Dman

I can't see the Twins signing Drew. The draft is deep and he just isn't exceptional enough to warrant giving up a pick. You can mark this down and clobber me if I am wrong but I see absolutely no way that will sign him. It is not TR's style. I think the guy who mentioned Bartlett has it right. TR see's Bartlett as a potential short term fix at SS and wants to give Florimon or Escobar another look to see if they step up. TR is probably high on Santana as well. Drew is a fantasy that won't see reality.

The thing that scares me about this is that if Sano, Buxton and some pitcher of ours become all stars then how are we going to keep these guys around at 30 Mill per year? Just those three would be 90 Mil at those prices. If that ends up the going rate 6 years from now.

I like that idea as it gives teams incentive to make sure their players are not doping because they will pay the salary to charity or baseball pension fund or something. Letting the team completely off hook doesn't hold them accountable in any way. I understand a team cannot control what a player might decide to ingest to enhance performance so it might be slightly unfair but if a larger incentive for not breaking the rules existed I think it would help.

I might be a bit of an A-Rod hater but am trying to be objective about this issue. I do have some issue's with MLB going above the 50 game suspension especially since they don't have him testing positive. However, just like some court cases allow for punitive damages I think that given the accusations, that same principal could apply to A-Rod in this case. If he was truly flaunting ways around the rules and trying to cover up his involvement etc. then I personally think he deserves the extra time. It also should serve as a deterrent for any other players trying to skirt the rules as the stakes are for non-compliance can be higher if the violations are egregious.

I have gone back forth about Morris over the years. I am totally biased because of that world series clutch performance. While I think he deserves to get in I also understand there is a line that has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise the hall gets diluted and means nothing. If you let someone in with a 3.90 ERA then there is an argument for lots of other pitchers. I do agree that stats do not tell the whole story especially given the era in which he pitched. Going deep in games can be more important to a team than an extra run in the pitchers ERA if it is saving the bullpen. Also a couple of bad years at the end of his career inflated that ERA even more. It is a tough call and Morris in on or slightly below line. I think it was a decision that could have gone either way but in the end I can live with the decision that was made. Jack will always be considered a great player whether he is in the hall or not. He will be forever remembered in Minnesota and in my mind for the rest of my life for that amazing game 7 that to me defined who Jack Morris is.

Like most on this site I go back and forth on Dozier. I want to believe that he will be better than last year as he had a really nice second half. Since most of his success came largely from one area of the plate it seems likely that there will be some regression as he adjusts to the new approaches likely thrown his way this coming season. As much as I believe in Dozier I think he will likely have a tough year next year and IMO he will regress. I hope I can eat some crow for this comment.

So to do 3+1 would $20-21M get it done? Or is the most guaranteed money always the winner?

Like most things coaching changes can go either way. I have seen many where the team actually gets worse under a new coach and sometimes a fresh look can really change a team for the better. I think the 49rs are an example of the new coach making a difference but football is a bit different. For a Coach to make an initial major impact he still needs talented players which is typically why it takes a while to turn bad teams around. Bad teams typically don't have great players. In baseball I don't see that the head coach makes much of a difference these days other than maintaining team unity and a few in game strategies everything is pretty much stats and on the players to perform. Position coaches handle most of the practice time and drills(ie player development). Joe Madden has great pitchers and is a likable guy. Gardy is a likable guy with no good pitchers. Would Madden have the same the success with the Twins rotation or team? I doubt it. I am not a Gardy lover or hater. I see this issue from both sides and would be happy with or without Gardy. My personal opinion is that TR is the one who messed up by not getting Gardy better pitching and he wasn't going to let Gardy take the fall for him (ie Twins Loyalty). The owners love TR and weren't going to fire him so there you have it status quo.

I think Garza will be good for a few more years but I like that the Twins are holding firm on the years. I don't have confidence that his arm will hold up. We can afford to spend a lot short term and still have financial flexibility as the young kids come up to fill holes where ever they might be.

