DocBauer

Very interesting article and projections. My only quibble would simply be, Mauer must continue to produce to the point you have listed. (If not improve) Could he? Yep. Will he? Now that is the question. Speaking of questions, I have one for you. In your scenario, what about batting Mauer in the 5 spot ahead of Plouffe, who would be ahead of Rosario? This would break up the RH hitting a bit, still provide runners on base, and should help set up Plouffe and Rosario in the 6 & 7 spots.

Well, since I absolutely love roster and lineup speculation, I naturally have to address this! CATCHER: I guess I'm not sure why Murphy wasn't at least mentioned, unless you just don't believe in me. My gut feeling is Garver over Turner. All reports have him solid defensively and with bette offense. But I think Turner gets a bit of a bad and undeserved wrap in regard to his offense. Each of the last two seasons, he has adapted to his level and had stronger second halves than first. That is a sign of growth and potential. Further, he skipped an entire level after his rookie half season. Murphy and his potential makes this a three way competition. I just don't know enough at this point to pick a top two. 1B: I'm just not convinced Mauer will be the 1B at this juncture. If he is, that would be pretty awesome. It would mean he had returned to a close approximation to what he has been. I'm sorry, at this point, I just don't believe that. Park can play 1B, so can Kepler if another quality OF emerges, (Walker?), Sano, I still think Vargas has a shot here, as well as Plouffe. Look, if we're not going to trade now, we still have him under control through 2017. I think it's very reasonable he would be extended at some point, at least for a year or two, and could be part of the 2018 equation. IMO, I think Mauer could call it quits by this point, or be a reserve. BTW, this entire group is pretty much the DH category as well. INFIELD: I'm sticking with Plouffe and Sano at this point for the corners, with Park. It's safe and makes sense. I still believe there is a bit of a "Plouffe long term" issue not yet resolved. I can't see this team without Dozier. He is just like, "Mr. Twin" at this point. Just, someone, please, give him a day off once in a while. Speaking of, I love the potential of Polanco. If he doesn't earn the SS full time, I sure hope he can accept being a great utility guy. I sooo hope Gordon is ready if Polanco isn't. But it would mean 3 levels in 2 years. Can he do it? Would be great if he could! While not making any deliberate predictions, the Twins infield, primarily the middle infield, might be the most interesting spot to watch over the next two years or so. Dozier could still be Mr. Twin or traded and Polanco slides in. Or what if Gordon slides in to 2B because Vielma gets a little bigger and stronger and can actually hit MLB pitching to go with his tremendous defensive tools? And yet, Escobar and Dozier could very easily be a very nice starting keystone combo two years hence.

Well, I suppose it may be stating the obvious, since the stats are listed directly above, but a few names pop out to me. Santana=nice to see the offense after last year! But his OB is only 15% points higher than his BA. I don't know if that's telling or not, but it seems a bit concerning. Polanco and Meneses=nice to see OB% so much higher than their BA. A poor BA is one thing, but to see BB and what surely must be solid contact, indicates a good approach at least, IMO. Buddy Bosher=while I have no real illusions of him being some milb contract steal of a signing...wow...winter numbers are impressive to this point.

While I am very much on record for supporting the Nolasco signing initially, defending it, but now advocating doing whatever is necessary and available for both parties to part and get a fresh start, I have to wonder; if Nolasco were kept, could he find a niche and a home in a bullpen role? I know the contract is out of line, but we're the answer YES, it would affect the bullpen, and possibly May as well.

Question: Do these numbers include his initial appearances in 2014? Because that would really skew the numbers unfavorably. Secondly, either way, in 2015, he was actually showing improvement, and at times borderline dominance, as the season wore on and his regular turns took place. That's what always bothered me, he was actually improving as a starter when moved.

Ryan is telling the truth. But the truth is not as simple as "no restrictions". You also have to include other comments he has made as well as those by the ownership. Ownership has never stood in the way of making improvements to the team. The Twins have never, at least publicly, stated any hard and fast budget totals. What they have stated, loosely, are operating cost parameters, which any business would have. And those rough operating costs, again for any business, would include sunk cost losses as well. So while the Twins have cut losses before, it's obviously not something anyone would want to do on a regular basis.

I like May. I support May in the rotation. He did quite well last season, and was IMPROVING. While I think he could really help the bullpen, I just don't agree with placing him there. (Unless everyone is healthy and Berrios is ready to be up. And then, for now I guess) But I have a really hard time looking in to my old, dusty, milky, cracked crystal ball and seeing May as an all-star next season. Doesn't that just seem, oh, "sudden"?

At the root of it all, there is nothing inherently wrong with May in the pen. At least, not for a year. It's maximizing all assets to the best of the team's collective ability. The root of the problem is removing one of the best rotation assets to fix the bullpen issue, and replacing May's spot in the rotation with a, probable, lesser candidate. Everyone healthy and, more or less, pitching to their norm, May is one of the best 5 starters and to me it would only make sense to move him when/if Berrios is ready and up.

