DocBauer

May was acquired by the Twins as a strapping, hard throwing SP. He has the frame and stuff to be a workhorse and throw many innings. No scouting report I ever read had him as a proverbial Ace, but all had him as a potential #2 SP, with a floor as a solid #3, and at worst, a #4 who could eat innings. The issue was not stuff, or endurance, but simply control to be effective enough as a 2 vs a 3 or 4 SP. And then, he found control. Like almost any young pitcher, he had a few bumps in the road. Witness Berrios, this season, everyone's darling and hope, showing great stuff and potential, but hitting a couple bumps as he acclimated to the ML. May wasn't great in 2015 as a SP, but he was OK. And he was getting a groove, and IMPROVING start to start. But the Twins had contention hopes, and TR brought in Jepsen and nobody else, so they moved May to the bullpen to help out. And he did great. And he probably has the potential to be a great RP. And right now, it could be debated if the Twins even need a closer, the truth is, with Jepsen regressing so much, a strong arguement could be made for May to audition for the role. But what helps the Twins in the long run more? Developing May in to a potential closer, or top set up man, OR, taking his arsenal of stuff and seeing what you may have in him as a viable, quality SP? Couldn't you always move him back to the pen at a later date?

I see where you are going here, and I appreciate your enthusiasm and ideas. But I'm going to disagree somewhat with your construction, as listed. First, given some real time at Rochester, which he is getting, there should be real hope and expectation that said AAA time, and additional ML time later on, that Buxton should be hitting at the top of the order somewhere. Second, I don't want to trade Dozier. I'm not sure how many people really WANT to see Dozier traded. But as I also stated recently in another thread, it may simply be prudent to do so. Polanco has a ton of talent and potential. But you will never see a return on that talent if you keep Jenkins him around, up and down, on the bench, and constantly moving him around. He is such a good hitter and overall producer that the past three seasons, every team he's been on places him in the 1 or 2 hold, and eventually moves him to the 3 spot because he's so solid and productive. He needs a spot, and I won't argue that point in the slightest. Third, I know this has been an ongoing debate for some time, but the roster as you select it...and I dont disagree...I think Mauer, looking like his old self, is best in the 3 spot until Kepler is ready to take it from him. I really believe that is his future spot. I also agree on the rotation. It just makes too much sense to not be that way, though we do run in to the 6 men for 5 spot debate. I also can't argue with your bullpen, though I think it's more fluid. Even with the Hughes move there, there are multiple possibilities there to be determined.

What is so damn frustrating is that it just seemed so blatantly obvious what had to be done! There were numerous options available to add some of the veterans that you speak of, to the bullpen and the OF. There were many OF and bullpen options to be added that would not have broken the Twins financial backs! As I stated in a previous thread, Cleveland is playing a pair of veteran OF's in Byrd and Davis that would have been perfect options to mix and match with Arcia, Rosario and Santana to allow Buxton and Kepler the time they needed. I get keeping Plouffe. I really do. Park had excitement and potential, but also a lot of questions as to how quickly he would assimilate. And while we all hoped therapy, hard work and more time removed from concussions would see some sort of return to the old Mauer, how could anyone know that it might actually happen? Imagine if the supposed limited market for Plouffe netted no immediate help but he was traded and Mauer continued to struggle, or decline, and Park simply wasn't ready. We'd be hearing protest after protest for selling short and not having options. But now, it IS time to think about moving Plouffe. Along with others, even with sunk costs. But those sunk costs will eventually come off the books over the next couple of years, we MIGHT actually get a solid return or two, and the replacement players will be playing for minimum contracts. You mention struggles by committing further to the youth movement that is already taking place. This team is already struggling. More power to the continued rebuild!

Yes they have. And really, shouldn't we expect at least a few struggles from such young players? I'm really disappointed in Rosario though, agree with you on that point. He has SOOO much talent. Considering his milb history as a productive hitter, and a not too bad OB% either, and what he did last season, i really believe he'd take last year's experience and build on it. It obviously hasn't happened to this point. I keep wondering f he's pressing, trying too hard for the bomb or big hit? At this point, our OF options are a bit limited, unless we're going to March Polanco or Nunez out to the OF. I think he could also benefit from some time at Rochester, but I don't know how wed do that at this point. Play Mastroianni every day? (Shudder) I like the idea of him getting some CF time to see if it could snap him out of things. At this point, with limited options, we might just be better off playing him daily.

