Jham

I mean, the real real problem is that Mauer has lost bat speed. It's made worse for Joe because he was a hitter who depended on letting the ball get deep. He now has to guess, start his swing earlier, watch it less, and square it up more exactly. Mauer's inability to lift the ball has lead to a ridiculous amount of double plays without offsetting 3 run shots. I suggested this in an earlier Mauer thread, while others stated the stats weren't there. Well, they're there now. Most of Mauer's HR in prior years came to straight away center or left. His first home run in Target Field was a bomb into the trees in center. He's lost the power to go center or oppo. He's in trouble.

But how do you explain his relative success at the MLB level?

Gaining an extra five wins from the bottom of the rotation means just as much as getting an extra five from the front, unless you're talking playoffs. Getting more production from the back is certainly a lot cheaper, but it also requires making the right choices among a number of similar options. Which is why this is important to get right. Regarding those who assume Milone will not be part of the long-term future, Soft-tossing lefties can be very effective and often pitch into their 40's. I compared Milone to Buehrle in another thread awhile back. Very similar beginnings to their careers although Buehrle debuted much younger. If Milone blossoms into a Buehrle or Kenny Rogers, wouldn't we be wise to consider keeping him? Put another way, if you had to bet actual money on who would be better over the next 5 years: Milone or May, who gets the nod?

Nevertheless, Milone pitching the same number of starts as May or Pelfrey over the course of the season probably leads to 2-5 more wins if he's at his career average. Perhaps more in a career year, or if May or Pelfrey completely tank. Granted, I've never liked Pelfrey. I do not know if he actually takes more time to warm up, but I do know that he is in the last year of his contract. If he ever wants to make major league baseball money again, he better pitch wherever we place him, and he better perform. I would move Pelfrey to the pen and designate Aaron Thompson who's really struggled of late. I mean, Pelfrey's about one more bad appearance away from a stint on the DL anyway.

So, after last night's exhilarating win, the Twins improved their record to a surprising 19-15, four games above .500. Before the season, I compared this squad with the 1991 club that went "worst to first" mostly because I believed this team was not as far away from competing as many believed. Anyway, on this day, in 1991 the Twins defeated the Milwaukee Brewers to improve to 17-15. The Twns got a strong pitching performance from Jack Morris and a big home run from Chili Davis. Mollie must have had a tough time picking up that splitter as he went 0-4 with 2K's against the Big Horse. http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIN/MIN199105140.shtml Our pace is similar to the '91 team. We just need a 15 game winning streak. On paper, their roster is better than ours. But we are much younger, so I can't say our team is necessarily less talented. That said, I think our rotation can be as good as theirs once healthy. We need some guys to break out and have career years. And we need a rookie to break out like Knobby. Not particularly likely, but it's fun to compare and imagine. Also, our bull pen needs to continue to get outs. I'm still not sure how Boyer's is doing it. His peripherals are all around his career avg. (according to fangraphs he has a career BABIP of over .300, either lots of hard contact or a lifetime of unlucky). His K/9 is around half his career avg. so perhaps his success is sustainable, or perhaps he's lost his marginal ability to miss bats, which isn't good considering the career BABIP. Here's hoping it's the former. His stuff looks nice, he's been a pleasant surprise so far, and it's hard not to cheer for a guy like this: http://m.twins.mlb.com/news/article/124187556/pitcher-blaine-boyer-finds-groove-as-twins-heat-up

Good thing Gardy's not here, he'd be saying how we have 8 number 1 starters. My thought is that the relative success of Gibson and May isn't all that unexpected. So far, Gibson hasn't struck out many. He hasn't had to. I've seen him mix in enough off speed to keep hitters off balance. I do think his K rate will go up as he learns to trust his change up more. But as of now, he's doing fine plugging away with fastballs. Nolasco's struggles are approaching lss at this point. Maybe he hasn't been healthy, but for some reason, I still think he'll be ok. Hughes is experiencing a predictable regression. That said, he doesn't have to duplicate last year to be a solid MLB starter. Pelfrey is the obvious choice to regress. Results aside, it still feels like he's eking by on smoke and mirrors, oh, and double plays. Nevertheless, he's still way better than I expected. If we intend to trade high and receive value in return, it would be wise to field offers on Gibson and May. Both of these pitchers would be attractive to other teams for the same reason they are attractive to the Twins. Obviously, either would have to bring back a haul, and I think either (especially Gibson) could.

