Steven Buhr

The height (or lack thereof) is primarily a disadvantage for pitchers who throw a flat fastball and sliders with relatively little break. All of the workout videos, etc., are great theater for the fans and demonstrate Berrios' commitment to being the best athlete he can be, but the most important factor to his elevated prospect status, imo, is his improved movement on his pitches. Significant movement is what will counter his lack of physical height, just as Santana's changeup helped make his height a non-factor. I'm a big fan of both Berrios and Stewart, but, like jokin, I have Meyer still ranked higher than both, simply because I believe he has similar upside potential and he's closer than the two younger guys to being in a position to start realizing that potential. It's the image of these three pitchers all reaching their potential, while serving in the same future Twins rotation, that can make even the most jaded of Twins fans feel just a little giddy.

But isn't this pretty much the same argument that opponents of a legal minimum wage have made for decades? If an employer can adequately fill its staff with people willing to work for low wages, why shouldn't they be allowed to do so? I'm a registered Republican and even I don't believe that. There are a lot of businesses that, due to location or other perceived perks, would have no trouble filling their staffs with 16-22 year olds, even without paying minimum wages. I guess I just don't believe that means they should be allowed to do so. Let me put it this way... Let's say I open a business on a popular beach in Florida. I have no shortage of college kids trying to land work with me (especially if I bring in a bunch of impoverished kids from Latin America to supplement my domestic work force). I implement a compensation plan that calls for wages below legally mandated miniumum wage levels and even 10-11 hour work days much of the time, but, in return for agreeing to work for illegally low wages, I agree to hold a lottery where I put the names of every employee who has worked for me for four or more years in to a hat and draw one name to pay $500,000. Win or lose, if you're still employed the next year, your name goes in to the hat again. (Of course, any time I want to, I can simply fire you.) Does that gimmick entitle me to avoid compliance with minimum wage laws, even if I have no problem finding more than enough kids to run my business? After all, nobody is forcing them to choose to work for me.

Suggest you also look at each minor league team's roster and look at how many players were drafted in the top 10 rounds (which are the only rounds where the slot value is over $100K signing bonus). After the "advisor" gets his cut and taxes take roughly 40% of what's left of that bonus (lump sum bonuses have taxes withheld at the highest tax rate), only a very small percentage of players have much with which to "supplement" their monthly salary. As for earning more money in the offseason, that argument is even less convincing than when people try to argue teachers aren't underpaid because they can get summer jobs. What do you suppose the "offseason" consists of? While they may only get paid for five months (a little longer if they get to attend fall instructional league, where they do, I believe, receive some modest additional pay, but I'm not sure on that), their offseason is far shorter than what you would get simply by measuring the time from their last game in the fall to the first game they get paid for the following spring. (They are not paid for spring training, for example.) As far as the minor league season not being as "grueling" as a MLB season, I think most players would beg to differ, since minor leaguers get fewer off-days in their schedule. I'm also pretty sure MLBers don't sit through 250-500 mile bus rides. And, actually, most minor leaguers prefer those bus trips over the daily 150-200 miles they spend on buses for "commuter road games" where teams don't even stay over night, but make the round trip for each game. What kind of offseason jobs do you suppose guys can get when they each also have expectations of an offseason workout plan laid out for them by the parent organization. I know a number of minor leaguers who essentially provide hitting/pitching instruction to young players in the offseason. Not exactly big money in that. Sorry, but imo there is absolutely no justifiable excuse for paying professional ballplayers less than legal minimum wages. The guy you buy your hot dog from in the concession is likely making a better hourly wage than the players on the field. Maybe minor league organizations should start "passing the hat" through the crowd during the 7th inning stretch so fans can throw a few bucks worth of "tip money" to players having a good game at that point!

I've never understood the organization's near-total disregard for the Senators era of their history. Makes no sense at all.

