jorgenswest

Baker doesn't appear close to ready. Marquis is not in camp. Is it possible that both will not be in the rotation as the Twins break camp? Who is in line to get those starts? Any signs of the Twins stretching out some of the players pegged for a relief role? What is the succession order? Liam Hendriks Anthony Swarzak Brian Duensing Matt Maloney Jeff Manship Seth may be able to help with this... what is the projected starting rotation at Rochester? How close are PJ Walters and Luke French to a Twin uniform? I know there was talk of scanning the waiver wire for reserve shortstop help. Pitching might be the greater need.

The rule 5 draft rules changed in 2006. Santana would not have been available had those rules been in effect when he was selected. The likelihood of any selection being successful (whether kept or not) is very low. The pool of players is much smaller. I would suggest that the Twins made the mistake in keeping Diamond and they made the correct move my returning Doyle.

What if Luke Hughes were to bat against lefties? Is he a better hitter against lefties? The major league sample is not sufficiently large. On the surface, it appears he has been a poor hitter on either side with an edge to hitting against right handed pitching. At the sample size, the K/W ratio may be more telling. RHP 55/14 in 217 PA LHP 27/10 in 107 PA Looks like a poor hitter either way with no apparent platoon advantage. You can look at some minor league data here. http://mlsplits.drivelinebaseball.com/mlsplits/playerinfo/471863 Luke Hughes may be a late bloomer. He'll need to be because there is no evidence based on past performance to suggest he is anything more than a AAAA player. In fact, I question whether any team would claim him if they tried to send him down at some point this year. I would go with Alexi for now and put hope in Dozier for the summer (with Carroll as utility)

I had the same thought. Given Span's and to a smaller extent Morneau's uncertain health outlook, Revere will likely be needed on an everyday basis at some point this year. I wonder if he will perform better in that role following regular play in Rochester. They certainly could give him 4-8 weeks in AAA.

Is it possible that Plouffe will start on dl?

Revere has a lot to add on the bench.

I don't see an adequate CF back up without Revere. Is it important? They would have to call up Revere if Span were to miss a few days. If Parmelee wins a starting job, will there be enough at bats for Plouffe and Revere? If Parmelee was starting, I think I would send Revere to AAA.

Interesting Maloney trivia... Traded to Reds for former Twin Kyle Lohse. He also made an appearance on a Phillie top 10 list.

Going into the season last year, I think it was clear that Hughes was not a major league pitcher. He walked too many guys and gave up too many hits as a starter in the minors. Maloney's numbers are more encouraging (especially in terms of control). It may also be encouraging that Maloney's name also made the BBA reds top 10 prospect list twice. I did not find Hughes on a Royals list. I think the Twins should have known that Hughes was not a solution.

As they build the bench, they need to look for a some plus skill that the player can contribute. Florimon (+ defense, speed?). Burroughs (left handed bat). Butera, Towles, Rivera (they can play C) Hollimon (don't see one. Based on career, he shouldn't be used to pinch hit or as a defensive sub) As for the bullpen. We need a mix of lefties and righties. We need a few with rubber arms that can pitch back to back days. We need a guy who can come in and get a strikeout. We need a couple guys that can pitch 2-3 innings. We need a guy who can give us a spot start. Where do Manship, Fien, Waldrop, Burnett or Burton fit in? What skills do they bring to the pen? What roles can they fill? Lets look at the skills. I hope the Twins are looking at skills as the build the roster. I hope the Twins are ignoring the spring statistics. It has no predictive value. None. Zero. The data is useless. Let's ignore it.

Sure I would welcome him back. Nothing against him. He works hard and plays hard every day. However, I would be very disappointed in the Twins decision. It would only serve to block any long term progress. We need to find out this year is Dozier is a solution at SS. We can't find that out without him getting significant major league time this year. With Punto on the roster, it will only delay his debut. I don't know if Dozier is a major league solution. Reports and data suggest he might be. I do know that neither Carroll or Punto are a long term solution. The Twins are realistically pegged for an over/under of 74 wins this year. This is the year to invest at bats in Dozier, Parmelee and Benson and see if there are signs of hope with them. I hope to see them by June 1. If the Twins were projected around 88 wins, the decision would be different.

How can we discount Hollimon's record in the minors based on a handful of spring at bats that have no meaning? His career AAA slash line is 222/320/426. His AA slash line is 252/342/439. He has over 1600 plate appearances at those levels. His OPS in the independent league was .774 and the team OPS was .805. I don't see significant speed in his minors data. There is question about his ability to play SS. What would he possibly add to the bench? Florimon would add defense. Burroughs a left handed bat.

If he has a year like any of the last 3, he would absolutely earn that money on the free agent market. The 9.5 million will be below market.

I would like to believe that the Twins do not use spring data as any measure. I do hope that they go by what they see and have to trust that the coaching staff is very skilled at assessing talent, ability and readiness to contribute.

