Alex

That's a good point, and those are questions we won't have an answer to. I'll just say this isn't solely Terry Ryan or Bill Smith's responsibility. It is organizational to some extent even if they face the brunt of it. I appreciate the discussion on quotes, though I disagree on the issue with the quotes to some extent (though I did agree and say that context is worth debating). I won't argue that there are certainly things that are simply pandering and said based on expectation, but I also think in this thread, many people have pointed to actual moves that support the idea that the Twins thought they could be competitive this season (Hicks, imo, being a prime example). Additionally, why would DSP throw Ryan under the bus by saying they had approved a higher payroll? It doesn't make sense unless the front office really did want to be competitive. I mean, of course it could be a lie as well, but why not just say "We agreed with Terry that the asking price was too high for players out there and decided to go with what we've got." Or, even couch it more by saying, "We left flexibility in the payroll in case we ended up (by some miracle) being buyers at the trade deadline." For me, as I've said, they've done a relatively poor job either way. If they lied completely about being competitive, they haven't done a good job of rebuilding, at least of being active. If they're waiting simply for prospects to mature, it could be a long wait (and it may never come that way). And, if they were honest in their comments about competing, they obviously haven't met that either.

I'm looking forward to seeing the new OF, Presley, acquired for Morneau. I'd also like to see how Colabello and Albers do and see if they can be contributors next year. And, Arcia if he gets healthly.

You're missing the point with your last statement and I think we'd mostly agree. I would be upset with the same and I realize that the Twins are in a different place than the Rays, but the Rays moves, goals, and reasons behind them make sense for them. It's not that I want to Twins to run their organization as a small market team. I don't see as much driving force or philosophy, or purpose behind the Twins front office-- it doesn't have to be the same philosophy, but I'd like to think the Twins could be smart within that philosophy. I'd point out that I think that my Hicks/Myers example still holds true, regardless of the philosophy. In fact, I'd argue that the one thing the Twins do that don't make sense is that they haven't used their financial flexibility wisely, for example, by going/getting after free agents and/or Cuban player who could help them as part of a rebuild, something the Rays never would be able to do.

Yep, it seems they really maximize value even with stars, money being an issue for them. Price is making $10M this year and will make more this year, so I'm sure they'd give up his last two arby years for good prospects. By holding off on Myers service time, they've bought an extra year of keeping him under cheaper team control, even if they trade him as they did Shields and maybe will with Price.

Jokin pointed out trades and how they seem more adept at trading players high than low (Shields was an excellent example). Then, just in terms of roster moves that are germane to this discussion... Both the Twins and Rays had a high level prospect that had good spring training numbers (Myers and Hicks). The Rays, likely a playoff contender for at least a wild card kept Myers down until June. At worst, they now have another year of control of a top prospect and all they had to sacrifice were 60ish games of him this season. To Myers' credit, they would have been worthwhile games, but the additional 100 they'll get closer to his prime will likely be even more valuable. Keeping him down 60 games was a smart baseball move that will pay off later. Hicks, not unlike the Sano discussion here to replace Plouffe, was given the position out of spring training despite the fact that that was the only merit (spring numbers) he really had for the job. In addition, the Twins didn't actually need him early on because those 60 games or so weren't going to make the difference between them making the division. We know how that story went and it's clear that Hicks's time was wasted, though oddly enough the result is the same (in terms of team control) because they had to send them back down, but with the additional negative of possible harm to his development and him hurting the team. At this point, and as many suggested before the season, there was little to be gained and much to be lost. I've mentioned plenty of moves I've considered odd in other threads, so I'll leave them there. I will admit, Tampa Bay calling Delmon up is an odd one, but it's an expanded roster move so it's not like it's really costing them anything.

I'd agree with this. However, there were a lot of people that predicted during 2011. The Twins were near 10 games out of first at the all-star break and were going to lose several key pieces (Cuddyer, Nathan, Kubel) without any clear replacements in 2012. The pitching staff was injured and showing its weakness and the middle infield was a mess. In fact, even Morneau and Mauer would be coming off of injuries and weren't sure things to produce, but let's assume they'd return to norms. That means that only 1B, C, and CF were soundly held down and there was nothing in the minors that was a sure thing to take over the other spots. The point is that by the trade deadline 2011, the Twins could have been taking far more action than they did.

