KirbyDome89

Good Call. I'm sticking with my stance though; lots of young talent acquired via drafting/trades and affordable FA contracts. The real question is whether or not the players the Twins acquire/already have are lovable....

Using baseball reference, following your 1 or greater WAR criteria, I'm seeing about 12 WAR from FA signings and about 22 WAR from draft/trade players. Fangraphs is basically the same at 13 vs. 23. Fowler and Zobrist, the two highest contributors each have contracts the Twins absolutely can afford and they account for 8 of the 12 FA WAR. The Cubs don't have a bunch of FAs contributing heavily to the WAR total, its 2 guys. I'm not pushing for the Twins to focus most of their attention towards the FA market to acquire talent, I realize the importance of drafting, development, and trades. My point is that when you break down who is contributing to the Cubs run of success, how each was acquired, and how much they're being paid, apart from one contract it is definitely repeatable for the Twins.

I realize ALL winning teams do those things well, that was my point, they aren't unique to Chicago and therefore the Twins can follow that path. Significant FA signings the past few years: John Lackey - 2 years $32 million Ben Zobrist - 4 years $54 million, Dexter Fowler - 2 years $17 million Chris Coghlan - 1 year $5 million Jason Hammel - 2 years $20 million Jon Lester - 6 years $155 million Miguel Montero - 6 years $66 million David Ross - 1 year $2 million Jason Heyward - 8 years $184 million Significant players drafted or acquired via trades: Jake Arrieta - $11 million this year, arb eligible next year Kris Bryant - arb eligible 2019 Javier Baez - arb eligible 2019 Willson Contreras - arb eligible 2019 Kyle Hendricks - arb eligible 2018 Anthony Rizzo - 7 years $41 million....seriously that is his actual contract Addison Russell - arb eligible 2019 Kyle Schwarber - arb eligible 2019 Jorge Soler - 4 years $15 million left Aroldis Chapman - 1 year $11 million If you look at those two lists with even a small amount of objectivity I don't understand how you can think they purchased their ticket to the WS or they would only be there because their payroll is so deep. Seriously, the draft/trade list is almost their entire lineup. Zobrist, Ross, and Fowler are the only FA position players seeing regular action this postseason, and Fowler hasn't exactly been lighting it up. Heyward has been awful and is now on the bench! Coghlan and Montero have played sparingly. Hammel isn't even on the postseason roster. Lester and Lackey have been solid no doubt. Honestly though, the idea that this team is in the position they are because of their payroll just isn't true. There are 3 contracts on that team that exceed all contracts currently on the Twins books (not counting Mauer here, didn't think that was really fair) and of those three, two of them; Heyward and Montero, have done nothing in the postseason and really haven't been good all year. If the Twins can drop $50 and $55 million on Ervin and Ricky I see no reason the Lacky, Hammel, and Zobrist types are off limits. So when you boil it down, the Cubs have been so successful this season because of a young core of studs on rookie contracts, mid level FA signings that have been solid, trades that have worked out well, and one big FA acquisition. I'm not buying the idea that because the Cubs signed Lester, their philosophy of constructing a winning team is somehow beyond the Twins. My hope is that when Mauer's contract comes off the books that money is allocated towards upper tier pitching, because this team DESPERATELY needs it. Even if that isn't the case, looking at the breakdown of who is contributing and what they're making I see no reason the Twins can't do the same.

Nobody is advocating the Twins payroll reach 200+ million. Likewise nobody is stating that the Cubs don't have a monetary advantage. However, that club didn't just shop for FAs for a few years and buy their way into the WS. They made good trades, drafted well, developed young talent, found the right manager, ect...Those are all things that the Twins are absolutely capable of doing, so yes it makes perfect sense to compare the two clubs in that regard.

You might have me on the big FA signing. Maybe its wishful thinking on my part (definitely is), but I'm not ready to let that go until we have a better idea of what Falvey is working with. I agree, identifying and trading for pitchers like Arrieta and Hendricks isn't easy and it won't always work out but its within the means of a competent FO to make deals like that happen. You won't always get a Cy Young pitcher in return, but you can certainly upgrade your pitching in this way, and the Twins absolutely are capable of doing it. Lackey was a solid but unspectacular signing. I don't see the Twins having that much trouble signing a player of that caliber. You're right the Indians are a closer match. I was just pointing out that basic principals the Cubs followed (save maybe signing a big FA) are definitely repeatable by the Twins. I think people have this idea that because the Cubs payroll is higher the Twins can never emulate anything that they do. Obviously their money helps in signing FAs, covering up bad signings (Heyward!?), moving on from bad trades, ect... Such is life in a sport with no cap. The Twins have to be more careful about where they allocate their money, but following the Cubs blueprint isn't as improbable as some believe. It would be great if the Twins could develop all their pitching in house, but I just see no way that happens. The closest thing they have to a front line pitcher at this point is Gonsalves? I haven't given up on Berrios but he's looking more like a mid rotation guy right now. The Twins would need to hit on pitchers in the next couple drafts, as well as have pitchers like Gonsalves, Jay, Berrios, and Stewart all reach their ceiling just as an attempt to put together a competitive staff by the time the young core is moving into their prime years. I don't like those odds. The Twins are going to have to be involved in the FA market or make significant trades to bring back top tier pitching. I don't see how the rotation can improve to playoff quality without doing one or both.

