GP830

Howbout Kepler, Berrios, and Burdi for Shields, Hedges, and Kimbrel? Padres get salary relief, Twins get a catcher and serious arms. I'd also be willing to omit Berrios, and forego Shields. Just pondering this evening! Thanks for humoring me.

Do you pull the trigger?

And to clarify, this just seems like to type of marginal, post-deadline move that could help to shore up a percieved weakness that the Twins currently have.

Right, He's not the long term answer, but he'd be an upgrade over Fryer and a potential compliment to Suzuki.

Cubs have designated Teagarden for assignment. He has a pretty solid slash line at AAA. He's 31 years old but his offense could provide a significant boost to the Twins C corps from here on out. Thought on this? http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/08/cubs-designate-taylor-teagarden-for-assignment.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

I appreciate you taking my comment in jest. I criticize because I <3.

I'm sorry, but the first sentence in this article is atrocious. "On Thursday night, Minnesota Twins center fielder Aaron Hicks left Target Field one hundredth of a percent away from falling asleep owning a .300 batting average." This is my favorite site, and I generally like your writing, Parker. But jeeeeeeez.

Meyer Polanco/Gordon/Santana Turner/Pinto -for- Swihart Thoughts??? Also, we'll throw in Deunsing.

In before someone says "Power Rankings don't mean anything."

Exactly! I think a gamble will need to be taken very soon-- some of these highly touted young guys need to be moved for value. Remember how Buck and Resto turned out? Exactly.

It just seems like he has never put up the numbers that are expected. Not to mention his struggle to stay healthy. I'm an Arcia fan, but do we need him and Vargas? And If we're cognizant of organizational haves and have nots, doesn't he become redundant? Especially since Vargas is a true DH with pop from both sides, and Pinto can play catcher (???). It makes me wonder if A) Arcia is the most expendable of the three, and if our quiver containing Rosario, Kepler, A-B-Dub, and Harrison makes him a less valuable option for us. It's a good bet he'll rake, but other teams may have better use than we do right now.

I guess at this point, the best question is what to do with the log jam of current "Ryan Howard Types" we already have. ML ready/Near ML ready Power potential, no glove, not a ton of contact, high K rates. I count 3 and potentially a 4th. I agree that spending anything on Howard would be silly, as we already have Arcia, Vargas, and Pinto. Something has to give on some of these guys. I feel like Pinto is the one we'd miss the least in terms of skills. Vargas offers the switch hitting potential but has virtually no defensive value, and Arcia has failed to turn the corner at the highest level, sucks in the field, and has been injured quite a bit. Are any of these three a part of the future at this point?

Howabout Stephen Vogt? Catcher with pop, LH bat, and a team that's fading? He's almost 32, but I'd rather him than some of our other options. I do not however know anything about his defense, which may make him not desirable.

Why does Soto always look like he's keeling over when he throws back to the mound?

Serious question- When players such as Arcia, or Pinto struggle defensively at their every day positions (OF, and C respectively), why aren't they given reps at 1B? Obviously, it isn't easy to just slide in to that position, but wouldn't it improve trade value and give the player another chance to succeed either here, or in another organization?

I'm very excited about this guy. He shows a lot of maturity for a man his age and has realistic expectations about his goals.

Exactly! He is what he is. He isn't going to transform all of the sudden into a GG catcher. Fish or cut bait.

I'm still a bit unclear as to what his deficiencies behind the plate are. Is it a framing issue? Is it his quickness to 2nd on a throw? I can't believe that this still an issue. Wouldn't it be prudent for the Twins to help him hammer down his defense (Even if he'll never be great, can't hammering down the fundamentals make him useable?), or start getting him reps at first or 3rd and use him as trade bait? I just don't understand what the hold up is.

