tobi0040

Doug is 40 years old and has spent probably 35 of those on baseball diamonds. Success in high school, college, olympics, and won a world series under a program that heaviliy relies on analytics. And has managed for two years. At this point in his life, "will listen" is not good enoug for me. If he isn't there yet, I don't want to hand over the reins and hope we have a convert later.

I think SD and Leviathan bring up some interesting points. While Doug has probably worked with 40-50 young players, here are the seven guys that will have the biggest impact on making the Twins relevant again: Buxton - played 90 games for Doug, has been very complimentary of Molitor Sano - played 56 games for Doug, has been very complimentary of Molitor JO - 96 innings under Doug Meyer- Never played for Doug May - Never played for Doug Gordon - Never played for Doug Kohl - Never played for Doug So I don't really see the connection to the future as a huge selling point for Doug. If he is more identifiable with younger players maybe, but being a first ballot HOF probably doesn't hurt Molitors credibility with young players. Here would be my two deal-breakers: If Doug really said he is not a huge SABR guy. Didn't we just get rid of a gritty, hard nosed guy that does not think math plays a big role in the game? This kind of reminds me of a guy that is sick of his wife of 20 years, divorces her and then re-marries someone that is identical to her. Can someone please send the link? I have not been able to find it. I also don't put much stock in Dougs handful of years of managerial experience. Paul Molitor is more than capable of constructing a lineup, yelling at umps, and playing the matchup game with the pen late in games. The fact that he played an extra 10 years at a much higher level should offset that IMO. I guess I don't see Doug's strengths as anythng close to weaknesses for Molitor. I think Molitors deal-breaker is how long is he willing to commit to managing this team. Obviously you can only go off of verbal commitment, but if is less than three years I don't really see the point.

Tough to say. It could be but I don't see them selling. They won 90 games in 2013 with basically the same team. Votto missed 100 games. They have plently of pitchers they could flip for bats.

True, but they are a contending team so I don't know that they will hand a spot on that talented team next year to Cingrani after the injuries.

I generally agree but I can't write off Walker as a non-stud. He has 30 HR potential and I agree he has a long way to go but he did improve some with his OBP this year.

Cingrani could actually happen. I have it on good authority TR was trying to get him instead of Meyer in the Span deal. That was before he was hurt all year and the Reds have a huge log jam in the rotation.

At the time, Maybin and Miller were big time prospects.

Clarification, I only support this hypothetical not going to happen deal if Stanton agrees to an extension.

Yeah, the Tigers gave up a marginal OF for the Padres and a good reliever for the Red Sox for one of the best players of all time. I will say, the Tigers don't rely on prosects the way the Twins do.

Regading the Stanton deal.....I am not expecting much out of Wheeler. I think Rosario still needs to prove he can be a corner OF bat. Walker is still quite raw. Sano, while a great prospect has some uncertainty about his position. I agre with DRJIM, that is not enough but I would do that deal.

I think 8/200 is reasonable if he was a free agent. My deal reflected he fact that he is effectively on a 2 year deal at $20M total now. If we ripped that up and gave him 6/110 we would effectively be giving him $22.5M a year extension on his existing deal, or paying him another $17M over the next two years. I go out 6 years and you go out 8. But I don't think we are miles apart. Call it 7/133. He gives up some money in exchange for security.

Both interesting ideas, but I don't see the Twins moving seven prospects right now, or turning around and dropping the $200M to sign those two guys. As a stand alone, I love the Stanton deal. He has two years left until free agency and that would solve our LF issue! If we ripped that deal up and gave him a 6 year, $110M deal it would be nice. Basically adding 90M over four years to what he is likely to make in arbitration. Not sure what the appetite would be for an NL team to get Sano given defensive uncertainty.

Unless it is a bad contract for bad contract move and we think the other guy will be better over the remainder of the deal.....I agree. Keep the guy. This would be a sell low and he has a good shot IMO to be much better than this season. Paying him to play somewhere else does not make sense after one injury riddled year. Then having to buy another pitcher.... One potential catalysts for a better team next year is 2015 Ricky being much better than 2014 Ricky. Before this year his ERA was 4.37. It was 5.38 this year. Give the guy 200 innings and that is a 22 run improvement. We move from 29th to 27th in runs allowed. OK, that was depressing.

Payroll will be about the same next year. Scratch Kemp and Hamels. You could get really creative, but the Twins have said they don't want two players making 50% of payroll as well. Not. Going. To. Happen.

