diehardtwinsfan

very few 19 year olds start in full season ball. Most that do are first round HS picks, not 2nd round picks. I think you're probably being a bit hard on Rortvedt personally. His bat clearly wasn't ready, though he adjusted. I'm not sure what the plan here, whether that's to keep challenging him in an even tougher hitters league, or hold him back and see if his bat can catch up to his defense. He's a very good prospect, though I don't expect to see him knocking on the door any time soon.

I think letting him go for nothing (which is what sending him to Japan or trading him would net) would be a mistake. He has the bat to be a full time DH and hasn't exactly figured it out. I don't know what next year may hold, but having a dangerous bench bat is always nice, and right now Vargas is cheap. Likewise, I don't see the team going out and getting a bat... so as far as I can guess, he should stay for at least another year.

There's no question they are valuable, but let's also consider that better starters leads to less stress on the pen. That shut down reliever won't be needed quite as much. Personally, if they want a shut down reliever, go get Wade Davis or one of the other top tier relievers. They don't cost prospects. If Davrish/Lynn doesn't excite Falvine, then they can use those prospects to get your man-crush out of Pittsburg or Archer out of Tampa. We have a decent system, but I figure they have the prospects to make one big splash without hurting the future. I'd rather that go for someone that isn't as easily found in FA.

He might be... I won't argue that. But there are some VERY good FA options out there in a strong market for RP this offseason. If they spend the prospects, get a starter. They can buy relievers for a lot less than what they can get a starter for.

I'll echo what others said.. If I'm parting with Gordon and Gonsalves (which would be the ask based on what I've read thus far), those will be centerpieces for a guy like Archer, not to save maybe 10M on an RP. That's just not a good trade.

I don't understand this trade. For one, he's got an opt out option. Second, while the contract is affordable, it's still a large commitment. Why not just go get an FA RP?

You have some interesting standards... Vargas posted a .758 OPS in his age 26 season, making him slightly better than league average with the bat. Santana was an all around better player and will likely sign a very large multi-year deal. That's not a C- guy. I'll simply note that we are talking bench bats here and a part time DH. Santana will want to be a starter, so again, I don't see how Santana makes any sense to this club. I'd be fine with Vargas and/or Park sitting around as a bench bat (though I really want Mauer taking some reps at 3B and RF this spring). They aren't bad options, with the only real issue being defensive flexibility. With Granite in AAA, Adrianza, and Escobar, I think we are covered if we need defense and want some offense on the bench, so long as we make sure the pen has some better options allowing Molitor to have 5 bench bats.

I'm just more of the opinion that Santana makes zero sense to this club. Minnesota makes zero sense to Santana too. They already have a good offense, not to mention a 1B for next year at the least and possibly longer (and quite possibly a nice one in Rooker as well).

yeah, I think a 4A type 3B signing in Rochester will make a ton of sense, but I'd much rather get pitching and lots of it.

the trade was the right call. Garcia and Kintzler wouldn't have moved the WC game to MN, much less made up the bazillion games we needed to catch Cleveland. They wouldn't have helped in the WC game either. Right choice all around. I can say that in hindsight, just as much as I did when they traded them.

honestly, I'm not too concerned about another bench bat. I'd be half willing to give Park a shot personally. Grossman might be worth setting sites on to upgrade, but that upgrade is going to be incrementally small. The team has gaping holes at SP and RP, and that is where FA money needs to be spent.

He will also be 39 next season after posting a forgettable season in the NL. I'd pass. If they spend money, go get some one with a better chance of performing.

nothing on this list excites me.

I don't think that ranking is too far off. This is a deep system, and while Slegers is a prospect close to the majors, he's not a high ceiling guy by any means. I would note that the encouraging thing is all the guys in the 30-50 range who could be contributing major leaguers in the not so distant future. Some could be pretty good.

these are reasonable. People forget that Buxton has no control over the arb process. He can choose to go year to year (at his risk) in exchange for an early free agency or sign something like this... just depends on what he wants.

Ross on a minor league deal makes a ton of sense. I have no issue with those types of signings. Cahlil is the guy in this group that might be worth targeting, though I hope that Falvine's medical staff is a bit better than Ryan's. Shoulder injuries tend to be something a player recovers from more than say elbow injuries. My problem is that I'm not sure a 1 year make good deal makes sense for this team unless they are really serious about going after a big pitching FA next season. Personally, I doubt that enough of our younger guys are going to be able to prove in 2018 that they are ready for what would now be 2 (or possibly 3 with Gibson) openings in the rotation.