If "upgrading" to Hicks is the only thing keeping us from winning the division, then trade for a real CF or call up Buxton and make a serious run. Personally, I have not seen CF situation as that horrible. In fact, I consider it a step up from what Hicks has provided us.

Agree completely. When I talked about Hicks as a failed prospect, I wasn't trying to generalize the feeling of the entire forum. All I meant is that Hicks has been passed by Rosario on pretty much every single prospect list I've seen. As such, I thought this move was more aggressive than typical for a front office oft criticized for being overly-conservative. I thought it was a positive sign that they are willing to take some risks and go with higher upside guys over the obvious choice. Of course, as others have stated, it could just be that the organization had other reasons for holding Hicks back. Hicks has impressed me with the season he's putting together in Rochester. What a pleasant surprise it would be if he could turn his career around and live up to the expectations of a high draft pick! Even if he never hits, I think he can be a good defensive replacement on a major league bench.

http://m.twins.mlb.com/min/video/topic/70087564/v104150183/oakmin-rosario-hits-a-homer-in-first-career-atbat Compare with: I do find it odd that this forum supports Hicks who many view as a failed prospect with maybe Shane Robinson upside, over Rosario who was tagged by many as a bona fide prospect. I really thought there'd be more celebration over him getting a chance over the more experienced Hicks. Alas the Twinsdaily forum is a tough audience to please... which I love. The Tommy Milone clip is just included for fun.

I somewhat agree. I think expectations need to be realistic. I just don't think May 4th is the time to be declaring that we don't care about winning when we're playing well and in the hunt. I think our young players are getting valuable experience. Winning is not only more fun, it is also motivating. I think it gets guys to play harder and practice harder. The Lookouts seem to have phenomenal chemistry. Winning together has almost certainly furthered their development. Winning allows the flexibility to bring guys up when they are ready as opposed to throwing prospects against the wall and seeing who sticks. Yes, sacrificing player development for a couple more wins is probably not the play. I just don't believe player development requires losing on a big league squad with no chance night in and night out. When players need more development, we typically send them down to the minors, not promote them to the majors.

I will say this, we've been fooled a hundred times over the years by spring training warriors and September call-ups who light it up when the games mean nothing. Experiencing winning and dealing with pressure has to be part of any learning curve. But not every player is ready for the failures that inevitably come with a major league promotion. It seems like most of us agree that young players are going to cost you some games. No one likes to feel like they lost a game for the whole team and about a state's worth of fans. There is value to allowing prospects to come up and follow in the footsteps of some veterans without feeling like they let everyone down if they boot a ball or strike out. Look how the shortcomings of Hicks, Florimon, Nishioka, and to a lesser extent Parmalee were magnified because we had to depend on them to play every day. They became local punching bags and had no where to hide because we had no one else. Sitting for a couple days has seemed to help Vargas, Arcia, and Santana this year. Could we have done that and kept winning if we didn't have Nunez, Hunter, or Shane Robinson on the team? Our young guys are getting experience, our veterans are playing well, our team is winning, and we're still complaining? Really? I think this is ideal. We aren't forced to bring guys up who aren't ready. We're (so far) winning games while allowing our young players to rest when they get overwhelmed. Learning to win brings us closer to the goal than learning to hold on to a roster spot. Find a way to help the team (IE take a walk instead of trying for a HR, make the routine play in the field even if you just struck out) even if you're struggling. That's called being a professional. That's what we're instilling. And to those who don't think our success is sustainable, I would ask this: Who is vastly outperforming expectations at this point? Robinson? Pelfrey? Maybe Plouffe after his awful start? Can we really call Gibson or May's success unexpected? Our biggest weakness is the pen, which happens to be the easiest/cheapest area to address via trade or waiver. If Buxton provides any sort of upgrade in CF, and E. Santana comes back at his career average, I can't imagine we'll be any worse than we are now, and we have a significant chance to be better. I hope that turns out, and I think that is and should be the goal. I VEHEMENTLY disagree with any notion that having Vargas, Arcia, Santana, Gibson, May, Graham, and probably Pinto, Meyer, and Buxton experience a major league pennant chase will somehow stunt the development of the team going to next year. Then we can supplement with guys like Sano, Rosario, Berrios, and Burdi to a team that has already shown an ability to compete. Funny, I see that as progress. I guess I just don't get it.

