Major League Ready

Mike, do you really think Buxton is better than Hicks right now? Buxton is not ready for ML pitching right now. So, the first priority should be his development which is probably best served at AAA for now. It could be argued he had not really mastered AA. Smalley was on 1500 talking the need for young players to master each level before moving up. I am inclined to listen to the guys that have been there and done that. In addition, this is a business. So, to say service clock should not matter is not very realistic. A big part of the constant complaining here is that many fans just refuse to acknowledge and/or accept this is a business.

No way on May. Get Nolasco healthy and deal him next year at the deadline even if you have to eat half of his salary. Then, bring up Berrios and go with Santana, Gibson, May, Hughes, Berrios. That's ice starting rotation. Mlone is there for depth or trade bait. If Meyer gets it together, then you have a nice problem and ammo to get a catcher if that problem has not been solved. Not now on Hicks. Let's see where next year. Is value is appreciating every day. This is better addressed during the off-season or next year at the deadline. Polanco all depends on if he can play SS. If so, he should be the last prospect we deal. If not, he is an ideal candidate to be part of a trade for an established Catcher or high ceiling prospect.

By taking the20M we would have paid him an investing it plus a little more to get a top of the rotation FA. So, we would have this FA pitcher plus all of the guys we would give up to get Tulo. Short term, Tulo would no doubt improve the team but even with him this team is not ready to contend for real. I would bet the cumulative war of the players we give up would be considerable higher than Tulo alone in 2018-2021. So its short term thinking. Fans want instant gratification but the odds are this is a bad trade for the final half of the assumed contract. Of course, that right when the Twins core has matured and ready to win (like KC). It is also the point in time where Mauer, Santana, and Nolasco will be off the books leaving room to lock down Sano and Buxton and probably add a premier FA to fill whatever happens to be our greatest need at that time if we don't screw up the management of payroll.

Mike, I think you hit on the key here. Is Polanco a SS or 2B? They might be keeping him at SS to promote a higher trade value. If the FO thinks he is best suited at 2B then they should try to trade him for a catching prospect. Another possibility and I am sure some will strongly disagree but I would not be opposed to selling high on Dozier if someone was willing to pay big, including a catcher. Then, bring up Polanco. Send Santana down and let Escobar play SS. That way you see if you can fix Santana while seeing if Escobar can perform like he did last year with regular playing time. Either way you hopefully fix catcher long-term.

The people who evaluate farms systems are squarely in agreement with "some posters" here. Regardless of industry opinion, I think it is a safe bet to say some posters find it more fun to be optimistic where you seem to thrive on pointing out every possible point of negativity.

One of the best posts I have seen here in a while.

Are you not the same guy always complaining that they don't move players up fast enough? Of course, they could play him out of position for 3-4 years. That would pretty much assure he never becomes a legit starting SS. Obviously that plan is also flawed unless Buxton does not pan out. Many fans live in the right now which initiates all of the complaining. There were lots of people freaking out after the first week. Maybe that's why the F/O has not embraced a full rebuild mode. Fans cheered when they signed Santana. I hated it. They have three guys signed long-term leaving 2 spots for several guys that should be better than all of them with the exception of perhaps Hughes. That move (at least the initial signing) made sense because the contract covered his prime years and the price was right.

This drives me crazy. It seems very reasonable to expect a professional athlete to stay in shape. The off-season should have been a time to get in even better shape. (ie. Shabazz Muhammad & Anthony Bennett) This is especially true for players like Vargas and Sano who have body types that it is not too hard to pack on 30 extra lbs.

Hamels would require more than just Polanco. The net would be to move a couple of players that would very likely contribute to a contender a couple years from now. We maybe get to 500 but probably not if the projects without Hamels added are anywhere near accurate. So we get a very good pitcher today that enter what is normal the decline phase for most pitchers. We loose 6 years control and low cost for a couple players that are highly likely contribute to a contender if we don't manage to screw it up. Instead, don't try to make a real bad team into a bad team this year. Trade Dozier for a top tier prospect when Polanco is ready for another piece we need. Use the $22M Hamels would have been paid plus what you are saving in replacing Dozier as he heads into his arbitration years for a FA SP of Hamels caliber. The net is a SP of Hamels caliber plus Polanco, plus whoever else would be required in a Hamels trade, plus whatever you get for Dozier.

