DocBauer

EXACTLY what I'm saying. There is, to me, a difference between rebuilding a team...which they ARE doing and began with better earnest last season...and just tossing nothing but prospects in to each and every role with a sink or swim attitude. To me, if my young team has a chance to win a game, I want them to feel they can win the game. Let someone come in, be that closer, let someone else slide in to that role here and there, rotate all these prospects in and out, off and on the roster, if someone underperforms or gets hurt, and you probably have another trade chip mid season. And what happens if the guy they would sign is less than 30 and performs well? You could decide to keep him, potentially, and he could, potentially, still be a part of the next winning team. Best of all world's here.

You have a point Nick, but I want my re-building team to improve, preferably with a continuation of young talent joining them. But one way for the team to improve is the bullpen, which blew WAY too many leads this year. And when my young, re-building team has a lead,mid like them to keep it. I want them to win together and experience success where they can. I would be greatly adverse to the Twins going out and buying a new bullpenumber. But I love a short term, bounce-back, near the end of his career 1-2 year guy to help set the pen up for success, (with the idea how could possibly be flipped or extended depending). To me, signing a closer would be akin to acquiring a veteran SS to compete with Escobar and help solidify the infield for a season or two while guys like Gordon advance and develop and prepare for 2018. The team, hopefully, performs better, wins more, the kids win together, and no-one is blocked long term.

When I talk about roles, I don'the say they have to be "rigid" necessarily, other than a closer closing. But Tonkin, as an example, seemed to be used very much out of his element as a mid/long reliever often. We've seen O'Rourke be used oddly before as well. I think relievers work better when used to their strength, and with an idea when and how they will usually be used. I also see no reason why some of the other names I listed couldn't begin the year with the Twins. My initial list is just that, initial, and how ST probably opens. I would absolutely audition all of the names I mentioned and go with the best options. KY point is a starting place and go from there. If one or more of the kids is ready, so much the better. But whether they are are aren't with the Twins when camp breaks, you have a well-staffed bullpen in Rochester to draw from, audition from, etc.

Closer: One of the above FA listed Setup A: Chargois Setup B: Pressly 6th-7th: Tonkin Long-Mid: Duffey (who could still start or fill in) LH A: Rogers LH B: TBD (FA, Boshers, O'Rourke, Wheeler, Melotakis, etc) This is how it starts for me initially. You have a closer and everyone else in a role instead of being asked to pitch "out of character". The second LH option is the area I'm unsure about. Even with a strong AFL, I'm prone to Melotakis starting the year at Rochester simply to continue to build up arm strength and additional experience after his strong AA season following surgery. But right now, he hasn't pitched back to back days in over a year. Between being a FA, rule that, etc, some of the options can and will change here, but as of now, you start with the above and audition Light, Wimmers, Baxendale, Jones, Reed and Hildenberger.

I agree with this idea and have advocated it. I understand the idea behind a veteran catcher for a season or two. Much in the same way I think a veteran SS could help shore up the infield for a season or two, or at the least, challenge Escobar. But with the enigma Murphy, the OK Centeno and Garver, I keep thinking that "Hick-type" just might make more sense.

I've been talking about this same idea for weeks now. Even on a young, rebuilding team, there is room for a more veteran presence or two. There is nothing wrong with this rebuilding team holding on to leads and winning games. I'd love to just trust Kintzler and somehow know he'd pitch the same in 2017 but I wouldn't count on it. Further, what would he so wrong with working young guys like Chargois in to the closers role? I would push hard for someone like Perez and move Kintzler. He may offer the Twins help and value, but I believe there is only room/need for the one veteran, at least from the right side. As of now, I'd sign said veteran and look at Chargois and Pressly in the 7th and 8th inning roles, perhaps alternating, and being given 9th inning opportunities as they arise. Tonkin, for now, could be used as a 6th-7th inning guy with Duffey as a long and middle guy. Roger's takes 1 of 2 LH spots. I'm not sure at this time who the other guy is. Do you look for another Abad or sort through the other LH options on hand? Now, this is a bit tentative of a plan as there are several prospects ready or near ready to audition. But it's a place to start, assigns roles to players, and stabilizes the pen even as its being re-tooled.

