DocBauer

Miranda might be the best long term option in the system.

I've got my own personal list of 10-20 prospects who make up my "guys I am keeping my eyes on the most". Naturally that includes Lewis and Khirilloff and others listed here. But I'm not so sure Javier isn't #1 on my list. All that talent and upside, and coming back from missing the season, could be a great story. Can't wait to see what he does this year!

My turn I guess: Three batter minimum: No way. No we're losing strategy and letting some get teed-off on if he doesn't have it. Also slows the game down more. Universal DH: Growing up, I always appreciated the NL game, but not because of pitchers batting! I appreciated the use if speed and defense in parks that usually were larger and seemed to have mkre turf. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to know to pinch hit for a pitcher with runners on base and down a run or two. Ive grown up with the DH and appreciate it. Pitchers are unique in tneir craft the way QB and kickers and goalies are. If the NL wants to keep pitchers hitting, go for it. But when an AL team visits, then use the DH. When a NL team visits, they get to use a DH and their pitcher doesnt have to bat. No advantage to either team...unless you just have a punchless roster. But a AL team is put at a disadvantage when visiting NL teams. I don't care about "universal" I just want things fair when they play. 20 second pitch clock: PLEASE! Clock on the pitcher and batter! The constant readjustment of uniform, gloves and jock strap are ridiculous. And whatever happened to "work quick and throw strikes"? Roster size: The game has changed over the years, as have all sports. I've felt for some time baseball needed to move to a 26 or 27 man roster. Gone are tbe days kf a 10 or 11 man staff. Also gone are platoons. More pitchers will lengthen the game? Mmmm...perhaps. More bats off the bench increases excitement and scoring. Reducing the September stinks. It's a special game. Letting guys get their feet wet in September is a staple of the game. Let it stay the way it is. Anti-tanking: Kind of ridiculous. How do you prove it, first of all? If a team is rebuilding and flooding their roster with young talent to build for tomorrow are they truly "tanking"? In the crazy and absolutely impossible to predict world that is MLB, does a higher draft selection truly offer some quick turnaround of success? I believe it was Ashbury who spoke about minimum payroll standards being implemented. If you don't match that, fine, the "left over" unspent payroll goes back in to the general fund to be split up between the league. And BTW, baseball would be a lot healthier if there was a more universal profit sharing split amongst all teams, similar to other sports. The very healthy NFL for example.

This! Age 24 is not exactly old for AAA...even if he does "warm up" at AA to begin the season...and he could see Minnesota before the year is done. His numbers improved EVERY SINGLE MONTH! That is learning, adjustments and progress. Yes, the last month was a downer. But it's a long season, and his FIRST full pro season. Even top prospects, and ML players as well, have those stretches where their BABIP just suffers for some reason. I will take his season long improved numbers. What does perplex me is the comment about appearing "stiff" as I've read various reports he is a good athlete with at least average speed. I find this perplexing. I find the idea of his playing a single position to be interesting, but I think it would be a disservice to both he and the Twins. It's just way too early in his career, only a season and a half in, to pigeonhole him. He needs coaching and development time at both spots. In time, he can hopefully be comfortable at both OF corners, as well as 1B, to just be average.

What does this prove? Quality SP can come from many sources including places where you least expect it. Debate all you want about Darvish last season and the attempt to sign him. No what the outcome, I feel pretty good we didn't swallow that 6th year. But it she's me the FO will actually make the big move if they feel it's the right one. But I do tend to agree with the point made that via draft, trade and development this FO is really concentrating on building it's own arms/rotation. Well done! This should be moved to the front page, IMO.