So you're saying we're #1 in something?

One...I absolutely would not trade Gibson. Are we really so jaded with this season that we would trade a solid, still relatively young SP this soon due to frustration? Let's get real people! He had a solid "rookie" year in 2014 and an even better 2015 despite W-L record. He has flashed almost dominance at times, and you want to dump him based an a couple poor starts before going on the DL? Two...Plouffe is a solid, productive ML player. Quit the hate out of frustration that he's not a stud or trade able stud. He really should be moved at this point, or soon, for whatever can be acquired. And it stinks that there isn't a big market for a solid, productive 3B like there was a few years ago. She point 3 for more. Three...despite attempts to improve the team, or at least keep it afloat for contention, the Twins find themselves now find themselves handcuffed to a few contracts. And we argue and debate at length about such. But in the rather obscene reality of financial contracts of sports today...a rookie contract pays more than most of us will make 5 plus years. If the Twins were to cut bait on some of these contracts...possibly getting something back with money or a prospect thrown in...they would be replacing said contract player with a minimum or slightly above contract for a year or two. Isn't that worth a more interesting, competitive, building for tomorrow team? Move Nolasco, Perkins if you can when healthy, Hughes or Santana if you can, Plouffe, maybe Dozier, and move forward.

May should have never been moved to the pen. Period. End of story. Someone besides Jepsen should have been brought on board to flesh out the bullpen. Right now, we are hoping and concentrating on Berrios and Duffey being allowed to stay in the rotation. Until another move, or two, is made, this is a sticking point as sooner or later Gibson will be back. (This is a good thing) Room still needs to be made. But until additional room is made, and it could be tough to do so, money already spent and committed just nèeds to be washed and swallowed in favor of smaller contracts with larger potential, May should be auditioned to a greater role vs Jepsen.

Actually, despite some fun and sarcasm, there are a LOT of great points here. Liked several, can't quote all of them. I like Plouffe. I would have kept him as well, unless there was actually a quality trade option for him. Coming in to the season you had young stud Sano, but Mauer and Park were mysteries. Park was and is loaded with potential. He's got flaws and is still ,earning, and Mauer has looked a lot like his old self until a recent slump, (is that reality or just a slump with nobody hitting around him?) But come on, Sano IS a competent 3B with room to get better. He showed it in the minkrs, he showed it in limited time last season, and he showed it recently when Plouffe was on the DL despite not playing the position in ST, or the early in the season, or despite reports he wouldn't play the position this year. (Banging my head against any nearby wall) I say again, platoon Plouffe, until or unless traded, with Mauer and Park and Sano at 3B/1B/DH/RF. Why is Sano the ONLY one to be asked to play out of position? PLAY POLANCO! He has tremendous potential as an overall productive hitter. Every time milb teams try to bat him 1st or 2nd, he ends up being a #3 hitter in their lineup. Why? Because the guy is a talented hitter! Bring up Beresford if you want someone to sit on the bench! I disagree with bringing Buxton or Kepler up right now. As much as it hurts, give them time.

50 bucks?! You big spender you! Too rich for my blood...or wallet.

I really like this. It's a frustrated, but really smart post. I suppose it's easy to say the smart plans are the ones that work. But there is truth as well as fiction involved. Having a plan and following it is great, and will hopefully pay off in the long run. Having no plan almost guarantees no success. But not every plan works for every team, to state the obvious. Some teams simply have more money to work with and can augment their rosters with big FA signings, extensions, taking on trade dollars, etc. Much like the Cubs example mentioned here, or the Yankees, who actually achieved success when they finally kept and promoted their own and supplemented with big paydays. (Sort of like the Cubs example) I am not defending Ryan, though at times I believe I see where he is going and what plan he has, but I feel that if he is guilty of anything, it's not making a strong enough commitment in any one direction. Given a chance to spend real money, he's made unprecedented moves in the FA pool to augment the team, try to keep them winning, to some degree, rather than embrace all out "rebuild", a word and option we know he dislikes. Part of me gets that, understands it, and even appreciates it as a fan. But even as you try to play the FA game, to keep your head above water, and put a better product on the field while waiting for the youngsters to come up, you also can't ignore short comings on the roster, and gamble that these players will leapfrog AAA and leap directly to the majors to provide a boost. CF for three years and the bullpen for two are prime examples. Nolasco didn't really work out. It happens. Santana and Hughes weren't bad signings, nor was Suzuki. But extending Hughes and Suzuki were big mistakes. Not adding an OF or two to bridge the gap, or adding to the bullpen with pieces that wouldn't break you, and could maybe later be traded, we're also big mistakes. I think he's allowed himself to be caught between trying to be competitive and the dreaded "R" word, and now the Twins are flailing and failing this season somewhere in between.