This team is projected to win 70 games. This team has no shot at a post season appearance. Managing personnel as if you do just retards the rebuilding process. I hope the FO does not burying their heads in the sand and manage our assets in the manner that best promotes rebuilding. We are going to suck so why not focus on development. Personally, if I am going to watch a 70 or 75 win team, I would find it far more entertaining to watch the young guys develop. Meyer showed good potential toward the end of the year and we know Meyer has a front of rotation ceiling. Let's invest in that potential instead of milking an extra win or two out of the season by starting Milone or Pelfrey. I would not be opposed to Milone being the long relief guy. He has managed to get it done over a significant sample size. Put him in the rotation or build trade value if he shows he can sustain the production in a long relief role.

It just makes no sense to extend right now. Polanco will be ready by 2016 or 2017 at the latest. Trade Dozier in the final 2 years of team control and get a nice return.. This also is one of the reason they need to figure out of Santana is a SS. If Santana pans out at SS, Polanco is our future 2B. I like Dozier but why in the world do you want to risk having big dollars tied up in Dozier. He will be less attractive as a trade asset or worse, his performance goes south and the contract is not only an impediment but you don't get anything in trade. You can also look at it this way. He performs great, you get a great return in trade during the last two years of team control. You replace him with Polanco or maybe even Michael in the next two years giving us more payroll to work with as the team becomes a contender. If he falls off, you don't have a big financial commitment to a mediocre player. The only way it's a good idea is if he improves quite substantially. I don't like the odds of that happening.

We have had consecutive 90 loss seasons. That's where we are. Perhaps more importantly, we have a number of prospects that should be ready in the next 2 years. I would hope where we are going is to build a contender and not sacrifice development for a few wins that might get us to 500. For example, Santana has the most value if he reached his potential as a SS so let's get on with that determination. Let's get Rosario here. I am not saying he needs to break camp but once he is ready are they going to sit Hunter in order to develop Rosario? Let's hope we finally embrace rebuilding.

I don't think Baltimore has anyone that would be considered a true #1. It seems to me that a true #1 is not necessary to get to post season play but a big advantage once you are there. I guess as GM you have to address the public as if there is a plan to make the playoffs but the odds of this team going from 72 to whatever it takes to win the central is remote at best. If it happens, it would be more likely a product of Gibson dominant in most of his games instead of 1/3 of them. Hughes would have to be as good or better and Nolasco would have to perform at his career best. If all of that went right, a whole bunch of offensive players would have to perform to their ceilings. I get TR has to take this approach publically but this audience is above rationalizing decisions based on the 2014 Twins winning the central or even a wildcard.

It sure would be interesting to sit on the internal discussions for a few days. Who knows what the process has been. Maybe they are going to try to get a big return on Hughes by the ASB and bring up Meyer.They might feel they can do the same with Nolasco and/or Santana in the following years.Perhaps the FO does not agree with Vegas odds makers and think we can contend with this rotation.Maybe it is purely a business decision. They may feel they are forced to make decisions that are not optimal in terms of building a contender for the sake of protecting the Twins brand.It is also a reasonable position to assume there will be enough time via injury but I have a tough time with a line of thinking that suggests we will get to the prospects as a result of FAs failing in one form or another. If you are sure they will fail, skip the failure and give the prospects the ML experience they need to grow.Maybe they have a plan that Mike would like.

I think there is a very strong likelihood Meyer gets his chance this year. However, every response here in favor of buying a rotation is almost completely focused on THIS YEAR. That is not an adequate examination of the situation given Santana was signed for 4 years with the possibility of 5 years if I understand the option correctly. Nolasco has 3 more years and we can't ignore we also have $23M tied up in Mauer for 4 more years. This short term view is the difference between how GMs think vs alot of fans. Is the goal to build the best team possible this year or build a contender. They require a substantially different approach.

