John Bonnes

OK, I'll be the contrary one. I don't believe this has much to do with Gibson's Super-2 status. It might be one aspect on that side of the equation, but it's a small thing. The big things, frankly, are that he hasn't been able to put two solid starts in a row and that they feel they can better control his innings limit (and thus his health) by keeping him in AAA. For those that feel this is purely financial, I'll ask the obvious question (which Terry Ryan himself has asked): if that's so important for Gibson, which isn't is important for Hicks and Arcia? - Hicks and Arcia are both much younger than Gibson - Both are perceived to be as valuable in the future as Gibson (and probably with less risk) - In both cases their promotion effects when they turn into free agents, which is a much bigger deal than when a player reaches Super-2. So, if this is such a driving force for the organization, why are they sticking it to Gibson and not Hicks and Arcia?

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1765-PJ-Walters-To-Fill-Rogation-Spot

I'm glad to hear it.

FYI - Andrew has been covering the New Britain Rock Cats for us.

It would definitely be easier for the Astros with their $7.9M slot for #1. If they sign Moran at a #3 slot value (which is more than he'll get otherwise), that gives them about $3.6M of slot money to sign someone with their #4 pick. That's the equivalent of a #5 or #6 pick. Manaea missed yet another start this week due to injuries. There is no way he goes top 5. I don't think he goes top 10 right now. And beyond that there are reasons nobody signs him below that money. His slot value is $2.8M at pick 11 and $1.8M when the Yankees pick. This isn't the old days. Teams CAN'T just throw more money at him. They're limited by the cap now. And if they can't sign him, whoever picks him just loses the pick and the money associated with it, and only get back a similar pick next year. Why would teams risk that when at best they get a high-upside pitcher that might have some chronic medical problems? It makes less sense for the Twins, after looking at the numbers. If the Twins were to sign a #4 pick at #6 money, they can pay $2.3M to their 2nd round pick. That would put Manaea at about the same level as a #16 guy. Id be a little surprised if he signed for that.

Above Gausman, who was fourth.

Re: Jose Berrios

Hmm. This could be what the Twins have in mind if they try to save some money on that 4th overall pick. If the first three go Gray, Appel and Bryant & Twins can take one of any of the next college pitchers for a discount AND get Manea in the 2nd round, I'll be doing backflips.

Fun read. Thanks for sharing. But how DARE you besmirch Ah-Ha.

Rumors persist that the Twins might make a deal for less than slot with a lower ranked prospect to allow them to use that money on their second or third round pick. On it's face, and given the payroll cuts the Twins had this year, this made me a little nauseous. After crunching a few numbers, I'm wondering if it might not make sense. The slot for the 4th overall pick is slotted at $4.5M. Their 2nd pick (43rd overall) is slotted at $1.3M. Together, that's $5.8M. If the Twins offered 5th overall pick money (instead of 4th overall money) to several of the players (everyone except Appel, Gray and Bryant) they would save $750,000. If that was added to the money for the 43rd overall pick, it would be like having money for the 20th overall pick. Similarly, if the Twins talk down the money paid to the 4th overall player, here's the "slot" that their 43rd overall pick improves to: 1. If they offer #5 money, they can improve from 43rd to 20th. 2. If they offer #6 money, they can improve from 43rd to 16th. 3. If they offer #7 money, they can improve from 43rd to 14th. 4. If they offer #8 money, they can improve from 43rd to 13th. 5. #9 => improves 43 to #12 6. #10 => improves 43 to #11. They way this would likely work is something like this, I think.... 1) someone with high contract demands falls past the slot where they're happy being taken. So a player who wanted top 20 money (~$2M) ends up falling out of the top 20 and has made it clear that if he doesn't get $2M, he's going to (or back to) college. But when the Twins come up at #43, they can offer that $2M even though that's way over slot, because they saved money by paying the #4 guy the amount given to the #5 guy. 2) Someone is not ranked as high as they think they'll eventually be. A players is told they will likely only get drafted in the 2nd round, but they want 1st round money, so they're already committed to college. But the Twins approach that player and make sure that if they offer $2M (mid 1st round money) that player will sign. Then, when it's the Twins turn, they choose that player in the 2nd round, but give them 1st round money. I think what encourages me the most is that there is so much extra money between the 4th and 5th pick: ~$750k. If they are neutral between Frazier and Meadows, or Manea and Stanek or Stewart, it makes a ton of sense to go through and offer them #5 money and take the additional leverage they gain with that 43rd overall pick. What does NOT make sense, IMHO, is taking a guy out of the top 10. That might get them even more money, but the incremental savings between #5 and #9 is also about $750K. I don't know that additional money is going to be able to make much difference in who they get with that 43rd (or 78th) pick. What do you guys think?

