prouster

Right. Dozier turned 22 about a month before he was drafted. Polanco, 22 at the start of the 2016 season, made both the BA and MLB.com top-100 lists. Yes, Polanco being 22.9 vs. Dozier being 22.1 is different, if a person wants to be pedantic. I guess I'm not sure what point you're making. Do you think Dozier was a better prospect? As far as me following the conversation, you made an argument that gave me a strong reaction, so I wanted to post something. I don't care if you respond or not. As far as the Twins roster is concerned going forward, I fall into the camp that we should try and trade Dozier. Whether that's at the deadline or in the off season might not matter so much, unless a team on the cusp thinks he can help with a pennant run and is willing to pay a premium for that chance. His homerun power would definitely be missed, but there are other guys in the lineup who could make up for it. I also like Polanco's ability to get on base better than Dozier's. Considering that Dozier is likely to decline in the very near future, I'd rather take a chance on the rookie.

Age doesn't necessarily matter when drafting (although a 17 year old high schooler may turn a few more heads than one who is about to turn 19), but it is a huge factor when evaluating prospects. If a guy is two years younger than the competition, his stats carry more weight than if he was two years older than the competition. That's why a guy like Daniel Palka is a fringy prospect. Yes, he's crushing the ball, but he spent most of the year at Double-A, where the average age is slightly over 24 (Palka, as of his move up to Triple-A, was 24 years, 8 months, and 7 days old--so, a few months above average). A guy like Max Kelper, on the other hand, dominated the Southern League as a 22 year old. Kepler was obviously the more highly regarded of the two before either wore a Lookouts jersey, but he was also kind of fringy when he began at that level. The fact that he owned players generally older than him caused him to stand out among his peers. In other words, no one said Polanco is better than Bryant because the latter went to college. It would be crazy to think that. The OP's point was that Polanco's minor league track record is more impressive than Dozier's. Which it is. While Dozier was still at Southern Mississippi, Polanco was making top-100 lists.

There are some intriguing arms that could be available at 15, but I'd like to see the Twins take a position player. Pitchers are simply too hard to predict, what with the high frequency of TJ surgery, other injuries, and just plain flaming out. I think quality pitching prospects can be acquired in ways other than the draft, namely through trades and international signings. This seems to be the route the Cubs have taken the last few years, and it has certainly paid dividends. Some players I'm particularly interested in that could be on the board at 15: Zack Collins - C, University of Miami (Powerful catcher, numbers and profile remind me of Kyle Schwarber, the chance of him being on the board at 15 seems slight) Blake Rutherford - OF, CA High School (Highly touted, considered the best HS bat in the draft until recently, signability concerns could cause him to slip to the mid-late first round) Delvin Perez - SS, Puerto Rico High School (Very toolsy, considered by some to be best position player in the draft, garners comparisons to Carlos Correa, fluid defender with little concern of ability to play SS at MLB level, hit tool is underdeveloped, one of the younger players in the draft, recently failed a drug test for unnamed PED, will almost certainly be available at 15) Alex Kirilloff - OF, Pennsylvania High School (Most here know a bit about him, will likely be on the board when the Twins pick) Will Craig - 3B/1B, Wake Forest (Smooth right-handed swing with tons of power, this guy can mash, will likely be available at 15)

I haven't read all the comments on this thread, so this post could be redundant. I don't think any of the catchers listed by the author, with the exception of Dioner Navarro, would have been any better than JRM. A few, like Avila and Iannetta and Soto and Saltalamacchia, would not have been upgrades over Suzuki. JRM has some upside. Those listed generally do not. I understand that your argument isn't that they would be upgrades in isolation, but that the Twins wouldn't have had to give up Hicks to acquire any of them. This is true. Then again, they have a potentially above average MLB catcher on their roster, who has shown flashes of hitting ability in a small sample size. Hicks has also flashed some potential, but his track record is dismal. There's nothing to suggest he will ever live up to his talents. Also, if you include Bethanchourt's triple-A numbers, you should probably include his MLB numbers. In an admittedly small sample size (160 PA), his triple slash line was .200/.225/.290. His wRC+ was . . . wait for it . . . 36. That's Aaron-Hicks-in-his-rookie-year bad (although Hicks' wRC+ in 2013 was 62, almost twice as good as Bethancourt). There are also serious questions about Bethancourt's defense, as someone else mentioned. Finally, I wouldn't assume that San Diego is preparing to deal a catcher simply because of this trade. Austin Hedges has looked more like Drew Butera than Matt Wieters thus far. It's possible they're hedging risk (pun intended) against him busting.

I'm with you that Berrios should start the year in Rochester. He doesn't have anything left to prove, really, but keeping him down for the first few weeks a la Kris Bryant would save the Twins a lot of pain and money down the road. Service time doesn't even need to be the primary reason for keeping him down. There really isn't an obvious place for him on the roster yet. (On a related note, I'm right there with you, as well, that some of the starters should be on a short leash.) Personally, I like the idea of Duffey making the rotation out of spring training. I think he showed he has the stuff to make it as a mid-rotation arm, at the very least. That bender of his is something to behold. In my mind, his presence on the roster makes it so the bullpen is the only obvious place for Nolasco. Unless, for some odd reason, a team is willing to trade for him.

I really don't think there's any reason to believe this. It's not as if standing in RF will make Sano suddenly forget how to swing a bat. Remember, he wasn't at third base when he was playing as the DH. Some people say they feel uncomfortable if they don't play defense. I don't think it affected Sano at all. There is also a contemporary, glaring comparison we could make. Miguel Cabrera has rotated positions throughout his career (3B, 1B, DH, and yes, LF). I don't know. I think he's a pretty good hitter. Thinking more broadly, I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make regarding the affect playing outfield has on one's offensive performance. Are you speaking generally or about Sano in particular? Is it that OF isn't Sano's "native" position? Because there are some pretty good hitters who have played OF. Trout. Bonds. Griffey Jr. Mays. Ruth. Etc.