The problem with this type of reasoning is that it assumes his rookie struggles are the reasons to avoid him starting. I'm not sure I agree as this can be said about any pitcher. I'll ignore his rookie season in large part because he got better over time and it was his rookie year. He got bounced from the rotation his second season for reasons other than his performance. Year 3 was the pen, and year four was the DL. I'm fine with May as a starter in 2018, and I'll be fine with that until he proves he cannot do it.

I'm still not quite convinced that Buxton can hit like Mike Trout for more than a month or two But yes, he does need to stay healthy. Not sure what the answer is there, but he's young enough that he shouldn't be pulled from a playoff game mid-game due to back issues from wall collisions...

I like the plan for the most part. It's reasonable. I'd do the extensions, with maybe the exception of Mauer. I don't think he's going anywhere to be honest, and as a 1B, I'd let the market determine his value, which I'm guessing would top out at 2/16 but likely be less. It might be more if he played 3B/RF/LF, but as a strict 1B, I'm not in a hurry to do that. I'd like the guy around at a good price (he could fill that Grossman role), but I don't think MLB will be opening up the check book for him either. I'd probably go bigger with SP and might go a bit better on one of the RP side of things... but a few nits to pick. Diaz won't need to be protected. He's a 1B in A ball. His OPS was good, but nothing special. Yes, he was young for his league and is a decent prospect, but with no defensive value, we can keep him off the 40 man for another season as no team will be able to stash him on their 25 unless he's injured. Vargas... so we are trading a young, cost controllable high K bat with SOME, maybe not a lot at this point, upside (slightly above league average OPS at age 26) for a guy turning 35 who had respectable offense (,840 OPS) in one of the most hitter friendly environments in baseball. Not sure I'd do that. I'd add that Reynolds is probably looking for a 2-3 year deal as a starter, not a bench bat. Grossman.. interesting. Not sure what to think there to be honest. Not the best defender, but a high OBP guy has a lot of value used properly, and I'm not sure a C prospect would do it for me (and I don't think teams would give up much more either). I'd probably offer arb here. To be clear, I'd have no problems putting that payroll at 130-140 and getting a good starter. I'd also be quite fine figuring out how to get Otani if that was the preference, but I do think at this point, spending money makes some sense. With a ridiculous amount dropping off the books in the next couple years and a team ready now, let's get the best starter. If that means we have May destroying AAA (and succeeding in MLB during the inevitable injury) because we burned an option, so be it. He can replace Ervin next season. If everyone is firing on all cylinders, we have lots of trade chips over the next few years to acquire that missing piece... and if the plan works out perfectly, we might find ourselves trading a guy like Gibson for lower prospects to make room for Gonsalves. It won't likely work out that way, but too much talent is a lot easier problem to remedy than not enough. The offense is here, go all in.

I'm guessing myth 3 was a bit tongue in cheek... but myth 2??? they don't need SP???? They have way too many question marks there. Yes, all those guys could pan out. They could also refute myth 1 and 2 in the same stroke... and then DFA or trade the guy they got to protect against 2 if by some chance you happen to be right. They need 5 starters... the likelihood of walking out of ST with 5 sure things next March is very VERY VERY low.

You do realize that your quote from me is exactly what Chitown was saying right? I think you'd be wise to look up risk aversion. Terry Ryan was risk averse. He never traded anyone unless said trade was terribly one sided. I'm not saying we needed to do the same the thing to LA, but to accept only JDL for Dozier would have been akin to trading Garza for Young. That's now how you build a team.

I don't agree. They need at least one RP... if not two. May, I might add, should start. You cannot count on this many young guys to step forward. I'd be fine with Hildy, Busenitz, and Duffey in the pen. I think it would be smart to slot in Chargois and reserve a spot for one of the other kids, but I'd want at least one more mainstay (if not two) so that Molitor doesn't rely too much on one guy. I'd rather not see Kintzler, Belisle, or Boshers in Twins uniforms in 2018.

I'm pretty sure everyone is off the 60 day come rule 5 draft. They can be re-instated in the spring. Though in Burdi's case, doing so would also require that he accumulate ML service time and pay check. I'm sure he'd be fine with that, but there are good reasons why the org would not. He's going to start pitching again in July... It will take most of the season for him to return to form. If there are open spots on the 40 man, I'd have no problems burning one on Burdi. I just don't want to see him stolen either because a team simply tossed him on their 60 day DL

I think Pit would be more interested in Gordon personally... and I'd be fine with that. Not sure I'd want to part with Romero, but I'd have no problems parting with a guy like Jorge and a lower level lotto ticket.

Burdi will be an easy one to poach if someone wants to. He gets selected and put on the 60 day DL. I know there's a gentlemen's agreement here on that, and hope no one wants to violate it, as in my opinion, that shouldn't be allowed.