nytwinsfan

Well put. The frustrasting but probably inevitable thing for fans is that even now we probably don't know the whole story. So it is hard to judge what he and the Twins should do, but these latest comments from Mauer about vision problems are very upsetting. In retrospect, maybe he should have taken some more time off during the last couple years when the team wasn't going to make the playoffs anyway, to try to rest and give his brain some time to heal. But what do I know, maybe the best way to overcome the vision problems is to keep working out his brain by trying to hit baseballs. The human brain is a complicated and unpredictable thing.

Why tho, I thought Sano was going to be playing 3B for the next decade, right?

Two words: William Benson. http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/67565098/v532367683/draft-report-william-benson-high-school-outifelder WANT. Fangraphs ranks him 15th http://www.fangraphs.com/scoutboard.aspx?draft=2016mlb&type=0&pos=all and MLB.com ranks him 18th: http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=draft So in our range. I wouldn't be unhappy with Shore though. He looks solid, with a really high floor.

It makes absolutely zero sense to move Santana to the outfield. Why would Ryan do that? They have Rosario, Sano, Arcia, and soon Buxton and Kepler coming to the outfield. Why oh why do they need Santana there? Whereas in the infield their only backup is Nunez. I know that these comments by Ryan might be just that: comments. But one of the many jobs of a GM (and admittedly not the most important one) is to sound like you know what you are doing. It would be one thing to say Santana is going to be getting ready to play some outfield, which makes sense, but that's not what he said.

This is great, and no doubt Melotakis has serious potential, but is it really realistic to expect him to pitch at his potential in the majors so soon after TJ? Remember how long it took Gibson to get his control/command back after TJ? It took more than one year. I just think we shouldn't count on him to be ready this season. We'll have to see how he's doing.

Great detailed and thoughtful answers both on the pitching and training strategy stuff and on the rest. I like his attitude as well. Good luck this year.

The press is a lot different now than in 2008. In 2008 lots of people, including in the press didn't even know who the top prospects in the organization were. Now you have prospect-obsessed bloggers and tweeters sniping at Terry Ryan and Molitor and some (admittedly not all) paper writers who are sympathetic to the views of those bloggers/tweeters repeating those criticisms in a more diplomatic form.

I can see that possibly being the case with Kepler, but I don't think so with Berrios. By all accounts they would have brought him up last year but for the innings limits. If he pitches like he did last year the pressure from the fans and press to replace Milone or Nolasco or whoever is going to be immense.

As a general matter I don't necessarily disagree, but despite his second-half struggles, Dozier has been worth 3.7, 5.2, and 2.4 WAR the last three seasons. Yes, the second half of last year was discouraging but I don't think you can trade Dozier now and expect that it is likely or even probable Polanco will exceed Dozier's expected production in the next year or two. Polanco didn't exactly tear it up last year either. Ideally, Polanco would be a year or two younger with one or two more options, so he could take over for Dozier in 2017 or 18, but it is what it is. Better to see how Dozier does this year, and assuming he is still a 2 WAR or above player, trade Polanco down the stretch to a team that really needs a 2B and get some value for him, and then wait for Gordon or Palacios to take over for Dozier in 2-3 years. That's what I would do anyway.

Here is my prediction: 1. Gordon 2. Jay 3. 2016 First Round Pick 4. Gonsalves 5. Prospect From Plouffe Trade 6. Stewart 7. Javier 8. Palacios 9. L. Wade 10. Vielma 11. Thorpe 12. Melotakis 13. R. Rosario 14. F. Jorge 15. Walker 16. L. Diaz 17. 2016 Second Round Pick 18. Turner 19. Blankenhorn 20. Garver 21. F. Romero 22. Jean Carlos Arias 23. Y. Landa 24. Reed 25. L. Wells I predict Polanco, Palka and Harrison will either be with the Twins (small chance for each) or in another organization (by trade for Polanco, or release for the other two). I predict Meyer, Burdi, Rodgers, and Chargois will be with the Twins and have exhausted their eligibility. I predict Walker, Turner, Melotakis, and Reed will get Sept. call ups, but won't exhaust eligibility.