Pelfrey really did not pitch all that well did he? He got into the same number of jams as usual, but then balls were hit at fielders instead of between them? If the double plays were just FC, wouldn't he have given up a good 3 or 4 runs and we would have probably lost? I've never been a big Pelf fan, but results aside, I need to see a bit more. I was fooled by Deduno last year. Luck is luck. Don't get it confused with stuff. At the same time, Pelfrey owes us, and Nolasco may be worse yet. Maybe Pelf really has turned a corner. If that's the case, I throw him 120 pitches every 3rd day until the wheels fall off or his arm falls off, whichever comes first. My bet is on the wheels, because I'm still not convinced he's even average.

How many concussions/CI before he learns to settle back another 6 inches.

How I imagine the managerial discussion went: TR: Who do you think should start at shortstop? Gardy: I like Escobar at Short and Santana in Center. TR: You're fired. Mientkiewicz: Whoever gives us the best chance of winning. TR: We'll let you know. Molitor: Whoever you think is best, sir. TR: You're hired! We're starting Santana at shortstop even though it leaves a gaping hole in center, Escobar is better and still young, scouts say his infield D is mediocre, and we're really just looking for a stop-gap to Polanco. I am positive TR orchestrated this, but Molitor is still the manager and ultimately responsible for line ups.

Has everyone pretty much changed their minds on Milone for Fuld? It seems like the response last summer was 95% positive with Ryan being praised from all angles. Now, it appears Fuld would be our starting center fielder. Just think, we could have had Fuld AND Trevor May to start the season. Oh boy! I actually saw a lot I liked toward the end of last season. And it's not like we don't have suitable options for many of our glaring holes, or lack of trade bait for that matter. If CF is a, well, the other CF, then we could in a pinch go back to Santana, or call up Hicks or Rosario. If corner D is a problem, we can DH Hunter or Arcia and call upon a Rosario or throw Escobar out there since we'll be chucking him out there anyway... If Pelfrey's terrible or Boyer comes down to earth, or Stauffer retires to sell pot pies, Meyer, May, or Hamburger seem plenty capable to work their way into the league from the pen.

Some were very critical of Gardy for playing favorites, but he was at least dogged in asking the FO for more talent. He voiced on numerous occasions his desire to have Gibson, Meyer, and May called up. He publicly disagreed with the FO on the Santana displacing Escobar debate. Molitors first few moves as manager: Santana to short, and Meyer/May back to AAA. I can't say I'm offended by anything that happened regarding the cuts provided they are short term. Hey, if Theo Epstein says he's never had a rookie break with the team, then I'm ok with our studs taking a month to get into a grove before coming up, hopefully with some confidence. If Kris Bryant isn't coming north, should Eddie Rosario? I would guess Rosario will be the first call up, as soon as he's ready. Molitor's hinted at as much. Hamburger will be added back as soon as Boyer fails or Pelfrey is traded. May will be up if he can show he's ready and Milone stumbles. It's still a competition, but eventually the season starts and you have to choose a guy. Meyer is the perfect candidate to get some experience in the pen before preparing to start next year. If we get to mid-June and most of this has taken place, I think most of those complaining will be satisfied, and I believe that is the teams ultimate hope.

I guess we just disagree on how important it is to get the Tonkin's of the world major league innings over keeping roster guys like Stauffer and maybe Pelfrey. I'm not sure one is better than the other. Given the fact that I don't have a ton of confidence in one over the other, I'd go with the option that still allows me to change over and go with option B if option A fails. The other options couldn't beat out Caleb Thielbar or Lester Oliveras for a call-up last year. So I lean a little more toward option A. If we get to June and our rotation is Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Gibson, and May and our pen features Graham, Stauffer, Milone, Pelfrey and Alex Meyer and we've fielded calls or traded Duensing will you be mad?

Also, if Tonkin had looked remotely reliable in his several opportunities with the big league club, we probably don't even sign Stauffer who, by the way, wouldn't have be the first low-risk bull pen guy to come in on a one-year deal and earn an extension if that should happen. If he's awful, trade him, release him, send him back to the NL and give someone else a shot. It's harder for me to justify a spot for Pelfrey other than that he's apparently healthy, and he's been successful during spring training, but I understand people wanting to give him a limited shot before eating his salary, and dumping him for nothing in order to promote___________ . To be honest, I'm far more worried about Perkins closing out games than I am about the net difference between losing Pelfrey and blocking Tonkin.

