Major League Ready

Carpenter and Altuve by a considerable margin but your point is still valid and Carpenter is playing 3B now but could play 2B. Regardless, I have not seen anyone suggest Polanco is clearly a better option. However, provided the right return, trading Dozier could be an important part of building contender. Trading a very good players was instrumental to the rebuilding process for the Royals, Cubs, Mets, Pirates, Orioles, Astros, and probably a could others I cant think of right now. I would prefer to trade Nunez and use Polanco in his role but the return wont be an impact player unless we get very lucky.

or a nomination for President of the United States

The hierarchy of my complaints are different than most here. Number one for me was extending Phil Hughes after year 1. At a minimum, they should have waited until the end of year 2. There was very little benefit to be gained. That mistake will be a problem in terms of a roster spot and payroll for the next 2 years. Next, extending and/or not trading Glen Perkins. The team did not need a closer and once again there was no reason to extend. Perkins wants to be here. At the very least, they should have let him play out his contract and then approached an extension with current information. Third was moving Sano to RF. At the time, I was not sure it was not a product of them believing Sano could not cut it at 3B and it did appear that there was a plan for Sano to lose weight. I still think a really fit version of Sano is more than athletic enough to play the OF and he has a cannon for an arm. While we still don’t know how the decision was made, it sure looks like they just did not want to trade away Plouffe. If this is true, they opted for a plan that was likely to produce mediocrity but more importantly failed to take the actions necessary to rebuild. The area that is most difficult to get a grip on is drafting and development. We just don’t know nearly enough about how or if they have adapted. The farm system had hit a low point but our farm system is now very deep. They have drafted power arms and the organization has never had this kind of pitching in the minor league system. The guys that just graduated look very promising too. I am skeptical like others on Buxton but I can’t fault the pick, perhaps the development decisions. Kepler looks like the real deal. Berrios should be very good. Rosario is going to be very good if he can maintain and hopefully slightly improve the approach he has been demonstrating since being recalled. Vargas looks like a different player. His minor league career make me a bit skeptical but his approach has improved immensely and that is something that can sustain improved performance. Drafting and development is still the most important aspect for any team and that is magnified for mid and small market teams. The point being it does not make sense to universally dismiss the management team and run them all out of town if a refined approach has resulted in the farm system getting so much better. Is change need? Of course, but I would not be so quick to suggest a massive overhaul, at least not without access to a whole lot more information.

And if the above is not enough to make the 2nd half hard to predict, let's add ... Can Kepler continue to produce at this level or will the league adjust? What about Vargas? That dude looks like a different player. Is he for real? Rosario has actually demonstrated some discipline and guess what, he is pretty productive hitting balls in the strike zone. Will he lose his mind (discipline) again? How about Buxton? You would like to think he will follow the same pattern and adjust to the next level. What about Berrios and Chargois? What will they contribute and how long will it take them to contribute at the ML level. I am sure we could come up with a few more. How to predict is beyond me but I am feeling a lot better about the future. All of the above are interesting topics on their own.

I would be happy with a good return on 2 veterans and elated if we made trades with a reasonable return on 3 veterans, specially if the return included a good AA or AAA catching prospect and or a high upside SP.

For starters, they won 5 of the first 6 second half games. Therefore, they would have to go 18-58 the rest of the way to produce the .283 win percentage you have predicted. I really dont know what number is reasonable because I think that is highly dependent on how many productive players are traded. I do know that I would not base it on the average decline in win rate over the past few years. That is an exceptionally poor methodology. I hope they trade all of Santana, Nolasco, Abad, Nunez, Suzuki, and Plouffe. We will fewer games but it is the best long-term approach and will actually enjoy watching the transformation to the players that will lead us back to contention.

I voted for 38 wins primarily because their approach throughout the lineup has looked very good lately and the bullpen has stabilized. I think the offense will be pretty good maybe even very good the rest of the year. However, they will likely lose some players by the deadline that will cost us a couple games so 35 wins might be a better estimate. Santana is the most probable. I can't imagine Berrios won't be here as soon as someone is traded and its hard to say how he is going to do out of the gate. Then, there is Suzuki. The man has been very good the past couple months and he seems like a very likely trade candidate. It will hurt us the rest of the year to lose him. 40 wins is in the cards if the starters can get it together. The would mean Berrios is good out of the gate and we get the good version of Gibson and Duffey. We could move May back to the rotation but that move should be executed for next season.

How about Ortiz & Sadzeck for Santana with the Twins picking up $2M of the remainder of 2016, $3M in 2017 and $4M in 2018? Over optimistic?

You both have good points. It always comes down to what is the return, right. I also don't know that I want to risk the decline that is probable with Santana. I think I take a decent offer and run. Different deal with Dozier... It needs to be a very good return. Sanchez, for example, would be a good starting point.

Apparently, the Target Field revenue has influenced a new view of paying down contracts. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/minnesota-twins It sure would be nice to get a good return on Santana. Between paying down on his contract, the poor FA market next year, and it being a sellers market in general, that seems quite possible.

A man can dream can't he? You are right, I was just being a typical fan hoping for an unrealistic return.

What if it was a prospect with front of the rotation stuff at AA. Sign me up!

It sure does seem to be a seller's market. Let's hope that means a very good return. I would love to see them eat half the contract and get a top 50 type prospect. I am not too woried about us still needing some pitching to get through this year and perhaps next year even if it means Nolasco at the back of the rotation. Pitch him until Gonsolves or someone else is ready and then DFA Nolasco or put him in a mop role if he has no trade value when Gonsalves is ready.