Of course it would make some owners unhappy. Making a change, however, would likely result in no significant loss in total revenues, but it may result in more of those revenues going to MLB Media, at the expense of teams getting as much from local media rights fees. The MLB office knows the status quo is wrong. That's why they've consistently talked about changes. There would never be a change if the only people inconvenienced were Iowans and Nevadans. But, thanks to the Dodgers' local cable fiasco and, now, Cubs fans being potentially inconvenienced, there's more attention on the subject. I imagine there are workable solutions out there that will address the revenue matters, but I do suspect it will take a serious threat to MLB's anti-trust exemption before real change occurs. That's probably also what it's going to take to affect change for minor league pay, too. In fact, I believe it's baseball's fear of a serious threat to their anti-trust exemption that is causing them to try to get a law passed making minor leaguers seasonal workiers. They're afraid that if they try to rely on their exemption to be allowed to continue screwing over the ballplayers, that might not sit well with some people and they may start re-asking why baseball should have that exemption in today's world. They also know that MLB, by itself, might not get much of a sympathetic ear from most of Congress. Thus, the coercion campaign with minor league officials. Each of them have local Congressmen who are likely to listen to their local team officials. It really is shameful.

In case you missed it, there's a new commissioner of Major League Baseball. I know that for many fans, that may come as a shock. There are fans who can legally enjoy a brew or two at ballgames who have never attended a big league game that wasn't played under rules dictated by Bud Selig. If it's true that "the exception proves the rule", then that applies to Bud Selig's role in "proving" the Peter Principle.There's no other way to explain that man surviving 22 years as commissioner of baseball. But today is not the day to trash Selig. Today we humbly beseech his replacement, Rob Manfred, to finally do something about a couple of the most outdated and ill-advised Selig policies. These are two issues that I have long felt were the dumbest, most indefensible of all MLB policies and yes, I've written here about both before - several times, in fact. I'm referring to baseball's policies concerning compensation for minor league players and the MLB.tv blackout policy. (This article was originally posted at Knuckleballsblog.com) These two issues are handled illogically, at best, and offensively, at worst, in the way that they reflect MLB's low views of the value they place on two of the assets most critical to the game's long-term viability -- their future players and their current and future fan base. FOX Sports writer Jon Paul Morosi posted an article recentlythat listed a number of issues that Morosi felt Manfred should focus on as he inherits Selig's throne atop Major League Baseball. I may disagree with Morosi's view concerning Selig's legacy, but his list of topics where Manfred could make improvements included a number of valid possibilities. Unfortunately, it did not include any mention of paying minor leaguers even minimum wage, much less a living wage, nor did Morosi mention the blackouts. I'm not surprised, of course. The next baseball writer from a major media outlet to properly and persistently shame baseball on either topic will be among the first. I won't go into great detail concerning either topic. There are plenty of articles available with a simple Google search authored by far more knowledgeable and talented writers than yours truly. But if you really want to read my take on the issues, you can find my thoughts on minor league pay by clicking here and on blackouts by clicking here (where I asked the Twins president why he didn't want me to be a fan) ... and here (where I attempted to start an "Alice's Restaurant"-like movement)... and here (where I basically just trashed Selig for his inaction on the subject). http://knuckleballsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/KernelsPractice.jpg