Great to see Gordon and Garver get off to such a great start considering the two spots they play are obviously a concern for the Twins. Considering the overall season he had, and potential, I'd think this is a good indicator that Gordon is clearly ready for AA next year. How awesome would it be to finish 2017 in Rochester? I really wish Garver had more AAA time this season. He clearly shows the ability to hit, and with some power, but also decent contact and a willingness to take a walk. I just have a really good feeling about him. But could it be expecting too much just a little too soon for him to be a real threat to open 2017 with the Twins?

I agree out with old and in with new. I don't want to trade Dozier but agree it's in the team's best interest to do so, with all the standard caveats of value, etc. But even with SP being the team's biggest need, you still need a full roster, and it's still a team game of SP, RP, defense and hitting. Yes I know that's stating the obvious, but it bears saying. And I will further repeat things I've stated before. Even on a young and rebuilding team, there is room for a smart veteran or 2-3 to be added. *Is the team better with Grossman as a 4th OF, or letting Granite sit on the bench most days as a role player? Or is the team better off with a quality 4th OF FA that might even be flipped and guys like Granite can play every day at AAA to at least start the year? *Is the team better holding open auditions for the closer spot right out of the gate? Or are they better with a short term vet, also a flip candidate, to shore up the pen, hold leads/wins/saves and work the young arms in to that role? *Do you turn SS over to Escobar, who I like and is still not old and a good bounce back candidate? Or, are you better off acquiring a more proven glove man, even in the short term, to further solidify the infield defense and use Escobar often as a quality role guy? My whole point is this team HAS gotten younger almost everywhere, is still getting younger with some additional prospects getting close. But there is still room to add a veteran or two to make them a better overall TEAM without either rushing youngsters or blocking them.

BPA, whoever that turns out to be. Preferably a SP. Whoever they select will almost certainly be 2-3 years away from regular ML duty. Just the nature of the beast, development time on a professional level. While it would be awesome to see the #1 guy be a stud college arm, they still won't help for a year or two and won't solve anything for next season. Go with the top guy, best prospect, highest potential, etc. if it's Greene, so be it.

Totally up to Joe to decide, of course. But strictly speaking in a vacuum, yes, it would be a good time for him to take a buyout and retire. He's suffered numerous injuries, and still seems to fairly often. He is simply not the player he once was, though he has some value, and he has a young family to spend more time with. Again, I'm speaking from a vacuum. Since I doubt he will retire, though I wouldn't be shocked, is to use him as a part time role player for the remaining 2 years.

Best of luck to the young man. This is the kind of risk/reward move, the kind of forward thinking move the Twins need to make more of. Could be a huge steal.

I'm a frequent visitor of Vikings Journal, just to take a look and see what's going on there. But honestly, I don't post much there or visit it the way I do TD. And the reason is simple, just not enough in the way of content or opinion as there is here at TD. It's a quality site with real potential. I'd love to see it grow as big and as busy as this beloved site has become.

BTW, if we could just create our own scenario, I'd rather put Dozier at 1B with Mauer retired or turned in to a bench/role player, Polanco at 2B, Escobar or acquisition at SS and Sano at 3B

I don't WANT Polanco at SS, though I sure wish he could be the answer there. And to be honest, SSS and work may show he's better there than expected. BUT, I like him better at 2B for sure, and not sure I want him as the utility guy. But if Dozier was NOT traded, I could see Polanco and Escobar fight for SS and the "loser" would be the utility guy and probably still play a lot between 3 positions. Not a bad problem to have. All assuming, of course, the Twins kept BD.

I think we all agree trading Dozier, grudgingly perhaps, for real pitching help is the Twins best option at this point. But if the market/return is just not there, or, for whatever reasons the new FO has for not trading Dozier would be at this time, then you play Polanco at SS. I'm not saying it's best position, or he should stay there for good, hut as stated previously, he's not awful there. His bat does somewhat make up for average-ish defense. Further, getting a chance to play the position full time, work at it instead of being bounced around, will assist him in getting better.