Nailed it there. Just one more reason (there are several) to trade Plouffe as soon as they can get decent value for him. Obviously different people have different ideas of what "decent value" means in this context.

I was responding to Mike Sixel with that post, not you. You made a good case, even if I don't agree with it.

True in general, but in this case how about responding to my specific evidence-based argument for why it is bizarre and not credible for this projection to systematically and drastically downplay expectations for four key Twins players compared to their actual performances over the last two years?

So for instance, in the two season period of 2014-15, Eduardo Escobar has the 11th best WAR (3.9) among SS in MLB for all SS with more than 500 PAs. In the same period, Dozier has the 3rd best WAR (8.2) in MLB among 2B with over 500 PAs. In that same period, Plouffe has the 13th highest WAR (6.1) in MLB among 3B with over 500 PAs. Rosario has only played one season, but during 2015 he was 13th among WAR (2.3) for LFs in MLB, although keep in mind he only played 122 games. Pro rated to 150 games, that would be closer to 2.8 WAR, or tied for 9th or 10th. So . . . Compare: Performance Projections (yours) Eduardo 11 37 Dozier 3 10 Plouffe 13 25 Rosario 10 35 Notice a pattern? So if projections ranked only one or maybe two of them A LOT lower than their previous years' production, I might buy it based on things like aging (for Plouffe or Dozier) or amazing luck (Escobar) or smaller sample (Rosario). But all four? I just don't buy it. So I think persuasively there is no clear "need" at any of these positions. Moving on, Murphy and Buxton are essentially rookies, as is Park (and likely late-season addition Kepler). All of them with the exception of Murphy have tremendous potential, and I think we have to give them a sustained chance. Sano is going to be fine, and then some. Mauer at 1B I buy is a "need," and assuming he doesn't back bounce from the concussion (which could happen) I'd be fine with finding a replacement for him in the starting lineup, except . . . yeah, that's not going to happen. So there is a need, but it is a need that is never going to be filled, Period. As for pitching, Gibson is good (as your projections concede) and Duffey absolutely deserves a shot after last year's fantastic performance. I think Duffey's projections discount him in part because they don't think the Twins will start him (and they might not), assuming you are using FGs. And although I'd be fine replacing Santana, Hughes, Nolasco, or Milone, the first two are locked in because of contracts (regardless of whether you agree with the idea that veterans with large contracts should be "locked in") and if we need another starter, it should be Berrios or May, who like Buxton, Park, Kepler, have enormous potential. So I argue for all practical purposes there is no "need" at starting pitcher either. The only positions where there is a need are relief pitcher and arguably catcher. But right or wrong, they just traded for Murphy, and they beleive in him, so they are going to give him a shot. So where is the "need" other than at relief pitcher? And even there, by the second half to the end of this season there will likely be a lot of very nice internal options.

Let's see how those four do based on track record over the last two years, not projections. Projections have a place in analysis, but they've been wrong about those four guys for a few years now.

Oh really, 3B is a need? We have two above average players, one with All Star potential, but it is a "need?" OK THEN. And yes, Sano has a position. It is 3B, and he has played it adequately for years in the minors. We won't know for sure if he can play it adequately at the major league level until he's given a chance to do it for quite a while, and he hasn't had that opportunity, but nothing, not his physique, his arm, or his athleticism suggests he can't play it. But other than 3B, I think we are mostly just having a semantic argument. To me, "need" was catcher until they got Murphy. Now we have an average or slightly below average catcher. To me, that isn't a "need." It is an opportunity for an upgrade, to be sure, but not a "need."

Other than Relief Pitcher, what needs? Starter? No, we have a logjam. Outfield? No, we have a logjam. Corner Infield? No, we have a logjam? Catcher? No, the Twins are going with Murphy in the medium run. Sure, we could upgrade at quite a few of these positions (most notably catcher), but other than relief, the Twins don't really have any "needs."