We pay scouts and managers to tell us when guys are ready and if they believe their minor league success will translate to big league success. I agree, there are points when you need to see what you've got, but as of now, we're tied for first place. If this season is another Jesse Crain-wreck, we'll have plenty of time to see prospect, fringe prospect, and AAAA all-stars alike. In recent memory, Fien and before him Burton were a couple of guys who made Twins games worth watching past the 5th inning. I'm not saying that Achter or Tonkin, etc. will never be pieces. I'm saying that I'm not going to dump a roster guy like Stauffer to make sure they get big league innings just because one of them might be the next Tony Swarzak.

We pay scouts and managers to tell us when guys are ready and if they believe their minor league success will translate to big league success. I agree, there are points when you need to see what you've got, but as of now, we're tied for first place. If this season is another Jesse Crain-wreck, we'll have plenty of time to see prospect, fringe prospect, and AAAA all-stars alike. In recent memory, Fien and before him Burton were a couple of guys who made Twins games worth watching past the 5th inning. I'm not saying that Achter or Tonkin, etc. will never be pieces. I'm saying that I'm not going to dump a roster guy like Stauffer to make sure they get big league innings just because one of them might be the next Tony Swarzak.

Maybe I should have put "prospects" in quotes, as the names I'm seeing thrown around as potential bull pen arms, other than Reed and Burdi, are maybe not so prospecty. These guys almost always fail in the big leagues, but are occasionally used to fill in trade gaps. But it's easier to a sell a not so prospecty guy as a prospect if you can tell your trade partner that "He'd be good in the Bigs, but we don't have room", as opposed to "We've proven conclusively that he has no big league future, because we tried him."

Still disagree. I think the worse worst thing that can happen is that we formulate roster decisions that impact the future/present roster based on whoever gets hot during spring training. Look at the guys hitting during the 6th through 9th innings when most of these relievers are getting action and tell me that you would feel comfortable projecting season-long success based on those results. We have been down this road before. "We don't need Span or Revere or Alex Pressley because Hicks is having a great spring!" I remember when people were saying that Slama was going to be a future set-up man. Imagine if we would have rolled with him instead of signing say Casey Fien. When we signed Neshek and Breslow, it turned few heads, and even fewer when they walked. Maybe we paid a bit for giving up on them too early and assuming we had better options on the farm. Can we please play one regular season game before we turn this season into yet another rolling audition of failed prospects eliminating whatever trade value they might have and start giving away rostered players for nothing?

I think it's a bit early to give up on Stauffer. He's a somewhat proven commodity, he actually has a bit of upside, and oh yeah, we haven't played a single game yet. I'm guessing we'll have to use a number of guys this year as arms become tired, go through slumps, get hot, etc. Having guys in AAA with options isn't a bad thing.

To be honest, I thought we maybe performed over our heads last year. I think that easily could have been a 100 loss season without guys like Santana, Arcia, and Vargas giving our whole team a spark and carrying us for several weeks. Obviously Dozier had a career year, as did Hughes. Some of these guys are due to regress big time. However, I think E. Santana, and Gibson are as competitive as they come, and I could see those 2 carrying the staff this year. Perk and Fien have some fire in the pen, and I think Pelfrey could has that in him if he could only get some guys out... We had a few guys playing hard for spots and for pride last year. We had a few playing to collect checks. I'm looking forward to a year where hopefully, finally, the guys playing hard will be our most prominent players. Those few weeks where Arcia carried the team last year and raised everyone else's play made more excited about the future of the team than almost anything I'd seen the previous 5 seasons. Of course, he promptly broke his ankle when our "leader" Plouffe whiffed on a bunt and left Arcia in a pickle... Vargas and Sano can't stand losing batting practice. Santana runs hard every ball. It seems like the culture is changing. Gardenhire seemed to recognize that. Moli's inherited some decent young players. Hopefully he feeds that fire rather than squelching it. If we can win a few games, the vets will reengage. Crucial season, imo. Could go either way.

Can't we figure it out once we're 12 games back? Which has been closer to May than September of late... Seems like that would give plenty of time to experiment, check guys out, and make decisions for the future. Unless of course the players we're fielding screw up and win too many games.