Buck Nasty

Grrr. I was a huge Plouffe booster the last couple of years. I just wanted them to pick a position (anywhere!) and leave him alone for 400 ABs to see what he can do. Finally....he gets his shot and starts to run with it. Then this. Obviously he could have benefited from more time on his rehab stint. I fear the hand will bother him the rest of the year (similar to what happened to Cuddy). And when we look at his numbers at the end of the year, they will not look good because of that. That said, I believe the key for him is to improve defensively. I think they saw enough of his bat to know he can produce some decent power numbers. But he can keep himself in the lineup through the batting slumps if he's making the plays in the field.

But then Souhan suggests that Ryan is going to be around long term? Ryan's quotes make it sound like he views this as a project (to turn things around) rather than an ongoing job. All I can figure is that Ryan is playing his status close to the vest because he wants to negotiate with the Pohlads or just because he wants to defer to them and let them make the decision? You are the only one to touch on what I think is the biggest piece of the article. What's Ryan's commitment? He walked away from the job a couple years ago because he was burned out. I'm assuming he was talked out of retirement because Bill Smith was failing so miserably. But his title is "Interim". And according to this link, that's his decision - not the Pohlads. Is he all in? If not, there is less accountability IMO. http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2012-08-27/minnesota-twins-gm-terry-ryan-safe-manager-ron-gardenhire

Agreed. I was pretty surprised to see the 30th overall pick in last year's draft already showing up as "a bust". I took the article with a grain of salt. Yeah, he's disappointed this year. But at least they point out his hip and ankle injuries have affected him. Let's hope next year is much better.

You gotta let it go man. Slama does not appear to be part of their plans. Some of the other guys mentioned have done fine. Fien has actually been very good. Robertson has been a great situational guy on lefties. Manship had his moments as a long man - i.e. his last game here. Oliveros looked good before he got hurt. I doubt Slama would have added anything beyond what they got from those guys.

Check out slide #10. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1306444-updating-the-biggest-mlb-prospect-bust-of-2012-at-every-position#/articles/1306444-updating-the-biggest-mlb-prospect-bust-of-2012-at-every-position/page/10

It seems like everyone is making this a “Slama vs. Gray” debate. It’s not. Slama was removed from the 40 man last year – long before Gray came along. Any team could have claimed Slama last year. None did. Why do you think that is? Does anyone really believe that all of MLB is part of a conspiracy to keep Anthony Slama out of majors? Come on. Slama has put up some good numbers in the minors. But he’s put up some bad ones too. Specifically, he’s averaging over 4 walks per 9 innings. Add that to the fact that his fastball couldn’t break a pane of glass and you probably have your reason why he’s not highly regarded. His 7 walks in 7 innings/1.86 WHIP during his brief stint in the majors only reinforced that concern. Regarding Gray – he has a decent arm with a fastball averaging about 93 mph per Fangraphs. This is the 5th year in the row he’s pitched in the majors and with 3rd team. So again – to make it sound like the Twins are the only people in the world who think this guy could be ok is incorrect. In a year where injuries have again taken a toll on this team, Gray has been healthy/available. He’s had moments when he’s been ok – especially at Target Field (27.1 IP, 18Ks, 1.28 WHIP, .245 BAA). He’s also had moments when he’s been horrible. But unfortunately, that’spretty consistent with the entire team. Bottomline, cutting Gray at this point would be the equivalent of throwing a deckchair off the Titanic to stop it from sinking. It wouldn’t matter. Again – this should not be “Slama vs. Gray”. If the Twins wanted to see Slama this year,they could have called him up. Here is a list of guys who got the nod ahead of Slama: Jeff Manship, Lester Oliveros, Tyler Robertson, Kyle Waldrop, Casey Fien and Luis Perdomo. That's six guys who they called up ahead of him! And I'm going to guess that Vasquez will be #7.

Because the money they'll pay Baker is far less than what they'd have to pay a guy who isn't coming off a major injury. I'd rather see them go after a Sanchez/Marcum/Jackson guy and sign Baker than see them throw ~$15m at two middling guys. But it's not really "less money" if you don't get any type of return. It just becomes a needless expense (see Jason Marquis). I'd rather give that money/innings to someone who might be part of the long term plan. I don't think Baker is going to be motivated to give these guys any "home town discount" either.

