Mike Sixel

That was clearly about Hicks, Arcia, Pinto, Gibson, Meyer, at least I thought that was clear.

Assuming, of course, that any of those guys are here the first half of the year, Brock.

It would be so depressing for Arcia, Hicks and Pinto to be in AAA, with Sano out for a year. Another year with old guys with no future on the roster. I hope all three are up. I will pay to see hope.

Miind. Boggling.

This is why you can't wait for all your prospects to line up and be perfect. This is why you also do other things to get good. I just hope they don't say "no need to worry about 2015 now".....

I believe the Twins are making this decision for whatever reason they are making it. I have no idea why they are making it. I don't agree, given the information I have, with the decision.

How about Drew vs any Twins SS in the system right now?

This year should be about finding out what the youth can do, since they punted fixing the offense at all.....and aren't likely to compete. I don't get how using Kubel helps that at all. It's hard to execute your strategy, if you don't execute your strategy.

meh, those SO trends lead me to think he's not very good anymore. If he's their primary DH, they'll continue their trend of being one of the worst hitting DH teams in the league.

levi....to me its about more at bats from their best hitter, not that he'll hit better......though that is possible.

Suzuki is worse than Floriman.....and he'd be your starter, followed by Fryer. new SS and those catchers? floriman and Pinto?

they are looking for MLB ready catchers. They are (and I know it is confusing to a Twins fan) trying to win now, not 3 years from now.

So signing an 8th starting pitcher makes sense, but signing 1 starting SS doesn't? It's not apples and oranges. It is "you need a SS every single game" discussion. Having none, as they do now, makes little sense. Signing Pelfrey, when they have Gibson, Worley, Diamond, Meyer, others around, somehow makes sense. Signing Suzuki, when they have a legit prospect makes sense, but not signing Drew? Sorrry, you can claim it is apples and oranges, but it is about resources and how you apply them. There are 40 and 25 spots to work with. Those are constraints on how you use your resources. You need a SS every game. You need a SP once every 5 games. They are flush with 4/5/prospect types now that they have signed FA pitchers. Yet somehow, using those roster spots and dollars on another SP makes sense, using money and a spot on a catcher makes sense when you have Pinto, but signing Drew does not when you have Floriman and a bunch of question marks at SS.

Neither will Pelfrey, or Floriman, or Suzuki, or most of the RP on the roster. Probably not Plouffe. Probably not most of the guys on the roster. But at some point, signing Drew costs nothing other than money. If you are willing to sign Suzuki or Pelfrey, it is hard to understand not signing Drew.

There's more to catching than "handling a staff"...like hitting and fielding as "traditionally" measured. He's not good at those.

We have lots of AAAA pitchers to deal......maybe even a number 4/5 that could be dealt, since they have other options. I'm confused that the line for SS is elite, but it is "easy" to find "a" catcher. It's not hard to find "a" SS either. I don't share the general disdain for Pinto's catching that others seem to have. I don't know if either of these is "elite" at SS. Interestingly, KLAW said today he thinks Franklin's bat might be good enough to make up for his 1-6 runs his defensive definciencies are probably costing.

Then who is your catcher? though I still might do it, I'm not sure.

Suzuki has been 28th and 27th in catcher war (espn version) over the last two years.....why would you play him and not Pinto? Why not give the young guy a shot?

Well, the really confusing one for this, Chief, is Pelfrey. Why sign a pitcher for 2 years, but not a SS for two years (especially with Gibson, Worley, Diamond, Meyer, et. al. available)?

The is plenty of evidence out there that many great athletes don't choose baseball because there is a quicker path to the NBA or NFL, that they don't have to toil 6 years on buses going to small towns. That data is actually out there. There are ways to keep competitive balance..... Like, the 10 worst teams get 1 month to sign up to 3 draft eligible players for any price, then there is a draft. At least 30 players would get market rates then.....there are many ways this could be more fair to the players. But I suspect at this point we are talking past each other now, and won't convince the other side.

Actually, the A's have several FAs on their roster, including an expensive Cuban. The Rays spent money on FAs this year also. And the Cardinals did sign some FAs to supplement their excellent drafting and developing players. So did the Rangers and Red Sox. The Yankees have been universally successful with mostly FAs. There is no "right way" to win. There is only winning. We've had this conversation. Had Ryan signed a good FA 3 years ago, then a good FA 2 years ago, then a good FA last year, this team probably would not have only won 66 games, and they'd have less holes, and we'd be talking about how they might compete this year. But when you decide to cut your budget, and not sign legit players, then unless your farm is flush (which it wasn't, but is now), your team will get worse. That's what they decided to do. Get worse. Not spend on legit FAs before this year (well, some would say KC was legit, I'd not agree). There is no "evil" in spending your budget to make your team better. There is no "one true way" in sports.

All we know for sure, is they got $25MM more in revenue, and the payroll is up around $2MM, a payroll that was (and remains) well below 52% of revenue. Why that is happening, we can only speculate on that.

Superb, even.

thanks, you just made me laugh at work ..... given the day, that is no small accomplishment bird. Have a great day!

The system right now is electrifyingly exciting. I agree on that 100%. That's not anything anyone disagrees with, as far as I can tell. Superb, even..... I think our issue is two fold, but I could be wrong: 1. Since they, in the past and so far the present, are all about building form within and trading the present for the future, they NEED to be better than other teams for their strategy to be successful, or they need to change their strategy. since we have seen the payroll drop (as a percent of revenue, with the new $25MM this year), it isn't clear that strategy has changed it. 2. Rankings, once players graduate, don't interest me. What interests me is what did happen, not what was predicted to happen (if it is the past). What happened, imo, is that other than Span and Revere and maybe Dozier, nothing has come up from the minors worth anything lately. Every single starting pitcher this year will have been NOT drafted by the Twins. There is only one above A ball that looks like he'll be in the rotation in the next 2 years they drafted. We clearly, 100%, disagree on this part. That's ok. It doesn't bother me one bit that we disagree, actually. Nor am I trying to convince you, because neither of us appears likely to change our opinions. But I believe the best way to judge the farm system in the past is by who comes up and does well, not on the rankings in the past. And, given that the team is sorely lacking good, young, players (even counting the 2 they traded away), we disagree on whether or not the team and its scouts and gm and farm director should be more accountable for that failure. Again, it's all about their strategy. If it is to "build the right way" by drafting......then the strategy was badly executed, imo.