Alex

Selling high would have meant trading him last year. That's the problem, that the Twins in recent history haven't done a good job of selling players at their peak value with the team.

Then we're in for a long wait. Ryan won't spend the money for one and I don't think they'll be willing to give up what it requires -- and neither will the fans if they can't stomach a Sano for Sale type trade that was floated hypothetically in the media last week or something similar.

The fact that we didn't trade Morneau has nothing to do with those players. His level of play has been poor and the Twins didn't want to eat his salary, and thus were asking too much for him by hoping to get anything back. My point is if you really think The Twins are in a position where their best option is to play Doumit in the starting lineup on a regular basis over evaluating a younger player in the majors, the Twins are in an incredibly dire position. Colabello, at least, while having a rough 100 ABs had certainly earned a longer look with the dominance he showed in AAA. More than that, there are other reasons he should be getting as many ABs as possible against major league pitching.

I like Doumit from a flexibility standpoint, but, wow, if we really don't have a player that is younger and more likely part of the future that we don't want to give playing time to on a regular basis over his putrid hitting and horrible defense, the Minnesota Twins are in an incredibly bad state.

Oh, and the really frustrating thing is to see a future hall of famer prime years wasted during this rebuild that is going to take longer because of that low risk approach to free agency and an inability to sell high on veterans.

I have a hard time with this rebuild. I like the depth of the farm system, but I've been very frustrated with the approach to free agency, which then bleeds into their trading. They don't acquire talent that might interest another team at the deadline and haven't really sold high on anyone in the last couple of years.

And they should maintain that with another high pick next year (Last I saw after picks were signed, they were #2 behind the Astros, but not a big difference). I won't argue that Ryan has been bad, but a lot of that is because of inherited players (Sano, obv, and Rosario) and inherited situation, ie being bad multiple years and getting multiple high picks. To his credit, he did add May and Meyer, but at some point, he needs to make the big league club better, and that doesn't look like it will happen anytime soon.

If I'm doing my math right, Hendriks has faced around 500 MLB batters and most of those were prior to age 24. I'm not saying he's going to be great, but he deserves a much longer look.

And so is positional value!

Interesting segment on FoxN in the pregame about the masks catchers wear and Hermann observed that many of the catchers getting concussions wear the same, light weight mask.

You are really mixing the arguments and points here. The more games Mauer is able to play catcher the more valuable he is. There's a balance between what the right number is that will keep him healthy and effective. This really only matters if the Twins are competitive. It's when they are competitive that there is reason to play him at catcher. For now, there's really no point to putting wear and tear on his legs.

Ryan of course did re-sign Capps instead of taking the supplemental pick. But the trade was still part of an organizational philosophy, one that Nick pointed out, and I think less about an individual GM than that overall approach.

Fair enough. I agree that at this point it would be difficult to get concrete evidence about an inability to get trade value because maybe that's true of everyone, but that is just one specific concern regarding larger concerns that Ryan (and the front office in general) may be stuck, to some extent, in the past.

No, but you made the comparison to other teams first. If you're going to make statements like "by far" and put "far" in bold, I'd assume you have numbers or read something somewhere that support your point. All I asked was who we were discussing as I wasn't sure who I could be missing in the current Terry Ryan era, or if we were talking about the previous, which, again, has no real relevance to me at this point -- and that was my main point.

As I added in my edit, I assumed that you're talking about the past here, which is less relevant now for a lot of reasons. One of which, while not part of this discussion, is that teams are valuing prospects far more than they used to. Relevant to this discussion may be that teams are using better evaluative tools now then they were at the time. While I'll agree he was good at it in his first go round, I'd agree with ThePuck that simply calling it above average and using the words "far more" than other teams without a basis for comparison isn't really helpful, especially when you consider that the Twins were often trading away veterans they couldn't sign for prospects, not something that has happened here all that much lately. In fact, this is a major concern that a lot of people have that Ryan has done little to disprove so far: In a lot of areas (evaluation, free agency, trading), the landscape has changed but that Ryan hasn't.

Help me out. Who are we talking about here? Or are we referring to his past tenure, which I think is becoming less and less relevant, especially in this discussion.

I just want to add that it's a strawman argument to say those of us advocating more statistical evaluation means we want less scouting.

Yeah, and it's pretty clear it's on his own. Diamond talked about how Perk was the one talking to him about that. It wasn't his pitching coach, it was another player that was taking the initiative. More evidence that it's not an organizational philosophy.

