kab21

No doubters Buxton Sano Meyer Stewart Rosario Best bets although I think they need another season Thorpe - a lot of hype fueling this train this offseason Polanco - I could see him getting some recognition Berrios - Had a solid enough season if someone really liked him before this year I just looked at the BP top ten Twins list and Parks really like Pinto (#5 ahead of Rosario) and he also really likes Felix Jorge (#9) rounding out the top ten.

The Tigers, Rays and Yankees have not had good offseasons so far. The Rays gave multiple years to Loney and signed Dejesus to an extension. And the Yankees have spent most of the their money without getting one starter (other than Kuroda) if they actually plan to stay under the luxury tax (talked about for years). And they will be starting Kelly Johnson and Eduardo Nunez in the infield.

I certainly am not ready to give Hicks a guaranteed starting spot to find out. That is basically what you are proposing with Worley and Diamond. If AAA wasn't an option with Hicks then I would stash him on the MLB roster as the 4th OF'er but you seem to think that is an awful option with the loser the 5th spot.

Worley will be in arb after the season and Diamond will super 2 so their cheap years are limited.

DiceK is a horrible example of a Japanese pitcher that had a couple of good seasons and then fell apart in the US. He had xFIP's of 4.17 and 4.64 in his first two MLB seasons. His decline was entirely predictable even if he hadn't been injured. Tanaka isn't Darvish but he also isn't DiceK. I would have no problem giving Tanaka 15-20M/yr for 5-6 years (plus 20M) based on how he projects in the majors. The whole deal would depend on the Twins being able to push payroll to 125Mish in 2-3 years. If that is possible (and it should be for a competitive team) then it would be difficult to spend that amount of money considering how many cheap pre-arb players are coming up to fill out the roster.

I think part of the issue is the claim that these guys are higher potential. The Diamond trade was hated by fans since he was a low upside starter w/o great stuff. He had one nice season but even in that season he had one of the lowest K rates in the majors. Worley K'd more hitters but did so w/o great stuff and with an abysmal swstr%. Deduno has interesting stuff but somehow still doesn't rack up many K's and BB's too many. And there is considerable question whether or not he's even ready in April (or June). The repeating point that has been made in this thread is that the Twins MIGHT have to DFA someone with upside and potential. None of these guys have upside past being a #4 starter and they certainly shouldn't be gifted a rotation spot because of that potential. As I see it Diamond and Worley can battle it out for the #5 spot. If the other is worth keeping then they will find a way to make it happen.

A) It's always going to be that way in this league. You aren't going to get fair value for guys in decline. You should be in win now mode and you sell your team short. C) I think you got 20 cents on the dollar for CC.

that is why I put in the disclaimer that perhaps he will naturally have a lower BAPIP. Statistically 3 seasons of data (according to fangraphs IIRC) is needed for a relevant sample size of BAPIP. Kepler played 61 games which is not even close to being a relevant BAPIP sample. Nobody should be surprised if his BA (consequently his OBP and SLG) bump up quite a bit this season simply due to an increase in BAPIP. The big thing is that BAPIP can easily rebound and he can be a success. A player with poor K and BB rates is more likely to struggle since he probably has poor plate discipline.

No, players want the most guaranteed money they can get. 6-7 years is a lifetime for a pitcher and if he's getting 20+M/yr as expected then he'll take every year he can get. The exception is taking a 1 year offer after a poor season.

It would be shocking if the Twins were in on Tanaka at this point after spending 80M on pitchers already this offseason. And this is precisely why the FA starting pitching market has mostly been in standstill. I would have no problem if the Twins spent silly money on Tanaka. He might not be an ace but it's likely that he would be pretty good (likely the Twins ace for awhile). Signing Tanaka would require the Twins to push their payroll to 125M in the next couple of years but that shouldn't be a ridiculous number.

I agree that you tender a contract but the fact that it is debatable should illustrate just how low his trade value is. FWIW - unlucky BAPIP and lucky HR rate balance out the luck equation.

This entire analysis is based on simple slash stats? He had an extremely low BAPIP last year. Maybe he naturally will have a lower BAPIP or perhaps it will return to a normal .300 next year. If that happens he will be considered an outstanding prospect again. If you actually look deeper at his numbers you would notice excellent K and BB rates with a solid isoP. the other guys you mentioned are similar level prospects. They outproduced him but there are also some flaws in their prospect profile. The good news is that Ft Myers should have an excellent season this year.

So basically your entire point is focused on Correia? Re #3) I think you should direct your ire at the rest long relief only guys if there isn't room to stash one of these pitchers in the bullpen for 1-2 months. I also don't think any of these guys have much upside. Maybe they become younger versions of Correia but that doesn't seem very valuable.

How exactly do we figure that Duensing has trade value? He's posted ERA's of 5, 5 and 4 the last 3 years. He's a mediocre loogy at best. His trade value is somewhere between Mastro and Presley but that's only if you can find a team that matches up.

