twinstalker

Nobody talks much about this as the reason for Gordon being in AA, but he was absolutely horrible defensively in spring training, and I think the Twins are sort of tying his promotions to his defensive play. Of course, at some point with even no improvement, he'd move to AAA, but my opinion is that while he's still early enough for AA to not be a total slap in the face, the Twins will give him incentive to tighten up his play in the field.

There's no way I would have sent LaMarre down. If he's at all for real, or even if he's on a hot streak, you have to ride it out. The downside of adding LaMarre now could be having to cut him from the 40, depending on whether the Twins need the spot, so his fate might ride on whether he starts out hot. Had he gone to AAA and shown that he's truly turned a corner, he might have ended up with a better opportunity, especially if Grossman regresses more. Now, if he starts out cold, he might be searching for work, though I'm sure the Twins would love him back at AAA. But from the Twins point of view, ride the hot hand. I hope they give him time and opportunity.

Win now mode? <rolls his eyes> Um, yes. But you are implying with that phrase that they have to give up the future for the now. Which, btw, is a complete fallacy today. Only the historical preponderance and absolute ignorance of teams truly giving up way too much long-term for short-term help has this as an either or proposition. The exploitable inefficiency is that some teams still probably believe this. Terry Ryan's group would. Ramos for Capps is an example of this. Falvine appears to approach it right. Do everything you can for the "now" that doesn't effect the future in any noticeable way. When they do eventually send out a "real prospect" for shorter-term help (think Nick Gordon), I suspect they will have somewhat soured on the prospect before the league finds out. Eventually, whatever inefficiencies the Twins are exploiting will cease to exist, and so they'll have to be on top of the others that spring up. Thus far they've benefited from the Pohlad's willingness to spend (e.g. the Garcia/Littell deal, Odorizzi, Lynn), so they may be more handcuffed in the future. But for now, "win now mode" doesn't make much sense in its implication.

I think it's pretty simple. Team needs a rh OF to go with rh DH/OF Grossman, and we can get rid of Vargas, whom we know a lot about. There's this guy in camp who is mashing it and fills that role. Why wouldn't you go with the hot streak until it proves out otherwise? There is nothing about Granite that is helpful, other than as a backup to Buxton, and the Twins can survive the one game until Granite gets called up to replace an injured Buxton. If Vargas is the argument here, and you don't think there are AAAA guys available all over the place who can do as much or more than him, then I'm not sure what to say. My guess, though, is that if Vargas were with another organization and made available to us, that argument wouldn't exist. The love for Vargas and Granite on here baffles me.

The timing looks right for him to replace Rosario or Kepler, though I'm not sure if Rosario lasts quite long enough for Alex K. to step right in.

As I said (or meant), and I think I'm mostly right with this one, a hitter-first college player taken past the top thirty is rather unlikely to profile as we're hoping Rooker profiles. What's in the head of most people genuinely excited about Rooker is/was not in the head of the organizations that are in the know (nowadays more than ever). You don't generally pass on the guy the commenters have in mind. That's why I mention his story is somewhat different enough to be hopeful that maybe one slipped through, but I'm staying sober on this one until he destroys the upper minors and shows he can hit breaking balls.

I'm not smart enough to know whether he's a great prospect at this point, but I will say if he is and if he's a fast mover, the timing couldn't have been better for him. 1st base, if not open, is soon to be, and the corner OFers are all lh, including the top two backups. I think the story here is different enough to be hopeful about. There aren't a lot of college picks 30+ that speed through the minors and become good players. If teams think there's a chance of that, they're on them earlier. I don't think Will Clark and Rafael Palmeiro lasted beyond the first few coming out of Mississippi State. Fingers crossed.

Or really that he'll ever be any good whatsoever. My bet is that the best value he could be to the Twins is in trade. But that's got to happen soon.

LOL. Andrew Wiggins is good because Glen Taylor/Thibs say he is. Twins are done with free agency because Falvey said they are. When are people, especially the media whose job it is, going to stop blindly believing what people with an agenda say? So many examples of it here in town.

