ShouldaCouldaWoulda

The biggest concern I have with the possibility of Sano in the OF would be the greater chance of injury. One thought I have not seen mentioned in Plouffe trade attempts is to Atlanta, since they are now converting Olivera to the OF there. Not sure what type of packages would/could be sent both ways in this case, but at least it seems like a reasonable trade partner in need of a 3B. If you look around the league, there are not many teams with a need at the position, and most have good young options currently. Who is our backup 3b next year, if Sano starts there and Escobar starts at SS? *On a side note, how is Dozier's arm, and would he even possibly fit as a potential 3B? I am not looking for answers if the Twins would play him there, as they seem to behind the curve in creating positional flexibility and maximizing rosters with position movement, but just want to know if he'd even profile there.

I hear you! It is kind of an insult saying he's a good "innings eater." One should not take that as a compliment, but as someone who is "replacement level" and temporary, until a good option comes along. I understand where it is nice to have a guy who can go deep into games, but going 6-8 innings each game, while giving up 3-5 runs more often than not is not a good thing. I just "feel" like the Twins would love to have them some gritty Alfredo Simon, Tom Koehler, Rubby De la Rossa, Wade Miley, Colon, Colby Lewis, and Jeff Samsdfasfjdioo;jia on their staff this year. All above 4era's and above 185 innings. But, if the Twins DO go out and sign a pitcher this year...it HAS to be Mike Leake! He is way too Twins-like NOT to have on our team. Just a guy who throws a ball, can approach 200 innings, puts a magnet on the baseball before he throws it, and outperforms his peripherals, and would be coming over from the easier league. Welcome aboard new team ace Leake! Just kidding, but I would not be one bit surprised at it, nor would I be surprised at people loving the signing here. They like the Eddie George's and Leroy Hoard's of pitchers, "Need 1 yard? I will give you 3, need 5 yards? I will give you 3".....for 300 plus carries of mediocrity.

Yeah, I don't remember anything ever being done on it at any of the SABR-sites, so was just curious if I was missing something.

I was very excited and optimistic about the Nolasco signing, and Hughes. No seriously, I was pumped about buying low on Nolasco. Not afraid to look like an idiot.

Anyone know of any work out there that has discussed or studied whether or not certain "types" of international prospects have a higher success rates than others? For instance, Cuban Sluggers in their 20's I am guessing have a higher success rate of translating well to U.S. professional success. But, what about 16 year old slick fielders that are wiry and guessing on future weight/builds vs. 16 year bigger kids that are all bat, but position is uncertain? Seems like their a lot of middle infielders in the pros, but then again, there is likely more international kids singed as SS's too than other positions. Just curious if there is some correlation research done of the MLB international players, and to what their prospect report said about them when they originally signed. Would be interesting to see if there is any common denominators that pops out, and what things were NOT said about them? Any guesses, or anyone up for this challenge?

Defensively, he is actually worse than Suzuki. One of the worst in the league. Not a lot that the two of them add behind the plate, maybe they combine to create a competent hitting platoon though, which is at least directionally right in that regard. I would rather go with a defensive-minded guy, who can frame well, and calls great pitch sequencing and location. I do not personally feel the either AJ or Suzuki offer us any of that. But, I am going into next year with very low expectations at catcher, so maybe I will be surprised.

That seems seems like an awfully long time to keep him down in the minors next year, IF he is hitting and healthy, and or, if we are having struggles in the OF in the majors. I DO think it would be wise to let him start the season, so that we can play Hicks, Rosario, and Arcia to start the year. We need to see if any of those guys have improved or regressed. Everyone one of them has at least one major offensive flaw that could drag them down next year. Hicks can't hit 70% of SP's, Rosario is allergic to walking, and Arcia is an enigma at this point. The could all come out an mash, or they could all succumb to their negative flaws.

If Buxton is in AAA, how long do they need to keep him down in order to achieve any service time saving?