I repeat what others have said, and I have before as well, just way too early to get bent out of shape on Gonsalves after a few bad rookie outings. Reminder: his last few appearances as the "primary" looked much better. On top of that, he has adapted and excelled at every level he has reached. And his control problems in 2018 were not season-wide, it seemed to come in stretches, where in other stretches his control was just fine. I believe his ceiling is a #3 who should settle in very nicely as at least a quality #4-5. But let's give him more than a few rookie appearances before we decide he can't cut it shall we? Right or wrong I tend to look at Alcala and Duran as 2 sides of the same coin. Probably because they both came to us last season in trade and we haven't watched them "grow up" in the Twins organization. But from all I have read, they both bring serious heat and have questions about secondary offerings, but with potential. Alcala, a bit older and having reached AA ball, I guess, strikes me as the more likely to end up in the pen. Is that fair? Probably not. I admit to being influenced by his numbers once he came over, as well as the video Tom shared, to think Duran may have more time/potential as a quality SP. Fair or not, just kind of where my head is at.

1] Signing Kimbrell would be outstanding to solidify and deepen the BP for the next 2-3yrs. But it might have been cheaper with financial freedom for another roster addition if they had pounced on someone else earlier. But can we truly complain if they do this? 2] Screw marketing! I grew up on the weird blue uniforms of the Twins. It has its place in nostalgia. The best uniforms they ever had was pinstripes! White, gray, cream, just BE the TWINS! Do the Yankees and Dogers ever change? Stick with class! 3] A healthy Castro can help this team. Especially as a tudor to the impressive Garver and Austudillo, who could also be the 13th man. If Rocco plays things right, and the FO plays things right, do we have to use a 13 man staff?

Not going back to the Twins arriving in Minnesota, and skipping the 70's, some of may remember those days, but since the 80's there has been a magnificent group of CF and CF prospects. Really, Puckett really set the stage. And then came Hunter, but not without some struggles initially. Then came Mack, (sorta), and Span, and Revere, (sorta again), and then Gomez. But it was, for years, a nice progression of talent. But Gomez was rushed and found success elsewhere. And then Hicks...not going there, and now Buxton. What else needs to be said we don't already know and haven't spouted out at length in internet ink? He is a tremendous athletic talent that compares to the affor mentioned players that I don't need to go on. Who knows how good he could be? Hopefully his arm will be good enough to stay in CF, along with instinct. But despite his reported "raw" nature, you can't just teach a patient approach at the plate. If his natural instinct is to work the count to his advantage, aggression can be taught and learned. Discipline, athleticism, power and speed are all there. Just give him a little to put it all together.

Thank you for the ego boost Jrod! Lol (pointless but interesting, one of my best friends is named Jarrod and we call him J-rod). But seriously, thank you for the compliment! No ego on my end, but if you are willing so gracious publicly, then I can graciously thank you publicly as well. Quick...how do I post a blush icon? LOL On a serious note, I always try to maintain an even balance when it comes to the Twins, despite being a fervent fan since I was 5yo courtesy of my father. I've always believed it's OK to being an optimist, but jts also OK to call out your team as well. I liked your comment about Gonsalves to "haters" and his eventual "owning" each level be has been at. I have often commented on this, and expressed candidly I expected him to struggle initially. The move to the ML is seldom easy. This kid is smart and has ALWAYS learned to adapt. I take his last couple of appearances with a grain of salt due to being the primary, and not the actual game starter. But it's also an indication, IMO, of a young rookie settling in. I also agree on Gordon, but again, IMO, if kept, he might fit best as a utility player who does a lot of things well. And despite disappointment for a 1st round pick, there is real value in that. I am a HUGE believer in Polanco as well as Lewis. In the next season or so, I can easily see those two as a tremendous keystones combo. At the end of the day, what's wrong with Gordon being a really nice role piece for a ML roster? I find your comments about Rortvedt vs Jeffers interesting. What have you seen or heard that makes you feel Jeffers is more confident? Really interested in your AJ comparison to Jeffers. Despite being so young I hate to make comparisons, but I could easily see Rortvedt as a better hitting and more powerful version of Butera. Jeffers is obviously older, though their trek through the system may parallel, as Seth alluded to. Jeffers, probably, is the better bat with even more power. Reports are the Twins like him behind the plate and like his framing. This could be a very interesting "battle" over the next couple of years!

