cmathewson

I think they want Hernandez to stay a starter for the time being. The guy they ultimately will call up when they have room for another lefty reliever is Perez.

People bitched about Bartlett and he was fine until they traded him. Some people (though fewer) bitched about Hardy and he was more than fine until they traded him. They also tried Castro, Everette, Harris, Cabrera, Punto, and Carroll there. None of them were close to good enough as regulars. I heard less bitching about those guys, because they were proven, sure-handed players. But they nonetheless sucked as regulars at the stage in their careers when we tried them, because they lacked the range and athleticism required for the position. They also had the disaster with Nishioka/Casilla. No on liked that deal, in the end, but it was lauded as a bold move to finally stop the revolving door. The only way to break the cycle is to develop someone. The Twins have two candidates for that until Santana shows up in a couple of years. Both have promising tools. Neither has had an opportunity. Let's see what they can do before we right them off. Is that clear enough for you? Tell me how that's wrong.

I don't think this has as much to do with their displeasure with Robertson as needing to make room for Swarzak. After three consecutive starts of less than six innings, the Twins need someone who can eat innings out there, especially with Hernandez starting tomorrow and not expected to go more than five. Roenicke will not be available after throwing 3 innings tonight. Burton is delicate. They don't want to put too much pressure on Pressly. All that adds up to a need for a guy who can take the ball for two or three innings. Robertson is just a lefty specialist, which is a luxury the Twins can't afford right now.

I agree with this. The same people who complain about the revolving door at shortstop also bitch about every shortstop we run through the position. In order for Florimon to develop, they have to give him a chance to iron out the wrinkles. The other thing that bugs me is focus on errors. The more balls you get to, the more errors you make, statistically. The stronger your arm, the more errors you make. Even with the errors, you get more outs. Very few shortstops in history have had the combination of range and sure handedness. Normally, you pick one or the other. Given the choice, I'll take range and arm. He's had a little more than two months of experience--not nearly enough to draw any numerical conclusions. In that time, I've seen him make plays that I hadn't since since Guzman was young. I've also seen him get out of whack with his throws. But he has a chance to be a very good defensive shortstop if they just show a little patience with him. As for Escobar, I see great improvement in him this year. And he's definitely better with the stick than Florimon. But he doesn't have the range. So give Florimon a chance to fix some things before you replace him. If he doesn't, you've got a nice plan B waiting in the wings.

Gladden said it's a typical umpire gauntlet young guys go through. He said he was talking to Bruno, who looked at the Pith f/x data on those called thirds and found all of them out of the strike zone. But eveybody goes through it. Even Mauer did when he was a rookie.

When they signed Polanco (the same year as Sano), I was thinking he'd be a slick glove, marginal hit guy, like Florimon is today. But he has a potent bat. Has he filled out? Where does his power come from? Also, can he play shortstop? Some reports say he doesn't have the arm to stick there long term?

I'm sure there's a stat guy who will be comparing the steady but unspectacular defense of Escobar against the spectacular but erratic play of Florimon. It's hard for me to say right now which I prefer. Florimon gets to a lot more balls, so he might be excused for the occasional miscue. But if they become too plentiful, it will be awful tempting to make the switch, especially when Escobar has the better bat.

"Strikeouts are fascist. Get some ground balls."--Crash Davis

Correction. 2.45. You'd think with such a small sample I'd do the math right.

Twins starters have averaged more than 6 innings per game with a collective ERA of 2.33.

"He looked good, other than he gave up a homer to the pitcher." Kind of like, "She looks good, other than being bald and looking like a dude."

Two sharp hits all game. The Jackson BB was on the 11th pitch, after he got ahead 0-2. Both Hunter's hits were inside-out singles, as was Cabrera's second RBI. Cab's first was a bleeder through the hole. He was ahead all day and just hitting his spots most of the time. 96 pitches, 7 innings of work. It was way better than I expected, of course.

Perhaps they have him pegged for a super utility role down the road. They have done this with Hermann and Rohlfing. In the era of 12 pitchers, it's nice to have a backup catcher who can fill in at other positions as well.

I don't agree. It's just too risky. Look at the way Guerra and Gomez developed after being rushed. Let them earn their promotions. If they dominate a level, bring them up. Until then, let them learn the finer points of the game when the pressure is off.

BA is a practically worthless stat. Hicks' career OBP is .379. His career slugging percentage is .421. Compare that to Revere. Career minor league OBP of .383 and SLG of .404. Of course, most of Revere's OBP and SLG is BA. Much of Hick's OBP is BB. His SLG is IsOP. Which would you rather have? I'd take Hicks' numbers in a heart beat. What's the difference between a K and a ground out? A ground out can lead to a DP. It can also advance the runner. Those two things tend to balance each other out.

I think fans are willing (maybe a bit too willing) to write off 2013. What must happen this year is a sense that the team has made significant progress towards contending (not just competing) in 2014. If the following players demonstrate that they can become key players in 2014, I think the 2013 record will be largely overlooked: Parmelee Plouffe Dozier Hicks Arcia Gibson Meyer Tonkin Of course, some of those players might not be ready to be key pieces in the core. But they are the kind of players who need to be able to at least contribute to a core of the following players: Mauer Willingham Doumit Worley Diamond Perkins Burton Fien Duensing Noticeably absent from those two lists is a shortstop who can be a competent major leaguer. Either Florimon or Escobar significantly exceed their projections or Ryan goes out and gets a quality major league shortstop for 2014. One way or another, we will have clarity on that position at the end of the year. Having only one major hole going into the offseason will give fans confidence that Ryan can build a contender for 2014.

