tmerrickkeller

The fears projected on this thread are substantial, and given the history of baseball, likely. But the key to each of the roster projections are the "second half" or "September" lineups. While the opening day offensive roster 1-13 is not pretty, everyone's hoped-for late-season 9 looks really good. We've suffered for 3 years. But we need to suffer a little longer. Even when the roster (with hope eclipsing history) looks like Buxton (CF), Dozier (2B), Mauer (1B), Arcia (DH), Sano (3B), Rosario (RF), Pinto ©, Hicks (LF) and Florimon/Escobar (SS), we are going to take our lumps watching the kids grow up. But the sooner we get to that point, the better. We just can't sign anyone that would block 7 of the 9 spots above from happening (I would agree, however, that a stronger SS - or hoping that one of the minor-league SS candidates can rise - or signing Wieters would be a long-term solution and within the budget). Corey Hart (or Rajai Davis) just provides one more layer of blockage, just as Parmelee, Colabello, Pressly, Mastro, Hammer, and Doumit do. The only one of those who provides a long-term solution is Parmelee, who can play 1B, RF, DH, and is a power LH bat. I see Pressly or Mastro as a classic 4th OF, but I also see that being Plouffe's role on a good team in a year. Hicks can play any OF spot (so can spot start in center to give Buxton a day off), Parmelee can play RF, Plouffe can play LF/RF/3B/1B, Rosario needs to be able to play LF/RF and 2B to maximize his flexibility. Give me the above 9, with Wieters and adding Anderson to the rotation, trading a couple of good relief pitchers and moving Diamond and Worley into relief roles and emergency back-up, and then a bench of Pinto, Plouffe, Escobar, and Parmelee. We won't even be world-beaters in 2015, but we'll at least be moving in a direction where 40-man roster decisions between Colabello and Fryer and Hendriks are just meaningless.

Still, the reality right now is: CF Hicks/Pressly 2B Dozier 1B Mauer LF Willingham RF Arcia DH Doumit 3B Plouffe C Pinto SS Florimon with Escobar/Parmelee or Colabello/Mastro or Hicks or Pressly/Fryer or Hermann as your bench. That is not pretty, even with improvements from some. I did like the September lineup that was posted earlier - but that assumes quick progression from Sano/Buxton/Rosario plus the addition of some others (Rajai Davis, John Buck) PLUS the progression of Hicks and the revival of Willingham, Plouffe, Parmelee, etc. That's asking a lot.

The problem with the free agent pool is that they are marginal addition by addition. Would Eric Chavez be a reasonable option at 3B and a regular DH? Sure, but then what do you do with Plouffe? If you make Plouffe a super-sub (a role I think he is destined for over the next two seasons), playing some DH, some RF, some 3B, some 1B, then how do you fit a Parmelee or a Colabello or Arcia regularly into the lineup. If Arcia becomes your regular LF, then is Willingham your full-time DH, and then what do you do with Doumit? It is easy to say that we have to trade some of these parts (Colabello/Parmelee/Doumit/Willingham) but those names look suspiciously like the names on the free-agent list, and why would you give us anything for any of those guys over the names that are available as free agents without giving anyone up? Winter rarely works as a time to dump the marginal talent and get anything back in return. Trades work best when someone is performing well and another team (through injury or poor performance) needs the part you are selling. As was the case with pitching, we either need a substantial upgrade, and simultaneously to dump the person he is replacing, or we need to let the marginal players sort themselves out while waiting for some rookies (who we are all excited about - I can't wait for Rosario, Buxton, Hicks, and Sano) to be regular pieces of the offense.

I agree with those who are coming to the conclusions that there are not very many outside options for the Twins at this point. Salty wants too many years and is not that highly-rated defensively (though this team will need to score more runs in order to compete); the remainder are in the mode of either Doumit (no D, reasonable O) or Butera (no O, reasonable D). Signing any new catcher to be a primary option also blocks Pinto, and I think he deserves a shot to be a regular. We have either Hermann or Fryer, and it is not unreasonable to think that between Pinto and Hermann/Fryer we could cover the vast majority of games, and leave Doumit to DH regularly. Any regular watcher of the Twins will note that Doumit improves substantially with consistent at-bats. It also appears (every year) that there are catchers available at the end of spring training if we desperately need to plug a hole. This isn't the highest priority for this team right now, and the options outside the organization do not mandate immediate action.

