Kwak

Mauer signed his 8-year contract extention December 2010. AJ was traded between the '03 and '04 season (specifically to "unblock" the Catcher position for Mauer). The Twins were a good team and were favored to win the division for '04--but not overwhelming favorites. "Holding back" Mauer for "that extra year" of service would jeopardize the '04 season by requiring the Twins to play two 2nd string-catchers until it "was safe" to promote him to the Twins. Recall that the '03 Twins had to come from behind (about 7.5 games I think) after the ASB, so starting off slowly in '04 could well cost the playoffs. The Gibson and Mauer scenarios are quite different. But playing Gibson early with the Twins, then optioning him to Rochester midseason for the purpose of shutting him down, accomplishes the same goal of service time reduction (that "control" thing) as does pitching in Rochester. It also exposes Gibson to MLB and serves to determine whether "he belongs up here" or not. Pitching in Rochester does not determine whether Gibson (or anybody else for that matter) belongs with the Twins or will be yet another failed prospect. Time to find out.

Absolutely! I was going to post this myself! Valuable innings in AAA? Baloney! That's where failures reside, scratching clawing, whatever to get another chance. A young up-and-comer might be sent there for a couple of weeks to show him that he never wants to be in AAA--so don't fail when promoted to the ML parent club. :s-instagib:

I wish to jump into this diatribe. The Twins did not have a year's control of Santana before he was traded. Ryan "stepped down" in September '07 and Santana was traded in the off-season between '07 and '08, about December '07. A poor result, or just a bad trade? Right now that point is moot. Compare to the result of Hunter leaving via free agency at the end of '07. The Twins did recieve a draft pick. Which end result was better for the Twins? Trade or Draft compensation? The Twins traded Delmon Young. I guess the only positive for the Twins was the salary saved--which doesn't benefit the fans at all. Ryan traded Luis Castillo in July '06 for Drew Butera and another Catcher (both were MiLers at the time), gave Casilla his (first of many) chance to be the next Twins 2B. Or should the Twins have just kept Castillo? Kubel had been mentioned as a trade candidate--problem was he was on the DL at the time and couldn't have been traded! Cuddyer. True he was a candidate for trade. I don't know if he was offered (he likely was) and who was offered as compensation. I do recall he basically played every game as one of the very few major league players regularly in the line-up. Twins fans were pretty much forced to watch a minor league team as the 2011 season closed with Cuddyer as the lone "name". Uff Da. We read last year that everybody including Mauer was made available in August--but there were no deals made. Hmm, maybe our favorites aren't as highly sought by other teams, as many Twins fans think? I don't think Morneau should be part of the 2014 Twins. But I definately would rather watch him finish 2013 as a Twin than have him be traded for the next Jim Hoey. I have already stated my position about Willingham, so I won't repeat it.

Don't pick a hometown guy--judgement is clouded. Mauer is all the "homer" Twins fans need, plus they have Perkins for another slice of home cookin`.

Maybe Willingham is a "Twins Guy" because of his performance on and off the field. Armchair GMs love to talk "deals" because it is a far more interesting subject than "keep him". I can envision Twins team next year with: (3 of the four) Arcia, Benson, Hicks, and Mastroianni starting, Parmalee at 1B, and Willingham DH. Doumit is the #2 C, #2 DH, #2PH, and emergency elsewhere and Drew Butera is not in a Twins uniform. Josh can still make his contributions offensively, will be less subject to injury. The offense is improved, the defense is improved, and the payroll reduced to the point that a premier FA can be signed to plug one of the remaining gaping holes. 2014 wouldn't be up to playoff standards, but will be far more entertaining than '11, '12, and '13 combined and will illustrate that there truly is light at the end of the tunnel.

Back to Benson! Strikeouts? If he bats .300 most all of you will be overflowing with glee--it does mean he made an out the other 70% of his ABs. Even if half of those are strikeouts, he's still batting .300. I'm not very familar with Benson, but from reading posts, Benson apparently has good power and speed on the bases (limiting discussion to offense only). Thus it sounds as if a realistic potential is 20 HR and 40 more extra base hits, many of which are a result of his speed and aggressively running the bases. That would result in a solid SLG. It wouldn't take very many walks for a .300 BAVG and the SLG referenced above to yield a more than acceptable OPS--and that with a very high strikeout rate. There have been some very accomplished (and acclaimed) hitters that struck-out often. I caution against getting hung-up on strikeouts. Take a step back and evaluate him holistically, not just on one statistic.

Hunter was most surprised his option was excercised (he had listed his MN residence). I think Hunter and Santana were kept for 2007 because the FO believed that the team could expand on its '06 success.

