Otto von Ballpark

Most MLB teams are built from drafting, though, no? It's not like the Twins are particularly unique in that regard, or that the Royals had to specifically emulate the Twins to achieve that. Would you say the Mets and Giants teams that the Royals recently faced in the World Series also "used the Twins model" for their rebuilds too?

We're counting it, but his injury happened on April 17, not even two weeks from opening day. No, 134 wRC+ over those 45 PA for a near 30 year old hitter do not remotely indicate a "breakout". Plouffe had full months of 158 and 124 wRC+ last year, 153, 161, and 118 in 2014, etc.

TR traded a lot of guys before their team controlled time was up? Lawton and Mientkiewicz, AJ was special circumstances to be sure -- who else? He really didn't trade "a lot" at all. (Not saying it was a bad strategy, with a competitive team and the old comp draft pick system, it made a lot of sense. I just don't see a history of aggressive trades, TR is far more likely to take the path of least resistance and ride out a player's control years or contract.)

Not sure if this is fully accurate. Those 3 guys you name are hardly cornerstones that the Royals success is built upon -- when they went to the World Series two years ago, Moustakas had a 75 OPS+, Hosmer 99. Gordon has been better, particularly defensively, but he's only a 109 OPS+ since they returned to relevance in 2013. Cain and Davis have arguments to be their team MVP in recent years, and both were acquired in trade. I'd argue that the Royals success owes more to a plan to exploit market inefficiencies around defense, limiting strikeouts at the plate, and dominant relief pitching, than simply waiting around for draft picks to develop. They were still mired in losing when they shipped out Greinke for Cain and Escobar, as well as when they sent out a top prospect in Myers for Davis and Shields. I'm not sure that's ever been the Twins model for rebuilding.

Jones and Stewart? Jones played 6 full seasons here and left via free agency. Stewart played out his full 3 year free agent contract here before leaving via free agency. TR took no action for either of those players to leave Minnesota, he simply waited until their team control was finished. Lawton and Mientkiewicz are better examples -- both guys traded 1.5 years before free agency.

Put another way, if they were still playing Suzuki 6 games a week at his current performance level, still 100% committed to Hughes as a SP with a 60-70 pitch limit, and still parking Kepler on the bench or in AAA while starting infielders in the outfield again, after everything that has happened, that would be the definition of insanity. The fact that they are not insane is hardly a very encouraging trend. It is more like the bare minimum expectation for a front office with a pulse.

About a month ago, with Milone? His salary is almost as high as Pelfrey's was last year. Last year they optioned Milone too in favor of May, although his salary wasn't quite as high then. They actually did demote Pelfrey to the pen very briefly (although still longer than Hughes' pen demotion so far, thanks to Gibson's DL extension). They have dropped Liriano, Slowey, Silva, etc. to the pen in the past. They released Jason Marquis at the end of May 2012. (It is a bit of a trick question you are asking too, because they never had many high salary players until a few years ago.) What do you think the old Twins would have done when a starting pitcher publicly admitted having trouble throwing 60-70 pitches? What do you think the old Twins would have done with 3 outfielders on the DL? In fact, some evidence suggests they just recalled Buxton to fill a short term need against their judgement of his readiness or development needs -- something they have done almost annually with Buxton, Hicks and Gomez. The old Twins signed and played Jordan Schafer to demote Hicks, just like promoting Mastro to demote Buxton. Would the old Twins not have signed and played Grossman? Would the old Twins not have buried Arcia? They did just last year. I guess it is nice that Suzuki is taking an extra day or two off per week, although they actually did that briefly two years ago when they first signed Suzuki and spotted starts for Pinto too (and Pinto at the time was a higher upside option than Centeno is now). Getting encouraged by these "trends" over recent roster messes is a little like getting encouraged by our "improved" but still terrible record since our 0-9 start. I guess it is not as bad as it could be, but not a lot has really changed.

It isn't that hard. Just start pitching him longer and giving him more rest between appearances. If another starter has a superlative performance and doesn't need much relief, treat it like a rainout for May and have him appear the next day. And as soon as he is ready to throw 3-4 innings, probably pretty quickly, you can let him start and Dean, Hughes etc. relieve -- heck, we did it last August in a pennant race, we can sure as heck do it given out 2016 record.

A.J.?

Oh great. Another Schafer, just like the multiple Hicks, Murphys, and Santana's.

If we still have 13 pitchers, no reason he can't be stretched out in the majors.