The biggest PR splash would be Tanaka, and in a way, the lowest risk given his age and incredible track record. I posted this elsewhere (but in an old thread) but I think the math necessary to sign him does not take him out of the Twins' equation. You determine what you would be willing to pay to him as a free agent (and my suggestion is that is 10 years/$150 million because this team needs to make a splash and have an anchor pitcher). Then you decide how much you'd have to spend to get him for that amount of time on a contract (and I suggest that might be 10 years/$80 million for the length of the deal) and you throw the remaining money as a posting fee ($70 million) which - even if you don't get him, which I think you would - you would broadcast loudly to your fan base. Winning the posting fee also means that Tanaka will feel a lot of pressure from the Japanese club to sign so they get their money, which makes the 10 year/$80 million possible. A huge, huge risk that is outside of TR's comfort zone? Certainly. But this kid's size, velocity, nastiness, and the success of Darvish all point to it being a reasonable gamble for a franchise that won't need to spend much on others in a few years because their roster is almost entirely in the minor leagues and will be pre-arb.

I'm just going to address #1 because I think Tanaka is the key to a lot of things. This is a rare opportunity, and while there are serious unknowns, I think you have to use Darvish as a baseline. Q1 - how much would you pay a 24-year-old Darvish as a free agent? Q2 - isn't the math a simple matter of taking the answer to Q1 and subtracting what you anticipate paying on the actual contract? I think given the politics, money, and PR of this franchise, you would pay him $150+ million for 10 years, and therefore, if you feel you can sign him for 10/$75, you post $75M (which, I think, will win). This also dovetails into the points made by other posters about the future of the franchise being minor leaguers under control and the commensurate low cost for them. Puts a lot of eggs in one basket, but you add a rotation anchor like Tanaka and then sign one more $15M/yr pitcher and you've changed this franchise completely. I think it trickles down to players having better batting averages because they are more engaged in games and not so nervous that they need to score 8 runs to win. And it wouldn't even take more money (not even the TV revenue money) than what is coming off the books with Pelfry, Morneau, and Blackburn. Can't we just call Tanaka our Pelfry/Morneau/Blackburn, then start thinking about spending the $30M in new revenue on another quality arm and high-quality bat in the infield, and then strongly consider increasing the payroll of this franchise to where it should be ($100 M) by being ready to pull the trigger on that "one more piece" as early as June if we're remotely competitive.....along with our usual fliers on guys coming off injury or otherwise low $?

Arrrggh (in honor of national "Talk Like A Pirate" day tomorrow). I think ye need to allow for the humans to err. 'Tis the very error of the game what makes it feel so human.

My bad on Gibson. He's in there for sure. So Johan, Hughes, Deduno, Meyer, Gibson. AND a Shandy? Dream is getting better and better.

Much has been said about the speed of ascension of our prospects (and I love that series of articles), but the Pollyanna in me put them all together and dreamed of a day in August, 2014.... Lying in a hammock, edge of the water, listening to the Twins play the Royals. Batting first and playing center field, Byron Buxton. Batting second and catching, Joe Mauer Batting third and playing first base, Justin Morneau Batting cleanup and the DH, Josh Willingham Batting fifth and playing left, Oswaldo Arcia Batting sixth and playing third, Miguel Sano Batting seventh and playing second base, Eddie Rosario Batting eighth and playing shortstop, Brian Dozier Batting ninth and playing right field, Aaron Hicks Starting five of Johan, Hughes, Deduno, Meyer and Diamond/Albers (we traded Correia wisely in mid-May when he started the season strong again and have Worley, May, Diamond/Albers, and Hendriks waiting). This year we actually strike out opposing batters. Bench of Plouffe, Mastro, Pinto/Herrman (we were also able to find a home for Doumit) and utility infielder (Beresford? Bernier? Florimon? Escobar? Shoot me, I'm saying Punto for 200 AB's a year and flexibility and clubhouse leadership). Perkins, Burton, Duensing, Fien, Thielbar, Swarzak and Tonkin (maybe that's one too many short-relievers....) I'm not saying Colabello or Parmelee couldn't play first, but I think we get Justin on a 2-year hometown deal and he rakes. We get Hughes for 3 years on a gamble and it works (for once). We get Johan on a make-good with an option (our option) for a second year. We have depth and flexibility. Dozier is a gamble at short, but we've gotta make room for Rosario. We're pushing some younger talent, but it's time to push them. Twins fans start showing up to see the future. I can't imagine anywhere else I'd rather be (a feeling that hasn't happened in awhile). What's your dream look like?

Who's playing first base?