Trades always sound like a swell idea--to the team that has an asset they perceive to be "fully valued". But we need to view from the perspective of "the other team". What value do they place on our asset? And is it possible that patience will permit them to acquire this player "for less"? We have read this about free-agents who have not signed as Spring training is about (or already has!) to begin--that the price will come down. Another example: during the Santana trade both Boston and New York were pointing-out that they believed they were "paying twice" for Santana. Once for acquiring him and second for paying him his salary. I'm confident that this reasoning would apply to any trade for Morneau or Willingham. The Twins must accept "diminished expectations" for said players. Other teams will see the same shortcomings in these two that the Twins see, and will adjust their "exchange" accordingly. The return on a trade will very likely be disappointing. I believe Willingham has significant value as a DH (more than what the Twins would recieve in return for a trade) and therefore should be retained. He won't be blocking anybody as a DH. AAA experience? The Twins Way includes extensive time in the minor leagues not just for the purpose of a man "proving himself" but also to become a Twins Player. But there comes a time when a guy has "to prove himself as a MLB player"--and that can't be done in the minor leagues. Consider Plouffe. There is still doubt in the Twins mind that he is the long-term solution at 3B--despite his 2012 season and all of the time he has spent in the franchise being evaluated. My point, if Plouffe's actual ML experience wasn't enough, then any more MiL experince for Dozier definately won't prove he belongs at the ML level. Dozier is 25 (soon 26), he has had plenty of years (from age 8) to "learn how to play", now it's time to actually play. The back-and-forth between AAA and ML may be fine for 22 yr-olds but not 26. The analogy of Carroll's career path and could that be Dozier in the future, sets the performance standard at "mediocre", not excellent. If these "good-guy, mediocre-type" players become the goal of the organization, they doom the franchise to continual disappointment. "Good-enough" is the enemy of "excellent".

Who was offered for Willingham, for Morneau? Would those guys be a cornerstone in any rebuilt Twins team? If not, then don't make the trade. Could either of these guys serve an important role in a rebuilt Twins team--DH for example? There is value in power-hitting. Is the Houston "Blow it all up" method the best method?--and would the Twins really take full advantage of drafting 1st or 2nd in the draft as opposed to just a little later? Last point, The Twins claimed they needed a new stadium in order to generate adequate revenue to compete in MLB. But "The Blow it all up" option claims otherwise.

Experience at AAA is overrated. Given the paucity of options at MI the Twins should give both Florimon and Dozier their "shot", if one guy stinks--replace him with Escobar and give him his chance. If both (or gag, all three) stink, hit the waiver wire in Summer and finish the season. Carroll is a UT guy, not the "next-in-line". The Twins played the merry-go-round in the infield for so many years with guys: Up/Down, Up/Down, it didn't work then and no reason to think it would work now given the age (mid-20's) of the players. If they fail--sign new people for next season and move on.

True, most of us are down a bit from several months of winter, 2 consectutive losing seasons by the Twins, and an unsatisfying off-season. It is natural to grasp for "some good news", and the "prospect list qualifies". But, we do need to temper things when we are told "happy news". "Tools" they do sound great, but most have a garage full of them, but that doesn't a craftsman make (much less an artist). To say: "They are projections", and "expectations"--not formed by an extesive body-of-work. Hey, most parents have immense projections for their kids--yeah, we know things don't always work out. Is Buxton a "Top Ten Guy"? I hope so, but color me skeptical. When I heard he had only hit 2HRs in High School (small schools too!), well I wasn't too impressed--but I hope I'm wrong and he does become the next Tony Oliva.

you failed to mention Oliva too.

The Twins will have plenty of cap space when it comes time to negotiate a new contract for Willingham. As a DH, he's not hurting the team defensively and other teams can more easily evaluate his worth to them for purposes of a trade.

Willingham has far more value to the Twins in his natural position--DH. I have read at least hundred posts about: Trade Willingham (or Trade Morneau) and it's clear that the Twins FO has also considered those very same options--and rejected the results. Keep Willingham, re-sign him short-term, and provide a bona fide powerhitting run producer from the DH slot. The youth will takeover the OF providing the defense, speed, arms, and (hopefully) enough offense to make things interesting. Mauer catches, Doumit backs him up, (Buh-bye to Drew) because with Josh as full-time DH (spelled by Mauer and Doumit) there is no need for a third catcher. There will be a credible offense--likely well above average if the reports of the young OFs is close to accurate, a big increase in OF defense, and enough power-hitting to push the fast guys around the bases. Read the thread on "Bad teams Rebuilding" there is a big need for a few proven veterans--especially with one at DH so he doesn't hurt his team in the field.

