Major League Ready

I can appreciate where you are coming from. We just disagree on a couple of key points. The first is that the Twins have a 4-5 year window. This team could be very good for a decade (maybe more) if the FO maximize assets. We still have a very good farm system after having graduated Sano, Rosario, and Duffey. Buxton likely starts at AAA but he will be up for good at some point next year. Kepler, and Berrios will also be up next year. Assuming they sign Sano long-term. That gives us six year of control from this point forward on a very good core. Plus, there are a number of players in the low minors that could help extend this up period. Obviously, many won’t pan out but the depth is such that the odds would suggest we will continue to add productive ML players over the next few years. We also shed the contracts for Mauer, Nolasco, Santana, and Hughes. Santana might end up being productive but Mauer and Nolasco are providing very modest value and Hughes is a big maybe. That payroll availability will also help extend the number of years we should be in contention. Use it to extend our best young players and perhaps add a key FA. Now let’s talk specifically about the next 5 years. Are they more likely to be good in year 1 or 5? They will be much better when Berrios, Buxton, and Kepler are transitioned onto this team. However, the team is not going to instantly reach their ceiling. It takes a few years. (See Kansas City) Therefore, Plouffe is not going to be here when this team really hits its stride. I would also suggest retaining Plouffe is a half @$$ approach regardless. I would rather they step up and go get a big LH power bat to hit behind Sano. Mauer is not going anywhere so the most likely spot is DH. We could go get a LH hitting corner outfielder but that is not ideal right now. It makes more sense to give Arcia a chance while you wait for Kepler and Buxton to get here. The bottom line is we should shoot for a better solution than Sano/Plouffe/Mauer for 1B/DH. We should also get something for Plouffe while we can because this team could be very good for a long period of time if we don’t get to short-sighted.

Yes, Hicks should start the season in center. Bring Buxton and Kepler up as soon as they are ready and let their play dictate the outfield of the future. I think Stringerbell is right that the most logical solution is to eventually trade Hicks. He has more value as a CF and therefore is a likely trade candidate. I also just don't see playing Kepler at 1B if his athleticism is as good as reported. Plus, it is probable Mauer is at 1B for 3 more years.

Why would it be “shrug worthy” if the twins got good prospects in return?

I agree completely that Mauer will be the 1B next year and I think the idea of him at 3B makes no sense at all. He is pretty bad a 1B, how is 3B a better idea? The reason I said he is part of the equation is because it has been suggested more than once that the solution is for him to be used at a combination of 3B/1B and DH. I would agree he is not part of the equation in the context you are thinking. As a matter of fact, it probably makes more sense to base the decision on Plouffe at 3B/Sano at DH vs Sano at 3B / someone else at DH plus whatever you get for Plouffe. You could also theoretically add spending Plouffe's salary on BP upgrades.

If you put him in a corner OF spot you have a way below average defender with mid 700s OPS. You might as well keep Hunter and once Buxton is here Rosario and Hicks are both about the same as Plouffe in terms of OPS or wRC+ and they are waaaaaaay better defensively. They also are still young and pretty likely to improve. If you play him at first you have the $23M man on the bench. Granted his offense was worse than Plouffe’s this year but I would not bet against Mauer having better offensive production than Plouffe next year. I would also bet on Vargas to be quite a bit better than Plouffe offensively with a little more experience. Regardless, there is little or no improvement to the team with Plouffe playing 1st. There are any number of options (including FAs) that should net better production at DH. And I am going to assume the make him a catcher statement was tongue and cheek. IMO, this is why Plouffe will be gone.

Mike, It seems likely that Buxton starts the season in AAA. I know Arcia's performance in AAA did not inspire confidence but what about giving him a shot for the first 6-8 weeks of the season in the OF instead of bringing back Hunter? Platoon him with Robinson or even Danny Santana. If he stinks the place up you call-up Buxton and/or Kepler. I just hate to let Arcia go for nothing.

This is a very reasonable option. Takes away some risk. I would probably still deal Plouffe if the return is attractive. I was impressed with Vargas ABs when he came back. His minor league numbers are much better than Plouffe. Plus he is a switch hitting power hitter to bat behind Sano. Sure, there is some risk Vargas does not pan out but the payoff would be big and the downside is not exactly severe. What are the Odds that one of Vargas / Pinto or Arcia wont be a league average bat like Plouffe? Vargas and Arcia have the potential to produce a 100 points or higher OPS. Do we want to be a fringe contender or great?

I missed it if anyone suggested Plouffe be traded for a "middling relief pitcher" but I doubt anyone here is an advocate of trading him without a fair return. Of course, fair is a relative term and many fans have a rather distorted view of fair as they tend to overvalue their own players.

