying he wasn't productive. It was more aimed at your comment that Walker will hit .320 in AA next season, which I'm sure everyone would be ecstatic about it, it just seems like quite the prediction.

Didn't he hit under .250 in A ball this year?

I think it's really a question if you would rather trade prospects for someone younger and cheaper or take the risk and give a 30+ year old a 6-7 year contract.

Guys that have made it the majors have a much higher success rate than guys in A ball, sure. But when you are looking at a list that puts much more emphasis and higher rankings on guys that have made it to the majors, the Twins are obviously going to be lower. Most of their highly touted prospects are between the ages of 18 and 23 and have been in the system for 4 years or less. I know it's fun to go look a player who is 23 and in the majors and bash the Twins front office, but honestly guys mature and develop and different speeds.

He is still only 23 years old and has less than 800 career PA. After his improved last couple months, I'm looking forward to see what he can with a full healthy season with regular AB's.

From the sounds of it, it's obvious the list you are looking at uses major league time as a huge advantage in it's rankings. Most of the Twins top young players aren't there yet, hence why they are lower on this list. I don't really see how it has any weight with how good the Twins system is if the guys have reached the majors or not.

Rasmus is also 28 while Hicks is 24. You are right, Rasmus had + dWAR is 2009, 2012 and 2013. This season Rasmus played 719.1 innings of defense to get to his -0.5. Hicks played in 528 defensive innings to get his -0.2, so not even close to double. Rasmus also made 14 times what Hicks did this year. Hicks also has less than 500 AB of major league experience. I know I am in the minority but I STILL think Hicks could be AT LEAST an average ML OFer. I still think letting him start 2013 as the starter at age 23 with no AAA experience was bad for his development. He has been treated like a yo-yo ever since then. MLB-AAA-MLB-AAA-MLB-DL-AA-AAA-MLB. That's in a 2 year span. I'm not saying anoint him as an everyday starter, but I'm very anti-kick him the curb.

Pelfrey is under contract and relatively has zero value in the trade market. Thus trading him is probably impossible at this point. There is no harm in bringing him into camp and attempt to use him as a reliever. If he looks good, cool, throw him in the pen and he could be a trade deadline piece. If he struggles or is simply beat out, then DFA/waive him. Makes no sense to cut bait now.

2014 Hicks : .215/.341/.274/.615 -0.2 dWAR Age 24, $508K, 2 pre-arb years left, 2 years arb left 2014 Revere : .306/.325/.361/.686 -1.8 dWAR Age 26, $1,95M salary, 1 year arb elig left. 2014 Rasmus: .225/.287/.448/.735 -0.5 dWAR Age 28, $7M salary, 2015 FA 2014 Ethier: .249/.322/.370/.691 -0.9 dWAR Age 32, $15.5M, $18M in 2015, $18M in 2016, $17.5M in 2017, $17.5M vesting option with $2.5M buyout in 2018. Hicks was much better after the break as well. Just some comparisons from players I have seen on this thread when it comes to OF.

I will agree with that as long as you say....proves success in the short term. It could turn into long term success or it could very well prove to be something that bit them in the ass in the long term.

There's no sour grapes at all. Predicting anything in the future isn't relevant I guess though. For I all know the Royals could go on to win the next 5 World Series titles or they could go on to pick Top 5 for the next 5. If their intention was to make the playoffs regardless of the result this year and in the future, they sure they succeeded in that nature. Royals fans are happy.

I really don't see the comparison though. This is about what Shields added to the team and what they lost in the trade, not when the Twins were swept in a playoff series. Sure you can compare the seasons in retrospect, but judging the overall franchises and what position they are in as a whole is completely different IMO.

But the Twins had more than a 1 year run! The Twins made the playoffs 6 times in 9 years! While the Royals could very well go on a run like this, it still stands that they traded a very highly touted prospect for a 2 year rental, who is all but gone after this year. Comparing the Twins run in the 2000's with KC's one playoff appearance is not a very good comparison.

Shields in 2014: 34 starts. 227IP, 3.21 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 3.59 FIP, 7.1 K/9 Odorizzi in 2014: 31 starts. 168IP, 4.13 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 3.75 FIP, 9.3 K/9 Obviously Shelds is more of a workhorse, but how much of a downgrade are they really and consider that Odorizzi was a rookie and 24 years old. It seems people want to write off Myers already, a year removed from winning the ROY. He did have an injury plauged down year, but I certainly wouldn't write him off yet. The kid is only 23 years old. Mike Montgomery was also part of that trade, and at age 25, and a former Top 25 prospect, might have finally figured it out having a fine season in AAA. If the Royals lose in this 1-game playoff and lose Shields in the off-season, what mission was accomplished? They still will have a fine 29 year old set-up man in Davis and a short lived playoff experience.

I don't really see the landing place being the problem it's the money AND years offered that really counts. I think teams with huge payrolls...see....NY, LA, BOS, etc. are able to offer a guy in his 30's a 7 year 150M+ contract and worry a lot less about the future than a team like the Twins who is ponying up 20-25% of their payroll to an arm for the better part of the next decade.

I really hope this means we will get to see him catch more than once a week for the month. Of all the opinions how he can't catch are out there, he only caught 18 games for the Twins this season. No reason not to give him some reps, we all know he can hit.

I wouldn't look at promoting Bernier as investing in the future but more as....he has played well enough to earn a promotion, he is 34, the Twins are going nowhere and more of a nice thing to do for a guy who is probably getting near the end of his career. I'm going to guess he isn't going to see the field much this month, really no harm promoting him and letting him live the life for a few weeks. At least how I see it. It would be different if they promoted him and played him over a younger player with a real future with the team.

Which would be a better dilemma to have in 2-3 years......having too much money tied up in a 34-36 year old SP to block extensions to some of the up and comers, or tie up money in extensions and unable to sign an ace pitcher/top FA at the time?

This was my fault and I apologize to mike for it. Won't happen again.

I have nothing to compare to then. How do I compare a guy who only had 50 AB in one season? Most players who have less than 3 years in the majors are generally role players who have little statistics to compare anyways. If you want to say that most players who get a shot at the big leagues have less than a 3 year career then OK, but I think that's a different study. Your statement was: "but we forget that many/most rookies don't actually get better, they are who they will become" and I'm using major leaguers who have a career do generally show that they generally do in fact get better.