diehardtwinsfan

This is a untrue criticism to rebuilding. The Pirates and Royals sucked for years due to absolutely awful decisions in the draft and at pretty much every level of baseball. these two teams finally got it in the last 3-4 years when they spent megabucks in the draft and internationally. Now they both have great farm systems but that wasn't the case for the decades that they sucked. if you want a better comparison to the Twins then it would be the Cubs or the Mets. Expensive losers but luckily the Twins aren't saddled with any long term awful contracts. If you pay attention to baseball you'll notice that both of these clubs are slashing payroll and rebuilding their farm systems. Imo the do anything to get to 80 wins plan could set this franchise back years in the rebuilding process. I think it's more true that the Pirates and Royals sucked for years due to a combination of things, the most important of which is: rebuilding a franchise is hard. Trading away all your major league players to "rebuild" doesn't guarantee you'll be "rebuilt" at some point in the near future. In fact, the most likely outcome is you'll be doing the same thing in a few years...trading away your good major league talent in some new GM's new five year rebuilding plan. Lather, rinse, repeat. If the rebuilding process came with some guarantee, it's an easy decision to make. It doesn't. Given the Twins current major league roster, the ability to spend $120M next year if they choose, some FA pitching available, and some potential redundancy at 1B/OF that can be dealt for ML pitching, there's an argument to be made for trying to win in 2013 that's at least as strong as the argument for giving up on the next couple years. In fact, I would argue the 2013 team, with the right moves, has a better chance of competing than expecting everything to come up roses in 2015 with the current minor leagues plus whatever prospects you add by dumping everything of value. Pretty much this.... I'm all for rebuilding if that is what the team thinks should be done, though the new CBA really takes away the Twins ability to improve the odds of a good crop of milb talent come 2015/16 timeframe, as they have limits as to what they can spend. There's a lot of reasons to think they can compete in 2013. The offense is there now, and there's plenty in the pipline, with the only positional weakness being up the middle. Their problem is pitching, pitching, and more pitching. Other than Diamond, not one of the FillerDs should be relied on for the rotation next year, and I really think they should be planning on starting one of Gibson/Hendriks in AAA as well. That means they need to fill 3 spots. Blackburn is a given even though he shouldn't be. I'd argue they need to sign/trade for 2 decent starters and get 1 starter on a prove it contract. I suspect Ryan might be able to flip Span for something, though it's looking more and more like his best bet is going to be a #3 starter.

This is a different point than the first one you made. The Twins had a lot of different things to address this offseason after last year's trainwreck, that's for sure. But to say there weren't people vocally worried about the rotation is demonstrably false. pretty much this. I remember a number of conversations with my family and the rotation was always my biggest concern. It was Baker, Liriano and pray for rain... and everyone knew Baker and Liriano weren't exactly sure things.

Seth, one thing you missed is that the Twins tinkered with his approach quite a bit during the step back stage. That improved his contact but sapped his power... now the power is coming back. I don't know why people are down onthe kid. 24 year old guys who post video game stats in AAA tend to be considered top prospects. Given his track record, it's fair to look at some of this from the lens of SSS, as some players can have break out seasons in the minors and never again approach those numbers in the same league... but Chris has been doing this for 1 1/2 years now. It's time to recognize that he has the potential to be something big. He may not get there, but he's earned the opportunity to try.

the twins should be trying out any pitcher that has the ability tomiss bats...

the question regarding trading the hammer has more to do with what the team's intent is with next year. If they want to be competitive (and plan to add the pitching necessary to do so), then you don't trade Josh... Period. If the plan is to punt on 2013 for 2014, then by all means, they should have traded him at the deadline or this offseason. My guess is that the team is going to attempt to be competitve (even if it isn't the best idea) and will try to add some parts via free agency and potentially flip one of Span/Revere/Morneau for some pitching help.

I think he's on teh 40 man, so him being a FA is moot. He's going to be in the mix next season. Edit: I think I confused him with the guy the Twins got for Liriano... If that is the case, I have no idea if he's on the 40 man.