Most of these guys are among the lowest compensated people at the ballpark. On the pay issue, suffice to say that, unless you are a US player drafted in the top couple of rounds or one of the very highest regarded international 16-year-olds playing ball anywhere in the world, signing your name on a contract to play professional baseball in this country is a losing proposition. You'd almost certainly have a better shot at making a living off your competitive fire by taking up Texas Hold'em. Wages for minor leaguers start in the neighborhood of $1,100 a month. That's gross (in more ways than one). Uncle Sam is going to take his share and then there are clubhouse dues, all of which leaves a typical player with a few hundred dollars a month to cover luxuries like housing, transportation and food. Of course, the players only get their money while they are assigned to an actual minor league roster. No pay for offseason workouts or team-sponsored appearances. No pay for spring training. You think there's really little difference for a player who gets the final roster spot on a full season Class A roster coming out of spring training and the first guy left off who stays behind at extended spring training? Guess again. One guy gets paid a pitiful sum. The other guy doesn't get even that. In his article, Morosi did include this item on his recommended to-do list for Manfred: "Engaging young athletes, especially African-Americans." Here's a thought, Mr. Manfred. Maybe if you actually paid young players working their way toward the big leagues a living wage, athletically gifted kids (of any ethnicity) wouldn't laugh at you any time you suggest they put their talents to work at baseball instead of other sports, where at least they have a shot at becoming more famous indentured servants of major colleges. The good news is that a lawsuit against baseball has been filed on behalf of minor leaguers, asking the courts to require teams to pay at least minimum wage salaries to players. What is MLB's reaction to that challenge, under Selig and, so far, Manfred? They're trying to convince Congress to specifically categorize ballplayers as "seasonal workers," akin to carnival workers. And they're enlisting the help of their minor league affiliates to help lobby their elected representatives on baseball's behalf, via not-so-thinly veiled threats of "contraction" of minor league teams if baseball is forced to increase pay to their future players. Those are nice guys running big league baseball, huh? Likewise, the issue of blackouts has been out there for years. Promises from MLB executives (including Mr. Selig, himself) to take a look at the issue go back at least to 2008 and probably further. But here we are, in 2015, and still cable TV subscribers in Iowa are blacked out from watching any game involving the Twins, Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Cardinals or Royals, unless it's a national network game. The blackout even applies to subscribers of MLB.tv. http://knuckleballsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/blackoutmap.gif Look at all the pretty colors in Iowa and Nevada! This has been frustrating to me and my fellow Twins fans in Iowa for years, but nobody in baseball or the media has really cared. Now, however, thanks to WGN no longer broadcasting Cubs games on the national version of their network, a lot of Cubs fans outside of greater Chicago may suddenly discover the problem. Welcome to the club, folks. Maybe you can get the national media to notice the problem. As with the minor league pay issue, there's some news on this front. Baseball has indicated they are looking into the matter and there may be changes to the policy forthcoming. Hmmmm... I think we've heard that before. Anyway, Mr. Manfred, if you want to convince me you are any different than your predecessor whatsoever, you can start by proving you give a damn about your fans and about being even mildly fair to the thousands of young players who are feeding your talent pipeline by clinging to their dream of playing big league baseball. Until then, a lot of us will continue to view you as nothing more than "Bud Light." Click here to view the article