Agree heartily with comment 3 - not only the errors, but (listening on the radio), heard a lot of "dug out by Morneau" on his throws. It's early. Small sample size. But eerily reminiscent of observations from last year. Defense up the middle is going to be important this year with the ground ball pitchers we have.

This is incredibly cool! The effort is very much appreciated. Getting that daily rundown of the minor league affiliates is great, on its own, but everyone at TD has done such a terrific job letting us get to know the prospects that it is even more interesting to see how they fare. Excited to see how Gibson does tonight. Thank you, thank you!

Haven't listened to the podcast yet, but can folks weigh in on where to go to get the best price on tickets/selection? I saw a reference to Ticket King in the description, and the Twins push you to StubHub a lot, but wondered if there were other alternatives to search and compare...thanks.

Sorry - can't figure it out, so help me. I see the stat line on everyone, above, and I get that it is GP, AB, R, H, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, (mystery stat), BB, SO, SB, AVG, OBP, SLG, OPS, WAR. So what's the mystery number?

I think if you tried to put him behind the dish for 500 ab's, he'd regress. But it struck me (as others) that he gained throughout the year in knowledge and the ability to drive the ball. I don't hold out a lot of hope he will balloon in numbers, but I believe if he gets to 500 plate appearances and plays DH a lot, he could push an .800 OPS (which in his case, with few walks, would mean a .475 slugging) that would be both a blessing and a gain - and realistic.

I think there is, historically. While no team decides L-R-L-R in any given series during a season (or alternates the 5-man rotation because of it), I think the ability to alternate sides for pitchers is an advantage in the same way that alternating hitters creates situational advantages for hitters. Would rather mix in a lefty in Fenway; would rather throw right arms in Yankee Stadium. (Please note: this is not to advocate Duensing for a starting role, just to reply with my two cents to the previous post).

You know the answer to that...they trade a low-level prospect or two for a large expiring contract from a team that's not going anywhere and is looking to shed dollars, adding to the Twins' 2013 payroll. I thought it was obvious.

And 6. $80 million is a payroll they can live with - pocketing a ton of cash if the team is good and fills the stands (and they can buy one or two more players in mid-season, something they also keep talking about), or "justifying" their low payroll if the fans stay away in droves as though their decision to spend only $80 million was prescient, rather than self-fulfilling prophecy.

I have to say, I love this question. It calls for pure speculation, and even with seasons and seasons of history, it's hard to tell what combination of factors play into the actual decision-making of the front office. That being said, there are an abundance of factors at play: 1. If you buy three "solid" starting pitchers or four "possible" starting pitchers (fill in blank here - Marcum, Myers, Baker, McCarthy, Jurrjens) and that ends up being a repeat of last year, with lots of injuries and under-performance, there is a perception that the front office has no idea what it is doing. 2. This was clearly not the season to go "all in" and buy up two or three front-line starters, because the supporting cast is not good enough for that to make the difference. 3. You cannot admit that you are tanking it for 2013, so there has to be a ray of hope, which means you cannot allow Diamond, Blackburn, Deduno, DeVries, Gibson, Hendriks, and Hermson to battle it out for 5 spots. That's just giving up, even if some of those guys don't have injuries. 4. I think (and this is purely from a PR standpoint) what they did was brilliant. They came up with a handful of low-expectation guys. They can clearly argue that they plugged the holes (and if you listen to the mantra coming from everyone, it sounds like the political parties after they have caucused about an issue - everyone is saying the same thing). "If the starters can go deep into games, we have a solid lineup and we have a chance." Well, if that works out, the front office looks brilliant. If it doesn't, well, the ceiling on these guys is small, they've gutted our defensive outfield, they've added a few players including potential front-line pitchers, and they have a wonderful Plan B that says that we've "stocked up" for the future without blocking our potential. 5. I don't expect the team to be very good this year. If they are, I'll be thrilled. If they aren't, I can at least look to the Meyers, May, Gibson, Diamond, Berrios of 2015 and keep hoping, and we're at a point where some subset of guys (both pitchers and position players) are going to start adding to the equation this year and next.

And between Average and Good is Reasonably Good. We could be reasonably good.