Not really, considering that sounds like he's referring to the eye test and not, you know, numbers. EDIT: He's pretty much been his numbers this season again. Moreover, what is baffling to me is that there is some kind of narrative that the Twins are using advanced metrics but are benefiting (to the tune of 3 consecutive 90+ loss seasons) by keeping it secret. Does their pattern of moves really suggest they do a good job analyzing/valuing numbers? Consider their use of spring training as a key evaluative tool in choosing players to make the roster (Hicks/Ramirez, among others), keeping players who seem to deserve a chance based on their numbers down in the minors (Slama, Colabello, Richardson etc..). Illogically keeping players up while sending others down (Hicks and Dozier both received longer looks than Parmelee, Colabello, and Arcia before getting sent back) From my observations, they are far more into scouting and what they see in a player than what that player has actually done.

Even if you don't trust in the concept of WAR or it's accuracy, its existence has nothing to do with the added value a hitter like Mauer brings when he is able to play catcher. Just look at next year IF Mauer does move to first base and it means we don't sign another first baseman. Let's use current stats. It means that his .880 OPS (this season) goes to first base. This nets us about +.130 OPS at 1st base, which is a gain. However, Doumit or Hermann start to play more catcher, which means that spot on the field is then filled by a player with a sub .700 OPS (-.180). Net loss is about -.50 OPS.

If the Twins are using advanced metrics more than other organizations there's little evidence of it or their ability to keep a lid on it is impressive because I've heard other teams refer to them and even admit they know what they are. In Spring Training when we played the Rays, I remember listening to Joe Maddon's interview and comparing it to Gardy's and the difference in analysis was astounding. Maddon talk about why they were batting Longoria 4th instead of 3rd (where teams traditionally place their best hitter) due to their research regarding the fact that they found the batting him in the #4 spot might net the team more runs due to in-house research. In an interview on MLB radio with the Pirates GM just before the trade deadline, he referred to their own metrics in evaluating players for trades and talked a lot about their defensive shifts, which have been highly successful and are based off of their own research. I don't hear the Twins talking much about their own research and evaluation other than "scouts say..." Meanwhile, we have Rick Anderson, after last season saying that "WAR" was a new one to him. This, after it would have been difficult for anyone to read an article about last year's MVP battle without running across the term. I also remember Parker's article that he wrote about Jack Goin and left with the impression that again, it was less than other teams were doing. In John Bonnes's interview with Terry Ryan a season or two back, Terry Ryan was either playing coy or was ignorant regarding some of the advanced statistics John asked him about. These are just some examples off the top of my head but there is little that leads me to to think the Twins are not using all the tools at their disposal to be effective in evaluation. I obviously can't say for certain that they aren't using it, but the OPs question was what evidence there was that they weren't using them. My answer is that I regularly see evidence that other teams (though certainly not all) ARE using them than the Twins.

What? He's brilliant. He's just setting himself up for the win!

You've probably summed up the issue here indirectly. If you think Morneau will be reasonably capable of those numbers -- you think he's more likely to reach them than not -- then it's not crazy to re-sign him. I think those numbers are a reach for him as he ages another year. Complete side note: Ran into this as I was looking at his stats. There's been some talk about Morneau going to a hitter friendly park because it will help him. Ironically, Morneau is hitting far better in target field than on the road: Target Field: .305/.351/.500 8 HR in 242 PA Away: .231/.293/.366 7 HR in 266 PA I'm actually shocked.

Maybe, but it would be impossible to tell without giving them a chance, no? I'll also go ahead and predict the same of people thinking that Morneau needs to be re-signed. I really don't get it, other than the sentimental value, but I imagine if people take an objective look (IE not a Twins fan), there's no way they'd be happy if their team brought in Morneau for a significant deal, especially if they were a rebuilding team. Are there really fans on other boards in other MLB cities arguing their team should go out and get Morneau?

I think "core" refers to players coming out of team control and entering FA. A player like Santana, who was lost to them because they couldn't afford him, and in the nearer future, players like Arcia, Sano, Meyer and Buxton. It did not, and should not imply they are going to overpay players who are past their prime. No offense, but I'd argue the "glass half-empty" crowd in this case are the ones saying the cupboard is empty or that better players couldn't be found in FA. They're arguing it's doom and gloom if we don't sign him.