Major League Ready

After the season he had at AAA last year, you would have structured the team to have Arcia as DH for the entire year? I am pretty sure there would have been a number of people who would have concluded that was incompetent management, including me.

Anyone with the prerequisite skills and experience to evaluate management would not venture a guess as to if this was competent management would not offer an opinion without knowing exactly how they came to this decision. I can only offer two observations of which I am confident. One, you played both sides of the fence. Two, that does not demonstrate the thought process of an objective individual.

Really, you want to argue what a travesty it was to let him go and management must be incompetent. Then, if someone makes a valid argument that he has not been very good offensively and has defensive issues, your position is that management is incompetent because they did not get rid of him sooner. Cmon, that is not even attempting to debate on merit. It looks like you are looking for any reason you can find to complain.

I did not think much beyond the choice was not Santana or Arcia. At least not if you want to start progressing toward a functional product. After giving just a little thought. Your solution seems like the logical choice to me. The velocity and movement is still present in many cases in AAA. That would give Park a chance to adjust with less pressure and Arcia gets his chance extended. The only problem with this discussion is that we don't know the whole story. It's hard to draw a conclusion when we don't know everything. Maybe Arcia had become disruptive and they did not want him around the young players. Who knows? There could be a number of other factors. Maybe, they are just want to move toward solidifying an OF of Buxton / Kepler / Rosario and Grossman. I would be ok with them rolling with that group for the rest of the year. That way they could act accordingly if that group or a member of that group was more suspect than we believe. I would be ok with them deciding to let Buxton figure it out at the MLB level. I dont see a reason to mess with Kepler at this point and we need to find out if Rosario can demonstrate a reasonable approach at the plate. That has to be demonstrated at this level but I also would not bring him back until he showed a better approach at AAA. I dont think we can really tell that by the box scores. At least not unless the BB percentage goes way up.

Absolutely it was an option. Probably the one I would have chosen. The point was that the choice was never between Arcia and Santana. Your point does not oppose what I am saying at all. In fact, it supports what I am saying.

You can all continue to pursue the ridiculous notion that choice was Arcia or Santana it won’t make it any more plausible. The choice was not anymore Santana then it was Taylor Rogers. Santana plays an entirely different role. If you want argue Santana should not be in that role, fine but that’s a different thread. You can also argue he should have been the DH instead of Park but that’s a different thread. The choice was Grossman, Rosario, or Arcia. Grossman gives you a good RH bat to compliment to Kepler and Rosario. Maybe they will finally do as we all hoped and use a platoon. In this case, Rosario/Grossman. Where Santana is concerned, Molitor values having a bench player with Santana’s versatility. So do other managers and the baseball media talks about the value of versatile players all the time. Having a guy that can be the BU CF and SS in one guy is a nice bonus. I am not in the hall of fame, nor do I have 20 or 30 years in professional baseball so I am going to just assume Molitor’s reasoning is valid. Santana stinking is a relative measure but Arcia has stunk even worse for two years. He was great initially but the league figured out his approach is terrible and he does not come to the plate with a plan. He has been pitiful with the exception of short bursts. Plus, he is a liability defensively. I wanted him to get a chance too but I just cant get bent out of shape by the FO taking this direction.

A number of posters have pointed out how poorly the roster constructed, yet there seems to be 12 pages of failure to recognize that’s what is happening. Buxton and Kepler are in all likelihood the CF and RF for a number of years to come. This move suggests that they believe Rosario will be back and occupy LF until a new prospect can bump one of them from the OF. In that case, Grossman and Santana round out the OF roster nicely. Grossman will be in the lineup against LH SPs, and provide pinch hitting at times and he is not a big detriment in the field. They can also count on him for a quality AB every time he steps to the plate. That certainly could not be said of Arcia. Santana provides b/u to all OF positions and SS or even 2B, plus late inning pinch runner and defensive replacement. That’s a valuable bench guy. I wanted Arcia to get as much of a chance as possible but the reaction here is a bit of a head scratcher.

They might play the same position but they are completely different players with completely different roles. I was very big on giving Arcia a chance to stick but the choice was not between Santana and Arcia. It was between Arcia and Kepler, Grossman, Rosario, Palka, Vargas, and ABW and maybe even Harrison. All the talk about roster construction here and then roster construction goes right out the window in this case.

Posters here keep saying how long as if it’s a sequential process. It is going to take however long it takes for our prospects to contribute and eventually become the primary contributors to contending. It took the Pirates and the Royals 20 years. Both of those teams also got major components of their turnaround by trading away very good players. The Twins did not have that opportunity. I am not any happy with the state of the team either but I don’t stress over bullpen moves or free agents because I am certain its not the path to sustainable success. You want some sort of time table you can put on your calendar. When or will Buxton adjust and dominate at this level. When will Berrios gain the necessary command? When or will Kepler reach his expected ceiling. When will Chargois dominate here like he is in AAA? Many here thought Burdi was the best option we had in the bullpen when he was drafted. How is that going? Need I go on? They have a deep farm system. If it comes together they are going to get better and better. If not, it's going to suck to be a Twins fan for a long time.