I mostly agree. However, there are some spots that still can be lost. For instance, if Hildenberger continues to basically suck and pitches even worse, there's no reason to not let him work out his issues at AAA. One of Duffey or Hughes could implode and be demoted/released, most likely Hughes (released). The importance of the 25-man roster is diminished now that we have a FO that is involved and understands how to use the 40.

I would trade Granite, Grossman and Escobar for Mike Trout, who could play vs lhp instead of Kepler and back up Buxton in CF. It's always fun when you don't have to consider the other team's considerations and restrictions! Heck, we're not even paying attention to the Twins' restrictions. Just so this post is somewhat constructive: a number of names above can not be traded, either procedure-wise or in practicality. Nor are teams looking to add players who need to be kept on the 25 and/or 40 man rosters. If Vargas is dealt, it's after clearing waivers and being dealt to a team that will offer the infamous PTBNL or cash. I don't think Aybar can be dealt unless he makes the team, as he has an opt out. Trade Phil Hughes? That's what Terry Ryan needed to do after 2014, in hindsight, instead of extending him (not in hindsight). It should go without saying that a deal involving Hughes is impossible. It's possible there's a team out there that has some space on the 40 man for Duffey, but they're not going to pay for that. He's the definition of replacement level.

These local media worry about Dozier not being extended is naive at best. Falvine knows (know?) there is zero reason to commit long-term to a guy who next year will be playing his age 32 season. If they believe he can do it again, they'll offer the 18 or 19 mil for 2019. If he turns it down, so be it. I don't know for sure that he will. The media in this town care more about keeping a guy, any guy, who's been here than they do building the franchise the way it should be built, which I personally believe they have no idea about. Dozier probably has three more good seasons at most. We've got him for one, possibly two. I think the way you deal with someone like that is to offer at most two years after this and let him walk if he doesn't sign.

Some of these guys need to start accepting the qualifying offer. My understanding is that not only is it a great salary, but a team can't offer it two years in a row.

People are making this too difficult. The first thing I notice is that Minnesota fans are not at all familiar with the concept of depth. Every team, from the Twins to the Gophers (hoops and FB) to the Wolves back in the day, every team has been shallow as hell. Then someone gets hurt, and we cry "why can't we have nice things?" and wonder why Minnesota sports are so bad or cursed. But the fact is that the men who've run the show in every sport haven't had much of a clue. Bad owners, bad front offices. Until now. So Falvine is here, and guys like Aybar and others appear on the scene. It's not because Aybar has a chance in the status quo, it's that he's a legit plan B if something bad happens. Kennys Vargas isn't an option unless needed. Same with Granite. Same with a bunch of the pitching this year. IF: Mauer, Dozier, LoMo, Escobar, Sano, Polanco, Adrianza OF: Buxton, Rosario, Kepler, Grossman The pitching will work itself out. There will be injuries, and Falvine will make strategic decisions based on spring training, options, injuries, etc. Basically, if you have options, it probably means your default is to start the year in the minors. It's a long season, and sending a guy like Busenitz down makes sense on many levels. Vargas--will be DFA'd, but if LoMo or Mauer goes down to injury, we have depth. Aybar--will get his release. But if Sano, Escobar, Adrianza, Polanco, or Dozier goes down, we have an MLB ready guy to maybe find room for. Granite--will be sent down. I see very little value in him (the ball does not come off his bat well against MLB pitching) and would deal him if another team needed his skill set. Meanwhile, he gets called up with an injury to the OF. He can play a good CF and might not hurt you too bad for a short period. Grossman--obvious choice. His background says he's very good vs lhp, and he gets on base. If he just loses it and can't be a decent force vs lhp, you do not replace him with Granite, you go outside the organization for a rh bat. This is not the old Twins way of thinking. If Hughes continues to suck, they will cut ties with him, but they're right to see if the latest surgery and rehab brings back his effectiveness. Same with Pressly and Duffey, iyam. Romero and Gonsalves go down, and there's really nothing that keeps them up, save for being exceptional all spring and having injury or performance issue with other pitchers. A guy like Fernando Rodney is being paid, but there is likely a short leash. No reliever getting sent down should expect to be there for long. Sanchez and his ilk--probably has a chance to pretty good, a very small chance, but I wouldn't discount the possibility. A bunch of these guys might not be good, but from a group, one can emerge, and that's someone like Sanchez (or Hughes). So, given no injuries, the position players are easy, and the pitching will figure itself out over the course of March. And if the Twins have injuries during March, they've finally addressed the lack of depth issues they've had forever.