Someone else referenced this, speculating that someone other than Ryan made the call. That's possible. Another possibility is that there was some confusion translating the original report (I'm assuming a Spanish language publication) into English. In any case, I really don't think this is the emergency some people see it as. It's December. They want Sano to rest. So what?

I agree with most of what you said, although I don't think Molitor should feel any pressure to slot Nolasco into the rotation. Why not try him out in the bullpen (which is what they should have done with Pelfrey, instead of the really weird decision to send Milone to AAA and have Pelfrey start)? Nolasco wouldn't be the first reeling starter to rediscover his stuff in the pen. I'm also not sure how a thread about the White Sox acquiring Brett Lawrie turned into bashing the Aaron Hicks trade?

My guess is they like Plouffe's 3B defense more.

No, I haven't watched any at bat that isn't available on the nightly highlights posted to Rochester's website. The stats simply don't support the idea that he's hitting a bunch of doinkers and beating them out on foot. For one thing, he's slugging .549 (before tonight's double). That's borderline elite. His wRC+, which is a weighted measurement of a player's runs produced per at bat adjusted for the league and ballparks that person plays in, is sitting at 193. League average is 100. This means Buxton has been almost 100% better than the average AAA hitter in his first 12 games there. There's nothing to suggest that he isn't murdering the baseball right now. For the record, it's discussions like these that made me wish we had batted ball data available for MiLB. That would clarify a lot.

Scorching hot taek. This is one of the problems some people demonstrate when it comes to sabermetrics: the analytically minded aren't always so analytical. It's pretty shocking that someone would value Buxton's AAA peripherals over his actual performance. He's absolutely crushing the ball right now, which of course leads to inflated BABIP and reduced walk rates. Yeah, his ISO isn't incredibly high (which isn't to say that it's low), but that's because his batting average is incredibly high. He's slugging .549 for Rochester, which is pretty stinking good. He's also OPSing .993, and his wRC+ is sitting at an irrefutably robust 193. Of course, this is all in an extremely limited sample size, so much of it is noise (although his performance has so far lined up with his track record). It's silly to look at just one or two stats, even if they're "advanced," and claim they describe the whole picture. I really don't get how anyone could look at Buxton's AAA line and assume that somehow he isn't hitting sufficiently well. Sometimes, when trying to figure out what's "really" going on, we can get too bogged down in shoddy analysis and miss out on what is happening right before our eyes.

"Trout is no doubt the best player in baseball, but is he the most valuable?" Um, yes. Let's say teams value players at $6 million per WAR, which is a pretty conservative estimate. Trout has already put up 5.5 fWAR this year, which makes the first half of his season worth approximately $33 million. His salary this year? Slightly over $6 million. Simply put, he provides Aneheim with a ridiculous surplus they could get from absolutely no other player. His salaries for the next five seasons are as follows: 2016: $16.083 million 2017: $20.083 million 2018: $34.083 million 2019: $34.083 million 2020: $34.085 million Even though Trout will make an incredible amount of money through the end of his contract, he'll still be vastly underpaid, which is really weird to write. In terms of "most valuable," it's Trout, and nobody really comes close. As far as Dozier goes, he's having a really great season. I think he'll (deservedly) get some MVP votes, but he's got some tough competition to actually bring the award home.

Agree. I think Nick is correct in general, but it seems strange to me that Gibson is included when many of us were harping on Terry Ryan et al. for delaying his callup to the Majors just a season and a half ago. Of course, Nick hedges this by saying Gibson deserves a longer leash than others, though I think Gibson and Hughes should be the only rollover starters whose spots are guaranteed. In other words, no need to worry about Gibson, especially after a single start.

As for a projection, I don't know. .260/.315/.420 with 35 doubles and 26 dingers? How does that sound?

Based on what? Vargas has demonstrated the ability to hit for power since he's been in the Twins' system. He slugged almost .500 over the course of his minor league career, and his home run total in the majors last year projected to almost 30 over a full season's worth of at bats. Choosing OBP to determine a player's ability to hit for power is . . . wacky. The only player on the team with more raw power than Vargas is (for the time being) Arcia. Simply put, the Billy Butler comparison makes no sense, because Vargas can mash.

I guess we're ignoring Schafer's godawful 1100 at bats before coming to Minnesota.

Long time reader, first time poster: If I remember correctly, the Twins drafted Mauer because Prior made it very clear he wouldn't sign with Minnesota. Drafting Prior wouldn't have provided any benefit, and perhaps would have set back the organization. And I don't think we should put too much blame on Mauer for the poor playoff record--bad pitching did us in, as well as half the batting order turning into whiff factories (Kubel for instance). But you're essentially stating that Mauer is the reason for the miserable play in the Twins' recent playoff appearances. According to Baseball Reference, he slashed .182/.250/.432 in the 2006 ALDS, which was bad (only Punto and Jason Tyner were worse). In the 2009 ALDS, he slashed .417/.500/.500 (only Punto was better). Then in 2010, he slashed .250/.308/.250 (Thome, Hardy, and Kubel were worse). Of course, Mauer's career playoff slash line of .286/.359/.250 only comes in 39 plate appearances, hardly enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. Mauer has helped the team in the playoffs, and he has hurt the team. The reasons for their awful performances in October have to do with far more people than just Mauer. Personally, I don't see how anyone could argue that there was a better option than Mauer in that draft. He's made a very strong case for himself as the greatest hitting catcher of all time, and with maybe two or three more 2 WAR seasons, which is very very attainable for a player of his caliber, I think he'll be a lock for the Hall of Fame.