I agreed with most of what you said - I take some issue here. The government/society has an interest in promoting stable social relationships. If it was simply handed over to the churches it would severely complicate the state's ability to incentivize the relationships that are strong economically and for child-rearing. I say let churches decide what they want to recognize as marriage, but in terms of the government churches shouldn't be involved in any way, shape, or form. They are ceremonial - the license has a pragmatic function. I was addressing this more or less in terms of "the way it used to be." George Washington didn't need a license for marriage. Those were evented at later times to help enforce Jim Crow laws. I'd agree that with divorce the way it is today, there needs to be some sort of legal contract, though personally I don't think the church needs to (nor should it) recognize government licenses of marriage. As it is right now, I don't think the state "incentivizes relationships that are strong economically and for child-rearing." If anything, it does the opposite. Finances are the number reason why people divorce and with oppressive taxes and inflation that erodes your wealth, families are under more financial pressure now than they ever were. 50 years ago, you didn't need both parents to work. Now, it's a matter of necessity for most families as one person cannot earn enough to keep up. Likewise, the government has made divorce very, very easy, and if encouraging strong relationships was its goal, then divorce should be difficult to do. I'm not saying the church has done a good job of it either, but if you lowered taxes and ended inflation, there would be a measurable drop in divorce rates in this country. I think in your last statement we essentially are saying the same thing, though I don't consider the church marriage ceremonial. It's a vow before God. I get that if you do not believe in God, this is not necessary, but what God has joined, no man should split apart. The church as a whole has dropped the ball on this one, and I'd argue that it plays a much bigger role in the degredation of the family and the assault on the sanctity of marriage than homosexual marriage every will. 50% of the population is divorced, and by some statistics, that rate is slightly higher in the church. I'm rather dismayed that my brothers and sisters in Christ will stand up fervently against homosexuality while meekly retreating on this subject. Taking a stand here would empty the most churches, leaving many of them up to foreclosure... so they retreat. My general belief here is that I could care less if gays marry, but my first ammendment says that as a member of the church, I do not have to recongize it or perform the ceremonies. To me, this compromise would work for about 90% of the people on each side (though the vocal 10% on each side would certainly disagree)...

One of the main reasons Gary Johnson didn't vote for a lot of those things is because he wasn't a member of congress. The list of people who have been in congress and voted the way I would like on fiscal matters is limited to pretty much Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul, and Bachmann is so flawed in other ways she's not worth discussing. The "Tea Party" was born in spring of 2009 and created a new era of Republicans which Paul Ryan seems to fit in. I have always been on board with "Tea Party" principals, but it took a really safe district or a lot of courage to take a "Tea Party" vote that would not change an outcome prior to 2009. I voted Ron Paul in teh primary, but he won't be on the ballot. True that Gary Johnson wasn't in Congress, but he does have a track record as the Governor or New Mexico... He used the veto stamp something like 700 times.

the Twins shouldn't be trading prospects at all.. they should be aquiring them. I wouldn't trade for Andrus if it's going to cost me a B grade prospect.

I'd keep Robertson, if for no other reason than that his peripherals indicate he might be getting unlucky... the rest have no buesiness being in a major league pen.

yeah, I think willingham is more likely to be traded next year or the year after depending on how Arcia/Hicks/Benson are doing.

sounds like one more big government republican to me who only cares about small government when a democrat is in office... Vote Gary Johnson.