Who I personally think/guess the Twins best 5 in-house starters are: #1) Berrios #2) Santana #3) Duffey #4) Gibson #5) May However, that really doesn't matter at all. So, how I think the rotation begins with a veteran : #1) Santana #2) Gibson #3) Hughes #4) Nolasco #5) Milone Notes: -Santana pitched like an Ace after the coaches fixed some of his mechanics. He is getting older, but should be rested up for at lest the first half or so. I think he should be good, but pitchers are pitchers, and impossible to know what they will end up as. -Hughes might be done. Seriously, the lost velocity is very concerning. Sure, you don't NEED velocity, but the data strongly shows that "individually" a pitchers stats get worse with the decline of his velocity. It rarely climbs back up. It might happen, but I am just going with my gut that Hughes might be done as an effective pitcher. Hope I am wrong, but expecting a bounce back seems a little less realistic than expecting something more close to what we saw from him this year. I wouldn't be surprised if we finally had to cut bait with him in the rotation by the end of next year, but they will keep putting him out there no matter what unless he gets hurt. If you have a big dollar contract and are healthy, you will be starting on this team, and most teams. -Nolasco is likely not going to give us anything but frustration, and he will not be traded. He has/had the stuff to succeed, but seems to be one of those guys who always underperforms his peripherals often enough to suggest that there is something amiss with him, whether it be predictably and sequencing, tipping pitches, or just missing spots. I don't know, but I am not counting on him to be anything, and he was the buy low free agent that I was by far the most excited about. I thought it signaled the Twins were becoming more stats inclined. Maybe he turns it around, but there is enough failure there to suggest he should have an extremely short rope, but it will be long. -Milone is the type of pitcher who can have a great game if all the elements are in his favor, but if they are not, he is a batting practice pitcher. Wouldn't be surprised to see him in the rotation all of next year due to some good games and stretches, and the desire for one left-hander, but think he flops to a 4-5 era range. No upside at all, just the hope that he gets lucky for a long stretch of time. -Gibson likely is what he is. He could have longer stretch of his first half success or he could have a longer stretch of his second half failures. So anything from 3.50-4.75 era is what we are looking at. I would say that is the most realistic range, but could somehow reach 3.25 if everything fell right. -The young guys I THINK give us some good upside and "stuff" and increased k%. The defense won't be as big of an issue. May probably never gets the chance to start, Berrios won't be up until May I would bet, and Duffey SHOULD start the year in the rotation, but for some excuse won't. Meyer never sees the MLB as a starter I don't think, especially with the contracts and performing young guys in front of him.

Feel free to add your own insight here, for your vote. So far Soler is in the lead but with NO 1st place votes. Wonder if Playoff performance is effecting votes. Would things change if Conforto blasts a monster bomb today? I personally think Soler, Conforto, and Bird offer the most upside with their elite exit velocities. But, I worry about Soler's roundball rate hurting is power, and hoping that he was just hurt earlier in the year because he is hitting now, like the way he did last year. Conforto might sit vs LHP's and be suppressed by the the park and his divisions pitching staffs. Russell might have a tough time moving up in the lineup with all the other bats, and his swing just looks slower to me and not very smooth. I know he probably will be elite hitter at SS, but just not sold on him. Baez has the contact issues, but could have the highest upside, considering position and power. Yelich just don't see ever hitting for power with that crazy roundball rate and park. Bird, I really really like due to his power and home ballpark, but might have a tough time getting in the lineup next year, and being at a position where you can scrap together guys in the late rounds that still give you power. Just my take. At this moment, I agree with the results in keeping Soler, but probably have conforto right with him, and the Russell. Having Correa and Seager already also plays into this decision, but it shouldn't since I can start all 3 with Russell at 2B and Correa and Seager at SS and MI, or even one at Utility.

Good idea. I will look into it.

Thrylos answers this. Pretty sure that he hasn't been going by Gregory since he was called up at least, but could be wrong.

I assumed that, and corrected what I meant for you. I just added the overall batting averages because that is the type of game Polanco would be relying on. Basically, I was saying that he isn't a lock to hit for .300, and without walking as much due to being thrown ALL types of pitches for strikes, that he might just carry an empty batting average.

Sorry my bad, I intended to write being fed strikes in general, not just "fastballs." Only 20 qualified hitters hit .300 or above this past year, and of players with at least 300 PA's there were only 28, including 3 ex-Twins in Colabello, Revere, and Pierzynski. in 700+ PA's in the upper levels (AA and higher) he has .287 AVG and a well bellow .100 ISO. Sure, Iknow he's young, but that can be an easy defense at times. By the end of the year there was at least 7 SS 22 or younger that were serving as their teams starter, and a handful of 2B, add in another handful that were getting their feet wet for next year. You can be young and successful and play up the middle, as they are often carried by their athleticism. Athletic-based smaller guys up the middle can often reach their potentials early and only improve marginally going forward, if they lack power. You do not just continually improve in every category over time...that is a myth and it can often go in the other direction actually, if the game you rely on does not correlate to MLB success. I think Polanco can be successful at 2B, and possibly even okay at SS for a time, as defense can sometimes be tricky to predict. I just don't see him likely turning into a player that is top half of the league of his position very often. He might strike hot and have his AVG carry him some years, but when it doesn't he could really struggle......unless, he does develop power. It could happen, just can't count on that happening and not many believe it will.