Agree. We can't have it both ways. We can't enter the season and, based on the roster, say this is a 7-win team, and then when they're on pace for 71 wins, say "We need to make a change at manager."

Me too.

By itself, I'll be happy with those names except McGuire or Moran. I would NOT be shocked if this board is goin ballistic the day after the first round as the Twins save money on that pick in the hope of padding later picks. I wonder what thy would need to get in later rounds to justify it in our minds.

Please, lord, keep these boys healthy. I don't ask for much. But please keep them healthy.

It comes down to this: it's just plain laziness to copy and past instead of summarize it. It takes about two minutes to summarize and 10 seconds to copy and paste. Here, time me.... - The Twins progress can be seen in their minors and to some extent in the majors, with the debuts of Hicks and Arcia. - Miguel Sano is not only hitting like Miguel Cabrera, but he's also concentrating on other aspects of a big league lifestyle, like learning English, including forcing himself to do interviews in his non-native language. - Meanwhile, the Twins have a second high-upside guy in Buxton, who is not only impressing with his skills, but with his work ethic. "He has treated this like his profession,” said Rob Antony. - And don't over look Kyle Gibson. Final quote....

Twins Twerp, I appreciate the feedback. We get feedback on both sides of the equation - some really like that part and some want no part of it. It's kind of a balancing act for now. I don't really know a way around that. Thanks, John

He just hasn't had any kind of sustained success. Holding AAA hitters to those numbers isn't particularly impressive. I see some bad starts, some great starts and a lot of mediocre starts. If he wasn't "former 1st rd pick Kyle Gibson" he wouldn't even be considered right now. I don't have any faith that Pelfrey or Hernandez couldn't match his numbers in AAA, so why would I believe he'll outperform them in the majors. Im not down on him long term. I just like to see people kicking butt before they are called to the majors. And until they do, I can only be so critical of spending more time in the minors.

I don't have a problem with bringing up Gibson, I'm just neutral on it. Like I said, I'd be perfectly OK with moving Hernandez to the bullpen and I'd have Pelfrey on a very short leash. But I think the true long-term thinking is to promote him when you think he's ready, and that has nothing to do with the guys in front of him. And I don't think he's really shown he's ready. I don't see a point in rushing him just because he has an inning limit. And I don't see a point in rushing him if you aren't sure he's going to be better than what is currently here.

Before I put this topic out here, I'd like to request that this be a positive thread. If you want to be critical or a writer, start your own thread. Who is your favorite local baseball writer? I'm asking for two reasons: 1) I'd be interested in which of the local writers is making an impression on most of our members and 2) I'm wondering if some fans of these writers would like to try and post links to their favorite stories in the forums as they appear. So I'd be interested in both - who is your favorite and why do you think others should read them?

I'm a little baffled by the vehemence being expressed that Gibson needs to be in the rotation right now. It feels like it has more to do with frustration of Pelfrey, Hernandez, etc than belief in Gibson. I'm trying to come up with a line of reasoning for promoting Gibson that talks about Gibson, rather than trashes the current rotation. The best I can come up with is.. 1. He was very good two years ago and even pitched a little in AAA. 2. He hasn't been bad this year in AAA. 3. He'll likely be better in the future. 4. I'd like to see him. That's a pretty thin case on which to build much outrage. Am I missing something?

Huh. I gotta say, I had overlooked this 27-year-old completely. And I don't mean this year. I mean every year. He's been pretty good for three years now - not the greatest strikeout rate, but he walks nobody and his ERA through 5 years in the minors is 2.56? But I don't know anything about the guy. Who is he?

I can't get too worked up about not promoting Gibson - the "no scholarships" thing should apply to him, too. Let's be honest - he hasn't exactly been kicking the door down. One could make a case that Deduno (or even Walters) should be promoted ahead of him, if it's based strictly on performance. However, I'm officially intrigued by making Pedro Hernandez a left-handed reliever. His splits are astounding. The questions is which reliever do you send down for him. The obvious answer is Pressley, but he's a Rule 5 pick. Next on the list might be Roenicke, IMHO. One last point - I think Pelfrey's time is limited. The Twins often make changes between mid-May and the beginning of June each year. I won't be shocked if Pelfrey isn't on this team one way or the other by June 1. I'll be a little surprised if he is.

A Beatles homage : "Come together, right now - over me."

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1720-Geeking-Out-Pitch-To-Contact-and-Team-Batting