Yes, that is the definition of dominating. Having a .944 OPS between A and A+ as a 19 yo is abso****inglutely dominating. Similarly, having a .867 OPS between AA and AAA as a 21 yo after a year of being plagued by injuries is dominating. So TWO years of dominating and one year of injuries.. Also, comparing him to Vargas? Really. The closest Vargas ever came to doing something like what Buxton did in either of those two years was a .910 OPS over 302 PAs in AA and AAA as a 24 yo. Yes, you just compared Buxton, a CF with elite speed and defense, to a good DH prospect (who wasn't coming off a year of injuries) who did slightly better offensively when he was 3 years older. OK then. Buxton cannot hit a good breaking ball in about a quarter of a year of trying after a year of being plagued by injuries and after being rushed to the majors, not "period." In summary:

Hope that "very soon" means January 1st. :-) Can't wait.

I for one am not looking forward to Sano playing OF. I just really really hope he doesn't hurt himself running into a wall or diving awkwardly. Hopefullly half or more of his games will be at DH, 1B, or 3B filling in for one of the other three until a contender's 3B starts slumping or gets injured and we find a trading partner for Plouffe.

1. Buxton - CF 2. Kepler - LF 3. Sano - 3B 4. Park - 1B 5. Arcia - DH 6. Dozier - 2B 7. Rosario - RF 8. Murphy - C 9. Escobar - SS Bench - Turner, Mauer, Walker, Polanco I admit there is a decent chance Arcia won't make it here, and Mauer will be DH'ing instead. Also, I'm not sure Polanco will be around, unless Escobar or Dozier has a serious injury before he has been traded.

But this begs the question, why would you ever ever not start your best five starting pitchers? One answer, that applies only to Berrios, is service time. That make sense to me. I get it. If he is up in late May or early June or whatever, I will have no grudge. But Duffey and May are clearly (and I mean CLEARLY) better starting pitchers than Milone and Nolasco. There is no doubt about it. None. Zippo. Nada. So why even have Nolasco and Milone start one day? Sure, you can say it is only one game, or two games, or three (however long the "opening day ration" lasts). But playoff spots are determined by one or two games ALL THE TIME. So again, other than service time, why would you not start your best 5 starting pitchers? May is very good out of the bullpen, but he is also very good as a starter, and it isn't like Molitor will be using him in only high leverage situations, and even then, the chances that he would be worth more out of the bullpen are negligible. Nolasco and Milone refuse to pitch out of the bullpen? Who cares. They are paid millions of dollars to do what the coach says, not to be spoiled brats. Say what you will about Mauer, but he plays when and where the coaches tell him, because he's a team player that does what the coaches think is best for the team. If Nolasco doesn't want to pitch out of the bullpen, then he shouldn't get paid. I don't know what happens under the CBA when a player refuses to play where the coach tells them, but it should be that they don't get paid/get fined. I'm not against depth at SP. That is a different question. We shouldn't get rid of all three of Gibson, Nolasco, and Milone at the start of the season, or even two of them. But that is a different question than who should be starting, and it seems pretty clearly uniquivocal that the only reason not to start Hughes, Santana, Gibson, May and Duffey is for Terry Ryan or others to save face on a contract that turned out poorly, or to avoid ugliness because Nolasco is a spoiled baby, or because the Twins have a strange obsession with needing to have at least one lefty in the rotation. And those are all crap reasons. With the exception of service time considerations, start the best five pitchers, PERIOD. Everything else is just bull crap. RANT OVER.

I agree with Seth about the bullpen and what the rotation likely will be, but I think not giving May a chance to start is a huge huge mistake in terms of what it should be. Gibson is a solid #4, and Milone is a borderline #4/#5, but May is a likely #3 with #2 upside and #4 downside. I'd start May over Milone. Assuming no injuries to any of the other starters, I'd start Nolasco in AAA to "get back up to speed", put Milone in the long relief role, and then trade him as soon as someone needs a serviceable lefty starter. Then when you trade Milone, bring Nolasco up from AAA to the long relief role. At some point, if Berrios is ready, there are no injuries, and everyone else is pitching well (which admittedly is unlikely, given the way starting pitching goes) I would also consider trading Gibson if the return is good. Do I think the Twins will do any of that? Almost certainly not.