I think in some ways this draft is shaping up like last year. There are a couple of high upside college arms followed by some HS bats and pitchers (and Turner). And just like last year there is a gap to the next best college starters. That can change since Gray moved up from interesting 1st rd'er to an elite talent but Stanek and Manaea dropped from top 5 contenders. The problem at #5 is that there are only X number of elite talents and every team wants college starters that also have upside (they get picked first). The frustrating part of this recent argument is that it's almost exactly the same as last where arguments were made well almost up to the draft that the Twins should be focusing on guys like Shipley, Anderson, Manaea and Stanek (despite poor seasons by the latter two) instead of Bryant and Stewart. The main arguments were positional NEED and NEED for immediate pitching help. The four prospects mentioned are all good ones but there's a reason they all lasted to pick 15+. Rather frustratingly I still type Kris Humphries (Bryant) every time. Right now Kolek is the guy I hope drops (assuming Rodon and Hoffman go 1/2). And Gatewood is the guy I think drops out of consideration. His defense is questionable already and I'm not exactly sold on his hitting (the upside is there).

Actually let's properly flip the question. Why are you so interested in giving scholarships (big league starting spots) to these guys? They aren't high paid but you're arguing that the Twins put themselves into a position where they are depending on a couple of these players in the rotation with the Albers of the world ready to rack up innings. In absolutely no way whatsoever is stashing an extra starter in the bullpen redundant. Starters get injured or are ineffective all the time and pitching depth is always needed. Gibson spending two months in AAA does not bother me since he completely sucked last year. If all of the Twins starters are still healthy and throwing sub 4.50 ERA's (and Gibson is great as you expect) then the Twins have a wonderful problem and something that they haven't had for half a decade (a decent rotation with minor league depth). I think Dozier and Perkins are excellent examples against your point actually. Nobody is advocating outright cutting of all 3 of them. It's pretty likely that one is the 5th starter and the other is in the bullpen. Maybe one of them gets cut but I think at least one of them has a significant injury and could spend some time on the DL (or sucks enough to be cut). Unlike a starting pitcher Dozier wasn't given a starting position in April. He was in a battle with Florimon/Escobar/Carroll for playing time at 2B/SS. Perkins had one decent year like and then he sucked just like these guys. The difference is that he wasn't given a rotation spot after that awful year and was moved to the bullpen. And you are 100% against moving any of these guys to the bullpen even it's temporary. Just to be clear the main argument here is that you can never have too much pitching. Having an extra starter in the bullpen and Gibson in AAA is significantly better than not having an extra starter in the bullpen and Gibson starting the year in the majors. In that scenario you are required to either rush Meyer or pitch the Albers of the world. that scenario sucks.

If they are more than capable then they should be able to earn a roster spot. But I think the bigger picture of these signings is that the Twins don't have very much confidence in this trio. There's the possibility that a couple of these guys are more damaged than has been made public.

Now we are concerned about having too many capable MLB starters? KC is boring but he is at least a competent MLB starter which is a lot more than we have been able to say for a few years. Every year I hear the same analysis: Why sign player X when random AAA prospect guy might be able to give you the same stats? Too often random prospect guy comes up and gets demolished in the majors. Gibson spending a couple of months in AAA doesn't concern me and neither does losing 1 or 2 of Diamond/Deduno/Worley.

The problem is that I disagree with your analysis of the talent pool for next year at this point. There are two great college arms that as of now will be gone and some less interesting college pitchers with a lot of HS'ers that are more interesting. I am much more interested in Kolek at this point than Beede for example but he's not even on your list of guys to watch. And the Bill James data is from drafts done in the 80's and early 90's. Baseball America has a list broken down from a similar time period (a little later I think) that shows success rate of 1st rd'ers and varying levels of success. For average regulars (not guys that simply made it to the majors) there was a slight bias towards HS players. This was linked in one of your articles. Twinsfan34 shows a similar trend (although not with %'s) so I'm not sure if the old Bill James data (you referenced a 10 yr old book) is even relevant.

I invoke the Duensing Rule.

It's not that Deduno/Worley/Diamond are worthless it's that the Twins have indicated (3 FA signings) that they aren't optimistic about them being effective next year.

I don't think the FO has any faith in Diamond/Deduno/Worley since they have signed 3 starters already and they are still talking to FA starters. I wouldn't be surprised if the Worley/Deduno injuries are more serious than have been reported in the media.

I would sign both of them for those prices and the cost of a 2nd/3rd rd pick. It would give the Twins a legitimate offense vs what is most likely a bottom 10 (possibly bottom 5 offense). People talk about this mythical concern of blocking prospects but the guys blocked (removed from the lineup) are the likes of Parmelee/Kubel/Colabello and Florimon/Santana. I won't lose any sleep over blocking them.

Not true. The OF is covered with Mastro and Kubel (and even Colabello). The alternative to a guy like Colabello is carrying 2 futility IF'ers or 2 backup catchers. Those players are basically worthless compared to having a legitimate bat off the bench or a part time platoon DH. And having a 13 man pitching staff is also pointless. More importantly if Kubel makes the team as DH then you basically have to have a RH'd bat to pair with him. Would you rather have Mastro getting those AB's or a guy like Colabello?