To expand on why I don't think signing Baker is a good idea....I don't think this team will be competing for a title next year. So, signing Baker for one year w/incentives is just throwing $ at another unknown along with the rest of the #5 type guys. You have to remember, this is the Twins. We're not going to get Stasburg. We're going to get back Joe Nathan 2011. In other words, even if Baker does pitch, there's just as good of a chance he'll have reduced velocity, command issues and probably only a handful of quality starts. Why not put that money towards healthy guy with a higher percentage chance to contribute meaningful innings?

Birdman - I agree with you that it would make sense to bring in a couple Free Agent guys to hold down two spots. Your guess is as good as mine, but I think they'll go for one higher quality guy vs. two Marquis types. Certainly a trade for a SP is a possibility and a great idea if we get equal or better value. I think they'll try a Rule V guy next year as well. Had Terry Doyle not had a terrible spring for us, he might be our #2 guy right now - lol. He's having a great year in AAA. I'm predicting moves like that vs. trades for big names. But it's just my opinion/guess. None of us knows what will actuall happen. Baker/Pavano/Blackburn might be in the picture too - but I personally don't think so. Baker, sure, but the other two?.......................FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NOOOOOO!!!!!! See - I think just the opposite. I don't see what good it would do them to sign Baker since he'd probably cost the most and hardly pitch next year. Blackburn is already on the payroll next year like it or not. IMO, if he does well at Rochester (7 innings 1 run last night) he'll be back like a bad rash. I'm not saying I'll like it. I'm just saying it's a possiblity. Pavano - like Baker would be expensive and health seems to be a concern so I don't see him coming back, but don't discount Gardy love for vets that battle.

Birdman - I agree with you that it would make sense to bring in a couple Free Agent guys to hold down two spots. Your guess is as good as mine, but I think they'll go for one higher quality guy vs. two Marquis types. Certainly a trade for a SP is a possibility and a great idea if we get equal or better value. I think they'll try a Rule V guy next year as well. Had Terry Doyle not had a terrible spring for us, he might be our #2 guy right now - lol. He's having a great year in AAA. I'm predicting moves like that vs. trades for big names. But it's just my opinion/guess. None of us knows what will actuall happen. Baker/Pavano/Blackburn might be in the picture too - but I personally don't think so.

The way I view next year's rotation is: 1.) Free Agent. They don't have anyone close to being a #1 guy right now. Most expect a veteran "innings eater" guy 2.) Diamond. This is a stretch as most expect some regression for next year. But he's been solid this year and there is no one else 3.) Gibson. Yeah, I know many say he won't be ready to start year or not ready period. But I think he will be. 4.) Hendricks. Yep, he's 0-6 with a 7.06 ERA this year. But just as most realize Deduno is not going to maintain his 3.33 ERA after only 8 starts, I think most realized the same sample size applies to Liam based on his numbers through the minors. 5.) DeVries, Deduno, Walters, Swarzak, Vasquez, Hernandez, Duensing. All of those guys are spot starter/#5 type guys. I'm sure they'll sign several other free agent guys. Not big names, but low risk guys to hedge against Gibson/Hendricks in case they are not ready or flop. Bottom line, it's not going to be a great rotation. But hopefully a couple guys step forward like Diamond did this year to ease the pain. Wimmers returns in 2014 and maybe they can add a prospect or two via Rule V or trades.

I don't think that's a certainty at all. I'm rooting for Plouffe. But if you look at his month by month game logs, he had a red hot June and half of July until he got hurt. I don't think a hot six/seven weeks is enough to say it doesn't matter how he finishes the year - but that's just my opinion.

I wisg they would have given him more time at AAA before activating him. Plouffe had finally found a home at 3rd before he got hurt. Hopefully he just needs more ABs to get his timing back. If he finishes the year poorly, I have to believe he's right back to square one again (man without a home) for next year.

I have to admit, I was eager to read the article after the title caught my eye. But wow...there has to be more/better guys somewhere in our minor system isn't there? Berrios is way too new to rate - see Shooter Hunt. Hernandez - his track record shows there probably isn't too much to get excited about. Vasquez is pretty much your classic 28 year old minor league free agent guy i.e. Walters and Deduno. So basically out of the five noted, I like Gibson and Hendricks (surprised so many are down on Liam already). But the other guys were a reach IMO. What about BJ Hermsen? And if the starting pitching depth is this bad, would it make sense to try Swarzak as a starter again? I know he struggled in limited opportunity this year, but he did ok last year in 11 starts (4.52 ERA and 1.29 WHIP). That would be a solid #2 on this year's rotation -lol.