Click and rank #1-#6. should take no longer than 30 seconds. Also, just testing this survey tool before I actually use it for more important questioning in school. Thank you. Let me know if something is amiss and I need to fix it. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/WBDPG3M

I myself really like Polanco, and my comment on him having a fairly high floor, but a lower ceiling is mostly just my own opinion based on looking at ALL of his stats at different levels, his limited at bats, and what others scouts have said in the past year. This is not an insult of Polanco, as having a high floor means I think he can be an everyday asset, but that I just don't think he has much of a chance of being very spectacular. But for context, I did a quick google search limited to the past year of comments on Polanco. Most of the evaluations came from Baseball Prospectus, Baseball America, and Fangraphs, but they are also the most respected resources outside of organizational scouts. Keep in mind, these comments are not really knocks on Polanco either, they just highlight the lack of ceiling....which is what I commented on. Most of these comments also said mostly positive things about Polanco and his bat and ability to likely play a decent 2B. For ease of reading and relevance, I only clipped the quotes to show that they also see limitations with him. This isn't to hide the positives said about him, as I admit that I like him, and so do they. I will give one final comment of my own at the end. "...his approach makes no effort to hit for power, he should be able to continue to hit for average as he moves up. Lack of power will limit his ceiling, though he will collect some extra base hits to keep defense honest. If he stays at short stop he'll be a below average defender, but he should be able to handle second base and could be an above-average everyday player there if he can continue to hit over .300...." -Jeff Moore scouting report '14 "....He's more steady than spectacular in all phases of the game, with above-average speed, developing gap power and solid bat-to-ball skills. Most scouts feel he is a little stretched at shortstop....." -Baseball Prospectus Annual '15 "....while he's shown the ability to hit for average, his utter lack of power could limit him to a second-division profile.... -Craig Goldstein July 10th '15 "Overall Future Potential: Solid-average regular Realistic Role: Average major leaguer Risk Factor/Injury History: Moderate; limited Double-A experience; hit tool will need to carry the profile. .....second base is the likely home at the major-league level. There’s a utility floor in the profile, with the translation of the hit tool as the leading factor to achieving status as a regular." -Chris Mellen BP Top Ten Twins Prospects "I often cover Twins backfields in Spring and saw a him a few times the last few years. Didn't do a lot for me. Some bat speed, but not much power and best fit is 2B. Didn't see a carry tool... I think he may start for a couple years here and there, but best as a utility guy on a good team. Lot of Twins prospect I'd take before Polanco." -Al Skorupa "....there are obvious limitations to his overall game." -J.P. Breen "...Polanco is easy to like as you can project all five tools to be at least average, though his line drive hitting approach may not get to all his raw power...." -Kiley McDaniel "In terms of the Top 100 field, I think Jorge Polanco is underrated because he’s not flashy, but he has the raw tools to be an impact second baseman." -Matt Eddy Baseball America In reading an article about players who have good BB/K ratios in the minor leagues, they excluded players that have a K% higher than 20% and players with an ISO lower than .100 because the simple fact that they will face much much better pitching when they move up to the MLB. Players that hit for no power will be faced with a heavy dose of strikes they are not feared at all, so these types of minor leaguers BB% usually plummet in the MLB. I personally feel that Polanco will be fed fastballs non stop due to his lack of power that is well documented. This in turn will lead to a low BB%, and he will have to rely on his bat to be valuable. I don't mind guys that don't have a high OBP, BUT they damn well better be hitting for power then (high SLG/ISO) Kinda like Rosario, Dozeir, and Hunter this year. Once the OBP isn't there, you had better offer power or ELITE glove to make up for not getting on base. This is where my concern is. I could care less if you are hitting .280, if you are only getting on base at a .290-.315 range, and slugging in the .300's. That is an empty AVG and nothing more. This is my fear.