Great idea. Give up your future for bullpen help on a team with a host of other needs for a team that still needs to grow-up a deep minor league system. Good god, no wonder some of you have problems with everything the FO does. I keep hearing the bullpen is not adequate for a contender. No $#!%. The problem with that logic is that this team was nowhere close to contending. Every sports writer who cared to predict the standings projected the team to finish last in the division. Yet, many of you want them to trade assets or commit to more long-term contracts. I repeat, no wonder you have a problem with every decision. You want it yesterday and rebuilding does not work that way unless perhaps you have a considerable revenue advantage.

Last year there were 5 SPs with a WAR above 5.6. Kershaw was tops with 7.1. Shelby Miller had a WAR of 3.4 and Atlanta got a haul for him. Of course, WAR is a suspect stat but predicting 10 extra wins in incredibly optimistic.

My statement had absolutely nothing to do with this year. You are changing the argument. I made a comparison of the Twin’s their record relative to their economic peers since the turn of the century? So go ahead and complain about this year but those who constantly complain about the futility over this franchise over the course of the tenure of this FO are rewriting history or they expect the same winning percentage as the top revenue teams. That is a foolish expectation given none of the lower revenue teams has equaled the top revenue teams or its foolish to think the ability to support a higher payroll is not relevant.

I don't think playoff series are a real good measure. About six months ago I posted the records of all of the teams with revenue close to the Twins and less since the turn of the century. Starting in 2000 was somewhat random. The logic was in take a couple years for new leadership to impact a team. Since the turn of the century, in spite of the past few seasons being terrible, only the As have a better W/L percentage than the Twins. This fact does not excuse some of the moves or how pathetic this team is right now but it does suggest the criticism should be tempered and the premise they FO is a bunch of fools is a fanatical response from fans who need an outlet to vent their frustration.

So, who would you sit in order to play Polanco?

I was hoping they would just play him in a lost year but Grossman does look like a much better bet and it's a no brainer to give Kepler preference in terms of ABs. You also have to believe they shopped him. Given they designated him for assignment, one would have to conclude there was not another team willing to give anything at all in return so the rest of the league appears to value him about the same as the Twins or am I missing something?

I would not have a problem with cleaning out the front office but the people who love to speak of the complete ineptitude of our FO office should consider where we would be if the FO who had followed some of the moves promoted and supported here over the last couple years. Troy Tulowitzki had an OPS+ of 90 in 2015 and 80 so far this year. What a nightmare it would be to have that $109M on the books not to mention the discussion here was giving up a couple top prospects. Escobar outplayed Tulo last year and Nunez is outplaying him this year for a fraction of the money not to mention the prospects that posters here said they would give up for him. Jacoby Ellsbury with a 663 OPS in 2015. He has been pretty decent this year with an ops of 772 but he has not been worth $21M/yr and what a mess it would be to have that contract on the books for the next 6.5 years. We would in all likelihood have 2-4 years at 21M where a league minimum player would outperform him. Matt Garza had an ERA+ last year of 70 last year and has 4 IPs this year. How about the LH relievers @ 6M/yr on multi year contracts? Antonio Bastardo has a FIP of 5.32. Tony Sipp has a FIP of 5.02 although is ERA is a much more respectable 3.22 Tyler Clippard, another $6M/yr reliever who also promoted here. His FIP mediocre at 4.6. Abad has a FIP of 1.99 and 2 more years of control with arbitration. How about those who suggested we swap Nolasco for Shields and throw in prospects. Shields FIP is 4.42. Nolasco’s is 3.47. Neither one of them is an asset but at least we only have one more year of Nolasco at $12M instead of 2 years and $42M. How about trading top prospects for 2 years of Lucroy. He is having a great year and would have been a huge upgrade but we would have trade our future to add a couple wins to a team that has a couple years of growing up to do. These moves that were supported rigorously here would have devastated this team’s future. The team has made 3 deals that make me scratch my head, the extensions for Hughes and Perkins, and to a lesser degree, Hicks for Murphy. The team has been bad for an extended period. The question IMO is has this period been abnormally long and has the FO positioned the team to be good for an extended period. That's how I would determine if sweeping changes were necessary or perhaps a couple key changes to leadership and/or scouting/development.

I think you make a very good point here. They need to give more consideration to development but the situation with Arcia is not a good example IMO. Sitting Kepler or sending Berrios back after one bad starts are harder to understand for me. Polanco is a hard one. Do you sit the guy who has really elevated his game (Nunez) or do you sit your all-star 2B. Dozier has not been good but he needs the playing time to make adjustments. On the other hand, playing time for Polanco might be a good motivation for Dozier to learn to take an outside pitch the other way.