Could not possibly agree more. There's no excuse for Tovar not being in the Twins HoF long before several guys who are already there. Inexcusable.

In case you missed it, there's a new Commissioner of Major League Baseball. I know that, for many fans, that may come as a shock. There are fans that legally enjoy a brew or two at ballgames who have never attended a big league game that wasn't played under rules dictated by Bud Selig. If it's true that, "the exception proves the rule," then that applies to Bud Selig's role in "proving" the Peter Principle. There's no other way to explain that man surviving 22 years as Commissioner of Baseball. But today is not the day to trash Selig. Today we humbly beseech his replacement, Rob Manfred, to finally do something about a couple of the most outdated and ill-advised Selig policies. These are two issues that I have long felt were the dumbest, most indefensible of all MLB policies and yes, I've written here about both before - several times, in fact. I'm referring to baseball's policies concerning compensation for minor league players and their MLB.tv blackout policy. (This article was originally posted at Knuckleballsblog.com) These two issues are illogical, at best, and offensive, at worst, in the way that they reflect MLB's low views of the value they place on two of the assets most critical to the game's long-term viability - their future players and their current & future fan base. FOX Sports writer Jon Paul Morosi posted an article recently that listed a number of issues that Morosi felt Manfred should focus on as he inherits Selig's throne atop Major League Baseball. I may disagree with Morosi's view concerning Selig's legacy, but his list of topics where Manfred could make improvements included a number of valid possibilities. Unfortunately, it did not include any mention of paying minor leaguers even minimum wage, much less a living wage, nor did Morosi mention the blackouts. I'm not surprised, of course. The next baseball writer from a major media outlet to properly and persistently shame baseball on either topic will be among the first. I won't go in to great detail concerning either topic. There are plenty of articles available with a simple Google search authored by far more knowledgeable and talented writers than yours truly. But if you really want to read my take on the issues, you can find my thoughts on minor league pay by clicking here and on blackouts by clicking here (where I asked the Twins President why he didn't want me to be a fan) ... and here (where I attempted to start an "Alice's Restaurant"-like movement)... and here (where I basically just trashed Selig for his inaction on the subject). http://knuckleballsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/KernelsPractice.jpg Most of these guys are among the lowest compensated people at the ballpark. On the pay issue, suffice to say that, unless you are a US player drafted in the top couple of rounds or one of the very highest regarded international 16 year olds playing ball anywhere in the world, signing your name on a contract to play professional baseball in this country is a losing proposition. You'd almost certainly have a better shot at making a living off your competitive fire by taking up Texas Hold'em. Wages for minor leaguers start in the neighborhood of $1,100 a month. That's gross (in more ways than one). Uncle Sam is going to take his share and then there's clubhouse dues, all of which leaves a typical player with a few hundred dollars a month to cover luxuries like housing, transportation and food. Of course, the players only get their money while they are assigned to an actual minor league roster. No pay for offseason workouts or team-sponsored appearances. No pay for spring training. You think there's really little difference for a player who gets the final roster spot on a full season Class A roster coming out of spring training and the first guy left off who stays behind at extended spring training? Guess again. One guy gets paid a pitiful sum. The other guy doesn't even get that. In his article, Morosi did include this item on his recommended to-do list for Manfred: "Engaging young athletes, especially African-Americans." Here's a thought, Mr. Manfred. Maybe if you actually paid young players working their way toward the big leagues a living wage, athletically gifted kids (of any ethnicity) wouldn't laugh at you any time you suggest they put their talents to work at baseball instead of other sports, where at least they have a shot at becoming more famous indentured servants of major colleges. The good news is that a lawsuit against baseball has been filed on behalf of minor leaguers, asking the courts to require teams to pay at least minimum wage salaries to players. What is MLB's reaction to that challenge, under Selig and, so far, Manfred? They're trying to convince Congress to specifically categorize ballplayers as "seasonal workers," akin to carnival workers. And they're enlisting the help of their minor league affiliates to help lobby their elected representatives on baseball's behalf, via not-so-thinly veiled threats of "contraction" of minor league teams if baseball is forced to increase pay to their future players. Those are nice guys running big league baseball, huh? Likewise, the issue of blackouts has been out there for years. Promises from MLB executives (including Mr. Selig, himself) to take a look at the issue go back at least to 2008 and probably further. But here we are, in 2015, and still cable TV subscribers in Iowa are blacked out from watching any game involving the Twins, Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Cardinals or Royals, unless it's a national network game. The blackout even applies to subscribers of MLB.tv. http://knuckleballsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/blackoutmap.gif Look at all the pretty colors in Iowa and Nevada! This has been frustrating to me and my fellow Twins fans in Iowa for years, but nobody in baseball or the media has really cared. Now, however, thanks to WGN no longer broadcasting Cubs games on the national version of their network, a lot of Cubs fans outside of greater Chicago may suddenly discover the problem. Welcome to the club, folks. Maybe you can get the national media to notice the problem. As with the minor league pay issue, there's some news on this front. Baseball has indicated they are looking in to the matter and there may be changes to the policy forthcoming. Hmmmm... I think we've heard that before. Anyway, Mr. Manfred, if you want to convince me you are any different than your predecessor whatsoever, you can start by proving you give a damn about your fans and about just being fair to the thousands of young players who are feeding your talent pipeline by clinging to their dream of playing big league baseball. Until then, a lot of us will continue to view you as nothing more than "Bud Light."