I think it is in the best long term interest of the Twins to start Dozier at SS this year. If not now, by June 1. They must assess if he can handle that position defensively at the major league level and speed of the game. If he can not, they must address the position next winter. I also think it is their best interest to start Nishioka at AAA or AA. If he has a chance to be useful, he needs to go play every day and find success offensively and defensively. If he isn't successful, at least they will know they can abandon any plans for his future as a Twins. At the close of the year, I hope to see Dozier as the majority starter at SS. I would like to see Carroll in the role of filling it at SS, 2B and 3B. He will get significant playing time in that role. I would like to see Nishioka in September having found some success in AAA. I think this plan puts the Twins in the best position for making off season decisions about the future of the middle infield.

I love this site. Thanks guys! I enjoy reading the thoughts and projections for the opening roster. However, I cringe every time I see anyone use spring data in support of a player making a roster. All winter long, I listened to Gleeman and the Geek remind me that Parmelee's 86 plate appeaeances last fall were not predictive of the future. They are essentially correct. There have been some significant studies about sample size and at that size we might start learning something about contact rate. It is also true that every sample means something. I am very certain that Drew Butera will never have an 86 PA stretch that matches Parmelee's OPS over that stretch. That it means he is almost certainly a better hitter than Drew Butera is not really useful. We knew that from the AA data. The spring data is essentially useless and shouldn't be used in support of a player making a roster or not. If the Twins assess that Michael Hollimon belongs on the opening day roster, they must not base it on his data from a few spring games. We shouldn't either. Last spring, Danny Rams hit .500. Steve Holm .400. Delmon Young had an OPS of 1066 (he is doing quite well this spring also). Nishioka hit .345. Dusty Hughes pitched 12 scoreless innings. Matt Capps' ERA was also 0.00. This data was just as useless last year as any of the incomplete spring data we are using this year. So if it's is useless, how do we join in projecting a roster for the Twins? How do the Twins make decisions? I hope they throw away the statistics this spring as they make decision about the roster. If not we may end up with a Dusty Hughes in the bullpen.

I love this site. Thanks guys! I enjoy reading the thoughts and projections for the opening roster. However, I cringe every time I see anyone use spring data in support of a player making a roster. All winter long, I listened to Gleeman and the Geek remind me that Parmelee's 86 plate appeaeances last fall were not predictive of the future. They are essentially correct. There have been some significant studies about sample size and at that size we might start learning something about contact rate. It is also true that every sample means something. I am very certain that Drew Butera will never have an 86 PA stretch that matches Parmelee's OPS over that stretch. That it means he is almost certainly a better hitter than Drew Butera is not really useful. We knew that from the AA data. The spring data is essentially useless and shouldn't be used in support of a player making a roster or not. If the Twins assess that Michael Hollimon belongs on the opening day roster, they must not base it on his data from a few spring games. We shouldn't either. Last spring, Danny Rams hit .500. Steve Holm .400. Delmon Young had an OPS of 1066 (he is doing quite well this spring also). Nishioka hit .345. Dusty Hughes pitched 12 scoreless innings. Matt Capps' ERA was also 0.00. This data was just as useless last year as any of the incomplete spring data we are using this year. So if it's is useless, how do we join in projecting a roster for the Twins? How do the Twins make decisions? I hope they throw away the statistics this spring as they make decision about the roster. If not we may end up with a Dusty Hughes in the bullpen.

I just don't see the competitive team this year. I don't think they are 10 million away. I would have not signed some that they did, cutting the budget further. I wouldn't have done it for the purpose of cutting he budget. I would have done it for the development of younger players with an eye on the next playoff win. The signed the players they did to appease fans. They couldn't justify cutting the budget further as a means of development. John is right. We can trade players in the summer. Trades are not that easy, though. Little can be expected in return for our investment. Look at the bounty we received for Delmon Young and Jim Thome.

As I read posts about the decisions the Twins have made and predictions about their roster, I wonder if they are in danger of entering a cycle of mediocrity. They have been there before, signing older players on the down side of their careers with the thought they would be the necessary difference in the coming season. Ultimately they were not and the Twins entered the following season with the same holes and questions. Of course there are many motivators for signing the veterans. Sometimes they are signed to appease the fans and increase season ticket sales. If the Twins had not made any moves this winter, ticket sales would be down even further. It seems that the Royals were in this cycle for many years, but now are coming out of it. The Mariners may still be in the cycle as they continue to pour at bats into Chone Figgins. As I look at this roster, I wonder if they have a reasonable chance of 90+ wins and a playoff spot. If so, signing veterans like Carroll, Marquis, Doumit and Willingham will have been money well spent. Is that season really reasonable? It would certainly be one historic turn around from 63 wins. Is it more reasonable to think these players were signed to give us a chance at 84 wins while appeasing some fans and increasing ticket sales? Will any of these players be on the next Twins team that wins a playoff game? I, for one, do not need to be appeased. Given the likelihood of mediocrity this year, I would prefer they search for the next Jamey Carroll or Nick Punto rather than sign one on the down side. I appreciate that they are looking for the next Todd Coffey or Matt Guerrier rather than sign a mid 30's version. Doumit? He is signed for one year. Would we have been better off finding out if Parmelee is a major leaguer? Should we see if we Towles is an answer as a reserve catcher? Marquis? I guess if he finds success, we have a chip to trade midseason. What if these signings are just enough to wonder if we are buyers or sellers? Even last year in a 63 win season, we were potential buyers mid July. Following a blue print of going with youth has risks. Fans will be angered when the it appears the only motivation is the budget. Ticket sales would be down further as signing veterans generates interest even though those veterans are on the down side. This blue print also has benefits. Moving up to the major leagues requires adjustment through struggles for most players. The Royals will benefit from the major league time given to Moustakis and Duffy. The Twins could invest time into Dozier, Parmelee and Benson. You will argue they are not ready. I concede they are not ready to contribute significantly to a 90 win team. I do think they will be more ready in 2013 with significant major league at bats this year. What do you think? Are the Twins making decisions that will lead to a cycle of mediocrity? Is it reasonable that the players they signed this off season will be part of the next Twin team that wins a playoff game?