Mauer is part of the equation. These are not completely independent parts, especially given the suggestions of sharing 1st, #B and DH among Plouffe/Sano?Mauer & others. There are only so many roster spots. Plouffe, Sano, Mauer, Vargas, Pinto, and Arcia are all candidates for DH / 3B / and/or 1B. Mauer is not going anywhere so no all of those guys are competing for playing time between 1B & DH. Plouffe and Mauer are roughly equivalent offensively and I still have a hard time counting Mauer out. I just would not be surprised to see a considerable improvement. I do think they should approach Joe and tell him this is his last year on scholarship. He is slightly above replacement level at his position. Maybe its time to hit the Gym harder and show up in the best shape of his life like Yadier Molina did this past season. Moving Plouffe helps find a way to give Arcia one last shot. He has done little to inspire confidence but I sure hate to give up on his potential, especially when a LH power hitter behind Sano would such a big plus. Moving Plouffe also gives Vargas a shot. I was really impressed with how much he improved his approach and his minor league numbers are considerably better than Plouffe. Having depth is good but you can only play one person per position at a time. This type of redundancy is not good roster construction and somehow the fact that we will in theory will get equal value back seems to be a small consideration to those who argue to keep him. It might not be a catcher but it could be pieces that are part of a trade for a catcher.

Which option would be more productive? Option 1 – Plouffe 3B / Sano DH Option 2 – Sano 3B / Vargas 1B / Arcia DH / Plus, use the money you would have paid Plouffe to buy 2 bullpen arms. Actually, use the money however you like. The added payroll is also an asset that could be used to be improve the team. Option 2 would seem to be a considerably better offensive team. I doubt Vargas is a downgrade at 1st defensively. His minor league numbers are much better than Plouffe. Mauer & Vargas share 1st base duties until a winner emerges. We could also use Arcia in LF to start the season with Buxton in AAA. Option two is a better utilization of assets and we have not even considered the return on Plouffe. So, yes, Pouffe is not only blocking Plouffe but also blocking other moves and additions that would improve the team. We need a #5 batter to protect Sano. Plouffe’s league average bat is not the answer. Vargas or Arcis is our best bet to provide that threat behind Sano.

Any FA of the quality TD posters are looking will have multiple suitors and sign a 3-4 year deal. You don't just go flipping them the 1st or even 2nd year. When these players reach free agency, they want to pick where they go. They surely don't want to be sent off a few months into a multi-year and have absolutely nothing to say about that new team. They also simply don't want their lives uprooted when traded at a moments notice. That's why so many of them ask for no trade clauses. So, if you want to make it even more difficult to sign free agents then go ahead and treat them this way.

For starters, this completely ignores the part where I said Trade for the best return and then trade the prospects to fill holes. This provides more assets and more flexibility. Of course, this premise is key to the entire strategy but these things get ignored here when it sounds like a strategy is not meant to maximize immediacy. Another problem is when MN fans thinking the Twins should run their team like the Yankees is part of the problem on TD. The Yankees have twice the Twin’s revenue. It makes zero sense to say the Twins should act like the Yankees. As a matter of fact, they have to do things differently because there are several teams with much greater revenue than the twins. Ask Billy Beane if he thinks a mid-market team should be run like a large market team. There is also absolutely no presumption that trading “for immediate return is worse than trading for prospects or over-paying in FA”, at least not the trade part. This presumption on your part is a product of ignoring the part about trading the prospects for what you need at the ML level. Where over paying for FAs is concerned ... There are a number of people on TD who are really high on paying for big name free agents. While I am not totally against this practice the realities (risk) for the Twins is far greater than for the Yankees. Sure, we could have signed Ellsbury like a few people here were very insistent upon? We would have 21.142M for the next 5 years plus a $5M buyout for a guy who played slightly above replacement level. We could have $83M in Mauer / Ellsbury / Santana / Hughes and Nolasco through 2017 and $71M through 2018 minus Nolasco. What do you suppose their combined war will be in 2017 & 2018?. Would Rosario be here had they signed Ellsbury?

Looking at offense in terms of position might not be perfect but there is definitely a correlation between position and offensive production. SS in general do not have the same production as corner infielders. CF do not produce offensively as well as corner OFers.

So, if you were looking at investments and one paid $1M in 2016 and $0 in 2017 and the other projected to return $0 in 2016 but $2M in 2017, would you take the $1M in 2016. That is an extremely poor investment strategy and this infatuation with immediacy of return is a very parochial strategy. It severely limits the number of trade partners and the potential return. Trade for the best return. You can have greater flexibility and more assets to trade for exactly what you need.