There is no easy or immediate way to fix the rotation this one offseason. I think we all get that. And I don't mean to make Allen the fall guy, but I think a different, hopefully more experienced pitching coach could help. Better health wouldn't hurt either. I don't believe we've seen the best of Gibson yet, though I know not everyone agrees with that. Healthy again, I doubt May is ruined, but from a viable experience wise, he has been delayed. I also agree on at least one quality RP, even a 1 year deal, to stabilize roles and audition all these young arms that are ready, or so close. Someone doesn't perform, option him for the next man up. Let's say Dozier brings back one good, quality, ready arm with additional upside. Let's say Santana is moved for something. You then have NEW GUY, Gibson, Santiago, Berrios and May as your most likely rotation. Duffey could thrive in the pen, but with better fastball control could still make it. Give Wheeler a shot just to see. Mejia may not be ready immediately, but and Gonsalves could be mid season. Is this great? But it's something not terrible to work with. But just stay away from the FA class unless you feel really good about bounce back or unmet potential. Please!

Agree. Overall, minors and majors, he's shown power potential and the ability to still take walks for a quality OB. I can live with power and OB with a few SO's and mediocre BA. He's still relatively young, has reportedly worked hard on adjustments, and it's just too soon to tell what you really have unless/until you give him a legitimate shot at consistent playing time. By 2017 you may have Walker or Palka ready to take over. But you still have to see what you have here in Vargas.

While I don't want to trade him, and remain unconvinced that he couldn't still be part of the next winning Twins team, you have to hope to sell high on Dozier for SP help. Not so sure about trading Santana. The FA market is not good this season, and it's very possible a team needing SP help could see real value in acquiring him from the Twins. But if the best offer is an A level player, you might just have more value keeping him and see what the trade deadline brings. I totally agree Mauer is a 300-350 AB role player at this point. Due to injuries that seem to constantly flare up as well as diminished offensive production. But good defense, and a LH bat with quality OB can still help. IN WITH THE OLD: I'm still campaigningredients for a quality veteran 4th OF. Someone who can fill in, be a solid bat off the bench, and hold a place for someone like Palka or Granite. I don't think you want them only playing occassionally or part time at this point. A veteran allows them to play daily and continue their growth while deepening the Twins overall. I also wonder about an experienced closer, perhaps someone on bounce-back or near the end. It could help stabilize the entire pen, allow the younger arms to really embrace their various roles, and allow guys like Chargois to slide in to the closer role without having the pressure of doing so straight out of ST. And I wonder about one more veteran role player. Grossman could be the team'should 5th OF and could PH and DH at times. But what Plouffe? Or someone similar. If Plouffe, or similar, could be signed on the short and cheap to be a bench bat and multi position role player, would that be so bad? Look, I'm all about the kids and the rebuild taking place. And the starting OF and most, if not all the infield when you discuss Vargas, could also be relatively young. And I dont want to take AB away from the kids. But why not a veteran 4th OF instead of relegating a Granite or Palka to the bench most days? If Escobar and Polanco start, where is your utility guy or bench role player? Point is, it could be good in the long run to bring on a veteran or two for the short and relatively cheap to firm up the club and buy developmental time for others. They might even be flippable at the trade deadline.

Been a big follower of Gonsalves and Melotakis since they were drafted. Not a big surprise since they are pitchers, and obviously both LH. I would not be surprised to see both with the Twins at some point. I've also felt for a while now that Garver might turn out to be a nice catching option, a solid all around player. After the season he's had, I'm really looking to see if he can maintain his success in the AFL as a springboard to the 2017 season and, hopefully, time with the Twins.

Agree very interesting take and cant/won't disagree in principle. But I will argue with you as to the totality of your cuts. For instance, just to pick a name, Pressly. He's not really all that old, has decent stuff, and pitched well the majority of the year. Also, being a RP, he's not as "old" as a starting pitcher, if that makes sense. The team is in a rebuild mode, though no-one from the Twins has ever used that word. And I like the team still getting younger and making room for more top prospects. But I don't think you can arbitrarily just say to cut everyone over a certain age, especially when some of those guys could not only help you, but potentially help you for several seasons.