Sure, other options exist. You trade away mediocrity for different mediocrity, or you can spend a lot of money and potentially get hosed. All of this not considering many high-impact players in the prime of their careers aren't likely to choose to come here if given other (potentially higher-paying, more competitive, warmer) options. Most legit building block players are not available on the open market either via free agency or trade- so you have to develop your own and hope to fill in the remainder with what's left. Very few free agent signings become worth the money, and sometimes the quantity of mediocre players it could take to acquire an above-par player just isn't worth. If you trade three mediocre players to acquire an above-average player you improve at one position and then have to fill 2 others with other mediocre players. It's a total balancing act and I acknowledge it can be frustrating. But I don't see many other viable options.

Exactly. You build a team using as many above-par players as you can accumulate, then fill in the rest with as many mediocre players as you can accumulate. If there are no more above-par, or mediocre players to fill in the gaps, then you do your best. I don't understand all of the criticism of this year's roster so far. If there were significantly better options, the Twins would have pursued them. If there were more players that were above-par and cost-effectively available, anyone would sign them. They don't exist. Right now there are high-upside guys in the minors who aren't ready (or if they are, there is currently no available spot for them, ie. Pinto), who's clock will start ticking as soon as they are brought North. If guys are struggling with aspects of their game in the minors, then from a business standpoint, there's no legitimate reason to call them up. Hence, you fill the ML roster with mediocrity until a legitimate building block is ready to take over. There are no other options.

I appreciate you saying that, and I also like the way you phrased it. Teams are seldom made of less than 50% mediocre players, even the best ones.

Quick question. I've noticed some heavy criticism aimed at the Twins for singing a nearly 40 year old Right Fielder with declining range and power. I know a lot of people believe that intangibles are over-rated. My question is: What would you have preferred the Twins do to address their lack of outfield depth? Young players with high upside and ascending value do not materialize on the open market, or even by development. Were there free agents you wish they would have signed instead of Torii? Does the irritation stem from the fact that Torii is taking potentially valuable AB's away from Rosario? With the understanding that the outfield is still a work in progress, and with a serious lack of vocal veteran leadership on the team (DISCLAIMER: Even if you disagree with this statement about a recent lack of veteran leadership, none of us are privy to what the front office sees as strong leadership, so this is just my opinion), what is the negative? The front office feels warm and fuzzy about Odysseus returning home to tell all of the youngsters (who may one day become incredibly expensive) about how special it is to be a Twin, and how much he missed the TC when he was gone. Right, wrong, or indifferent: There is significant value to what Torii brings to the table. Yes he's old. No, he's not 2002, or 2007 Torii. But signing Torii was an investment made in Buxton, Hicks, Rosario, and Arcia (among others). And let's be real: it's not like Trout or Stanton were available for peanuts and they decided to go with Torii instead. This was a strategic, cost conscious, investment made for the future, as well as a tip-of-the-cap to the past (and let's be real: fans love tip-of-the-caps to the past).

--OR-- Escobar and Pelfrey --for-- Andrew Susac (catcher) and Steven Okert (LHP) from San Fran. We trade "highly-sought" Escobar and a pitcher who had a great spring, for a good catching prospect, and good LH relief prospect who is near ML ready. Escobar could play 3rd for the Giants and Pelfrey could have good shot at the rotation. Giants would still have Sanchez as a backup catcher, and the Twins would still have SP and SS depth.

I'm not an expert, so please go easy on me: Howabout Escobar for Travis d'Arnaud. Mets need an SS and have Kevin Plawecki who they hope to potentially push for the big league Catching gig by mid-season. We have several (Although, not a ton: Gordon, Polanco) legitimate middle infield prospects coming in the next few years, and Escobar's value has never been higher. d'Arnaud is 26 and could help us pin down the position for several years. I've seen people refer to Esco as a luxury, but wouldn't we rather have a luxury at catcher than at a position that seems to be pipelined for the foreseeable future?

That's a good point, Sir. However, much like my post in the Pelfrey trade thread regarding Milone-- if a contender's catcher get's hurt--they would be interested in an established, trusted ML catcher. If Suzuki is hitting above .250 and providing the same stability he has in his career, then why would he not be enquired on?