I appreciate the distinction and the response and it's a heck of a list, but I guess I judge it from more of question of is the rebuild -- the attempt to get better -- active or passive, and maybe that's what you're also getting at. Most of the moves discussed are passive, including drafting players. It's certainly important to draft the right ones, but everyone gets to draft players and the front office doesn't have to do anything additional here. Trading two starting CF is certainly more active. However, the fact that these CF were cost controlled and young (and thus could have been part of a rebuild) categorize this trade more as trading from a strength to need. Still a good move and definitely important in a rebuild/tear-down, so it's definitely important. Signing Deduno could end up being key and may bridge a gap, but he'll be around 32 or 33 by the time that happens, correct? Not to mention, Deduno could have signed with anyone after last offseason. He's certainly helped but I guess I have a hard time giving them credit for this when essentially no one else wanted him, but he has been a good find.

You're clearly upset about this, but what did the Twins gain by keeping him a month? Now they can give Colabello regular playing time at first as well as maybe Parmelee again. In addition, they got something back for him, the full picture of what isn't clear yet, but it's probably an upgrade over Clete Thomas/Wilkin Ramirez at least which means it will help next year. Beyond that, hard to know, but all they had to give up for that was about 100 AB from Morney. If they want to sign Morneau in the offseason, they can, just like before.

What's Presley's defense like? Is he a legit CF defender? If so, it might mean that they want someone to keep a spot warm in CF for next year.

No worries. I appreciate the apology. I think, and maybe we've heard them already, but just posting things you see as important and good aspects of a rebuild that maybe we've missed? I do hope I'm wrong and there's more to this than just waiting!

Another personal, inflammatory post. Can was stop being rude and actually discuss it? Most of us have been around sports our entire lives I'd guess. Somehow this discussion has been turned around and we now have a theory that doesn't exist. I'm not arguing that the Twins aren't rebuilding at all, but I, and others, pointed out how neither their words, nor many of the moves are the act of a quickly rebuilding team. In answer to the question of the thread, my perspective is that: 1.) They could and should be making moves that better support a quick rebuild, but based on Ryan's comments and the moves he made it seems like he thought they would be competitive. 2) In terms of both, I'd argue you can rebuild and still be competitive, but the Twins aren't in an active rebuilding mode -- it's far more passive and they haven't been able to be competitive while being passive (waiting for prospects to develop). Their rebuild approach could have been better (arguably they should have been in it since 2011) and their attempt at competitiveness is not only leading to another 90 loss season in 2013 but it looks like it will head that way in 2014, so that's not successful either. Rebuilding should be active and not just being terrible and waiting for prospects to mature. TRs only credit is trading two young CF, but there seem to be other opportunities that have been missed along the way. To your point about "shouting it from the rooftops" I understand why he wouldn't want to shout it from the rooftops. However, people have also questioned whether Ryan actually said the team would be competitive, which he did. They've also said the moves seen are those of a rebuilding team. It's true that some (the CF trades), but many are not.

I disagree on both points. First, I think that there are people that recognize there's a continuum and that very few if anyone who is using the quotes thought the Twins wanted to be a division contender. Second, I think it's a bad idea to get into the ignorance debate, and insulting. Anyone paying attention to front office interviews during the offseason, spring training, and even during the season (again I'll point to hearing Ryan multiple times say he didn't do his job, not to mention Dave St. Peter's recent comments about available payroll) knows that this wasn't a one time quote. I'll add that people supporting their ideas with a quote is actually a good thing. There's also nothing wrong with debating whether it was taken out of context, but in the case of this discussion, I don't think that's happening at all.

Yeah, and it's better than no quote, which is what those arguing "the strategy was always a rebuild" have.

Plouffe isn't the only person not to slide this season. And though I don't want to take the blame completely off him, it does seem like some things are getting missed in the coaching process.