Absolutely. It all fell apart so fast. Pavano, Liriano, Baker, Blackburn, Slowey all had double digit wins that year and pitched over 150 innings each. Then you had Duensing finish the year as a starter and did ok (I think he took over when Slowey went down). All those guys were ages 26-28 except Pavano. Then there was Perkins (still a starter at that time in AAA), Swarzak (prospect star fading, but still only 24 at that time), Gibson (22) at AA along with Guerra (21) and two more 21 year olds in Wimmers/Hendricks at A ball. Wow that blew up fast....

I don't see signing Baker as anything that will help this club - at least next year. I mean...I've read a lot of people on here questioning how much Kyle Gibson can be counted on to contribute next year and he's 9 months ahead of Baker in recovery time. Furthermore, I'll bet if we looked back on message boards from when Baker was pitching, there were plenty of people who thought he wasn't anything special anyhow (although I always like the guy). I just don't see why it would make sense to risk money towards Baker. And let's forget about Baker taking the "home town discount" because he loves it here. He's going to go where he gets the best deal. To me, knowing this team needs a proven innings eater, it would make sense to bank any money that would be spent to retain Baker and go after a healthy arm that can be counted on for a full year of work.

Well, I think that pesky concussion thing might have had something to do with Span regressing. It's hard to hit/play well when you can't stand up straight. Read my post again. Nobody is expecting Revere to improve by adding points to his BA. But is it really unreasonable to believe that a 24 year old player won't get better at pitch selection? If he takes more walks he'll be fine. He's a contact hitter with speed. If he's hitting the right pitches, he'll get plenty of doubles. You don't have to be a HR hitter to post a decent OPS (see Mauer).

Whoops. I was late and a post got in between. My response was to Steve and Brock.

Players don't peak at age 24. If he had repeated levels in the minors (as many players do), he likely would have posted higher OPS during a repeated year. Again, I point to the year over year improvement - this year to last. Continued improvement won't come in the form of adding points to his BA. It will come from taking more walks, and hopefully more gap power. He's never going to be a high OPS guy. But .750+ with his defensive range = pretty good player.

Revere has a higher OPS than Span this year. Your comparison doesn't take into consideration that at age 24, Revere is still getting better. He moved through the minors pretty quickly. Had he repeated a level (like many guys do including Hicks), he certainly would have inflated his career OPS. Just look at the difference between this year and last year at the MLB level. I feel your comparison isn't completely fair since you are choosing to exclude his one year at Beloit from his overall minor numbers (the year he had a .930 OPS) while using all his MLB career line. At age 24 and with only two full years under his belt, his MLB career averages are probably less important than his year over year improvement.

I like the thought process. But, if I had my choice, I'd prefer to move Span and keep Revere. I know on paper (as you've laid out) Span should be the better player. But Revere just keeps proving people wrong at ever level. Wouldn't it suck to trade him and find out he just keeps getting better? Yes, he could regress too. But we are just guessing. We know what we have in Span. He's solid. But he's also older, not getting better and had concussion issues. Bottom line, one of them should be moved. Let the market decide who (based on return).

I love that they are going after these International guys. It's just like extra draft picks in my eyes. When you look at our top 20 prospects, five were signed as free agents vs. actually drafted: #1 - Sano #4 - Arcia #7 - Salcedo #11 - Kepler #13 - Soliman And let's not forget Nishi!

I was actually referring to bringing Perkins in during the 8th (hold situation) vs. saving him specifically for a typical 9th inning save situation. It's pure speculation on my part, but I doubt Gardy would have sent him back out for the 9th to get the save if he hadn't breezed through the 8th with only 10 pitches. In that instance, Gardy did exactly what you wanted him to do - used his best reliever in a close game outside of 9th inning save spot.

Nope. But if you are not busy, I might have you look up some other stuff for me. Oh - and you could also run through prior threads and double check my spelling/grammar. Every message board needs a guy like you to chime in with their internet superiority vs. just participating in the conversation. Keep up the great work!