nytwinsfan

I think you are well on the legit side of the line here. I'm not excited about Buehler, Funkhouser or Cameron. Assuming Tate and Matuella are gone, I'd be more interested in Allard, Happ or Kirby, probably in that order (assuming Allard's health problems are resolved by this summer).

EXACTLY. This is the year to figure out what we have.

Tonkin and Achter could probably use more time, true, and Reed and Burdi definitely. But 2 of 3 of Milone, Pelfrey, and/or May need spots. I just don't buy it that any of those three will not be as good as Stauffer. Maybe May, but if so, that is because he is still working some things out to reach his much higher upside. Thielber may not make the pen and he has a noticeably better career FIP than Stauffer, playing in a more hitter friendly park. He's also a lefty. If Ryan really meant what he said about playing the best people, and thus was willing to bench Stauffer, I'd have no trouble with the signing. But that's BS, as we saw last year with Nolasco.

I think you are underestimating Achter, Tonkin, and Z. Jones. Yes, they don't have the same closer or set-up potential as Burdi or Reed, but they are legitimate prospects, and would have been top 10-20 in our system a couple of years ago. Arguably Tonkin and Z. Jones still are.

This literally has not happened, at least in the last few years. Hicks is the only recent high-ranking prospect that failed. Slama wouldn't be in the top 30 in the system today. Vargas, Santana, Gibson, Dozier, Arcia have all been solid or better. May was starting to figure it out before the season ended. Who else am I forgetting? In terms of FA, Nolasco, Pelfrey, Doumit, Marquis, Corriea, Willingham, and Morales, not to mention the countless "former-Twins" veterans, have either been mediocre (Willingham was good in 2012) or just disasters (everyone else). Only Hughes and Suzuki stick out as a FA signing that has worked out great in the last few years. Fein was a minor league FA who came up through Rochester, and thus was more akin to a prospect than Stauffer.

Nope, the worst that can happen is that a bunch of guys perform well in ST (and in the minors for that matter) and you end up not playing the guys who perform well because Terry Ryan needs to justify the signing.

Fair, but (1)-(3) also overlook: (4) Tim Stauffer hasn't been that great over the longer term for someone playing in Petco Park, (5) The Twins bullpen was bad last year because Perkins got hurt and the rest of the Twins bullpen was otherwise bad last year, whereas this year we have a lot more talent, young and veteran (Milone/Pelfrey) available and available soon, and (6) although I agree $2.2M is chump change, Terry Ryan doesn't like "chump change" going to "waste," so he will keep Stauffer pitching well beyond the point where someone else could be doing a good job to justify the $2.2M.

Good questions. Just funny because there have been many posts/threads devoted to the exhaustive debate of just these issues. Walker's potential is very very divisive.

Uggh, behind the paywall. If you have access, can you tell us their ordering beyond Aiken and Rodgers? Would really appreciate it. Also, amazing they still have Aiken first.

I just don't understand why they signed Stauffer. It makes no sense to me. There are plenty of good options, including whichever of Milone/Pelfrey/May don't make the starting rotation. And Tonkin, Z. Jones, Achter, and maybe even Burdi or Reed are right on the doorstep. What a waste of money. And I'm not just saying that because Stauffer has been poor this spring. His track record is not so impressive that I would sign him and take up spots for all of the above. It just made and continues to make zero sense.

Imagine when the team is actually good, selling out games, and selling out of Buxton and Sano jerseys.

Man, I hope so.

Yup, I agree with Nick. The reason that the Twins are going to start Santana at SS this year, but didn't last year has little to do with how solid we are at CF (John's right, there isn't much difference to last year). It has to do with who are manager is/was, and whether that manager was interested in winning as many games in the short run versus building for the long run. That being said, while we need to figure out if Santana can be a SS, we also need to find at bats for Escobar because we need to find out if last year was a fluke. With Polanco, Escobar, and Santana all capable of potentially playing a couple of positions and hitting well in the next few years, we need to figure out who is going to be our starting SS, who is going to be a solid utility player, and who is (realistically) going to be traded. Sorry, but that may require tinkering, and not always having the bat in the lineup on a given day that is likely to do the most damage that day. But this is the time to figure that out.

I don't understand what happened with Pinto. How can you be hit 3 times? (1) This can't be that common, becuase I rarely if ever hear about it. (2) Shouldn't Pinto have moved back a little? (3) Shouldn't Jones have moved forward a little? (4) This seems like something that shouldn't happen once, let alone 3 times in one AB. WTF? There must be something more to this story. Please let me know if you hear anything further, about Pinto's condition, or what happened. Really hoping he is ok and there is no concussion.

May's performance gets me pumped up. He clearly still needs to work on pitching from the stretch, but whether it is as a starter or a key reliever, this guy is going to be big for us in the future. Very exciting.