Foremost, if you're sitting in the #1 position in the draft, it's almost by definition stupid to take a pitcher due to the risk. That pitcher would have to be a college pitcher who sets himself apart from not only the other pitchers but maybe the past decade of pitchers and of course the hitters. I think Strasburg is an example of that. But if Harper is in that draft, you don't take Strasburg. I have no issue with the Twins taking Lewis number one, especially given that doing so allowed some financial freedom and creativity. However, let's not forget we're only going to get a partial season and six full years before he hits free agency. Scott Boras isn't about to change his ways wrt his players playing out their team control asap. And knowing that, the Twins will really be facing decisions on whether to trade Lewis by his second or third full year. That's not optimal.

Whoa, first thing I notice is that Killebrew is not in LF and Morneau is not DH. Haven't read the comments.

I absolutely love it when someone argues against something they wanted me to say instead of what I said. "Why, yes, I've said it before and I'll say it again...Pearson will NEVER have more than a cup of coffee in MLB." This, according to you, is what I said. Thanks bunch. Also, as far as potential goes, 80% (made up) of players have some sort of really high ceiling they'll never reach. In Pearson's case, his potential if all goes right is said to be 20/20. Again, in a vacuum, who would you take if you had to choose a player for the franchise you're starting, Zach Littell or Pearson? I highly doubt more than a very small percentage would take Pearson. I doubt Seth would, which is what I'm arguing.

You seriously think a 3rd round pick from the most recent draft who struggled is a better prospect than a pitcher who commanded the price of a legit MLB pitcher (Garcia) and dominated AA? Let's put it this way. If knowing what you know now could have thrown Zack Littell into the 2017 draft, again, knowing he's dominated AA and is ready for AAA, would you ever take an outfielder at least five years away whose upside potential is 20/20? I like that the Twins used their cap space to acquire Pearson, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. It's likely he'll never have more than a cup of coffee, and if he does, he'll be at best average. And yes, I could use the same argument with Littell and others you have listed ahead of him. Lewin Diaz comes immediately to mind.

I've been thinking about this all wrong...

I don't think we should assume Kiriloff is in Seth's top 5. (Okay, I'm kidding, but this is why I think prospect lists should be presented in the opposite direction)

The two with high ceilings here are Thorpe (obviously) and Littell (potential to be a long-term starter). Garver and Wade will be at best role players, and Diaz' future is murky. I would rank these five as 1. Thorpe 2. Littell . 3. Garver . . . . . 4.Wade 5. Diaz

No way in hell Lewin Diaz gets picked. No way in hell Twins were going to lose Thorpe. Those were the biggest two locks I had. Lewis Thorpe would be the first pick or essentially the first pick, given the maneuvering teams do up front in Rule V. Diaz, of course, can't help a single team and can't be wasted space with so few position spots used. And unless something clicks, I don't see much evidence for high-end potential.

I think almost by definition "core" means players you're 90% sure will be a Twin two years from now. I wouldn't give Escobar a 30% chance.

Thanks for these. One thing that would be nice is a more consistent addition of records, playoff status, and games behind/ahead, if pertinent. Record either before the game starts or after. Thanks!

I thought no one lost out on the playoffs due to a tiebreaker.