Great point! Just my opinion, of course, but my opinion is based on observations of moves the FO HAS made, as well as comments they have made over their time in charge. My opinion is this, broke down in a different points: 1] Possitively "giddy"...and yes, I used the word "giddy"...to be placed in charge of an organization that had SO MUCH TALENT sitting at the ML level, with so much potential to unlock, and some decent milb talent available, it also recognized development and changes needed to be made from the top down, or bottom up, depending on how you look at it. Hence changes in the back office, scouting, milb staff, and now the ML staff. 2] You mention trade opportunities, as have others, and I agree. And while we can lament the trades of both Escobar and Pressly, there was a deliberate attempt to build the milb funnel with talent. Talent for depth and competition, but also maybe for future trades? The FO has made various veiled comments about augmenting the "core" in the future. We can debate at length about FA opportunity, available payroll to do so, sustainability for competition,etc. But are they looking for the ability to trade now, or soon, from positions of depth and strength? I sure hope So! Despite opinions of ownership being cheap, this new FO has done some things we've never seen before, or rarely seen before. No matter how it turned out, while still trying to build a new system/structure, they made aggressive moves for 2018 to build off of the 2017 season. They also ate contract money to gain prospects. They even traded away some "free money" in the form of international dollars to add prospects. Again, the debate about ownership being cheap. We can debate, and I will argue WITH most anyone they could have, and should have, done even more than they did! But instead of just "pocketing" all the Mauer and Santana and 1yr contract money, they HAVE forked out some payroll on some interesting options. But back to the original idea: Top down or down up, the organization is being re-built. I don't believe, like TR, this new FO is being conservative with moves or with prospects. In fact, I think they are being aggressive with their moves, even though I don't like all the moves they are making. (Perez makes me shudder still). I think they are being very deliberate in building the system, from management to coaching to the talent depth. I don't like the whole "Sano and Buxton or else" philosophy. But I kind of get it. I think they are trying to build the entire system. And I feel the trade aspect will come around mid season if the guys on hand just perform anything close to expected.

I'd like to just make a couple comments on both Gonsalves and Gordon, admitting I am no expert: Gonsalves: He was considered a 2nd round pick who slid due to some controversy for covering for his teammates. He has pitched very well at every level he has been at, sometimes struggling initially as many/most prospects do when promoted, and has always made adjustments and proven himself with production. He has risen steadily up the milb system and evaluation lists. But he doesn't not posses that single plus-plus pitch to allow him to overcome or compensate. Even young pitchers who have that ability tend to usually struggle initially unless they are just special, or figure it all out very quickly. Our own Berrios is not the same pitcher he was when first promoted, as an example. While Gonsalves has been known for good control, generally speaking, he fought said control in 2018 with a rise in BB totals. Even that being a fact, his increase in negative numbers were "sandwiched" in a series of starts while being lights out in stretches. How good he can be remains an open debate. But given a little more time to harness his breaking stuff, and gain experience, I think he has a very good chance to fill one of the spots in the rotation for years to come. I do think, however, that Thorpe may have even better stuff and even more potential. Gordon: I wasn't a fan of his original drafting. Over time I've come around on his potential. I think he has received undue criticism for things like his music interest. When you spend your off season working out with potential HOFers and refer to them as Mr. Soandso, I see a work ethic and respect. He has shown flashes of what he can do, followed by fades. Ugly fades at times. Let us consider what he has flashed, and those fades, and just examine his 2018 season as a microcosm of his career thus far. His first half of 2018 at Chatanooga was excellent and very worthy of his Rochester promotion. We know ugly the second half was. If he had struggled but still managed to hit .240-.250 in his first taste of AAA would we be judging him so harshly? Why the second half fades? Does he just take longer to make adjustments than some, and longer than we'd all like? Does his body break down because he's still developing physically and needs more physical maturity? I don't have the answer. I wish I did. We'd all like a top draft choice to be ready NOW! But it doesn't always work that way. Still only 22, athletic, still growing physically, and at the AAA level, I think it's way too early to judge him too harshly. Let's just assume he needs most of 2019 at Rochester to further develop, in all areas. Maybe he gets a cup of coffee. SS, 2B, really solid utility, let's say he doesn't stick until 2020 at age 24, still gaining experience as a young ML player. His future is still very fluid. I just wouldn't give up on him too quickly until I see what 2019 brings.