Not clear what you would do? Start him right away next year? 1. Yes, but they can do that just as easily after calling him up in June. 2. I don't think anyone besides Sano will be up in June, though Buxton is a possibility. I'd guess he's more likely a September call-up 2014. At most it might be 2-3 players, and it's debatable whether that will impact the Twins financially in a negative way -- and if it does, that's pretty far down the road. 3. There's plenty of time to work this kind of deal out, though that would be the smart thing to do once he shows he is has superstar potential. All of the things you mention are true regardless of whether you call him up in April or June, imo. To look at it another way, I don't see anything gained by calling him up in April unless the Twins are competing for a division and he's definitely the best choice. Neither of those is true. What's frustrating to me is to see a team like Tampa continually make good, smart business and baseball moves that aren't any big secret while the Twins seem lost in a fog and there is difficulty finding rhyme or reason to some of theirs. Not all of Tampa Bay's moves work out, but very rarely are they head scratchers when made and their logical reasons for doing so are readily apparent.

I admit I was exaggerating a bit and knew someone would use this argument. I thought by now, especially after the last two seasons, we've had enough evidence that a good or even great spring training really doesn't show whether a player is ready for the lineup or not. Off the top of my head: 2012: Parmelee, Dozier, Jeff Gray 2013: Hicks, Ramirez Three of those players were called up from AA or nearly so at the time. In the Twins situation, there's no reason to call him up to start the season even if he would be the best starting 3B. Next year looks like another rebuilding season and there's no reason to start his MLB clock in meaningless games or risk that he might not be ready as they did with Hicks (though I think Sano has a better chance of success).

No reason for him to start with the big league club next year. None.

I actually feel bad for the guy. IMO, he deserved a chance at the starting job out of the gate and he certainly would have had his best opportunity to prove himself (or not) a full time big league player had he not gotten injured. Next season he may have another shot as well, but I think it's less likely.

Do you think they'll both be up and playing at elite levels next year? Right now, I personally tend to think they won't be, not to start at the very least and maybe not until September, if at all. I don't have much hope for next season and think a fourth straight 90 loss season is possible. It's hard to imagine it being worse or this bad again, but I said the same thing about last season as well. Key players are older for the most part and there are no prospects who I feel confident will succeed and be a major improvement over what we have now except Arcia (though I'd like to see if Parmelee can be). And, as Puck mentions, they still need pitching. I realize some people have said Ryan will be more aggressive in FA this year, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Perhaps their pitching his improved by framing, but they also utilize shifts more than anyone else based on statistical analysis.

First, I think this post moved from discussing ideas to attacking a poster. I think we should get back to ideas. Regarding "generic" statements, Ryan also said he wanted to the Twins to play meaningful games in August and September and not just April. He's also apologized this season in various ways for example, in one interview he said he let Gardy down implying the talent he acquired wasn't good enough. Again, we can choose to believe him or not on this issue (and I also happen to think he thought Hicks was ready, otherwise why not get a cheap fill in or let someone else- named Clete -play CF, not to mention they kept Hicks up a long time). I tend to believe that he wanted the team to be competitive (he wasn't saying they were going to win the division) and I actually think his moves show that. I think he didn't go after higher upside pitching because it was out of his own price range and that trading two young, cost controlled OF for filling a longer term need than about rebuilding. It makes even more sense if you think that he believed Hicks was ready. A true rebuilding team keeps Hicks down until he's absolutely ready (and doesn't eat ML time) and a rebuilding team gives ABs to guys like Parmelee and Colabello instead of playing veterans who aren't hitting.

This is a big part of the philosophy that people are frustrated with: the safe choice. At this point, Morneau is a "safe" choice because he's a known quality. There's really not upside there. It's true that the names given don't match, but we have already gone around about the blocking issue. However, the outside perspective is valuable, imo, for other reasons and the crux of the blog is about how the Twins fans view Morneau, which was further confirmed by comments like these. I'm a Twins fan, but calling him a "league average" first baseman is out of touch as well. If he doesn't cost much to retain and no one wants to take him for essentially free, there is a reason.

I posted this elsewhere, but if anyone thinks that there's a rationale reason to sign Morneau, they need to read even an outsider's perspective here: The Problem With Justin Morneau - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

For anyone that thinks there's actually a rational baseball reason for signing Justin Morneau, you should read this piece from a fan of another team: The Problem With Justin Morneau - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

Jeez, this team has become almost unwatchable. You can basically stop paying attention when the opposing team scores its second run or when the Twins score their one (if you have a bet on who will account for it). Or, the more sadistic thing to do is watch the whole game in hopes that they'll get two runs and you'll believe in miracles again...