I want the Twins to win as much as possible come 2017. But I also dont want them to go "buy" a team in FA with the youth movement taking place. I'm still in favor of a veteran closer from somewhere, or Kintzler if you believe in him enough, but not both. I thought Pressly and Roger's acquitted themselves nicely last season, as did Chargois. Not as sure about Tonkin, but not sure he was used correctly. This should be the year where guys like Reed, Hildenberger, Jones and others finally get their foot in the doorway if opportunity, (along with others). And the great thing is, should someone get injured or need more AAA time, you're going to have another 3-4 guys just waiting to come up.

I like Garver going to the AFL to get more time and continue to grow and showcase. I still would have liked him up for September, but I also get taking a good hard look at Murphy. Problem is, they didn't look long or hard enough at Murphy in September IMO. Garver's age doesn't bother me that much. He's not exactly pushing 30, can clearly hit a bit with gapped and some HR power and has a good arm. He's also playing a position that sometimes takes a little time to learn. My question is could he really be ready to start next season. If not, I'd think Rochester to start the season rather than sit on the bench. I kind of like Centeno as the backup catcher for 2017.

Smart and accurate post. Coaches and instructors at any level, inclouding the ML level, are there to massage player egos...not in a bad way, but to calm, nurture and build up...and offer tips and suggestions, as well as reminders. Yes, sometimes they do Korea than that; they teach a new grip, or in some cases a new pitch, (splitter instead of a traditional change for instance), or help find a timing mechanism that aids recognition or power to a batter. And this is NOT the old, worn out Ortiz arguement, or reference to the So-Cal homesick Nolasco who recently enjoyed some success, but to other players currently on the Twins, but it almost feels like the coaches have been meddling too much. After a series of poor starts, the super talented Berrios was FINALLY told to relax, have fun, and just throw. Santiago is not a super control pitcher. He's not outstanding, but solid and effective. He stunk after coming over and the Twins were attempting to make him a control pitcher. It appears the coaches backed off both players and suddenly Berrios looked better and so did Santiago when just asked to throw. I don't know if this is a direct result of the Twins ML coaches or not, but since his most recent promotion, Buxton has appeared much more relaxed, and has even talked about being so, having more fun, relaxing, etc. You build a team with different players with different skill sets. To try to make somebody be something else they aren't is seldom a good idea. We all thought Buxton was supposed to be a high BA, high OB stolenough base machine with decent power who might develop more power eventually. (Not unlike a young Puckett) But what if he is truly a good AVG, decent to good OB power hitting player with speed? Doesn't mean he can't be a dangerous and effective leadoff hitter if that's where he fits best in your currently constructed lineup, but maybe he's really more of a natural #3 hitter? I'm just saying, you need to find the strength of a player and build on that instead of force feeding him to be something else. And I'm starting to believe there's been some of that going on.

I agree on a new pitching coach with history and track record. Allen could be very good in a certain role, I just don't know what that is. But for whatever reason, things haven't clicked for him here. The Molitor topic is somewhat different, but for the sake of this post topic, yes to change. Gibson is, frankly, a much better pitcher than he showed this season. As is Duffey, who claimed his fastball command was the issue this season. That's pretty big! Messing with Santiago and the entire Berrios situation shows a lack of communication, IMO. I dismiss the Nolasco turnaround and comments.

Yeah, probably the worst ever, though debatable and not necessarily relevant. Bad is bad. Moves and lack of moves by the FO were aweful. Some of Molitor's handling of young players and lineup construction is indefensible, though I do wonder at times if FO interference and mandates had an effect there. Not to sugarcoat things, but talent wise, this is not the worst team, and IMO, this team is not as bad as it appears. Blame injuries, youth, management and coaching, or what have you, but the simple truth is there were a lot of kids playing this season and taking their lumps collectively, as is often the case with young players. Rosario and Sano are the most tenured of the prospects and each has slightly more than a year and a half service time at the ML level. I guess that's the glass is half full position here.