Pretty good list. Obviously, everyone has different views, especially down in the 20-30 range, but I thought noticeably absent were Garver, Cederoth, Tonkin, Max Murphy, and depending on how much you value potential, Lewin Diaz. Certainly others people could make an argument for as well. I was surprised they included Zac Larson, and Niko Goodruml, and to a lesser extent Darnell.

I don't get where this idea of lack of hard work comes from. Certainly, there are a couple of guys on this team that could be criticized for that (Hicks, mabye one or two others). But there is often one or two like that on most teams. Santana has worked his butt off by all accounts, and it just seems like baseless pop psychology to claim there is some kind of culture of losing with the Twins. And if there has been a culture of losing, which I don't have any team-wide evidence for and therefore am NOT asserting, it probably has much more to do with management (Gardy & Ryan) than it does with players. I am very very confident that Molitor will not allow there to be such a culture. He may be many things, but someone who allows a culture of losing is certainly not one of them. I'm not saying that if Santana plays SS and is terrible for many weeks or months at a time, he should automatically stay there. Playing him at SS is part of the competition that you want. I'm all for competition, especially in a year where we are unlikely to be contending, but you'll never have a competition for Santana at SS if you never give him a chance there. And I'd rather have that competition this year than next year, when Buxton will be in CF.

Well this just sucks. Hope he is ok.

Because you won't have a chance to contend in 2016/2017 if you don't play hard in 2015. You need to see who is good (maybe you are right, and Santana won't be able to handle SS, but you won't know if the guys don't play their hardest in 2015). And obviously there is some chance to contend in 2015, even if it is small. And you want fans to keep coming, for many reasons. So I don't think it follows from the fact that Molitor thinks there is a much higher chance of competing in 2016 or 2017 that the team should just dog it in 2015. It probably doesn't make sense for Molitor to even admit publicly they have little chance in 2015, even if he thinks its true. That's just common sense psychology. I think Dozier will be around and good then, but Plouffe will probably be traded by then. Perkins and Mauer might not be quite as good, but (1) they were not that great last year, (2) they might not be that good this year, and (3) there are a lot of potential replacements for them on the way. On balance, I think it is likely the Twins will be significantly better in 2016 and 2017. If you disagree, fine. There is always risk in prospects, true, but the current number and quality of them reduces that overall risk somewhat, and makes the upside pretty high. I'm definitely not against figuring out who we want going forward. In fact, that is what I want by starting Santana at SS. We've seen Escobar at SS, and he was pretty good, I'm not denying that. But Santana has higher upside, so let's give him a shot. Escobar should certainly get plenty of playing time as the backup infielder. And if Santana falters at SS, then we can go back to Escobar. You say you want to see which one "is better and has more potential" but if you put Escobar at SS, we'll never know Santana's potential. We already know Escobars.

Thanks for the interesting list and thoughts. One reliever I think people might be overlooking is Sam Clay. His results looked bad last year, but he has good stuff (low 90s lefty w/ good slider), and the results were the result of a ridiculous .443 BABIP. People are constantly talking about how Santana is going to regress from his .405 BABIP, but pitchers traditionally have even less control over their BABIP than hitters, and Clay's was even higher. His FIP was actually quite respectable, based on a lot of Ks, with his main problem being Walks. But even walks, about half of his were in his first five games (Burdi had problems with walks his first game or two as well). So he's definitely someone whose potential is being underrated right now.

I mean, yeah his 2014 was strong. He was worth more than 6 WAR for a team that almost won the World Series.

Reports of Santana's defense that I've seen are that he has the tools (quickness, hands, arm) to be a solid defender, but makes too many errors. And his defense so far this spring has gotten glowing reviews. He probably has the higher long-term upside with the bat compared to Escobar, so let's see if he can stick at SS. I'm totally with you on playing Rosario in CF though. At least platoon him with Hicks. Either DFA Nunez (having Rosario be the secondary back-up infielder) or DFA Schafer.

In 2015, probably. But in 2016, a team with a MLB-experienced Santana at SS and Buxton in center probably beats a team with a non-MLB-experienced Santana at SS and Buxton in center. And the chances of contending in 2016 (and 2017) are much higher than in 2015. That's what Molitor, correctly, sees. I think the Twins will be decent this year, exceed expectations, and maybe even get close to .500, but making the playofffs in 2016 and 2017 is just way more important than getting a couple games closer to .500 this year. That's how I see it, anyway, and I think that is how Molitor sees it.

Great, just what we need, a manager who doesn't believe in saves. Next thing you know you'll be telling me Molitor believes in vaccines, global warming and evolution too.

All of that makes sense for the Twins, except for the big negative for Plouffe. Are they just assuming that last year's defense was a fluke, and that he will regress?