Just tossing this out there, have to wonder if they not didn't like Cole as much as some...possible...or just really liked/like the future still of Gonsalves and Gordon both?

So, his expected BA against should really be in the. 280 range? And his ERA should be in the 4.60 area? Yea, I'd take that for $3.5M instead of letting my talented arms audition, learn and grow. I'm sorry, I still don't get this move at all.

I haven't watched much of Littell, so it wouldn't be very fair for me to comment on his potential, despite reports or milb numbers. But what I did see was a guy who just looked nervous, rushed, and wasn't ready yet. I remember one game where he was brought in from the pen with the bases loaded and lost the game. I want to say he walked in the winning run, but not sure i remember correctly. Hopefully he can embrace his 2018 experience and learn from it and build on it.

Right now, today, I'd rather have Pressly and Escobar, and have them extended. I really liked/like both of them and feel we'd be better off with both of them. But I also get the realities of building the entire organization, the depth, and offers that were too good to pass up. And the more I read about the returns, the more I like them. Depth is awesome for building, and for competition. But at some point, that depth also means opportunity for trades. I hope this FO will take advantage of that going forward. What impresses me about this list is how many really nice looking young ballplayers are in the honorable mention area, or not mentioned even there. Between what is on the roster now, and what will be arriving over this season and next, I admit to being pretty excited.

I really liked him hitting in the 3 spot where Molitor had him. But with the way the team is constructed currently, he sure seems the natural choice for leadoff.

I get that. There are absolutely certain words that are used and over-used to the point where they not only become monotonous but grating. As a person with a writing background and large vocabulary, I can find it equally frustrating. Just the other day I used the word "shirk" and nobody I worked with knew the word . Maddening! According to the Oxford English Dictionary, there are literally over 228,000 words in the English language, whether they be full, normal entries, obsolete words or words that are derivative in nature. Do over used words happen randomly? Or is a happenstance of culture? Meh, it is what it is. At some point, these annoying words will begin to fade from normal, daily verbiage and will literally be replaced by other random words that probably mean the same thing. Until then, meh, so much more to worry about like the cost of a pound or hamburger or who closes for the Twins in 2019. **: you knew it was coming, right?

Nick, a well thought out article and I generally agree with everything you outlined. I do believe in the theory of more accurately figuring out this team, as well as seeing what the new staff can do with it. With that understood, I don't even have an issue with a certain degree of payroll rollback for 2019, especially if it allows for future moves. Where I DO have an issue is missed opportunity to augment this roster, just as it is, to help this team win. And I don't imply a single $20M signing to do so. With such an obvious need for a reliable and proven pen arm, with so many available and the costs being so reasonable, they have missed opportunity. With a number of solid bat, versatile players available for infield depth and protection for Sano, they have done nothing. Perez may seem like a fall guy. But it goes beyond that. With young pitching that NEEDS opportunity and experience, and with other holes left un-filled, this particular move, along with a couple "non-moves" has me very frustrated. Maybe lightening strikes and I will be forced to gladly eat my words. But the $3.5M for Perez could have been used much more effectively on a couple final pieces while still keeping the 2019 payroll down.

Brad Boxberger anyone? Don't know a lot about him, to be honest, but MLB listed him as one of 7 FA who could be a steals. Numbers look good.