Great post, Seth. Thank you. Wish I could have been up there for the event.

I don't think I advocated anything resembling simply accepting whatever the coaches decide and not questioning it. The point is that what coaches see in March does matter when putting together your roster. The point is that advocating you toss out anything that happens in March and base the decision on some small sample size of what you saw from May or Meyer in September seems inconsistent with contending that there be "no scholarships." Nothing wrong with advocating that May/Meyer get a rotation spot if you feel they've earned it over everyone else, but I can't go along with a suggestion that they have already done so. They simply have not, imo.

I guess I'm having trouble understanding how people can be against "scholarships," but at the same time wanting to hand May or Meyer a rotation spot in April, regardless of whether they impress anyone in March. Sounds like we're only against scholarships for pitchers who the team did not trade a CF for a couple years ago. i don't think you overly rely upon results in spring training GAMES, but I do think that how well a guy pitches overall (including bullpen sessions) in March should play a part in who opens in the rotation. If another pitcher, even Mr. Pelfrey, is determined by the pitching coach and manager to be more likely to be effective in April than May/Meyer, then that's the guy you use. You don't let his salary determine he's the right guy, but you also don't let his lack of popularity among the masses determine that he's not. April wins and losses count just as much as those in any other month and, while you and I might not be optimistic about the Twins' chances of being competitive in 2015, the team itself should not be punting on Opening Day. The season will be plenty long and there will no doubt be plenty of time to get both May and Meyer their starts with the Twins. I just don't believe they are any more entitled to be handed a rotation spot with the Twins, just because we're tired of waiting for them, than any veteran pitcher should be.

Hey they were on the ball when I bought it! And besides, I'm not the one who claimed I WASN'T!

Actually, Jeremy, this was helpful. At the Kernels Hot Stove Banquet, they have a silent auction and i bought an autographed ball from 2013 that the Rock Cats had donated. It only has 15 signatures on it and I wondered if any of them were Sano. After looking at all the variations you have, I'm pretty sure there IS a Sano autograph on the ball (there's one with that distinctive "S". However, if it IS Sano's signature, we have yet a sixth variation, which is no more legible than any of the others.

Good thing you've never been an autograph hound! No telling how many of those you'd have acquired by now!

lightfoot789, on 22 Dec 2014 - 11:56 AM, said: They could win both halves with these line ups. Interesting... when I read this, I thought, "they don't have split seasons at AA," but in fact the Southern League DOES do split first half/second half seasons, like the Midwest League and Florida State League at Class A levels. The Eastern League, where the Twins' affiliate in New Britain has been playing, does not split their seasons. I do like the splits because those teams really can and do change significantly from the beginning of the year through to the end. It keeps fans interested and the players are virtually in a "pennant race" right from from Opening Day.

So, you're saying he made this decision without consulting with Joe Mauer? As for Hughes' deal, it's hard for me to imagine anyone not liking this (Scott Boras maybe?) Hughes gets significant financial security and the Twins send another message that they're serious about making sure they never again have a rotation like those they had in 2011-12.

I'm fine with this. Did the Twins pay more for Santana than I think he's going to be worth over 4 years? Yeah, probably. But that's the price an organization pays for failing to develop high-end in-house starting pitchers for an extended period. If you don't have GOOD young starters, you have to pay for them in the open market, either in big dollars or hard-to-swallow trades. Two years ago, the Twins had zero quality starting pitchers. They signed two last year and now one this year. Only 1 of the 2 last year turned out well, while 1 underperformed miserably. We don't know if Hughes will regress. We don't know if Nolasco will bounce back up to career-norm performance. And we don't know if Santana will continue to pitch as well as he has the past 2 years. But having 3 guys of that caliber is better than having 2. You've got just that much more room for error. And all it's costing is money, which there is no shortage of in the Twins' coffers. Gibson, May and Meyer, if healthy, will all get opportunities during the season. Berrios may, too. But if he doesn't, I'm not sure that would be a terrible thing, either.

