Major League Ready

Absolutely agree. I was speaking strictly in terms of a going forward basis. It is entirely possible that the Twins, Sano and his agent are aware that his size could diminish his value and there could even be a plan in place. Actually, you would hope this is the case but you sure don't here much about conditioning with most MLB players. Some of the young guns like Bryce Harper are pretty well known for their worth ethic.

He could stay at or even a little below 250 if he was totally committed. Look what Shabaaz Muhammad and Kevin Love did to their physiques. They had considerably less bulk than Sano and they both took off 18-20 lbs. I seriously doubt that at 6' 4" he is in peak condition at 268 and I really don't believe he was 268 last season. I would have to see him weighed to believe it. Does anyone remember when Delmon Young got sick and lost weight. He was not remotely as athletic as Sano but that weight loss allowed him to move considerably better. He was just too lazy to stay in shape.

There is a pretty good chance the Twins feel their OF come June 1st will be Buxton is in center, Kepler in LF, and Rosario in RF? If this is the case, the question becomes how you make the most out of this situation both short and long-term. If this is the likely case in the minds of the FO, this presents an opportunity to take a look at Arcia. Personally, I think the odds of his succeeding are about 30% but I hate to let him go for nothing only to watch him hit 30 HR/YR for another team. It’s also an opportunity to try Sano in the OF if they believe Sano is suspect at 3B. If they believe Sano will be fine at 3B … get on with it for god sake. Trade Plouffe while you can get something for him. Why alter your plans for a guy likely to be a superstar for a guy who is league average at best. I don’t think they would which leads me to suspect they don’t believe in him a 3B or its posturing. They could still go get a FA like Austin Jackson. Start the season with Rosario, Jackson, and those who are auditioning for the 3rd spot. Once Buxton and Kepler are up you have a high-class problem of what to do with the excess IF everyone works out. Here is a long shot but interesting scenario … Park exceeds expectations, Arcia rebounds and is hitting well above league average while Mauer is stinking it up. Would they finally put Joe on the shelf, put Park at 1B, and Arcia at DH?

Right. That's the point. There are hard opinions being formed here because of a weight listed on the Twins website. We have partial or poor information on a number of things. #1 on that list of things is what likelihood the Twins staff puts on Sano being able to play 3B. Without that information, it is pretty hard to judge these other moves.

I just don’t think it is wise to form the staunch opinions found here with less than complete information. At first I thought Sano to the OF was just a ploy. However, we have not seen much of Sano at 3B. It is quite possible that the Twins talent evaluators are convinced he will be a defensively liability at 3B. If this is the case, experimenting with him in the OF does not seem likely nearly as bad idea of an idea. It also makes a big difference for me in terms of retaining Plouffe or trading him. In most cases I would look at his size and say no way but he looks quite a bit faster than faster than Mauer and Arcia, and waaaaay faster than Plouffe or Willingham. Is he really 270. Even 250 is quite a bit different than 270. LeBron is 250 and I am pretty sure he has the athleticism to play a corner OF position. No doubt his physique should not facilitate great athleticism but the eye test suggests he is an anomaly. I would love to see stop watch comparisons between him and some of the others we have mentioned.

This is a very simplistic view from a financial perspective. The absence of a cap is irrelevant unless you presume all teams have the same spending capacity regardless of revenue. Teams with similar or less revenue than the twins are trying to compete with organizations with literally twice the spending capacity. Production per dollar spent is extremely important when a team can spend twice as much per player on the roster. That’s why some of us value production per dollar spent. BTW … You also completely ignored the fact that he was under contract with his Korean team for two more years. They allowed him out of his contract to what I presume is a considerably more lucrative contract and his former team was compensated for losing his services. You are only look at one side of the equation.