I totally agree, kids often fixate on athletes at a young age, and as they grow older they hopefully are able to form more meaningful relationships with individuals in their lives who can be considered role models. I was speaking more about the adults who never moved on from the hero worship of their childhood. I think a lot of the extreme reaction in either direction has everything to do with that. I think the role model card is often played as a way to justify calls for extreme punishment or put social pressure on organizations. Personally I can't stand that. I don't believe athletes need to act in accordance with what society or social media would deem acceptable role model behavior. As long as an individual is available to the team a fan really can ask no more. If players fail to do so then criticism is fair. However, I think the critiques should be directed at the individuals actions and the detriment caused to the team rather than his/her inability to live up to standards that are forced upon him/her outside of the work place. You're right, athletes are going to continue to be looked at as role models. I agree that its a good thing most of them seem to be decent people.

"hero-worship among athletes, putting them on a pedestal." I think this has everything to do with it. Like you stated, domestic abuse is an unfortunate part of all walks of life, it isn't unique to athletes or one sex. I've never been comfortable with the hero label regarding athletes. Everybody is entitled to choose their own role model but personally I need mine to be a person I know beyond what I see on a field or a television screen. The pedestal is the reason for a lot of the extreme reaction after an abuse story comes out. Fans either don't want to believe their hero could do such a thing and therefore defend or deny the actions, or they're so hurt by the actions that they demand instant justice, often in the form of lifetime banishment.

I disagree. The Twins certainly can develop young talent, make good trades, find a manager who is can be patient with the young players, and make good mid level FA pitching signings. I wouldn't even rule out the possibility of an "ace," pitcher acquisition until Falvey takes over and we have a better idea of what the plan is for this team.

KC acquired both to bolster the starting staff. Davis didn't move to the bullpen until the end of that 2013 season and it was because he was tanking as a starter. KC got lucky, I doubt they knew they were getting an elite reliever when they traded for Davis so I wouldn't exactly call this a fair example of a top relief acquisition. It sounds like both of you (and almost everybody else) are advocating for the same thing: buy low, sell high candidates on short term contracts. Its a solid plan. Mike said it best, spending money isn't an issue, this team has to in order to improve. However, committing long term to a position as volatile as relief pitching should be avoided, at least at this stage in the rebuild.

Such is the game of baseball, it has no clock which is one of the best parts of the game. I don't think I'm ever going to be on board with limiting the number of pitching changes that are allowed in a game. I think a manager should be able to utilize all 25 men on that roster each game. There are issues such as commercial time between innings and pitching changes, and ungodly long instant replay reviews that should be addressed long before drastic changes are made to the way the game is played.

Polanco as SS could be dicey if Sano is playing 3B. I think some of the offensive that Polanco may lack at 3B can be found at 2B by Dozier, 1B if Vargas platoons, and an improving OF of Rosario, Buxton, and Kepler. It isn't an ideal fit but giving up a little offense at 3B won't devastate this team. I agree, a utility role isn't appealing, but if Molitor uses Polanco like Dantana (i.e. playing him nearly every day) then I can stomach the utility role. Obviously 2B is the preferred spot for Polanco. I can see scenarios where options 1-4 work out. If somebody is traded, I hope its Dozier. He'll absolutely return more than Polanco, and he has only 2 years left on a good contract before free agency. Given the outlook for 2017 I think it makes much more sense to trade Dozier.

I think "We burned option years and consequently have little idea of what type of MLB player they will be.....so we must put him on the team," is a little more accurate. Hopefully the new regime places more value in options and consistent playing time.

I've defended the Park signing since it occurred, and I still think he can mash MLB pitching, but at this point he is still almost a complete unknown. A platoon of Vargas and Mauer at 1B is a good option to start the season. If Park destroys AAA then this rotation needs to be reexamined.

His minor league statistics are as relevant to this story as her gender is to her ability to call a game.

I couldn't agree more about how to approach the season with Hughes. As for where he fits, that is a more difficult question. I don't see a return to 2014, especially after a significant injury but he certainly could be an effective starter again. Given the state of the rotation I think he should have every opportunity to prove he cannot start before he is sent to the pen. However, even if he becomes nothing more than an expensive bullpen piece I'm still hopeful he's productive in that role. The Twins just need decent pitching, whether in the rotation or bullpen, and I think Hughes can give them that if he recovers. Unfortunately I have little confidence that we'll see Perkins pitch at a high level again. Hopefully I'm proven wrong, but as someone has had surgery to repair a torn labrum I can attest to how difficult it is just to get back to throwing again.