Yeah the only we trade Gordon is if Escobar continues to hit consistently next year, and plays at least top 15 SS defense. If that happens and the Javier looks to be on an advanced path Gordon COULD be on the table in trade talks. That is just a lot to gamble on. Even if Escobar looks good next year, could we feel confident that he could continue to be a valuable SS for the next 4-5 years, in which time Javier might be ready to step in at 20/21? Yes, that is young, but MI's can step in earlier and add value with their gloves and athletic ability still. Anyway, I doubt we trade ANY MI's at all. I bet we keep all of them, just because they are hard to fine good ones. We also need to consider that we are likely placing way way too much consideration in Dozier's play from the last two years, and even with that, he was bottom 1/3 of the league for 2B in the second half....where will he be in 2 years? He certainly isn't going to gain defensive value at this point, and he likely isn't going to gain power either. We could be looking at an epic drop off with him, if can't continue to pull the ball with power. The guy does hit a lot of just barely HR's. With that in mind, we should probably keep Escobar, Santana, Polanco, Gordon, and Javier. Polando has high floor, but not a very high ceiling, Santana has a low floor but a high ceiling, Gordon has and average floor and a high ceiling, and Javier we have no clue on at this point. However, we are likely looking at replacing SS and 2B in the near future, so we shouldn't be looking to trade away chips where we have guys that are good now, but might not be the case in the near future. In my opinion, we will be needing a 2B just as much within 2 years. Yup, I think Dozier will be a negative WAR player by then. Just think the margins for error with him are not gradual, but steep. If he can't pull for power, he is a bad player, and we have seen this for long stretches of time. In my opinion, we trade the guys with the most current value. With those guys that have current value, which ones are most likely to regress, and which ones have possible replacements that would be decent starters. I would say we look to sell high on one of our young OF's and Dozier. Now, I don't mean these guys aren't good, I am saying they ARE good and that's why we put them on the table. Rosario, Hicks, Buxton, and Kepler should all be possible trade chips and so should Dozier. What are the odds that Rosario improves his approach and keeps up his BABIP? Trade him before he gets exposed for a whole season and loses value. Hicks had a great year, but still isn't valuable vs RHP's, especially if he is playing LF or RF, so we should consider selling high before he regresses or gets hurt again. Buxton still has some luster and hope left with him, but some are starting to question he ever meets #1 prospect expectations, if so see if we can get a frontline SP or stud position player in a major trade...we have young guys who can play his position already at least. Kepler had an amazing season in AA, but lots of guys have great AA or AAA seasons are not able to keep that up while climbing leagues. Odds are his value will never be even close to what it currently is right now. Just being realistic. He is at a position of strength, so it won't hurt as much. "Look" to trade one of these guys, but only for "equal" value, not for the sake of trading them. Same with Dozier, and I already explained the reasons for him above. If we hold all of Rosario, Hicks, Buxton, Kepler, and Dozier we will likely be looking at some of them just fading into the background of our team, or we sell low on them later and get scraps in return. Again, only do a trade with these guys IF we are able to get in return something that makes us all smile. Imagine what Dozeir and Buxton might get us in a trade, with us still having OF's in tact and 2B replacements.

The Cubs are essentially built to be an AL team. They have good position players on the bench, that could be starters elsewhere. 2nd Half Position wRC+/WAR (AGE): C) Montero 119/1.0 (32) vs Suzuki 71/.1 (31) 1B) Rizzo 126/1.8(26) vs Mauer 97/.2 (32) 2B) Castro 109/1.1(25) vs Dozier 73/.4 (28) SS) Russell 101/1.9(21) vs Escobar 120/1.3 (26) 3B) Bryant 138/3.2 (23) vs Plouffe 92/.7 (29) OF) Fowler 137/2.5 (29) vs Buxton 63/-.2 (21) OF) Coghlan 124/1.7 (30) vs Hicks 96/1.0 (25) OF) Soler 104/.2 (23) vs Rosario 98/1 (23) DH) Scwarber 129/1.6 (22) Sano 141/1.5 (22) Bench: Baez 98/.5 (22) Jackson 87/.2 (28) Denorfia 79/.3 L Stella 109/.3 (26) Move Schwarber to DH, and slot in whomever you want and shift the lineup around and play anyone anywhere. That is what I like about them, not afraid to play guys out of "normal" position. Whereas Twins fans scoff at the idea of moving guys around to maximize our roster/lineup. So and so will never play there, so and so has never played there so its not going to happen, etc. However the Twins you would think would fit better in the NL, but they don't. 3 of our best hitters are Sano, Plouffe, and a forced to play Mauer. So, where do those 3 play in the NL? One either has to sit out, or someone needs to be moved to another position, and then who do they replace? I would safely bet on the Cubs young position player any day over the Twins. I still love the Twins guys, just like the Cubs guys more. Okay; You have to pick 10 guys from both teams for you now and future to start a new team: C) Scwarber (cheating), otherwise Montero over Suzuki 1B) Rizzo, over Mauer or Sano because he is BAT and GLOVE 2B) Castro, over Dozier because age, upside, talent, defense going forward at 2B SS) Russell, over Escobar if just for the defense and age, but think Russell will be the better hitter too 3B) Bryant, over Plouffe no explanation needed. Over Sano at 3B as well due to the defense and similar OF) Buxton, over Fowler because of age, defense, and hope, otherwise production isn't close right now OF) Rosario, over Coghlan because age and defense only, not sold on him being a great hitter over time OF) Soler, over Hicks because of age, power, last year DH) Sano, can play the corners in OF and IF too if Maddon were coach ALT) Baez, over Dozier or Hicks because age, upside, power, defense, positional flexibility, and might go to the OF if needed. That is 3 Twins to 7 Cubs. I cheated by putting Schwarber at C, but that was only so I could put Sano at DH or Rosario in the OF. I can concede Dozier over Castro due to Doziers last two 1st halfs, but think Castro will be the better overall player going forward (and the last half.) I wouldn't be surprised if Baez outperforms Dozier overall going forward of the next few years either, but he is 6 years younger. I'd take any 3 of those players right now, but would prefer the two young athletic guys going forward in the long run. Just a few different ways of looking at who is currently on the roster, without going into minors. It really doesn't look like the Cubs will really need too much from the minors even, especially of someone gets converted to the OF, like Bryant, Baez, or Castro to CF or LF, which has been discussed. It actually seems like the smart move, if they can't get full value for Castro or Baez in a trade. Wait a minute...they need a CF'er and we have 3 young guys that can play there very well right now, and they have 3 SS/2B that are all young and athletic? Hmmmm.