I cannot believe just how much press this subject has gotten and how nauseating it has become, and just how stupid everyone seems to be on the issue. The overreactions of both the left and the right sound like a bunch of petulant little kids who desparately need their *** beaten so hard that they can no longer sit down... Just a few things: 1) No one, and I mean no one looks at the whole discussion. These guys spent most of that conversation speaking about divorce and how they were proud to be married to the same person their entire life. The right loves to take a stand on gay marriage, but never talks about divorce (which has far more to do with teh sanctity of marriage I'd add)... And that has more to do with the fact that the church's divorce rate is no different (if not sligly higher) than outside the church, and half of their congregation would get up and leave if they said something. 2) Marriage licenses, ironically, were setup to prevent blacks and whites from marrying. I find it amusing that small government conservatives are suddenly in favor of government laws. This is a church issue, and it belongs there. Give it back to the churches. 3) Not all of it is simply bigotry.. I'm a Christian, though I hesitate to call myself conservative any more because my libertarian views no longer seem to mesh with what is now defined as "conservative" I think homosexuality is wrong, and I think homosexual marriage is wrong. That's pretty clear biblically, but it has absolutely nothing to do with how I interact with those homosexuals that I know (and I have had gay friends over the course of my life). I also believe that two homosexuals in a free country are free to do something like this so long as they are not violating the freedoms of others.... and unlike more potent issues like abortion (where you can argue that the unborn child is alive), two dudes getting married poses absolutely no threats to my freedoms or the freedoms of anyone else in this country... you might (and I mean might) be able to make a case against raising children, but that's a completely different case and not an easy one to make. 4) So much of this is nothing but pandering, and it's exactly what is wrong with this country. We are spending trillions of dollars a year on wars, special interest, welfare, and many other things that we cannot afford and have racked up debt ratios that would render private corporations insolvent. The economy is in shambles and the people that put it there continue to run free. The only way we've been able to make it work is by diluting the value of the currency we have (effectively slowly robbing people of their incomes) and are only a few years behind the Europeans with the mess they currently have and we are fighting over this? One of my former congressmen (steve Latourette) just resigend a couple of weeks ago, because as he put it, things were so polarized that the leaders could simply throw out a controversy and watch the entire thing fall apart into right and left taking shots at each other. Moderates (or libertarians such as myself) get shut out of the debate alltogether, even though both sides have some very clear flaws in their stances.

not quite sure why teh FO/Gardy is getting heat here. My complaint with Gardy in particular is that he never lets rookies work through things... he did exactly that with Dozier. I do think he should have gone down a bit sooner, but injuries might have forced that a bit... Hopefully teh kid can put things back together in Rochester and force his way on to the team next season.

26 years old, AA player, lots of poor seasons in between AA and rookie ball... if he's top 30, that means they have a horrible system.

I'll have to respectfully disagree here John. Though last year there were so many questionmarks and only so much to go around. Though in defense of the FO, with the budget TR had, he could not have fixed every hole this offseason, but I remember a number of occasions where my main concern was the rotation. Baker and Liriano were the only two that had a chance of being above average pitchers, and both of them had some pretty signficiant question marks. That said, I don't get the enfatuation with spending tons of cash on relief pitchers. Bullpens will do a ton better if starters are consistently going 6-7 innings/start... You give them decent starters, and they improve on their own.

yeah pretty much this... the other thing is that what he's doing with the bat is being done in a very small sample size. Some guys can be decent hitters when they aren't playing every day, but are pretty lousy when they are.

no scholarship program. He's arb eligible, not on a contract. they can dump him whenever.

congrats!

I think Nick is being a bit negative here. Baseball is littered with examples of people who didn't make it their first time around, and given that Dozier was hardly considered a big prospect, it's not surprising that he struggled. I do think he needs to earn his spot next year, but given his age, it isn't wise to write him off as a bust either. Let's see how he handles Rochester and how he does during his second stint before we call him a bust.

it can improve. both are young for the level, which does make a difference, but yeah, I was expecting more out of Boyd.

given that I am in Detroit this week, I kind of wish this was an away game.

Try hard to move Span in the offseason and slot Parmelee in right. Try to move Justin at the deadline and then slot Chris into first base. It's the only way to get everyone the ABs they need, I think. it should maximize value too. Justin is going to be very expensive at the deadline.

apparently you didn't read BYTO

didn't realize that boyd is having trouble getting Ks... he was supposed to be one of those power arms... hopefully that improves.