I'll be sheepishly honest....I skipped a few pages of this thread. Would you believe by accident? Oh well... At the end of the day, we're all looking for something to talk about with baited breath...err...urgent fingers....until the next season starts. But isn't this the ultimate version of perspective as well as "wait and see"? We have a poor-mediocre performing OF of considerable talent/potential who is a completely unknown enigma at this point, traded for a highly drafted and highly rated prospect, (somewhat skewed just being from the Yankees probably), who has produced in a SSS that grants him potential but also marks him as enigmatic at this point.

+1, +1, +1 How many time and in how many ways can I like this post? I have said the exact same things numerous times on Nolasco myself. I liked the signing. It was a good move. It just didn't work out. Healthy, he can still be quite good for somebody. I truly believe that. But it's time to move on for both sides. That's just how it goes sometimes, whether it is a job, a romance or an athlete on a sports team. I don't know that anyone from the Twins has come right out and said anything resembling giving up on Nolasco and selling low. But it has been intimated by others. And I think it is ridiculous if at all true. You would play someone over another player just to increase potential trade value, but let the other, better player languish and the team lose to make your trade point/objective? As I stated in a somewhat lengthy post earlier today, (Mauer to the OF), I also am a Mauer apologist. But while an appreciative fan, I can be an apologist no longer. Now, or in the near future, the Twins will have ready Plouffe, (assuming he really isn't traded), Sano, Park, Kepler, Arcia, Vargas, Walker, amongst others potentially, needing AB's to produce, or at ,east show what they can do and are capable of. And most of those guys are about 25 or younger. And to a man, they all have greater offensive potential that what Mauer has produced the past two seasons. Again, OK BA and OB in '14 but zero power, a little more power in '15 but mediocre BA and OB, (especially for him) Mauer hitting .285 with a .370 OB and 34 Dbl and 12 HR, (HR's based 150 game Mauer flat out hitting better) is valuable. What we have seen the last two seasons, in comparison to what is here and coming, is not. For the good of the team, an ongoing version of this Mauer should be turned in to a bench player and veteran PH. There is no shame in this, only reality.

BIG TIME LIKE. Hughes, Santana, Gibson, Duffey and May, in whatever order, is the best starting 5 you could March out to the hill. You always need more than 5 starters over the course of a season so Berrios is your 6th guy for the moment. I understand shifting someone to the bullpen for NOW if there is a need or a logjam in a healthy rotation. But it is so wrong to arbitrarily decide at this point that May is destined for the pen in '16.

If there is any chance of keeping him healthy, I actually like this move. His career numbers, despite the lack of pure power that was expected, are quite solid. He's a solid 4th OF candidate. Though if Buxton is in CF, I'm not certain there is room for anyone, initially, besides Arcia for the 4th spot. But thus is a solid move.

This would be an example of Professor Harold Hill's "think system." You imagine or "think" of yourself performing in such a way that you learn to do so. Rumor has it the Twins are using Hill's system on a handful of relief pitchers to "think" of themselves as left handed and highly successful.

Your point is granted in regard to Nolasco. And I don't dislike Nolasco. Unfortunately, things just didn't work out. And not only do you have Milone as an option instead of him, but Berrios should be ready at some point, if not soon. So my one concern is comments and reports about not trying to move Nolasco for fear of selling short. To me, that is misguided. Both parties need a change. And I would really hate to think the Twins would consider not starting Milone, or Berrios simply to give Nolasco a shot at improving trade value.

Smart, well thought out, and difficult to disagree with. I might argue that a fully healthy Hughes is slotted ahead of Santana, but really, it's not going to matter much. Gibson obviously holds the 3 spot. And I absolutely believe that Duffey is in the rotation as well. Assuming Berrios begins in the minors, and he probably will due to depth to sort out and not service time, the 5th starter SHOULD BE May. He's not only young and talented and part of the future, he was pitching very well last season before his move to the pen. But rotation depth, and his success in the bullpen last season, almost certainly marks him for that role in 2016. (With hopes he may be able to return to the rotation in 2017) So you can start May, then move him to the bullpen when Berrios is ready. Or, you have Milone and Nolasco to fight for the final spot....until Berrios is ready. Right in line with your thinking. I would hope they wouldn't start Nolasco simply to help increase trade value.

Marshall would be my pick. Between he and Runzler, you'd be increasing the likelihood of finding a talented and veteran steal on the rebound. From there, you have the likes of Rogers and others for the second LH in the pen. (Milone?) In the past, the Twins did well converting LH starters such as West, Reyes and Swindell, for example. I haven't taken the time to really look at the LHSP market to see if there is a likely candidate for a move of this nature. But it should be considered.

Perhaps like May in 2016 and then back to the rotation in '17?