Doc, your original list was written before Kepler came back, right? And it included such names as Mastroianni, Grossman, Rosario, Tonkin, Pressly -- I really had no idea what it was you were trying to say. Buxton was the opening day CF. How is it really a change of approach for him to start at the beginning of June with every other CF on the DL? Kepler starting over Arcia -- what is the change of approach there, exactly? They have been starting everyone over Arcia lately. Centeno has started 10 of 24 games, although 3 of those Suzuki was explicity out with injury. talk about baby steps... Don't look now, but Hughes is starting again tonight, and if it goes well I wouldn't be surprised to see him stick if/when Gibson finally returns. (And even if Dean sticks around longer, he seems exactly the kind of low upside starter the Twins always give a nice long loom before inevitably cutting them after the season, not really a useful change in approach) A change of approach would be a veteran finally, truly getting benched or traded, May getting back in the rotation, an aggressive bullpen addition with upside, etc. I just can't get excited about "signs of change" like Pat Dean in the rotation, Juan Centeno starting 2-3 times per week, and what outfielders they use with 3 OF on the DL.

I think that was more about building the academies than any direct player development stuff.

Didn't we hear similar encouraging observations the first couple games of the season?

No. Testing with penalties didn't begin until Lawton's third year out of Minnesota (although for what it's worth, he was busted in that first year of testing).

Generating a list of shaky assertions like Ortiz failing the equivalent of a post-2004 test with penalties, or Kevin Millar's "career year" in Boston, is hardly evidence equivalent to observing the sound and gait of a species of waterfowl you are trying to determine. More like, an anonymous, unverifiable source once named it as a duck, and it once frolicked alongside another waterfowl named Kevin Millar who we don't know was a duck, but had feathers... I know I said I'd stop, but what I meant was, I will only continue the discussion in animal metaphors.

I'd probably re-phrase that. I don't think we'd want to "cut" Dozier today or this coming winter, even if we didn't have this contract. His past performance was good enough, and recent enough, that we still have to approach him as a potential asset, probably for the next year or perhaps even two. The contract was probably offered because the Twins viewed him as a permanent veteran fixture, rather than that status being derived from the contract, so I don't know that it would be any easier to bench/demote him without it either. As an aside, Dozier does have two option years remaining, although his service time is such that we'd have to option him very soon, and for quite a while, to delay his free agency -- by my count, we'd have to option him no later than June 12th this year, and leave him in AAA for the rest of the season, to delay his free agency by another year. But we absolutely could option him for awhile just to work on things, I know the team has previously opposed it, but I hope they continue to consider it. Polanco absolutely deserves an extended look this season.

Judging by the discussion I linked a few posts above, disapproval of the extension was a rather small minority here. I guess I fell in the "probably ok" camp.

Jumping into this tangent: I think TR did have some fine accomplishments in his earlier tenure. It did take him awhile -- 6 seasons of thorough non-competitiveness -- but it was a pretty good run after that, even if the playoff outcomes left something to be desired. I think he made a mammoth mistake in choosing his successor, and his return to the GM role has been pretty spotty, especially in trying to leverage the new resources of Target Field.

And someone speculated Centeno has been a good match for Trevor May. For what it's worth, he has caught May's last 3 scoreless appearances (although he also caught his 2 HR clunker vs Detroit a few weeks ago). Would be interesting to see those two paired as a starting battery.

To be fair, Byrd himself was signed during spring training largely to replace the suspended Abraham Almonte (who should return in a month). So it's not like Byrd was their Plan A, and Grossman Plan B. More like, plans B & C. And even with those suspensions and Brantley on the DL again, assuming they recall Tyler Naquin to replace Byrd, that will give them 4 active outfielders hitting roughly league average or better this season, so they're not too desperate at the moment. (Albeit one of those outfielders was supposed to be their utility infielder, and he might be better served subbing for Uribe at 3B...)

For the record, here's the original article and discussion of Dozier's extension: http://twinsdaily.com/articles.html/_/minnesota-twins-news/minnesota-twins/minnesota-twins-and-brian-dozier-sign-4-year-extension-r3476

So, let me get this straight: not 100% trusting a conclusion based on an unverifiable, anonymous, selective leak of a name allegedly derived from incomplete data illegally obtained 5 years earlier qualifies as a "conspiracy theory." But using Kevin Millar's 5 extra raw HR at age 31 with Boston, hit at the same rate as he did at age 29 with Florida, is totally valid evidence for supporting PED speculation? Got it. Obviously this discussion has devolved to pointless even by internet standards, so I'm done.

Man, the FSL is tough for hitters -- the league HR/9 rate would rank 17th among qualifiers in MLB this year! Less than half of the MLB overall rate.

Jay is on pace for 133 innings right now (after his best/longest start of the year so far). He threw 85 innings last year, between college and the pros. Tyler Duffey went from 70 innings to 121 a couple years ago -- he did pitch the last month or so out of the pen, but he was doing pretty poorly as a starter at the time (4.67 ERA, 6.2 K/9 in his first 9 starts at Ft Myers). If Jay is pitching well as a starter, there should be absolutely no need to move him to the pen to conserve his innings. Don't mess with what is working. If they really want to keep him under a firm 120 or 130 or whatever, they could simply skip his last start or two. Although promoting him to start in a more difficult, less pitcher friendly league in AA would probably naturally reduce his innings a bit too.