I agree with the first part of the sentiment, but not the second portion. I absolutely agree that it is time, or will email time, to bring in new blood and new ideas. The Target corporation example is a great one. After a time, not necessarily through the fault of anyone, ideas and approachespecially become stale. Much like with the manager or head coach of any pro franchise, no matter how successful, eventually ideas become outmoded and voices become more difficult to listen to. Just as players themselves need to be replaced at times, so do coaches or FO personnel. Back in the day, the previously mentioned Andy McPhail was a tremendous example of this for the Twins. So I agree with new blood. I don't know, necessarily, if that is in the GM spot or president of operations. And I also agree with said new blood making various decisions as to who stays and who goes, who fits, and who doesnt. But, IMO, it's overreaction to call for a complete house cleaning just for the sake thereof. St Peter and Antony are prime examples. I've never seen the ad with the cancer patient, and I strongly disagreed with his comments in regard to the 25th man on the roster comment, as well as his "the Twins Way was a media creation" comments. Both were limited in thought and rather assanine, I thought. All roster spots are important, and the proverbial "Twins Way" was about smart and well-rounded baseball. But I can't look at past successes and Target Field and say he needs to automatically go. Same with Antony. He seems respected and knowledgeable in his daily functiomns, but that doesn't mean he should be a strong GM. He was acting GM previously for a few months. A poor performing team at that time shouldn't define whether or not he's a capable assistant. It seems our past few drafts have brought high quality. There has been a noticeable shift in the organization in a more power pitching approach. The last couple of seasons, most of the Twins milb clubs have ranked near the top of their respective divisions in quality starts, SO's, etc. Just because the vast majority of the Twins top 30-ish prospects haven't reached the majors yet shouldn't be an indictment to the scouting department or those running the milb show. We've all been impatient and extremely eager to see the kids reach the Show. Some of them have, some have had cups of coffee, some are getting really close to debuting or "sticking", some appear ready or close to AAA and AA advancement. We can argue about rate of promotion, or some sitting on the Twins bench, and with sound reasoning, but to just "wish" them al, to the ML at a super quick pace is not practical. In short, new blood is a definate, but cleaning house for the sake of doing so is baby out with the bathwater IMO.

I've got to say, and it's just a hunch and no condemnation to Turner or his potential, but I also have had a feeling that Garver would be the best overall player of the two and become the starter.

No matter how terrible, disappointing or gut - wrenching this season has been, I still keep envisioning an Aug. 1st lineup with Buxton in CF, Kepler in RF, Sano at 3B, Arcia/Rosario in LF, Polanco in the middle infield, Murphy as the primary C after his AAA success and promotion, and Berrios starting the game.

Now see, except for moving Plouffe down to the 7 hole, I actually like this lineup. Though, to be hinest, I'm not even sure why Plouffe is playing. Only 2 Gan Messenger to shake the rust off and they say he's still not 100% but is trying to play through it.

I agree 100%. And part of that process is to let guys like Buxton and Kepler every single game and AB they can at Rochester. It's also the reason I wasn't too upset by the Mastroianni promotion. It's not the option I'd like to have, and I don't think I'd be starting him, but, I'd rather him in the short term. But the other part of making this happen is opportunity. And that comes from doing things differently than before. We can lament all we want about past business, or this offseason...and with good reason in some instances. ..but whats important is how business is done going forward. Some of the recent options and waiver wire moved allow for said change. Will it be maintained? It has to for the team to move forward. That's going to mean a few tradex, the eating or partial eating of some contracts, and possibly the inclusion of some lower level prospects as well. But it's the only way you make room for Berrios and Duffey, or May, etc., plus maybe acquire another C or RP. BTW...I still want May in the rotation as well. But the way things are set up at the moment, Meyer off to a good start and minting it is probably the more likely option.