Duffey's emergence clearly shows the potential and reward to be had by drafting relievers and experimenting with them. It's not like you get to draft a Clemons or Verlander at the top of the draft board every year. Sometimes you have to groom a pitcher, not just draft one ready made. And to the Twins credit, the list of relievers that were given a starting shot really isn't that long. Tyler Jay appears to be a different sort of experiment. While his velocity will almost undoubtedly dip to "only" the low 90's as a starter, rather than the high 90's as a reliever, the fact that he comes to the Twins with a couple additional pitches already in the fold with potential makes him more of a starting candidate to begin with. If memory serves, didn't he often pitch multiple innings in many of his games? *side note: while Gutierrez was given a shot to start, wasn't that at least partially attributable to having more time to work on his secondary offerings for a relief role?

I read it in a book somewhere. Let me see if I can find it again. I'll forward you the title. "Baseball for Dummies" or something like that.

FWIW...I like Suzuki quite a bit. But I like him as a gutsy gamer of a guy who gets the respect of his teammates as a quality reserve. I don't know how good Murphy is going to be. I don't think any of us do, but we all hope for at least ML average. (which isn't such a bad thing considering how difficult it seems to be to find a catcher of this quality level as of late) But I imagine a lot of the conversations that have been taking place for young catchers that seem to have the big shine on them start something like: "Let's take a look at your top 10 prospect list..." And unless you feel really, really good about a guy, or he's really proven something, I'm not sure I'd pull a trigger on a move like that either. I also think Rosario is the better overall player than Hicks. He may never be the best OB% or contact guy in the world, but he has the look of a quality AVG hitter, has some good pop and power potential as well as speed and defense. I'm just not convinced, despite improvements last year, that Hicks is going to come close to his original ceiling. But remember, comparing an OF and a C based solely on offensive numbers really isn't a true comparison at all.

*A second note on the OF:* I don't see a problem with Arcia as the 4th OF, and I think it likely. He can play a corner OF spot, DH, perhaps PH here and there. With Rosario and Santana both able to play CF, the 4th OF doesn't have to be the classic 3 position player in this case. If you are Molly, you have to be a bit creative, but you move Arcia, Sano, Plouffe, Park and Mauer in and out of the lineup at the OF corner, 3B, 1B and DH so that matchups are favorable, everyone plays, no-one sits often, but you avoid Arcia and Sano in the OF together as much as possible.

Back to the basic title, "what holes need to be filled?"...... If the Twins are truly inclined to have Buxton begin the season in Rochester, obviously ST will sort some issues out, then we MUST find another option that can be a legitimate player there. If we don't, we will literally be starting a 4th straight season with a question mark in CF to begin the season. What kind of winning or competitive team has ever done that? Davis would be an excellent option, though I don't believe he's the only option. But solid, available, not overly expensive, not in a position to expect or demand a permanent gig? He might be the best choice. The team, as currently constructed, has exactly ZERO LHRP options that are proven. This also must change. Bastardo would be a perfect option. His signing will help the bullpen balance and depth immensely and not cost a fortune. Barring that, the team would have to look at lesser option, make a trade, or look/hope for a Swindell or Reyes starter converted to reliever option. Isn't it easier to just sign the proven commodity rather than trade prospects? Rotation speaking, Berrios opens in the minors barring a run of injuries or the such. Not for service time, but because the depth is enough that we probably need to sort a few things out. Does May open in the rotation, where he should be, and where I want him? Or, with Hughes, Santana, Gibson and Duffey already there, does May go straight to the bullpen for 2016 and have Milone and Nolasco fight it out for the 5th starting spot? 5th starter or long relief is the only way Nolasco should be kept around. Solid career pitcher. It just hasn't worked here. It's time to part ways and move on for both parties, whatever that takes. I've read about not wanting to trade low. But, would you dare put him in a higher position just to attempt to raise trade value at the risk of the team's record, or the regression of another younger, better pitcher? I'd sure like to think the answer is no.

I don't know if you can call them a great core or not...but you are making my memory take a stroll down the lane. Bostock, Larry Hisel, Ford, Smalley, Wynegar were all some pretty good ones. Unfortunately, they didn't fimish their careers in Minnesota, with the exception of Smalley coming back of course.

What baffles my brain right now is what to do about CF. Davis, who is solid but unspectacular, is used to being more of a role player than full timer? Revere? A lot of people want to blast him, and he doesn't have much of an arm, but he's got real speed in the OF and on the base paths and was solid at the plate last year with a decent OB. That can't be said about a lot of the Twins bats last year. Assuming they would have interest in signing, do you go heavier in your investment for Span or Fowler? They could play CF for now, then slide to a corner spot later. At the absolute worst, they see time as a multi position role player. They have to be interested in signing, and they would take more dollars and years, unless they are on a make good 1 year.

I wanted to like this, but I just can't agree with the "until it blows up in their face" part. I'm just not there yet. We still have to find someone to help cover CF, allowing Buxton to begin in Rochester since that seems to be the plan as of now. I think that clears the way for Arcia to begin the season as the 4th OF. It gives us a dangerous LH bat off the bench and to play OF and DH, and allows time to see if Arcia can fully rebound. At least until such a time that Buxton and/or Kepler are ready for promotion, at which time some adjustments would have to be made.