I thought the sanctions are applied to a team "that overpays the combined slot values threshold" in the following year's draft. Thus, if the Twins draft Apple, pay him this whopping amount, and are unable to carve it out from all of the following draft selections of the 2013 draft, then the sanctions apply to the 2014 draft. Those sanctions may include forfeiture of the Twins' 1st Round selection. I think if the Twins select him they may have to agree to immediately place him on the Active Roster (and leave him there for three years!) in order to reduce the signing bonus to "fit in the slot". While that strategy may be appropriate for Appel, it deviates from "The Twins Way" and opens the door for many other draftees in the future to demand the same concession. Given the Twins refusal to grant Mauer's request for deferred compensation with a guaranteed rate-of-return, I am certain that the Twins would choke on immediate placement on the Active Roster and the resultant "loss of control" over a player (Apppel)--even if it is warranted.

One of my favorites in that category was Arizona. Two star-quality starting pitchers and a cast of decent but unspectactular ML-quality players as a supporting cast. True, Schilling and Johnson were "overpaid" by TD posters standards (not by mine!), but the rest of the cast was quite affordable such that AZ was a "popularly-priced" team. Two star SPs can effect a huge influence in a 7 game series--when their manager relaxes the "pitch-count" rules!

I think you took both sides of the issue. 1) "The Twins have not generally been well built to win in the playoffs." 2) "At the end of the day, it really is more random than anything." I definitely agree with statement 1). especially when you add "...high-end starters, power hitting and (perhaps more importantly) experience...". I maintain that the Twins were constructed "assymetrically" to "conventional wisdom" (high-end starters, power hitters) in order to assemble a more consistently entertaining team, but one with "less upside". Sort of like teams trading stars for multiple decent players who individually won't improve (much) but the two extra (decent) players will generate an additional win versus the lesser competition of the regular season, but won't help when opposed by the stouter playoff opponent. The three combined salaries quite like represent a cost saving when compared to the one star player plus the two "replaced" players. I will disagree with statement 2). because it more than just losing four consectutive playoff series, but every game of those four playoff series. If entirely random there should have been some wins along the way. Random implies something like a 50% probability of a Win in any game. 0.5 raised to the 12th power is (rounded) 0.000244, or less than a .02% occurence of zero wins in 12 games, definately not random. Clearly, the other factors in baseball outweigh random occurence.

+1. Remember when Smith was walking out the door (leaving his head in a basket) and quipped "I wasn't the only one who signed-off on him, only the last signature." Perhaps there should have been several more heads in that very same basket.

You forgot Valencia in April 2012--ughh that was brutal. The Twins had many horror stories in April 2012, sorry to dig him up, but I thought he batted 6th, so it was 6,7,8, and 9!

Problem is--he will have already been selected by the time it's the Twins' turn in the draft.

If I may be allowed to jump into your conversation let me introduce some other facts and see if they are illuminating to form a conclusion to your discussion concerning Butera, et al. Mauer's injury did heal and Morneau played regularly at 1B with few off-days. Butera played far more than "an emergency catcher". Butera's hitting for the rest of the season was substandard, but he was not demoted to AAA like Parmalee--he stayed with the Twins. Hermann was promoted in September but hit poorly in but a very small sample of ABs (18 I think). Considering neither Hermann's nor Butera's 2012 season was strong at the MLB level why didn't the Twins sign "competition" for them? Why was Parmalee's poor hitting deemed for banishment but not Butera's? To respond "he needed AAA experience" isn't any more relevant to Parmalee than for Butera. To me, the real answer is derived from "Why was anybody signed to compete with Butera (and Hermann) to be a bench catcher for the Twins?" Those guys are plentiful, cheap, and can easily be dismissed without issue. The answer is easy.

Save your time--statistics only display the result of what happened not why it happened. Matchups, psychology, injuries (yes those "little ones" where a guy still plays--but not as well), fatigue, weather, manager's decisions, scorer's decisions (hit or error), capability of the fielder, the field, lighting ("dome hits") and so on. The game is played by people and the end result is caused by people, not probability, or prior results. True, there is an element of luck or "random events", but over time that element is over-rated.

Much back-and-forth here. It seems there are two groups--Group A "It's Random, just get to the playoffs and Hope to get Lucky!" and Group B "The Twins Front Office are Idiots!" Methinks there should be a Group C.

Here goes. Twins wouldn't need "pop off the bench" if it was put in the lineup in the first place. Gardy probably has figured-out that every game situation late in the game Morneau will face a LHP and he needs a RHB who "has some pop". Had the Twins figured this out a few weeks ago, they could have signed said RHB "with some pop" for about $1MM plus some incentives--or shall I say re-signed.

"Overpay". "Block young players". "Worry about future payrolls". ????? It makes me wonder if there is some kind of Stockholm Syndrome happening or if there are shills posting as average fans on this site. I have lived in quite a few cities around the nation, interacted with fans of many different (professional) teams and I must say I just don't recall anybody (but a claimed Twins fan) express concern if the owner "overpayed" for a player. Almost always I hear complaints that they have a [disappointing] team and/or their "cheap/dumb (xxx) owner won't spend more to improve their team. Universally all agree atheletes are "paid too much" but aren't at all concerned about the owner's profit margin.