In 2015 it means We have a shot to be a 500 teamWe won't be relying on AAAA SPsOne spot available for May, Meyer, Milone or it means you are relying on an injury to make room for them. Sps are often injured but it is hard to feel good about relying on failure (injury) to make room. It just is not consistent with building a contender. Loss of a 2nd round pick. Not a big deal but a guy like Burdi is valuable for several years.Provides an opportunity to trade Milone, Pelfrey or both. Would the Giants trade Susac and two top SP prospects for Plouffe and Milone. (pelfrey too if they want him)For 2016 If position prospects advance as expected, we are likely above 500 but not likely to contendOne spot open for May, Meyer, Berrios, Milone, and others. This troubles me because I don't like any of the potential scenarios. The only way there is room for they guys we need to develop in order to contend is multiple injuries. For 2017-18 Hughes is likely goneMaybe Nolasco and Santana defy age regression and play a role in contentionMaybe they defy age regression and we trade them for prospectsMore likely, Age related regression is makes Nolasco and Santana league average or worse. They are not tradable and the money invested in them could have been used to get one legit front of the rotation starter or elite position player with money left over.So, these investments give us a decent team the next couple of years but not contender. If we are quite lucky in terms of them maintaining performance and health, Nolasco and Santana could supply veteran leadership and be part of bring the Twins into contention. If we are not lucky or if they regress normally and have the normal level of injuries for 33-35 y/o SPs, we tie up payroll that could have been better utilized. I guess the question is ... should we take this risk to improve to what is likely 500 at best this year and perhaps slightly better than 500 in 2016? Obviouly, this is wildly speculative. Anything could happen. These are just likely scenarios.

Good point that Walker does likely make a ML roster given his RH power. I guess the intrigue is that if this guy's approach improves, he could be an all-star.

The good news is there are a lot of options that are legitimate candidates to break-out and be significant contributors to the ML club in the near future. My slightly different spin is that there are a few I watch closely because they could be boom or bust. Walker tops that list for me. He could be a beast or never make a ML roster. I would love to see Walker and Rosario break through and all of the sudden we have a very dynamic outfield in 2016. Gonsalves and Burdi seem like the most obvious pitching candidates but who knows. If we are going to wish, let's wish Stewart shows his ability to be a future ace. That way we have Berrios, Meyer, and May all on the immediate horizon and Stewart no too far behinds. That would mean we can start watching a quality product again soon.

I don't understand why some disregard Milone so easily. I ran the stats for 2012-2013. There is very little difference in their numbers over that period between Nolasco, Masterson, Buehrle, and Milone. Of course, the others pitched more innings. He must at least have trade value but why would we let him go at this point. Give him a chance to establish some value at the same time we see what we have in May, Meyer, and eventually Berrios. You would have to believe we would be in pretty decent shape if he is our #5 starter.

I hope Terry Ryan does not give up anything for a player coming of a year with an OPS+ of 84, especially at $10M$ plus a year and two years of control. Ricky Nolasco and Aaron Hicks, yes. With Phil Hughes, not even a consideration!

I watched the AFL Championship game on TV today and Rosario was really impressive. He went 4-5 with a HR, double and 2 singles. The HR was blasted pretty good, the double was a bullet over the RFer's head, the two singles were right on the button up the middle and in his 5th at bat he scorched a line drive but right at the RFer.

For some reason quotes don't appear when I click on quote. Anyone know what's up with that? Anyway ... I was listening to the MLB network on satellite radio and it came up that Rasmus has some issues with attitude but the mention. I agree on the club option but if we were willing to overpay the 1st year, and the option was attractive enough, the extension might fly. Not likely but I would like to see this type of creativity at least attempted.

Rasmus is a good candidate to take a 1 year deal to rebuild his value and he would have to like his odds of staying in the line-up here. My question would be is he a head case that we don't need? How about a 1 year deal with an option for a 2 year extension. That way, if he works out, he would be a trade asset as Rosario, Kepler, and others are ready.

I would hope that Arcia has enough desire to improve that it would not require financial compensation to convince him to show up early and work on defense. I would also like to see him show up 20 pounds lighter.

I don't like the idea of Santana spending another year in CF. His highest potential value is at SS. Of course, CF is also very though/expensive to fill through free agency. There are not many options in LF but there are a couple that seem feasible. Then, a platoon of Hicks/Schaefer would be workable because they also serve as 4th outfielders/pinch runners and defensive replacements. I wish I knew more about Tomas. He could be part of the rebuild which has much more merit than an aging place holder. Yes, the Twins have not done this in the past. However, we need to keep in mind that the Twins were among the lower tier of teams from a revenue perspective until very recently (historically speaking). Now, they are still middle of the pack in terms of revenue but this type of acquisition is much more realistic with the incremental revenue produced by moving to Target field. Tomas in left with a Hicks/Schafer platoon in CF and Santana to SS seems like the best rebuilding plan to me. Hopefully, Rosario keeps raking and we see him in the mix. I would probably roll with Nolasco / Hughes / Gibson with May, Meyer and Milone competing for the 4th and 5th starter. Milone was pretty darn good and it is time to test May & Meyer. It is time to fully embrace we are rebuilding. However, I would not object to Masterson on a 1 year deal.