I think everybody was just glad Nolasco was gone and the Twins couldn't trot him out to get blasted every 5th day. That said, I agree about losing Meyer. I wasn't sad to see Nolasco walk but I wasn't sure how to feel about giving Meyer up in the deal. If Santiago isn't resigned and and the money is used to bring in actual MLB pitchers then then the move makes some sense. If Santiago is tendered a contract, the money saved is negligible and at best you're getting a pitcher who is marginally better than Nolasco. If that is the case they basically gave Meyer away.

Statistically hitters have more success with each PA against the starter. By the third time through the order the difference is enough to merit removal of the starter. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with a pitcher going the distance if he is rolling but there is an argument to be made for removing a pitcher before innings 7 - 9.

How long have you been hanging onto that list....

Not all of us are cool with some of the things that have been published regarding Mauer either.

I might be one of the few posters who still doesn't mind the Park signing. I'm also in favor of keeping Vargas at 1B next year. What I don't understand is how anybody is comfortable with those two forming the DH/1B platoon next season. Mauer isn't near what he was in 2009 but he still has value, I see no issue with using him in a platoon role with Vargas as has been suggested. I agree that Park can spend time at AAA until the team has an idea where he falls between the guy we saw in April and the one that was sent down in June. With every fly ball to LF I reconsider Grossman's place on this team moving forward. Its hard for me to be excited about Palka and Walker, they were basically the same player in AAA this season, low OBP guys who have high, insanely so in Walker's case, K to BB ratios. If they get a major league look its fine, but it shouldn't be at the expense of mauer.

I can't help but feel some of my excitement is dampened by the prospect of Antony sticking around. Also the fact the final list included Picollo, Falvey, Bloom, but not McLeod was disappointing. I'm hoping the fact he came from a large market while the other three were from smaller market, more familiar teams wasn't the deciding factor. Who knows, maybe Falvey comes in and guts this entire organization (fingers crossed!) It does feel a little like the Twins are holding on by their finger nails to the "old way." But hey Flavey put together some great pitching in Cleveland, so we got that goin' for us.....which is nice.

So for the record, criticism of an individual's character, which only those closest to that player (this doesn't include fans, media, and likely not even all teammates) can attest to is on the table. But criticism of production on the field, which every fan, media member, and team official has unlimited access to is off limits. Makes total sense....

Not sure where that comment is going....

I haven't seen anybody question Reusse's sources or accuse him of lying about the events he highlighted in the article so we can move past that. The issue lies in the characterization of Sano in each of those instances, and the use of those characterizations to build an image of Sano as lazy, unprofessional, and undedicated to the team. Its a massive jump to say an individual isn't dedicated to the team because they left early spring training after being one of only 25 players in the entire organization to attend. That is calling out his character, and I don't agree with it. I would have a problem with an article like that if it had focused on anybody in the organization. The backlash towards the article has everything to do with the narrative the article crafted, not who wrote it, but feel free to keep tossing the Reusse straw man out there. If attacking the article; I haven't seen any attacks levied at Reusse, isn't a good look then I'm absolutely fine with "looking bad."

This isn't hypersensitivity. Its an annoyance that Reusse can write an article, make accusations about Sano's dedication, professionalism, and physical fitness while providing what can described as weak evidence at best, and people drink the kool aid like its Jonestown. Also the notion that because Sano's stats don't match last season everything Reusse wrote is suddenly true and irrefutable bothers the hell out of me. All players use the offseason to address weak points in their game and preparation, that isn't unique to Sano, and because he plans to attack this offseason differently than the last doesn't validate what Reusse wrote. What else can Sano say when asked how he plans to train this offseason? Do I wish the instances I listed had gone differently? Absolutely. Do I think 2 weeks at early spring training and dropping 10 lbs would have changed the season for Sano? Absolutely not. Pitchers adjusted and now its on him to do the same, thats baseball. I don't see that as unprofessional and lacking dedication. The degree to which honesty is involved doesn't change whether something is an accusation or an assault. A false narrative is exactly what that article created. Those instances I listed were right from the Reusse pieces and I threw in the bp session from the season. I'm not denying any of that happened. However, the idea that we're supposed to now believe that Sano is basically a selfish, undedicated, overweight, low character member of the team because of those actions is ridiculous. You're right, people are seeing something that isn't there... I haven't read every article about every player since the franchise moved to the cities. I don't care that similar articles about other players have been published in the past. If they're similar to what was published this spring then they're just as off base and no less trash than what I read. The notion that "this stuff happens all the time," justifies the article doesn't do it for me. What is irrational is thinking that because a player leaves EARLY ST, doesn't lose an insignificant amount of weight, and misses an EARLY bp session before one game, you have now gleaned enough information to assess his dedication to the team, his professionalism, and his fitness. Ultimately all of these reflect on his character as an individual. I'm all for criticizing season statistics and performances. There is evidence available to support an argument. I don't agree with making assessments about character, and who works hardest, because none of us, including Reusse, know enough about any of these players outside of the field to accurately comment.