Your argument makes sense if you ignore two very important considerations. Shields is about to turn 34 years old. Therefore, the likelihood of him repeating 2015 numbers or declining is greater than him performing like he did at his best. Who knows he could be better than 2015 but to bet he will perform to the number you posted in his age 35 and 36 seasons is unlikely. The last thing we need is another $20+M/yr contract for a mediocre or worst contract. $58M/yr between Mauer, Santana (age 34-35 seasons), and Shields in 2017 and 2018 is a VERY bad idea. The second is that you can’t buy low on a 34 y/o SP at $21M/yr. If he rebounds to his absolute best at age 34 you get what you paid for in that season. What are the odds he does that in his age 35 and 36 seasons? What you describe as buying low, I would describe as paying market price for the level he played at during his best years and hoping he will defy the odds associated with aging SPs. None of this is even the most salient point as to why you don’t non-tender Milone. He would have value to another team. Therefore, you tender and offer and trade him if you don’t feel we need to keep him for depth.

I have a hard time with some of the logic here. There were calls here to trade for Shields and take on 3/63M but we should none tender Milone at $7M. ERA+ / FIP Shields 93 / 4.45 Milone 106 / 4.30

Anyone have a reliable scouting report in terms of his defensive ability at 1B? I have heard he is terrible from some sources and good from others. I also heard awhile back that he has played some outfield.

Ouch! That part I would not forget. I found it online. That was a great commercial now that I look back at it. This is the very fringe of baseball conversation, right?

That's such a vague reference I doubt anyone caught it. Its from an old commercial. I think it was Maddux, Smoltz, and Heather Locklear.

Don't get me wrong. You are probably right but Borris and agents like him gets more because he uses every possible argument to benefit his clients. I just want to believe the Twins also exploit every angle in negotiating trades.

You make a good point that the system might change. However, you would think they would try to make it more viable. You could also argue that it is actually starting to work. You may have noticed I put COULD in capital letters. I would try to sell it if I were the Twins. Freese only hit 24 home runs over the past 2 years. Plouffe could easily double that number. Chicks dig the long ball, you know. He is also a year younger which has some influence over the number of years teams are willing to give. The Angels also have a bloated payroll and obviously did not want to risk it. Put this all together and I still agree that it’s probably still better than a 50/50 chance Plouffe gets a QO but that would stop be from making a point of it with interested teams.

Someone may have already mentioned this but Plouffe COULD net the team that trades for him a compensation pick two years from now. He will be 31 and probably gets a 3-4 year deal so that team probably makes a qualifying offer. That’s pretty significant and that's my pitch if I am TR.

Seems like a big leap to jump to the conclusion that the Twins are not valuing Defense. Hicks was going to be replaced by Buxton which is a defensive improvement. That trade also improved defense at catcher. The most likely replacement for Hicks beyond the first couple months of 2016 is Kepler which should only be a modest decline in defense over Hicks in a corner OF position. Overall, that trade will make the team better defensively. Many people here have stated that all of the OF options made Hicks more valuable as a trade chip given he can play CF so this does not seem to point to a change in Philosophy. The only other move they have made of any significance is Park. What do you expect out of a move for a DH/1B? The Hermann trade is much more likely that they felt Palka was the best return they were going to get for Hermann.

Watched the game… I have been pulling for Walker for a couple years now because of his ceiling. It would be a big boost to the Twins if he can improve his approach or maybe its pitch recognition. Four ABs is not much to go on and the man just keeps getting it done but he did not look good in terms of approach or pitch recognition. Let’s hope he improves this approach in 2016 at AAA and contributes to a run of several years where our team is a serious contender. Rogers looked pretty darn good. He could contribute in 2016. Burdi seems to have found some control. He will be here too if he can sustain an acceptable level of control.

Most of us didn't see Duffey as a serious prospect either. Count me amongst those who don't see it with Dean but I hope to be wrong again.