Maybe I am weird or way off base but I don't want Sano or Buxton up until they are essentially overly ready. At 20 or 21 in six years when they hit the FA market at least one of them might be gone as the going rate for super stars seems to be around 25 mil per year. I don't want to train them in the Majors. I want them to be truly ready for the six years we have some control over them.

I am a Pelfrey Believer and hope he proves his doubters wrong.

It is a tough call. When do you give up on a player? It seems lots of people on here were upset with the Twins for giving up on the former Twins who were All Stars this year. Not saying Parmelee will ever be an All Star but patience is a virtue for a reason as it can pay off big time. Personally I am not a believer in Parms but I do think he deserves one last shot with us before we declare him a Joe Benson.

I am not thrilled with anyone who is left. It is a deep draft this year I say keep the pick or picks see what we have and try again next year. I know it is the same old, same old but once more of our prospects move up things will change. It seems like there are too many players we need to find out about this year and build value in to trade them. I don't see things shaking until the trade deadline and then again at the end of the season.

I reread my post and you have my personal apologies for my somewhat snarky Reply. No offense was meant. I could have phrased things better. What you had to say was valid we just disagree in some respects.

My only concern is losing one or two of those three for nothing. If they have value it would be nice to get something for them. Lets make sure that they have little value before dumping them. I honestly don't care if they stash them in the bullpen this year as I see only marginal improvement this year anyway. We need to find out what players have value for the Twins in the future soon as there should be greater talent knocking on the door for the next couple of years and with any luck into the future.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the issue most had with Worley and Diamond last year was the apparent projection that they were our number 1 and 2 starters. Worley was the opening day starter and most didn't believe he was even close to a number 1. He went on to prove most of the Twins Daily posters correct beyond their wildest imagination. He ruined TR's expectations for him and made himself virtually untradable. Seems like the best thing to do would be try and allow him gain value back for the organization instead of just dumping him. I get your point though as Nolasco isn't really a number 1 either. I think we will have pitching issues again this year but I don't believe they will be as bad as last year. The offense on the other hand might be brutal this year unless several guys step up. I am happy TR did get the Free Agent Monkey off his back. Hopefully those posts are gone for a while.

I think the issue is what if they all come to spring training and look good? Who are you going to give away for free? Maybe in the end all three of those guys could beat out Correia and you give one or two of them away. I don't think that is smart way to operate. We could end up giving a decent pitcher away and get noting in return. Certainly you can do that but wouldn't it be nice to get something for Worley a guy you Traded for instead of nothing? I am not a big Diamond fan but he was our best pitcher not that long ago. If Deduno is healthy there are lots of teams that would plug him into their rotation. Maybe trader Terry has this all worked out and a trade or trades are coming and all this will be an exercise in futility. On the flip side these guys might never be the pitchers they once were and we let them go anyway which sucks but happens. Right now there is no evidence of that. I agree with Leviathan. Hang onto these guys until you know for sure they are done.

I guess I don't get all the angst for these players. Yes they all struggled at the major league level but they were at or near the top of their peers in AAA. How many prospects have had a season at AAA like CC? Just because he didn't adjust to MLB pitching right away he sucks? Like any one with those numbers he has a legitimate chance to be a star. He is 30. So are several free agents and teams went 6 or 7 years with some of them. Why go negative? Albers pitched better than Gibson in AAA and the majors. Why does only Albers suck? His slow fastball and pinpoint accuracy somehow worked better than the prospect touted to be a number 3 starter. Albers will never be an ace but neither will 90% of the pitchers currently in baseball, does that mean he isn't needed in a rotation? We just signed Coreia and Pelfrey to be essentially the same kind of pitcher he is. We need guys with upside and he could fill a roll on any team in MLB. Thielbar held his own in the pen and was a better option than many in MLB. Is he a closer no, but lots of teams had worse options than the Thielbar last year. We got him for free he has been a good place holder until someone better knocks him off the roster or we get value back by trading him. He is still a good story and positive for the Twins. I kind of despise it when people use stats to pump up why there prospect is good and then ignore them when it suits their needs. These guys had great years at AAA. It didn't translate immediately to MLB. That doesn't mean they are not or will not be better than lot's of current MLB players. Personally I like the Twins approach. Find talent anywhere you can. Who cares where it comes from. who cares how old someone is if they can hit 25 home runs for you. Be patient and see if their skills will translate to MLB. Who knows you might find a star outside the draft but you'll never know unless you try.