I am not willing to abandon Gibson after a poor start and injury. Considering what he's shown the past two seasons, and apparently still has upside, I'd really like to hold on to him. I think frustrations are boiling over to the point where fingers start getting pointed everywhere and anywhere. The Twins needed to make room in the rotation to keep Duffey and Berrios both. Half of that mission is acco,polished now with the removal of Milone. Nolasco needs to be next. The reason is simple, contractually, he should be easier to move than either Hughes or Santana. I disagree he doesn't have value. His contract is not grossly out of line, is good for only one more year, and his overall career numbers have been solid. I could see a team, NL, with aspirations and a hole or injury needing some help that would consider him a solid pickup. Especially, as I have long maintained, the Twins were to pick up a portion of his dollars, and possibly throw in a lower level prospect. I would love to see a 3rd opening eventually, trade or move to the pen, to make room for Meyer, or possibly May back to the rotation. But for now, clearing space in the rotation is a big issue.

I stuck to INF and OF in my previous post. (And they are somewhat tied together at the momemt) Catcher is a mess. And I would not dare so to not go get another one if you can...reasonably. While both Turner and Garver offer some hope, the best we can hope for now is that a month of Murphy at Rochester will get him looking more like the player we hoped we were getting all along. Then, he needs to be promotec, started, and let Suzuki be the backup. (Or gone) Did I read somewhere recently that the team ERA with Murphy starting was substantially better than when Suzuki started behind the plate?

I hate to say this as I love the guy, he's done a lot for the team, is not 30 yet, and sooner or later is going to come out of his current slump, but it may be time to seriously look at moving Dozier. Today? Probably not. But maybe come June and he's hitting like he has in the past? You can't have a young talent like Polanco, filled with potential, even if it is ultimately determined that he can't be an everyday SS, and just keep yo-yo-ing him in and out of lineups, up and down the Minnesota-Rochester shuttle. How about Sano at 3B, Escobar at SS, Polanco at 2B, Nunez and Santana at utility, Mauer and Park sharing 1B/DH. By the season's second half, the OF could include Buxton, Kepler, Arcia and Santana as a fill-in. Unfortunately, that still leaves us potentially an OF short, unless Rosario finds himself again. But still, doesn't that INF/OF situation just make a lot more sense that where we are at now?

Nolasco, healthy again and having moments and games of looking like a viable MLS again, he may have trade value. Particularly to a NL team where he has spent the majority of his career. Or, put another way, healthy again and only 1 more year left on his deal, the Twins have to find a way to move him to keep Duffey and Berrios both in the rotation. Plouffe has been mentioned yet again. Healthy, fieldimg, hitting as he has most of the past couple of seasons, I'm still surprised that "reportedly" he has little individual trade value. Maybe as part of a package, especially if someone has a significant injury any time soon. If the Yankees are ready to start tearing things apart, maybe there. Long shot, but maybe. Moving Plouffe and obtaining SOMETHING of value also helps set the INF with Sano at his natural and more comfortable 3B position. Which, in turn, helps, eventually, set up the OF. As to the original post, a healthy Santana, back in a groove and not throwing like his last start, and with his career track history, would be the one guy that would qualify, or come closest, to being a #2 SP. But, while he is not owed a fortune by any means, 2 remaining years on his deal would scare off a lot of teams IMO.

Lolligaggers!

Absolutely they bear responsibility. Both for last year and this year. And the FO has been terribly "hopeful" and short-sighted as to be depending on such rapid progress/preparedness of these youngsters. Burdi getting hurt, however, doesn't help. Chargois seems to be the real deal. But with so much time missed due to injury, I'm stil, OK giving him a little more time. But he should be at Rochester immediately, IMO. Not in regard to your post Mike, but in general, I find it interesting that the past couple of seasons there has been much consternation about Tonkin and Pressly actually getting a fair chance to show what they can do. And now, this year, they are finally getting that opportinity. While the results have certainly been mixed, there have been positives as well. And yet, in frustration for a losing team, and a bullpen who's two "mainstays" have been hurt, or ineffective, or both...along with the Fien situation...there seems to a relative ease to also point to Tonkin and Pressly. I'm not really sure thats fair at this point.

