John Bonnes

1st of a series Buyers or Sellers They sure aren’t selling. The Braves only real competition in the NL East is the Washington Nationals, over whom they hold a 6.5 game lead. But they’re unlikely to take that lead for granted. Last year they won 94 games – and got knocked out in the one-game Wild Card playoff. The year before they collapsed down the stretch, losing eight of their last ten games (including their last five), finishing one game out of the playoffs. This is not a franchise (or fan base) that is going to feel like they’re all set. What They Need Which is a little weird, because they’re just about all set, as the Twins learned when they were swept by them earlier this year. The Braves starting pitching ranks 2nd in the NL in ERA. Their offense ranks 4th in runs, but they’re that “low” because their big free agent acquisition, BJ Upton, has just a 594 OPS. That isn’t going to last. However, there have been multiple reports of the Braves evaluating others teams' relievers. That’s a little odd, because Craig Kimbrel has been fantastic as their closer. However, they lost two left-handed setup men Eric O’Flaherty and Tommy Venters to Tommy John surgery in the same week in May. That’s left Luis Avilan, whose numbers look good, but 18K in 33 IP don’t inspire confidence. Neither do the 13 walks that go with them. What Might Work Last year at the deadline, and indeed in the offseason, there were lots of rumors about the Braves and Twins talking about a deal. That was because the Braves needed a center fielder (which they filled by signing BJ Upton) and some right-handed power (which they fixed by trading for his brother Justin). However, the Twins have three effective left-handers in their bullpen right now. Caleb Thielbar is unproven, but has been deadly against lefties. Brian Duensing represent a more senior option that would still not require a king’s ransom. And Glen Perkins would give the Braves the best lefty-righty combo to lose games in Major League Baseball. As the Braves evaluate relievers, they’ll certainly approach the Twins. Sleeper Targets Here are some names from down the prospect list which could conceivably interest the Twins in any non-Perkins deal: Jose Peraza – SS – Low A – 19 years old He’s skilled enough defensively to, project staying at shortstop, but he also showed some pop last year in Rookie League. This year, he’s only at .256/.317/.339, but he also just turned 19. He’s a guy the scouts often like: toolsy and projectable. Luis Merejo – LHP – Rookie League – 18 years old He dominated in the Gulf Coast Rookie League last year, striking out 53 in 41 innings. He’s back there this year, but he could make his way up to A ball and there is some thought he could move fast. Cody Martin – RHP – AAA – 23 years old Martin wasn’t on any Top 10 Braves list because he’s a command-control pitcher. But this year he’s posting a 2.45 ERA between AA & AAA and has 95 K in 88 IP (and just 74 hits). And those rates are not out of line with his numbers every other year. Don’t forget – Atlanta is the organization from which the Twins plucked Scott Diamond. Dream Target Mauricio Cabrera – RHP – Low A – 19 years old The Braves top two remaining pitching prospects, JD Graham and Sean Gilmartin, are both on the shelf right now with injuries. So let’s look for a bigger arm a little further down the ladder. Baseball Prospectus described Cabrera’s arm as “ridiculous” with a fastball that can work in the mid to high 90s. He needs to develop secondary pitches and command, though he has the makings of a slider right now that could be very good. If he progresses, he could be a top of the rotation arm. If not, he could still be a dominant reliever. If he were to be part of a package, there could be lot of excitement about the future of the Twins rotation with him joining Kohl Stewart and JO Berrios in the lower minor leagues. Each day in July, we’ll be publishing a profile of a MLB and whether there is any possible fit for a trade with the Twins. Tomorrow: The Washington Nationals