I brought up Max Scherzer myself as the closest example. He is certainly an Ace but the Nationals had $64M more revenue than the Twins in revenue. (2014- $287M and the Twins had $223M) This is not the $100M+ advantage that some teams have so it would be reasonable to say that this is a c loser example but that $60M pays his salary a couple time so Scherzer is not a relevant example. http://www.statista.com/statistics/193645/revenue-of-major-league-baseball-teams-in-2010/ Is Shields an example of the kind of contracts we are discussing? You were the one that qualified the type of players that get 6 year contract or more. Now, you want to use James Shields as an example. OK, lets pretend that deal is an example. Shields was mediocre at best last year and will be 34 next year with 3 years remaining. Santana was a fair amount better with an ERA+ of 104 and a 4.17 FIP, Shields had an ERA+ of 93 and a FIP of 4.45. At this point, it looks like the FO made the better choice so again this is not supporting your case. I mean Tommy Milone had a 106 ERA+ and Pelfrey’s was 97. Not signing a 33 y/o Shields to a big contract is not what I would call conservative. I would call it is calculated. Shields deal will likely be another example of why lower revenue teams don’t do these deals. So, far you have come up with one example that panned out and that one was a great player joining his father’s team. I guess when we have a player that has a great son we can count them against the Twins if they don’t sign him. Your only other example that was actually signed by a team with equal or less revenue is Mike Hampton and he was a bust. Shields is not really an example but if consider, he looks like a bust too. Feel free to list the other specific examples you have made that I am ignoring. It looks to me like you can’t come up with a single successful example other than Griffey and you still want to criticize the FO for not doing what every other FO has avoided or failed trying.

Cmon, you can’t possibly think that stating that a team has done something is an example. You made several claims statement that several teams have signed the type of 6+ year contracts were are discussing and provided one specific example. If I say that the Twins have had a better record over the past 15 years but all of one of the teams with similar or less revenue is that proof? No, it’s a statement or claim. Providing specific proof like the win records of those teams is a specific example. I also stated each and every time that your statements were not proof so frankly, it seems disingenuous. The Cueto example is a rental. I don’t think it is beyond anyone involved in this thread that the entire issue revolves around the number of years and total dollar commitment. Deadline deals are a mere tangent here. It sure seemed clear that the basis of this debate has been 6+ year contracts for elite players. I would bend and say Cueto is Elite because there is no point in debating a ½ season rental. The Royals exposure/expenditure here was less than $5M. Do you really think that example is relevant 6-8 years and $150M plus deals required to sign these guys in free agency? I get it that they have not deadline deals either but that is an entirely different matter. I will give you Griffey but let’s be real about that too. How many other teams have the elite free agents father on the roster? I am thinking that influenced the signing. This is also a 15 year old deal. Is this really all you can come up with over the past 15 years, one great player that went to play with his father? Where are all the “Aces” you insisted have been signed by the teams with equal or less revenue? If you can’t come up with ½ dozen for those bottom twelve teams in the past 15 years, I think it is fair to say that such signings are rare given more than 50% of the teams in question would have not done this in the past 15 years.

I would guess that deal requires a Kepler or Gordon plus another B- prospect. That would put us in a situation where an injury is required for Duffey to have a spot. May is in the pen for sure and we need two injuries to have a spot for Berrios. At least that's the case if you put Milone behind Berrios in the pecking order. Two questions come to mind. Do we want to create a situation where Berrios and Duffey are the 6th and 7th starter for the next two years. I realize guys get hurt but I don't like this idea. How much better than Duffey and Berrios is Miller and do we want to give up 6 years of Kepler or equivalent for 3 years of Miller?

I never said it was not conservative. I implied it was the norm. I asked you repeatedly for specific examples of lower revenue teams on the upswing of a rebuild making this type of move that would suggest it is not the norm. I should add that they be successful examples because the bombs hardly support your point. If it was the norm, it would be easy to come up with examples. It’s not like we did this dance once. I kept asking for specific examples and you ignored it because it does not fit your preferred narrative. At one point, I even went so far as to put up all of the free agent SPs over the past several years and asked which one of them fit your scenario. Is it really all that conservative if it is the norm amongst team with similar revenues? I will be happy to acknowledge TR is extremely conservative if you show us the examples of a team as described above acquiring an Ace or MVP via free agency or trade. There should be plenty examples based if your position is valid. I mean we are talking about 17 years and a dozen teams that meet this description. I would imagine the result will be SPs that we can debate if they are actually an ace. That’s fine, at least we can put in perspective how many such transactions took place and there for determine the relative conservatism. That is if you will actually respond with specifics instead or restating your position or ignore this all together if the facts don’t fit you position.