I'm a huge fan of Dozier. And I'd hate to see such a good and productive player lost to my team. (I say this in spite of his struggles this season) But if we look at roster construction the rest of this year, and going forward, it may simply be a better fit for Polanco to take his spot. Sano plays 3B. Escobar holds down SS. We have 1B and DH set, it seems, for the foreseeable future. Eventually, Buxton and Kepler should be 2/3 of the OF, with Arcia, Rosario and Walker strong factors. Palka? Maybe. Santana? Maybe? Maybe it's just me, but it seems there is a path here that seems kind of obvious.

Brandon, a really great article. Thoughtfull, direct, and I believe accurate. Well done! And thank you for an honest and "step back" perspective. While I hope I don't end up repeating you too much, I have some points I'd like to add. 1} It's simply way too late, and meaningress really, to play GM in a revisionist role. But since you brought up the points, I feel compelled to do so. I am NOT going to play the bash TR game. However, IMO, he has blown the CF situation for 3 years, and the bullpen for 2. I have stated before, and you pretty much said the same thing, that the otherwise conservative Ryan was gambling on prospects being ready. Hicks wasnt, and Buxton wasnt. The young, power armed RP weren't and still aren't quite. But instead of providing alternatives, we are stuck where we are now. It seemed OBVIOUS to me that what the Twins needed was a veteran RH OF to play both corners, a possible 4th OF/CF option to delay Buxton, and a couple of quality RP. And yet, none of these moves took place. There WERE options for these spots that would not have cost a fortune...some of them may have been along the lines of make good contracts...but they were out there. Cleveland has 2of them alone in Davis and Byrd. How much better are our options now if we have them, or someone like them, to platoon with Arcia and even allow Rosario to go down and find himself? And again, I simply can't believe...though I agree with avoiding 3 year contracts...that a couple quality, experienced RP couldn't be moved at some point to a team in need later this season when any youngsters proved ready. 2} Plouffe should have been moved. I like Plouffe. I still do. But Sano is the future, should be at 3B, and we are only delaying his overall value, and positive roster construction by forcing him to the OF. Even with questions about Park's ability to fit in right away, there were enough options available that moving Plouffe in some sort of deal should have taken place. 3} I absolutely agree about giving Buxton and Kepler time. (Reference point number 1) The hype, hope, talent and potential for both is tremendous. But as you pointed out, Buxton has so few games and AB above A ball to almost be scary. And despite all of Kepler's tools and potential, he was very raw, is just coming in to his own, and it is very short-sighted, perhaps irresponsible to just want to promote them and play "sink or swim. 4} As disappointing as this season has turned out to be, as much as we want all of these tremendous young talents to succeed, there is a learning curve attached. And promoting them too soon, or promoting them and sitting them on the bench, is not the answer. The problem is not having some sort of viable option at the ML level to better allow this. Polanco is another name you bring up. I think there are still question marks what to do with him, where he fits in best. And I'm not sure I have a proper resolution. But there has to be a plan in place here at some point. He is just way too young, way too talented, has way too much talent to just be yo-yo'ed around the way he has been.

Also really surprised Fien was claimed and not Milone. Please, please, if Fien does well for the Dodgers, new team and new league that doesn't know him, lets not jump on some "the Twins should known better" bandwagon. I'm confused about the Dean promotion. I just don't get it. He is not a top prospect by any means, but I'm not a hater. The vitriol against him is very misplaced, IMO. And he may end up doing a great job, who knows. But if you are not going to keep and use O'Rourke as an effective LOOGY, then why bring up Boshers? I know he's just turning 28 and was in the independent leagues a year ago, but he was good there, seems to throw fairly hard, had a solid ST, has excellent numbers at Rochester through 10 appearances and 12 IP.

The reason Mastro is back, in theory, is he can PR and be a defensive replacement, with a start here and there against LH pitching. I'm not saying he's an ideal option. And I could be accused of attempting to spin things in a positive manner. And I really wish we had Sweeney still around, or another veteran option. But I'd rather promote a 5th OF bench option...for NOW...than interrupt much needed playing time and AB for Buxton, Kepler and Walker. Yes, Buxton is playing better. I get that. And he is super, super talented with a potentially huge future in front of him. But having already been promoted twice when not ready, I feel it's a lot better to give him more prep time and experience, as wel, as continued confidence and good mojo, than to rush him right back. Come on waiver wire!