As I read posts about the decisions the Twins have made and predictions about their roster, I wonder if they are in danger of entering a cycle of mediocrity. They have been there before, signing older players on the down side of their careers with the thought they would be the necessary difference in the coming season. Ultimately they were not and the Twins entered the following season with the same holes and questions. Of course there are many motivators for signing the veterans. Sometimes they are signed to appease the fans and increase season ticket sales. If the Twins had not made any moves this winter, ticket sales would be down even further. It seems that the Royals were in this cycle for many years, but now are coming out of it. The Mariners may still be in the cycle as they continue to pour at bats into Chone Figgins. As I look at this roster, I wonder if they have a reasonable chance of 90+ wins and a playoff spot. If so, signing veterans like Carroll, Marquis, Doumit and Willingham will have been money well spent. Is that season really reasonable? It would certainly be one historic turn around from 63 wins. Is it more reasonable to think these players were signed to give us a chance at 84 wins while appeasing some fans and increasing ticket sales? Will any of these players be on the next Twins team that wins a playoff game? I, for one, do not need to be appeased. Given the likelihood of mediocrity this year, I would prefer they search for the next Jamey Carroll or Nick Punto rather than sign one on the down side. I appreciate that they are looking for the next Todd Coffey or Matt Guerrier rather than sign a mid 30's version. Doumit? He is signed for one year. Would we have been better off finding out if Parmelee is a major leaguer? Should we see if we Towles is an answer as a reserve catcher? Marquis? I guess if he finds success, we have a chip to trade midseason. What if these signings are just enough to wonder if we are buyers or sellers? Even last year in a 63 win season, we were potential buyers mid July. Following a blue print of going with youth has risks. Fans will be angered when the it appears the only motivation is the budget. Ticket sales would be down further as signing veterans generates interest even though those veterans are on the down side. This blue print also has benefits. Moving up to the major leagues requires adjustment through struggles for most players. The Royals will benefit from the major league time given to Moustakis and Duffy. The Twins could invest time into Dozier, Parmelee and Benson. You will argue they are not ready. I concede they are not ready to contribute significantly to a 90 win team. I do think they will be more ready in 2013 with significant major league at bats this year. What do you think? Are the Twins making decisions that will lead to a cycle of mediocrity? Is it reasonable that the players they signed this off season will be part of the next Twin team that wins a playoff game?

I think he will have a major league career but I wonder if he is closer to Kubel than Morneau. Based on splits I have seen, I wonder if it is reasonable that he will hit well enough against lefties to be an everyday 1B. That doesn't mean he won't be a valuable player but it may take a manager willing to platoon to maximize that value.

If Gardy was ever going to platoon someone, it would be Plouffe. They don't even need to find a platoon partner. They can just give one of Span, Mauer, Morneau and Doumit a day off against lefties. If he is on the roster, his bat should be in the line up against every lefty.

John, Don't want an argument over metrics to distract from the discussion. Coffey 2010 - $0.2 (-.99 WPA) 2011 - $2.1 (-.04 WPA) Wheeler 2010 - $0.3 (-.80 WPA) 2011 - $1.6 (.33 WPA) I don't see how this metric better supports either of these veteran relievers, but I do concede the point. My point... Let's invest the innings and dollars in pitchers with an upside.

It cost the Twins $400,000. Hardly a gamble or foolish. I hope given a similar choice next year, they will take the same chance on a player. Easier to argue that signing Capps or Marquis was a foolish gamble. How about Coffey or Wheeler as a gamble? Below is player values from fangraphs for the two. Coffey 2010 - $0.2 (0.0 WAR) 2011 - $2.1 (0.5 WAR) Wheeler 2010 - $0.3 (0.1 WAR) 2011 - $1.6 (0.4 WAR) Projections for both put them with a season somewhere between the last two. The expected value might be 1.1 million and a WAR of 0.3 with little upside and a realistic chance of another season of almost no value. At best, their signing might make a WAR difference of 0.5. It would have been foolish to sign them and any money over the minimum would be a gamble. I would rather invest the innings in players with an upside.