Given the "clearing the path" theme, I certainly see a justification for these moves. If you are Pollyanna (and I am) there is pitching potential, outfield potential, and bounceback potential all over the place. Except one. And it's the one Seth acknowledges. Pedro Florimon has had a long time in the minors to develop, and has never hit. He is a flashy fielder, but makes way too many mistakes to overcome his weak bat. He's (most likely) not going to start hitting. And more importantly, we don't have any almost-ready middle infielders that he is blocking, probably for 2 years. Given the payroll, finding a solid SS on a 2-year deal would have made sense all around (still would, if any were available). As we put batting lineups together for 2013, the glaring holes are at #1 and #2, and we're hoping against hope that whoever mans CF can be one of those (which is a lot of pressure on Mastroanni, Benson, or Hicks), but without moving Mauer up to #2 (which isn't going to happen, in all probability), we don't have TWO guys. I don't mind starting Dozier at 2B, and Carroll at SS or utility, but the existence of both Escobar and Florimon is like admitting that we don't have a good-enough player, so we're going to rotate three backups. 1 more player. Plenty of money. No blocking of an almost-ready minor leaguer. Dumping whichever of Escobar or Florimon, and just having 1 of them as a second utility/back-up guy along with Carroll. It just makes too much sense. Now, is he (was he) out there? That I don't know....

I agree that a contract of 2/15 or thereabouts given the $80M payroll and dollars coming off next offseason is not what makes this a questionable signing. I think they need to spend some of that money to give us some optimism and put people in the seats. I don't buy the argument that any dollars "unspent" this year necessarily become dollars to throw at someone in the 2014 offseason, or that they'll go over $100 million by the amount they are under $100 million this year. Because they won't. My concern is with Joe Saunders. I think he's a valuable pitcher and can give you 185+ innings of middle-of-the-road stats on a different team. I think guys like Saunders do well on a pitching staff with a lot of hard throwers when his offspeed stuff is a variation from everyone else. I don't think he's so valuable in a rotation with Diamond, Pelfrey and Correia who all throw a little softer and nibble the edges, just like Saunders does. My way of thinking, he's just a little too much like those other guys, even if marginally/statistically better. Now, should we have signed Saunders at 2/$16 over Correia at 2/$10? But we've beaten that horse....

JC, you're right. This IS the point - don't just throw money away, and if you can run the business for $80 million, do it. But we have a "cheap theater" here in Sioux Falls, and everyone I know who goes there finds it pretty much disgusting. The seats are broken and they don't fix them. The place isn't clean and they haven't tried to update a thing. It seems clear that ownership is just trying to milk the place for a few dollars with no long-term view to keeping people happy or trying to do the right thing on any level. Because (while there is competition from Redbox, HBO, other forms of entertainment etc.) there is no place else in town to watch relatively new-release movies for $3. I hate seeing this team use that business model, and that's what this feels like - sort of a "what you gonna do?" spit in the face. I also agree with the posters who say that there is no logic in not spending the money to save it for the future stars - the future stars are all young and under control for years to come. I think the team has to "do both" and try to get the best players they can get and spend $93 million per season, so long as those contracts don't block the longer-term plan to bring up the 2015 lineup that we've talked about - where every single one of them is either a pre-arbitration youngster, or a guy named Mauer.

I know I'm talking out both sides of my mouth here, but I get it on both sides. If you are slashing payroll and not being honest about your plan for rebuilding, it's self-fulfilling. Fans don't come because the team you told us was going to be competitive clearly isn't. Revenues decrease. Payroll then decreases to account for the lost revenue. The team worsens. Fans don't come. That's the spiral we have been in for two years. When you pare payroll in a new stadium down to $80 million, are they actually asking us to believe that this money is being saved to compensate future teams? We're in a youth movement. The guys that we're bringing along are going to be $500K/yr guys under our control for a few years. Someone posted a month ago about a potential 2014/2015 lineup where the entire payroll would be around $40 million, including Mauer's $23. Are they going to go $50 million over budget in a future year with the pocketed savings? No possible way. I agree that with last year's pitching staff, a poor defensive team just made worse by our off-season moves, and lack of quality arms in the upper minor leagues that they are doing what they have to do. We need pitchers who have some upside and aren't willing to pay $20 million/year to get them (unless, a completely unlikely scenario given the remaining talent on the team and the overall payroll, it is the LAST $20 million to put us over the top). I do believe this team is moving in the right direction. It does stink. I understand the frustration of people. I just love baseball and wish we would be better now.

I'm a Twins pollyanna, but "Revere" and "home run" are difficult to put in the same paragraph (even with the "inside the park" modifier). I agree that he has a higher upside so long as he hits with authority, which doesn't mean the same as hitting for power. Squaring up balls, and not trying only to hit dinks and leakers.