I would part with Sano on a Shields like deal if we extended the guy a the same time. Tack on 3/69 to his existing 2-25. Before we do anything like that, we should explore just signing a guy. Which would you rather have: Lester and owe him $150M over 6 years and keep Sano Or A pitcher like Shields that is not as good for 5-94 and be out Miguel Sano The reality maybe that the top pitchers arent coming here, or maybe it will cost 7-175 and not 6-150. But we should make a calculated decision. I don't think we should part with Buxton or Sano right now on a 1-2 year thing. One player doesn't turn round a 70 win team.

I totally agree. The other thing that has been proven is that you can both play talented young players and field a team that is as good or better than by signing the likes of Pelfrey, Corriea, Kubel, Bartlett, and by playing AAAA types like Parmelee, Colabello, and insert several 28-30 year old pitchers. Twins - 70 wins Houston - 70 wins Cubs - 73 wins Marlins - 77 wins As we approach the winter meetings, free agency, and into the spring when we break camp I hope the Twins have learned this.

Good call. Always look at the alternative.

I think we are talking about two different things. First, the Twins benefit from a new-ish stadium. Minute Maid Park was built 14 years ago. The Twins also roped season ticket holders who signed up for a new stadium into hanging on for an all star game. So I think the Twins numbers are inflated quite a bit. We are at 2.2M this year while Houston is at 1.65M. I would not be shocked if the Twins dip into this range next year, given how many people cancelled. I also think attendace year over year should not validate a strategy. Houston has players playing and getting better that are part of their future. We have ran through the exercise already, but the Twins have wasted too many innings and at bats on guys that were never going to be part of the 2015 or 2016 team. Not to mention playing guys out of position. Not to mention we finished with the same record, so for my money I would rather win games and invest in the future versus 70 and invest in guys that will be retired or playing in Japan next year. So if the goal is to win, both now and in the future, I have a tough time seeing how their approach is not superior.

Regarding Myers contract, he seems like a guy that would fit into the mold of an extension that buys out a few years of free agency. Oddorizi has 5-7 or whatever. An equivalent trade would be a year from now, the Twins are a .500 team and trade Buxton and Berrios for 2 years of Shields. At the time, Myers was 3rd overall and Oddorizzi was 35th. I would be irate and the reliever would not help my fury!

Here are my two cents. There are times to bet the farm and times to not bet the farm. Is James Shields going to take a .500 team to the world series? We will soon find out. The relevance argument seems short term to me. KC is a middle market team that could have really used Myers and Odorizzi for the next 7-9 years on the cheap. They are now going to be drafting 15th for years and not signing anyone of value in free agency, i.e. no mans land. If this trade makes them better in year one, a playoff team that is not good enough to win it all like the Twins fom 2003-2010 for one year then worse for the next five or seven, is that a good trade? I can go along with the deal if they were an 88-92 win team before the deal and/or resigned him. But I truly believe this deal was made out of desperation by the GM and long term KC will regret it.

My guess is five years from now, they will want a mulligan. Myers is going to be an above average player for years. Odorizzi will be a long term #3 starter. And I don't see KC signing Shields, nor do I see them in the playoffs next year without him. The biggest issue I see is Moore bet the farm in order to keep his job, not because it was a prudent transaction.

I agree that we won't be good until the big guys get up and that in 2011 and 2012 we did't have many options. Although the fact that we let a bunch of ex-all stars go without much compensation probably at least played a role in not having anything coming up. But I think in addition to Meyer and May, Santana at SS, and Pinto at catcher could be useful pieces too. You could also list a few bullpen guys as well. But we simply don't know what we have

Sounds like no disagreement then. But I am guessing you agree that had the Twins acknowledged a rebuild and embraced a young movement, we would be better in 2015 and 2016. That was the point I was trying to make. Kuechel 439 IP. Mchugh 202 IP. Cosart 240 IP. Peacock 227 IP. All are pretty young. In addition to Altuve, Springer, etc. getting their feet wet. This does two things. Allows these guys to make adjustments and grow and gives the team clarity. Sometimes you think a guy is going to be good and he isn't, but clarity is valuable too

This may be your opinion, but the Astros have Altuve (24), Keuchel (26) Springer (25), Singleton (23) and Mchugh (27) on their team. A few young starters putting up league average numbers already and ahead of us on the experience curve. They have Correa, Mccullers, and maybe something comes of Appel, and two top 5 picks next year. Certainly not a lock that we leapfrog them. Folks on Astros Daily may disagree

I fixed the error about the record, I remember them being ahead all year. The comp wasn't the point I was trying to make though.