I guess I'm not smart enough to do the analysis on these moves, but I'm left comforted by one thing: It does seem that pretty much every offseason the Bitch Sox make big moves for big players and spend big money. yet they seldom seem to win a lot of games when those players take the field. As Thrylos alluded to, the Twins and Sox simply have very different approaches to assembling a roster. The Twins primarily build from within and the Sox act like they want to be the Yankees, but on a much lesser budget. Anyone who expects the Twins to act more like the White Sox in the offseason simply is frustrating himself/herself. It won't happen. It's not how the Twins put together a roster. And, as frustrating as I admit that is at times, I can't say there's much evidence to support the Sox' way of doing things is any more likely to generate success on the field.

Great stuff. This team could use some personality.

First, I think you have to acknowledge that he's had considerable success since leaving the Twins. In addition, one of the reasons some (including me) were ready to see him go is that he didn't seem to be getting any better and was about to start getting more expensive. The Twins were going to have to commit to him for more money and more years and, based on the performance levels at the time, it made more sense to get something for him. It appeared that, regardless of who's fault it was, the Twins' coaches and Liriano were not likely to find any kind of magic together that would allow him to live up to his potential. I don't know if it's true the Pirates coaches "fixed" something with Liriano or not, but I think you have to allow that it's a distinct possibility. I wouldn't suggest bringing him back if it would be a reuniting with Rick Anderson and Ron Gardenhire, but that is not the case.

Guess I'm the contrarian in the group on this. Liriano is the one guy among those listed that I could reasonably see being a top of the rotation SP. Any concerns over alleged misuse or poor coaching are no longer relevant, given the manager/pitching coach changes. I also don't like to give up a 2nd round pick for a FA signing, but even someone like me who loves minor leaguers has to admit that the odds of Liriano becoming a strong contributor to the Twins are better than pretty much anyone the Twins would draft in the 2nd round. People act like getting "only" 150-170 innings from a guy with Liriano's talent wouldn't be worth it, but that's 150-170 more innings of high production than you're likely to get from anyone else on the current staff not named Hughes.

Actually, you could argue, "yes," because this group has essentially been coming up together. It's true that, if Sano starts the year in Chattanooga, that would be a significant addition to this "class," as is Stuart Turner, but for the most part this group of position players have been together since winning a championship for Elizabethton in 2012. They gave Cedar Rapids a great line up in the first year of the affiliation between the Kernels & Twins and, obviously, did the same in Fort Myers this past year. Now Chattanooga, also in the first year of their affiliation with the Twins, will get pretty much the same group. Given the wash out rate for minor leaguers, in general, it really is pretty encouraging that a core group of 6-7 position players would be able to continue to progress together this way. Lookouts fans are going to have a lot of fun next summer.

Just in the interest of accuracy, Hu is 8 months older than Gonsalves and 2 years older than Thorpe. I like all of the break out picks you've all mentioned! Harrison would definitely be on my list. Watching him in CR in 2013, I thought he really needed to work on zone recognition to cut his K rate and make more consistent contact. He did that, even if it may have come at the expense of HRs. I think those will come. I struggle with defining "break out" season. A lot of the guys mentioned had good 2014s and I expect them to show continued progress. Not sure that constitutes a break out. If we're talking about guys who had "OK" seasons that I think could be primed for eye-opening seasons in 2015 (like Berrios improved from 2013 in to 2014), I'd be looking at Harrison, Stewart, Goodrum, and if you want names nobody else has mentioned so far, maybe Bryan Haar or Jason Kanzler.

Beats the hell out of continuing to debate the relative pros and cons of base coaches we've never heard of, though.