1st of a series Buyers or Sellers They sure aren’t selling. The Braves only real competition in the NL East is the Washington Nationals, over whom they hold a 6.5 game lead. But they’re unlikely to take that lead for granted. Last year they won 94 games – and got knocked out in the one-game Wild Card playoff. The year before they collapsed down the stretch, losing eight of their last ten games (including their last five), finishing one game out of the playoffs. This is not a franchise (or fan base) that is going to feel like they’re all set. What They Need Which is a little weird, because they’re just about all set, as the Twins learned when they were swept by them earlier this year. The Braves starting pitching ranks 2nd in the NL in ERA. Their offense ranks 4th in runs, but they’re that “low” because their big free agent acquisition, BJ Upton, has just a 594 OPS. That isn’t going to last. However, there have been multiple reports of the Braves evaluating others teams' relievers. That’s a little odd, because Craig Kimbrel has been fantastic as their closer. However, they lost two left-handed setup men Eric O’Flaherty and Tommy Venters to Tommy John surgery in the same week in May. That’s left Luis Avilan, whose numbers look good, but 18K in 33 IP don’t inspire confidence. Neither do the 13 walks that go with them. What Might Work Last year at the deadline, and indeed in the offseason, there were lots of rumors about the Braves and Twins talking about a deal. That was because the Braves needed a center fielder (which they filled by signing BJ Upton) and some right-handed power (which they fixed by trading for his brother Justin). However, the Twins have three effective left-handers in their bullpen right now. Caleb Thielbar is unproven, but has been deadly against lefties. Brian Duensing represent a more senior option that would still not require a king’s ransom. And Glen Perkins would give the Braves the best lefty-righty combo to lose games in Major League Baseball. As the Braves evaluate relievers, they’ll certainly approach the Twins. Sleeper Targets Here are some names from down the prospect list which could conceivably interest the Twins in any non-Perkins deal: Jose Peraza – SS – Low A – 19 years old He’s skilled enough defensively to, project staying at shortstop, but he also showed some pop last year in Rookie League. This year, he’s only at .256/.317/.339, but he also just turned 19. He’s a guy the scouts often like: toolsy and projectable. Luis Merejo – LHP – Rookie League – 18 years old He dominated in the Gulf Coast Rookie League last year, striking out 53 in 41 innings. He’s back there this year, but he could make his way up to A ball and there is some thought he could move fast. Cody Martin – RHP – AAA – 23 years old Martin wasn’t on any Top 10 Braves list because he’s a command-control pitcher. But this year he’s posting a 2.45 ERA between AA & AAA and has 95 K in 88 IP (and just 74 hits). And those rates are not out of line with his numbers every other year. Don’t forget – Atlanta is the organization from which the Twins plucked Scott Diamond. Dream Target Mauricio Cabrera – RHP – Low A – 19 years old The Braves top two remaining pitching prospects, JD Graham and Sean Gilmartin, are both on the shelf right now with injuries. So let’s look for a bigger arm a little further down the ladder. Baseball Prospectus described Cabrera’s arm as “ridiculous” with a fastball that can work in the mid to high 90s. He needs to develop secondary pitches and command, though he has the makings of a slider right now that could be very good. If he progresses, he could be a top of the rotation arm. If not, he could still be a dominant reliever. If he were to be part of a package, there could be lot of excitement about the future of the Twins rotation with him joining Kohl Stewart and JO Berrios in the lower minor leagues. Each day in July, we’ll be publishing a profile of a MLB and whether there is any possible fit for a trade with the Twins. Tomorrow: The Washington Nationals

... on the trade market? The good news is that it doesn't appear to be Konerko. First, he's hurt. Second, he has 5-10 rights. And third, the White Sox at least say they don't want to trade him. I know, people are down on his home run production, but I can see a team looking to fill a gap and add some veteran leadership taking a longing look in his direction.

I thought this was going to be about trading away Rod Carew. Now THAT was a heart-breaker.

Excellent story Nick. To me, it drives home something we're seeing with Hicks now and have seen in the past with Kubel & Cuddyer (and to a lesser extent Morneau): at the very least, sometimes greatness can take awhile. I'm also intrigued by how this thread and several others are turning into the same debate over & over - and a poorly defined debate at that. I think it is "should the Twins sign upper tier free agent pitchers this offseason?" I say poorly defined because everyone had a different idea of how upper tier is defined, and sadly some seem to purposely try to misrepresent others definitions. With the season only being half way over, its hard to define it too much, since we ont have final results on the pitchers or great guesses on thi likely salaries. So how about this: someone post a new thread eith that topic which includes a list of likely FA pitchers from Cots, and if our feeling especially generous with our time, some stats like ERA, FIP, K/BB. We can debate values and which seem like good fits as the year goes on. And we can include a link to that post in any herd where it looks like members are starting to play with that loose tooth. Any volunteers?