The 25 man is a mess. Until that clears Hicks will stay in AAA.

I agree that three catchers is too many but I think they wait until spring training to sort it out. There could be trades yet as well. I think Mastro is the right move as he has always had trouble hitting so could be replaced by almost anyone if needed. Hopefully Hicks figures things out sooner rather than later.

He didn't have great success in the majors but then again lots of players struggle when they are brought up for the first and even second time. The numbers he put up in AAA were impressive and he was named MVP of that league as well. I don't think there are too many prospects that accomplish that ever. As for age several teams just invested 5, 6 or 7 years in 30 year old free agents so I hardly think his time has run out yet. Personally I think a lot of teams wouldn't mind having a guy like that in their system. Chris Colabello (30) of Framingham, Mass., hit .352 with 24 home runs and 76 RBIs in 89 games with the Rochester Red Wings. He finished the season first in the International League in batting average, slugging percentage (.639), and on-base percentage (.427) en route to league MVP and Rookie of the Year honors. The Minnesota Twins signed the first baseman as a Minor League free agent in February 2012.

That was pretty much predicted on this board after the Suzuki signing. I can't imagine two many teams that would be interested in picking him up but you never know. I like Mastro but his future here looks bleak anyway.

I agree with Thrylos on this. There is room for all of them if the Twins want to. Spring training is going to be really huge for those pitchers. I agree with most posters that Diamond is likely the odd pitcher out as he appears to have the least upside. It looks like the Twins have set themselves up to see if several players can generate trade value at the trade deadline. I think the goal is to try and get something for the marginal players and then make room for the guys who are performing well in AAA.

If this is true then I am bummed. I really thought the Twins might have caught lightning in a bottle with CC. With Mauer at First though there really isn't a good spot for him. I was hoping the Twins might be able to work out a trade with Houston or somebody for him at the very least. The way he played in AAA made me a believer. I think he can adjust to MLB but it appears I am in the minority here.

Thyrlos, I love what you write and agree with you 9 times out of 10 and maybe we agree on this more than I realize or maybe I just have a bug up my rear I don't know. I'm just not buying the awesome chemistry that Pelfrey brings to the Twins. If he was so charismatic how is it the Twins managed to lose 90 games with him on the team? If Mauer and company are so devoid of chemistry shouldn't we be trading them for guys with the magical stuff? If the Twins of the past had so much chemistry why didn't they win the world series every year? I think the conclusions you are making cannot be made based on something that appears to happen randomly and or variably. Is this not the chicken and the egg theory. Is it winning that creates chemistry or chemistry that creates winning? Is the world series winner the team with the most chemistry? How much more chemistry does Pelfrey bring versus Diamond or Albers? Is chemistry even quantifiable? I can agree that chemistry helps a team and can be a powerful component in winning teams but the team with the greatest chemistry in MLB could be one of the worst teams and not the best so it doesn't automatically make you a winner. How many teams have bad chemistry? are they only the ones that are losing? How is it that teams with bad chemistry become winning teams even with virtually the same players on the team? As for those that like the fiery personalities, those are often the ones that are the most divisive in the club house and are anti chemistry. So I am a little confused in that regard. As I stated early on in this thread I don't get the article and even after you have tried your best to explain it to me I still don't get it.