Are you expecting the moment they determined to move on from him they would have a trade partner or do you want them to run him through waivers?

What I find interesting on this site is that the FO is often cursed for not promoting aggressively in the minds of many who post here. There is constant complaining right now to get guys here soon. Then, when a player fails who is promoted aggressively, the FO is cursed for their failure. They cant be bost to aggressive and to passive. Which is it? In this case, what is the alternative? Sit Kepler. I seem to recall several people complaining he did not get played the first time he was up. He is a better prospect than Arcia at this point so playing Arcia over Kepler seems ill-advised. Sit Grossman? He is the hottest hitter on the team. Now, I am all for getting the players of the future ready so we are not in this same situation next year and beyond but I don't think you want to send a message to the team that if you play extremely well you will be benched in favor of trying out a prospect. The outfield of the future could be Buxton, Kepler, and Rosario/Grossman rounding out a 4 player rotation. That would work out nicely against LH pitching.

Right. There is no bias here against the front office or management in general. Give me a break. It does not matter what the FO does, half of the people who post here are going to complain. Meyer has been either wild or hurt. He has never performed well for any extended period of time but he should be at the MLB level. No bias here!

One of many demonstrations of poor judgment. I would not give him 10 seconds of consideration.

Smalley was on 1500 yesterday. He said they sent him Rochester with instructions to work on loading on his right side. He was asked when Buxton should be recalled. Smalley suggested it would be a mistake to rush him given the change in mechanics. Buxton needs enough reps to make this change feel natural. The intent of the change is timing as much as power. He will still need to learn how to hit a curve but the results of this change in mechanics look promising. The AAA version of Buxton playing here would make a huge difference to this team. Not to mention it would give us something worth watching.

You went from "So, we're a rebuilding team how exactly then" to "sounds like a complete disaster to me." That's quite a change in position from one post to the next. Can I assume my answer satisfied your question as to how exactly this team is still rebuilding? Obviously, the present team is very bad. Thus, the need to rebuild. It would be a disastrous situation if the team did not have good prospects. How is it a disaster to be in a situation where you have prospects that should be better, in some case, much better than the players you have at every position? I would agree it will be a disaster if we can't build a great team from all these prospects but we are not even close to that point presently.

Yes. There are teams that win with low budgets. The original point is that the Twins have done that better than every other low budget team over a long period of time. That is a fact that you and others simply wont acknowledge. You just ignore whatever facts disrupt your rant. Does the fact they are losing more than other teams in rebuild mode indicate bad spending? They have lost more for a 1/4 season. There were other teams that lost more over the course of this rebuild and others with just slightly better records. Obviously, their record was pretty good last year but make no mistake, they were and are still rebuilding. Regardless, I would still be inclined to say yes. The FAs have not been productive with the exception of Santana and 1 year for Hughes. Is this really very far off from what every other team experiences in terms of success with free agents? Also keep in mind a big part of their spending being higher is that they were stuck with Mauer's contract. Nobody was going to trade for him at that salary. Therefore it somewhat misrepresents the teams effectiveness in terms of spending. They got unlucky that Mauer's injuries derailed his career. You could argue they should have never signed that extension and I you would have a reasonable point but that is a different argument.

I think they are a rebuilding team because of the following reasons. 1) The rotation. They have two rookies that will likely be their best SPs but the need time to develop at the ML level. They have two veteran pitchers (Nolasco & Hughes) with no value. It is also probable that a 3rd member of the rotation is in AAA right now and Gonsalves might just be the key to completing a playoff contending rotation. It would seem to me the rotation is just getting started in terms of rebuilding. 2) The Outfield – Buxton and Kepler are our best prospects amongst position players. They are also among the best prospects in the game. The league has adjusted to Rosario’s lack of plate discipline. He needs to adjust. He will be quite good if he can adjust and a 4th outfielder if not. Bottom line is that it’s probable two-thirds of our future outfield is playing at AAA. Sano probably (hopefully) moves back to 3rd so it might be appropriate to say our entire outfield is in rebuild mode. 3) The Infield. 1B-Mauer is replacement level. I am not sure how that will be handled but he is not the best option going forward. That is probably Park. 2B-It is obvious the league has adjusted to Dozier. They will pitch away, away, and away. If he refuses to adjust or cant adjust, he will not be much more than replacement level going forward. 3B-Sano should be the 3b of the future and I join everyone else in wanting him at 3B. Experiment aside, this is a product of rebuilding. C-I think we all agree that the catching position needs to be rebuilt. So, basically, the entire infield is in a state of rebuilding. 4) The bullpen is in transition right now as several people are being auditioned and there is more to come. Chargois will be here by the AS break and several others are good candidates to be here between now and next season. Sounds like a team in rebuild mode to me.