This makes no sense to me given we have an abundance of great OF prospects. Why would you go trade or sign free agents only to block the great prospects. Anyone that is any good at all will require multiple years. We need a guy to help transition to the new guys given Buxton and Kepler on on the verge of being here to stay. I also don’t see what happens with Plouffe being much of consideration in terms of bring back Hunter. The offense impact of Plouffe leaving is more a product of what happens at DH. Regardless, Hunter coming back should be determined by his acceptance of a role where he helps transition to the outfield of the future. 2016 in terms of the outfield needs to focus on transitioning Buxton and Kepler to the ML team and eventually determine which of those three stay. Personally, I hope they don’t give up on Arcia so he probably needs to be added to the mix. Hunter is actually an ideal candidate for this role if he is willing.

I seriously doubt Molitor thinks Hunter is equivalent to Mike Trout. For god sake the manager does a good thing, shows some leadership himself by acknowledging Hunter and some of the posters here have run out a statement meant to be praise to be literal to an extreme. Having said this, next year needs to be about the transition of Buxton and probably Kepler to the ML team. If Torri would accept this role, it seems like a pretty darn good fit all around. Buxton and Kepler can start in AAA where they belong and transition to the ML club when they are ready. I would add that it is not possible to determine how much his leadership added to his WAR value. However, the team is outperforming what the vast majority of TD posters predicted by about 10 wins. Is he responsible for 10 wins? Of course not but Its not too hard for to believe his leadership was worth 2 games. In which case signing him looks like it was a very smart decision, especially if he has aided in the development of Hicks and/or Rosario.

Is it allowed to demonstrate this much common sense on TD?

I don’t see the big deal about a bat flip but I am not a professional baseball player and I don’t completely understand their decorum. However, I don’t need to understand their decorum. The players, coaches and managers obviously knew it was a disrespectful. My ignorance is irrelevant and I am not inclined to suggest that the Twins players should not have been offended by this obvious act of disrespect.

You are overlooking some very significant variables. The appropriate measure is not Tulo vs Escobar next year. The measure is Tulo vs Escobar + whatever FA assets they can get with 20M/yr + whatever the assets we would have given up would contribute going forward. That of course is unknown but the players received in that trade project to add considerably more value over the course of the six yrs of control for them vs an aging shortstop over the next 5 yrs. I will take Escobar and go buy a great bullpen + our equivalent to Hoffman + Castro + Tinoco over Tulo and it is not even close. I would bet that Hoffman alone has a higher WAR over his 6 yrs of control than Tulo does over the next 5 yrs. Spend the $20M wisely on FAs and it’s not even remotely close and we still have not mention Castro who at a minimum looks like a great candidate as a closer. Short-term thinking is a good way to build a perennial loser.

What is Nolasco's trade value if the Twins pick-up 5-6M/yr?

Gotcha. I am sure you are right. A given percentage of athletes are not going to work hard once they get the big pay day.. I thought the $23M was relevant in the sense that fans have a right to expect someone getting paid that kind of money would work very hard.. To put it in perspective .... a man or woman gets a great education and works very hard to get promoted to six figure job where they work 50-6 hrs/wk.. At $150K/yr it takes the person described above 150+ years to make what Mauer makes in a year (playing a game).. You can see where the average fan might have a bigger problem with an athlete at 23M vs league minimum. Others not might care about the scenario above but might see it in the context of how that $23M might be used to better the team when the player earning it is basically replacement level.. We could buy a couple very nice upgrades in the bull pen for that kind of money.

I am not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that the fact that he has the big contract has taken away his motivation or how much he is paid is not relevant?

I would think it would be more important to work out as you age. Look at Yodier Molina. He looks completely different. How about Jerry Rice. He outworked his competition and it is hard to question the results. I have no idea if Joe's regression is related to concussions but it is reasonable to expect an athlete with his frame and getting paid $23M/yr to be in great shape. That might be a bad photo but regardless of the photo, his work ethic has been questionable, especially for a guy that flies out to the warning track a lot and also hits quite a few off the fence. Maybe a good workout routines adds a few HRs/yr

Buxton has not been here that long and he simply is not ready. it is hardly fair to expect that mentoring or coaching is going to overcome someone not being ready for this level. Arcia appears to be an extreme head case. I am not close enough to the situation to hold any firm opinion on him but as the song goes "there is none so blind as he who will not see". The concept that players are able to make a difference in the win column via their leadership seems widely accepted. Why is it so difficult for you to accept Hunter's leadership has impact?

Big brothers and big sisters is basically a mentoring program. Is it crap? Many of the most successful companies in America make substantial commitments to mentoring programs. Just because you don’t understand does not mean it is crap.