The thing is, they, like other really good team, realize that only #1-3 starters matter when it counts. Regular season pitching staffs from two teams can have similar overall results $1-5(6) spread out differently, however The team that gets more results from their #1-3(4) are the team that is better set up to win in the post-season when it counts. In a way, the playoff schedule is rigged in a way that favors teams that can afford to put a lot of money in top-end SP's #1-3. Teams like the Twins would be better off shuffling their rotation to pitch their best pitcher in game 2 or 3, while punting against aces. That way if you get lucky and beat the ace you are set up good for the rest of a series, but if you lose vs the ace who cares, you likely would have lost no matter who pitched. Anyway, #4-5 SP's aren't as big of a deal. If the Twins met the Cubs this year in the WS, they might as well throw Pelfrey out there vs Arrieta.

Hughes was OUR #1 starter, but he was NOT a league #1 starter. Gibson was OUR full season #1 this year, but certainly not a league #1 type. Hughes MIGHT never be anymore than he was this year...it happens. Gibson might just be what he is the past few years, which is really good for periods and really bad for periods, averaging out to being okay. Santana can be as good as he was the last month, but I don't know that he can sustain it for a whole year, but at least he does have the talent. Duffey will likely regress as he gets scouted more, but I like what I see from him- probably a #3 upside over time.

Okay, what is the MLB ratio of Caucasion vs. Latino at-bats, ratio of Caucasian vs. Latino HBP's, and then compare that to the ratio of Caucasian vs Latino confrontations. Context is needed. Guessing these are most likely #1-6 hitters, so what is that ratio too. Guessing we won't get that info, but I am guessing these would make the brawls less of surprise.

I think Twins fans (or any hometown fan) are WAY too presumptuous in their beliefs in the future value of our players. There seems to be a heavy consideration to recency, without looking at the limitations, circumstances, comparisons, peripherals, etc. What was our belief of Santana, Vargas, Arcia, Suzuki, Dozier, and Hughes heading into last years offseason? One year does not make a career. I was very excited of the success that Rosario, Hicks, Escobar, Plouffe, Kepler, and Duffey showed this year, but I would not be at all surprised if one or all of these guys falls backwards next year, just like last years group of improvers. I think Sano is fine, simply because of his raw power and approach, but he could certainly not be as beastly, and still be successful. All of these guys I mentioned have had some luck and or have major flaws to cover up. I am most confident in Duffey, but still feel he will be closer to 4.00 than 3.00 era next year. Anyway, just making the point that we "might" have ourselves an average-to-above-average SS, but he might crater next year too, and he certainly hasn't sustained his success for that long to show that he is anything to feel real confident about. I think he can be legit, but definitely sure he will be. Let's temper our expectations for next year people. I feel that we could be a much better team next year, but actually have have a worse or similar record to this year. We have to assume that we will not be as lucky in the W's as often as we we were this year.

"one trend that never reached MN, the velocity trend." LOL!

I agree that we will likely be a better team next year, but that might not equate to even as good of a record as this year. Luck doesn't usually follow you year to year.