Interesting! Thanks for posting this, Mike. Perhaps the most interesting part of this for me was the assessment of Kirilloff and that he might run better than Kepler. I think it's tough to predict how guys like Kepler will develop in terms of HR power. Who would have thought Dozier would hit 25+ HRs in a season? Kepler has plenty of power. You would think he could develop into a 3 hole guy that would hit upper 20s and even have an occasional 30 HR year. All I know is that the idea of having Kepler/Sano in the heart of the order for years sounds great. I am really pulling for Palka to continue developing and do what he is doing now but at the ML level. Kepler/Sano/Palka could be a fierce middle of the order for a long stretch.

Pretty impressive SP staff at Chattanooga!

I would not bet on us eating salary but we had different economic circumstances for most of our history. It’s not like Arizona getting a huge TV contract but we do have more financial resources than we did throughout our history. It would be nice to see that additional revenue used to get a good prospect in this situation.

I was simply thinking some of the better teams are big on versatility. However, It is a different animal when you put it in the context of a 50 win team so you make a good point.

There seems to be a general assumption here that our staff did not recognize that major league pitchers could exploit his swing mechanics or that they did not understand his plate discipline was horrible and he swung out of his shoes because he was obsessed with hitting the ball 600 feet. We all saw it. Helen Keller could have seen it. So, I am pretty sure others teams recognized it. Therefore, we were not going to get much for a player of this description unless we had traded him when he first arrived. That would not have gone over too well here. I am pretty sure the talent evaluators for other teams identified his defensive weakness as well. Maybe they simply looked at their ML roster and the guys that will be here within a year and said we just can’t continue to give Arcia playing time because there are young players on the roster that need the playing time. The acquisition of Grossman probably helped this along. They might also have determined that Palka would hit as many or more home runs, not give away Abs, and is significantly better defensively. He should be here early next season. It’s really pretty simple. His value was next to nothing once he struggled so mightily last season. I wanted them to give him a better shot myself but I don’t understand the angst. He had plenty of opportunity prior to this season. This is the Joe Benson thread version 2.

That would be pretty hard to work with. You would have Arcia/Park, a BU Catcher and one other bench player to cover BU for the rest of the position players. I think the the roster construction criticism has been justified and this platoon would ensure we continued bad roster management practices. It would also be the end of Robie Grossman. He is not an all-star but he is not a liability in the OF, at least not to Arcia's degree, and he does not give away AB like Arcia does. Of course, they could try to get by with one less BP arm but the starters are going to have to be more reliable for that to be feasible.

I don’t think this is hindsight in the sense that there were people here who thought he might rebound. I thought he was an interesting candidate myself until Washington made him a qualifying offer and he opted for a 1 year deal. A 2 year deal with a 3rd year club option would have been a different situation but I still don’t think it would have made sense to give up our 1st round pick even under those circumstances Add all this up I given how Desmond was trending. However, at the time this signing occurred, here is what we knew for sure. 1. Desmond wanted a 1 year deal 2. It would cost us our first round pick 3. His offensive performance declined 4 straight years 4. He was pretty bad last year 5. He was poor defensively at SS Then, we have a number of circumstances that are reasonable debatable. 1. There was a very low probability of Desmond playing at this level. 2. Assuming he would transition to the outfield was risky. 3. The probability of getting the draft pick back was very low. 4. The Twins were predicted to finish last in the division by pretty much everyone outside of this fan base and some local media. 5. The Twins should be focused on giving playing time to Buxton, Kepler, Rosario, and anyone else who could part of the solution. Being part of the solution first requires being here past this year. 6. Desmond would have blocked players that will be part of our future. If you are Texas or a team that is in a window where they have a shot at a WS, a one year $8 deal when you have already given up your 1st round pick is a reasonable move. If you are a team with a very low probability a contending and in a rebuild mode where you have several players that need the playing time to develop, and you are giving up the 15th pick, it would be incredibly incompetent to sign Desmond. I would guess there is not a GM in MLB that would have given this 5 minutes thought given the circumstances specific to the Twins.

It would sure be nice if something went right and Nolasco and/or Santana are great this month and one of them is traded by the deadline. For that matter, it would be just fine if they both got traded. Berrios would be here to stay. As long as I am wishing, let's hope they get a nice return on Nunez and Polanco gets a chance.

Thanks Seth. Palka is reported to have a strong arm where Walker is said to be suspect in that area. If he has decent speed he and takes decent routes he might be a big bat without the being a big defensive hole. It pained me to watch Delmon and I don't ever want to watch that again. I hope this guy turns out to be a surprisingly good transaction. His K rate is quite a bit less than Walker but it would be really encouraging to see him improve in that area in the next year.

How much if a liability is Palka defensively in the OF? I cant find a scouting report that is not 3 years old. Is he a DH / 4th outfielder at the ML level or can he play acceptable OF defense? Mauer has 2 year left. Maybe Palka spends next year in AAA and eventually replaces Mauer. Is the IF at the end of next year Sano / Vielma / Polanco / Palka? That could be good provided this came with good returns for Dozier and Nunez.

This.

We found something we can agree on. The first sentence was supposed to end after competent management. I thought I had edited it but the scripts that run on this site lock-up my computer at times and the edit was not saved. Regardless, you still complained that they cut him and then complained they did not cut him earlier. I would not have cut him either but that was not the point. I would have sent Park to AAA and given Arcia one last shot as Mike suggested.