Been reading, reflecting, mulling and stewing since this announcement and my initial post. I'm about the most frustrated and angry as I have ever been as a Twins fan at this moment! I actually like most of the moves made this off season, even if most aren't major needle movers. Most have been smart additions. And if the team feels it's prudent to shave at least some payroll while truly figuring out the "core" and then move forward, OK. I dont like that approach, I'd rather add a top RP and another versatile player with a solid bat to give us something, someone, other than ONLY Adrianza for the infield, but I could at least understand that tactic. This is $3.5M spent on a very poor SP who's only positive claims are that he was once highly ranked 7-8yrs ago and twice has thrown more than 180IP in a ML season. As poorly as he pitched, almost any starter on the 40 man could replace him for the minimum. A RP? He has 11 mediocre IP from the pen and should be considered behind Moya and Vasquez both at this point. It's not the 40 man spot, or the $3.5M that bothers me. It just seems to a WASTE of a 40 man spot and $3.5M that could have been applied to a more trusted RP or solid infielder. So now we are that much closer to our supposed budget cap, taking opportunities from guys who need and deserve opportunity, for a 28yo LH who strikes out 5K per with a 4.63 career ERA coming off his worst season ever. How does this fit any sort of plan? I hope I am forced to eat my words. I hope I end up looking foolish for being so worked up. But this move just leaves me confused and angry. And now, with apologies, I will step down off my cranky man soap box and go hide in my cave until the first sign of Spring.

Is "meh" a "meh" enough response? Or should I slap my forehead, kick the dirt and say !@#$?

Of all the above, Brach would be my choice. The numbers are there, as is the experience...including saving some games...yet he's young enough at 33 to have a few good years left. (Longer deal, extension, etc). I'd be interested more than I am in Norris if his second half mystery fade could be figured out. If it is fatigue,he could still be valuable as a 1 IP closer or set up option. There is value in that, but it shortens your pen. Tyler Clippard may be as good or better than any of the above list. On a 3 yr downturn, is Greg Holland going to have to settle for a milb invite? If so, why not us? 1a] Brach 1b] Clippers 3] Buchholz: at 34 and multiple time missed due to injury, would he consider a move to the pen to prolong his career and hopefully avoid the DL with more appearances but fewer IP?

Posted this elsewhere: 2010: $97.5M payroll ranking 10th 2011: $112.7M payroll ranking 9th 2017: $94.2M payroll ranking 23rd 2018: $129.5M payroll ranking 16th. Twice in the past several years ownership has had the Twins in the top 10 of payroll when they had a team they felt had a chance. After 2017 they jumped from 23rd to 16th, just behind the mean, believing they might have something. The 2010-2011 numbers are not ancient history. Nor is a recent $36M jump. No excuses for not spending if opportunity is there. If reported revenues are close to correct, and the 52% rule is in place, then the Twins CAN afford $130M payroll. And I see no reason why a bump to a $150M would skew numbers badly for "going for it". But "opportunity" is the catch word. Spending just to spend is not smart. Spending wisely is the key. No excuses offered. But it's also easy to cherry pick low spending years. Context is warranted, and years of top 10 payroll and large spikes must also be weighed and considered. Just offering a different perspective.

Liked your post and agree with you. But a couple caveats, if I may. Even as thjngs stand today, with the arms being brought in, an no knowing exactly how Rocco will utilize his/make his roster, I'm not sure Magill is guaranteed anything. I saw some very bad performances from Magill last season. We all did. But I also saw a mid 90's FB and a wicked slider, all in his first extended tour of ML duty. At times I found myself fascinated what he might do with greater consistency. I am neither a fan or believer, but with a year of experience, could Johnson unlock greater consistency to lower the BB and HR numbers that seemed to come in bunches? Talk about Jekyl and Hyde! I'm only saying, I'm intrigued.

PO'd by the loss of Allen when he made so much sense. I get RP are a bit of a turbulent breed except for the truly elite. And even they stumble at times. Maybe signing Allen would have turned out to be a bad investment, even for only a year. Honestly, who else is out there at this point to bring in?