He'll never have the contact of Revere or even Span. But I don't really care as long as he shows the patience and power he has shown in the minors. I used to think making outs with contact had more value than strikeouts. That was before I saw Ben Revere ground out 222 times in one year.

I think they'd add Boggs to the roster before Benson. After last season, Benson really does need a half a year of AAA at bats to get back to where he was in 2011. Plus, I'm not sure how his wrist is doing. Last I heard, he was resting it (the one he broke last year).

I agree. If his upside is 800+, he might not hit it until he's 25 or 26. Until then, I expect something in the mid .700s, which is still very good fr a center fielder. Last year a 100 OPS+ was .740 I think.

Hicks has way more raw power than any of those guys. He also has much better patience. Those two things combined peg his upside at 800+ OPS. The question is, when will he show his upside? I think we need to wait longer than one game to push the panic button.

I don't forget that, but I tend to discount it because he's developed since then. I look at the year he had in AA last year and focus on that. By all accounts, he has turned a corner. I see no reason to take his projection down by looking around that corner. But I also think those who pick apart his earlier years take an overly dim view of it. So let's look at it. I don't think Twins fans are used to having guys drafted in the teens who come up as prospects. Hunter was drafted 20th overall. Span was also drafted 20th overall. When was the last outfielder taken higher than 20 in the June draft by the Twins before Hicks? I can't recall. Kirby was drafted in the January draft. It's been a while. Hicks was the top high school outfielder in that draft class at 14th overall. Based on his draft position, he should become a solid major leaguer. I know there are some high-profile busts in the draft. But the vast majority in his draft position succeed. He had some issues in his development. But outfielders are known to have issues in development. Hunter didn't hit until AAA. Span didn't hit until his third year in AAA. Both took longer than Hicks to get here. Hicks tore up rookie ball. Based on that, they sent him right to Beloit as a 19 year old. He wasn't ready. So they kept him there an extra year. If he had taken the traditional path through Elizabethton, he would have been in Beloit for the first time as a 20 year old and progressed normally to A+ as a 21 year old and AA as a 22 year old. A lot of those who discount him as a prospect talk about repeating Beloit. The neglect the fact that he skipped a level first. He had some issues in Fort Myers. Lots of guys struggle there. But two out of the last three years he's been excellent. I do expect him to have his share of slumps in the majors. Hitting in the major leagues is hard. He'll face a lot of guys who are almost as good as Verlander. But his patient approach is relatively slump resistent. He's way more advanced at this age than either Hunter or Span were. I wouldn't surprised if he doesn't put up better numbers than Span did last year. I'm going out on a limb odds wise to say that. But, I've been over that. The odds don't favor better prospects, who often beat their projections by playing closer to their minor league numbers than the average ballplayer.

I think you missed my point. I said "average", which I think includes all the best guys and all the worst guys and every guy in between. No one thought Mauer or Cabrera or Fielder would project to average. They were exceptional. I don't think Hicks is in that class, but he's well above average. Someone quoted those averages recently, which translated to something like .233/.290/.350 for Hicks. I think Hicks will be 20 to 30% above that, which was .270/.360/400/760 If that is all you expect Aaron Hicks to do in his prime, you do have low expectations for him. You either have a very forgiving wife or are not married.

His OPS with bases occupied last year was over 1.000. <script type="text/javascript" src="http://widgets.sports-reference.com/wg.fcgi?css=1&site=br&url=%2Fplayers%2Fsplit.cgi%3Fid%3Dmauerjo01%26year%3D2012%26t%3Db&div=div_bases"></script> RBIs are a matter of opportunity. Willignham got a lot more RBIs primarily because he had Mauer on base at a .416 clip ahead of him. Meanwhile Denard Span had an OBP of .342. Ben Revere? His OBP was .333. So, you see, Mauer didn't have many opportunities to drive guys in. When he did, he hit very well.

My guess is he'll start a throwing program in August and maybe ready for some relief work in the fall instructional league.

It was implied. Just bringing up the issue after three at bats in the kid's first game, and following up with a lot of negative projections, implies that people think it will likely happen. My point is, give the kid time to settle in before you start speculating on who will replace him on his ultimate demotion. I don't think it's fair to Hicks to predict he'll be ROY or an All-Star or whatever. But I also think a lot of the projections are low. For example, the formulas that predict how a guy will do in the majors, given their performance at AA or AAA are based on averages. Those averages are brought down by non-prospects and fringe players who get opportunities in emergency settings. Nobody would say Hicks is a non-prospect or a fringe player. He's a BA top 100 prospect who should outperform those averages by 20 or 30%. If I had to make a projection, I'd say .270/.360/.400. I realize that is not supported by the formulas. But I don't care. Call me a homer or whatever, I don't care. I've watched him enough to know he is unlikely to wash out. I don't even want to consider the possibility at this point. It's like saying to your wife, "you know, I'm the last person to say anything about someone's weight, but what if you put on a different blouse today?" It's just a rhetorical way of calling your wife fat. Just don't do it.