Lots of stuff out here. I'll try to reply to 3 repeated points and make one myself: 1) Growing the site is important, but even more important is not being embarrassed of our own site and the discussion in it. 2) As for the arbitrariness of enforcement - it's fine not to like it. But we're going to have to live with it for now. We've got a big site and moderation is a multi-member job and we're going to need to figure some things out as we go along and so are you. And when we screw up, I think you can deal with it. We aren't caning anyone. Just redo your post in a more civil manner or enjoy a timeout. 3) "It's less fun." I heard the same thing from a vocal minority three months ago when we tightened up enforcement of civility here and I didn't have any sympathy then and I don't now. The numbers give me faith. I firmly believe the 97% will find it more fun to not have to read a bickering exchange surrounding insight about their favorite team. Finally, I'll pass along something despite it probably being insulting to some because I want to be very candid. I was speaking to another moderator from a bigger forum about these issues and he confided that his moderators call their problem members "kindergartners." As in "The kindergartners are bickering again." Kindergartners bicker. They are more interested in winning than gaining any insight. They latch onto their issue and whine about it endlessly. They freak out when something isn't fair, even if the consequences are minor. They crave attention. They hold grudges. Being a kindergartner is not about positivity or negativity. It's not about intelligence. It's about emotional maturity. And generally once they identify kindergartners who lack that maturity, they ultimately ban them, because sooner or later it rears its ugly head. I think we could almost rewrite the entire comment policy to read: "If there is a chance that a moderator is going to read this and think 'This guy is a kindergartner' then don't post it. Especially if you think a moderator already likely considers you a kindergartner.

I would say some are negative and some are positive. What I would say that they have in common is that they seem to be driven to "win" a debate, they tend to use a lot of rhetoric that inflames rather than extinguishes. The members I value are the ones who are just the opposite, and there are a lot more of them. They play peacekeeper. The separate themselves personally from debate. They're willing to concede when they are presented alternate evidence. They seek a deeper level of truth from when they joined the thread, rather than trying to win a thread. It has nothing to do with positivity or negativity.

I'll reply to this honest question, just so we're clear. I'm often asked by people who have been banned or whose posts have been deleted "I just want to know where the line is." Or "I just want to know what the limits are." Here is the answer: We are working in a very nebulous and dynamic environment. We are figuring out our policy for maintaining civil discussion as we go along. There are five moderators with different opinions. Every time each of those moderators checks in, they're in a different state of mind. And finally, we all have limits to the time we can donate to these forums. So there is no line. There is no limit. There are a lot of them, and they're always changing and that's the way it has to be. So just stay the hell away from it. And frankly, that shouldn't be so hard. In fact, I can objectively PROVE it isn't that hard. Here you go: - We have 2757 users right now on Twins Daily. - Every day, we have about 300 active posters. - We keep needing to delete stuff or warn about 5 to 10 members. When about 97% or our community can consistently stay away from the line, I'm confident that the other 3% can figure out a way to, too. And if you are unfairly penalized - deal with it like a grown up. Re-do your deleted post in a more civil manner so you can still make the point. Sit out of the forum for three days (or seven days) and just read things. Maybe see how others stay away from the line. Or enjoy another site. Or do something else. You'll live. Let me share one last thing. I've talked to several people who run national sites much bigger that TD and here's how they do things - they see a post that makes them think they probably don't want that guy on the board and they just block the IP address. They do not think twice about it. No deleted post. No warning. No temporary ban. This is common, because they just don't have the time (or, frankly, the incentive) to rehabilitate anyone who looks like a moron. When they told me that a year ago, I was aghast. It seemed arbitrary and unfair. Now, with as much time as I find having to moderate or explain the process of moderation to others, I'm a lot more sympathetic. To be exceptionally candid, my life would be a lot easier with permanent bans on about seven members. And as stretched as we are right now with time, that might be enough reason. That might be the new line. Again - this isn't that hard. Be civil. Leave your ego out of it. Don't try to "win". Stay away from the line.

I think there's a middle ground here that tends to get lost if we're not talking about specifics. I was disappointed that the Twins didnt't sign FA pitchers, but I also wasn't lobbying for Greinke/Sanchez. I seem to remember lobbying for Dempster and Ervin Santana, and probably a few others that didn't work out as well. I think you can find some players which balance the risk or even use it as an opportunity to create an asset - like Willingham and his contract - that can provide a benefit to the season AND something other teams could value. But I'll also say - I'll be surprised if the Twins do that. It's not Ryan's MO. I wish they did more of that.