I can say with certainty that your perspective changes when you are given responsibility for 9 figure organization. The way 10s or 100+ million dollars is thrown around here is extraordinarily different than any organization I have ever worked for or with. Its easy playing fantasy GM.

The difference in perspective here is that you want a better team than the team with the best record in the AL and the WS winners at the start of 2016. It would cost a fortune to make up the difference in free agency. This is fantasy IMO opinion unless if you have budget of NY/LA or Boston. The Royals, Mets, Pirates, and Astros were all in the same position a couple years ago. Did any of them trade away premier prospects to get established players? I think it would be accurate to say they all patiently awaited their core to come together. The trades the Royals and Mets made that were the most influential were trades in the past for prospects. You also use a comparison the very team that is the best example of it taking time for a core to come together. It took several years and the Royals developed the core of their team from within. Their free agent additions were considerably more modest than the Twins. They have one player on the WS champs in Davis that came from trading away prospects and that was a bit of a fluke. Yes, they made a couple of big deadline deals. I don’t know how that is relevant to this discussion. We can talk about that if we get there and they do nothing.

OK. Fair enough. Let’s talk about the specifics and you tell me if I am too optimistic. I would add that that The Royals and the Mets followed this same path. I guess the same could be said for the Pirates. Allowing your young players to develop is a perfectly valid strategy. Berrios, May added to the rotation and a full year of both Santana and Duffey seems like a much better starting rotation to me but we are obviously not talking about a sure thing. Bullpen – We should be able to get a lights out reliever for Plouffe. Granted, I am counting on a couple RPs coming from our system. Is that too optimistic from a system with Jay/Burdi/ Reed/Jones/Chargios and a few others with back of the bullpen stuff. That seems like a way better bullpen to me but maybe I am placing to much faith in these guys. BTW … Burdi has an opponent BA of .080 and Reed has a Whip of .83 OF – Buxton provided no value last year. It seems reasonable to expect he is going to be a very good player, quite a bit better than Hicks. Rosario should improve as he learns to practice some patients at the plate. The Royals had several improve year over year. This leaves us with Kepler vs a 40 y/o Torri Hunter. By 2017 that should be a considerable upgrade. Catcher – Murphy should be a considerable upgrade over Suzuki Park is by no means certain. That deal could tank but he could also be the answer hitting behind Sano which would be a big deal. To me this is a much better team than 2015. It just is not markedly better on opening day 2016.

I cant speak for others but this is not even remotely close to my position. There will be a time to go big but we are not there yet. The difference in opinion is that some posters think the twins are throwing up their hands if they don't go all in. LuCroy is a good strategy for a team with a window that is closing. It's extremely short-sighted for one that has not even entered their window. He will be long gone by the time this team enters what could be an extended period of on if we don't trade away the very assets that will get us there. IMO, taking a chance on Park, getting a solid catcher, trading Plouffe for a great RP + a good prospect. Then, work Berrios into the starting rotation. Take the 1st half of the season to determine how Buxton, Rosario, Kepler, Arcia, and maybe even Walker plus some others we have not even considered can form an outstanding OF for the next decade. All of the power arms (Jay/Burdi/Meyer/Jones/Chargios,etc) we have in the minors should produce at least a couple outstanding RPs and Jay does have the potential to be a very good SP. Give Nolasco until June to see if he can make a comeback. If not accept its a total failure, cut him and put May in the rotation. If Mauer does not make a comeback this year, he becomes a bench player, you put Park and 1B and open a spot at DH for another power bat. I am sure How is this throwing up our arms. By 2017 1B Mauer or Park 2B Dozier SS Escobar 3B Sano LF Kepler CF Buxton RF Rosario C Murphy DH Park or Arcia or Walker or Vargas or someone not even thought of yet. 4th OF/DH Walker 5th OF DH Arcia or Vargas is DH 1B if Arcia bombs SP1-Berrios---SP2-Santana---SP3-Duffey---SP4-Hughes----SP5-May Good god, how much change do you expect over the course of 1 year? This looks like a team that contend to me.