Suddenly this org has all kinds of CF filler

As of today, his 730 OPS is close to his career average, though maybe he's platooning less now? He sure looks a lot better. I honestly wonder if the Twins might stick with him when Hicks comes back, and let Hicks learn to dominate AAA.

There's a lot to be excited about here, but I'm curious as to why Rosario isn't in the top 100 on these lists. A 923 OPS in High A as a 21-year-old and he did well last year, too. I always hear: "He might not stay at second base" but the fallback is center field, which is up the defensive spectrum, not down it. Can anyone give me any insight? What's not to like? Unlike Arcia, he was also a pretty high (4th round) draft choice, so it's not like he's surprising people, is he?

bump

Thanks. I think this suggests that OPS and OPS-BA are essentially equal in their importance for a team. OPS is SLIGHTLY more important, but that's splitting hairs. They're essentially equivalent. So whether you count the hits once or twice, it's about the same, although it might be just a little better to count the hits twice, for whatever reason.

I can't run the numbers myself - I'm a little busy this morning - but would anyone like to do a quick correlation between Seth's OPS-BA stat and Runs scored and share it with us?

This gets to the heart of the matter. I'll publish proposed Comment Policy changes for feedback tomorrow, but consistent unrelenting negativity turns into trolling. Right now, it looks like this.... #2 Trolling - Trolling. Trolling is often subtle and is hard to define, but can kill a forum in a hurry, so we take it seriously. Here are some examples: - Making ridiculous or obviously stupid assertions and then defending them with illogic or drama. - Persistently negative comments, especially if they're in a thread or topic that derails the thread. Our purpose is not to discourage negative viewpoints or debate, but in a forum dedicated towards a team, such behavior eventually crosses into trolling. If you are approaching that point, you'll need to practice extra caution, staying away from overly negative rhetoric and presenting coherent points. In short, you probably have less leash to work with, because the very act itself is bound to cause some reaction. - One-line comments that add nothing but question everything. There are more and we're learning them (much to our chagrin) so we'll try to keep adding examples. If you're warned for falling into this behavior, understand that we have become extra sensitive to those kind of posts.

The Twins have not, as a team, run the bases well with any sort of consistency regardless of whether they were good that year or not. I'm puzzled by this conclusion. Is "0" average? Ar the Twins not above average in eight of the 12 years? Or am I reading the data wrong?

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1943-Gleeman-and-the-Geek-Ep-99-Gibson-Time

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4526[/ATTACH]In this week's Minnesota Twins podcast, Aaron and John talk about expectations for Kyle Gibson's promotion, where Aaron Hicks rehab stint will take him, Wilkin Ramirez' setback from a concussion, Trevor Plouffe's trade value, Antoan Richardson's eye-popping OBP, Oswald Arcia's quiet success, trade speculation, the upcoming zombie apocalypse and answer mailbag questions. You can listen by clicking below, download us from iTunes or find it at GleemanAndTheGeek.com.

I'm glad to see Gibson. I wonder if we'll ever know why they took their sweet time in making this move. But the timing of this is, at best, odd. I wonder if they Twins will reconsider things tomorrow, possibly adding him to the 25-man roster later this week. He can still hang out with the team for a few days. I don't know why they would short themselves the opportunity to have another bench bat (or maybe even more necessary after Saturday, a bullpen arm) for those four games. The only thing I can think is that they want Gibson available as long relief for those four days in case one of the starters gets knocked our early.

As you noted.... He's more than a legitimate candidate - he might be the frontrunner. We talked a little about this on the GATG podcast today - we may not be celebrating what is going on right in front of our eyes enough. Arcia could be pretty special. I wonder if there isn't something here about prospects and how we rank them based on their history. Arcia was ranked #41 overall because....well, looking back it's not exactly clear why. He's super young. Had success at every level. Had all the tools. But he wasn't super-highly regarded when he first signed, so at every step he's had to climb the prospect ladder as opposed to starting at the top.

Just a reminder to the community - if you have a point to make, then make it. But continually throwing one-liners out that questions everything but add nothing to the discussion is close to the definition of "trolling." And we ban trolls.