Rosterman

Bruno did have success in the minors. Not sure what they are looking for, considering you have Hernandez and Vavra, not to mention Molitor to give batting and base-running advice. I would love to see Bruno be the system hitting corrdinator, if possible. Chad Allen might be the call-up? The next season will be nteresting to see what happens with field management and coaching, and if the Twins stay within (people like Mauer, Dougie M., Tommy Watkins and all the other former Twins getting jobs from Valentin, Dinkleman, Toby Gardenhie and such). If the problem is the minors, then do we have a house-cleaning of the minors THIS YEAR!? Also, who sets the standards for batting? How much say does Molitor, who has a pretty good idea on how to hit, have in the matter.

Very fine post. Still not sure who will be the closer, and not sure how May will eventually pan out in the rotation (he needs the innings). So many of the bullpen names are expendable (Boshers, Tonkin, Kintzler even, Pressly). Yes, we need a catcher and if can get Castro for that price, fine. The more one looks at Plouffe, we probably need that safety net for third, if the alternative is Escobar. I could still live without Escobar if push comes to shove and go with another signee. But wait and see. He might still be a minor trade chip if someone needs a shortstop. We have to hope Hughes comes back and Gibson increases his trade value. If Santana and Dozier can hold forth and keep up their value, maybe the Twins can flip them if they start to tank. I still wonder who the coaching staff will be, and at this point, I would rather pout my faith in a Dougie M. as a possible manager if the club is truly rebuilding. The pain is we got all these parts that really have little or no value, and why are we keeping them on the 40-man (Park, Santana for example).

There is nothing wrong with having a professional designated hitter on a team. Just think, the Twins could've kept Ortiz and paid him less than they are paying, say, Joe Mauer. In the end, imagine what that would've given THIS team. H appily keeping Matt LeCroy as the main DH in two of the three years since Ortiz worked, because LeCroy could also catch. Would it be bad to have Sano DH for 15 years? (Or even, Arcia, at one point).

There IS something about over-managing, and not trusting the guys you DO have on your roster. If you can't play them, why are they there? The big one was the third strike bunt attempt. And, of course, you have a bullpen full of relief pitchers and you think about starters doing the job instead, yet you don't have enough faith in your starter to let him throw more than 63 pitches. Geez. (Arrieta was also warming up at one point). Cleveland was the same. Short start. They used ALL their other pitchers yesterday in the loss. Yet your bullpen needs to be more than three overworked guys, plus bringing in your closer early rather than Shaw (not to mention bringing Shaw back out after a rain delay). Trust in your guys. Like the Cubs in the 10th. You have to trust that Edwards will see this as the game opportunity of a lifetime and pitch well, but not over pitch. The inute he does, turn to the situational guys. But suddenly you might have a long extra inning game and THAT is when you want a Lester, say, coming out of the pen to save the day in the end. The Indians had Bauer and looks like he was going to be a 2-3 inning guy at the least. Very over-managed. At some point, you have to trust your players. Inspirational when the Cubs held a quick meeting in the weight room during the rainout. It wasn't the greatest game ever, far from it. Too many errors. Badly over-managed by both sides. Some bad umpiring behind-the-plate. It's not a great game when you allow the other team to tie when you pretty much could be considered to have the game in the bag. What did make it great, it started all over again in the 9th inning, and was a brand new game after the rain delay...with lots and lots of tired players on the field giving their all!

at this point, no team would be looking at Sano as longterm at third. The Twins will give Sano two more seasons and then have to deal with signing him longterm or hoping he is a true trade chip, depending on is position. Pitching is such a tough decision. Even throwing free agent money could be frowned upon.

Well, you have to have veterans to trade (we have Ervin and Dozier). It's nice to have prospects in the minors (for the rotation we have Berrios, Gonzalves and Stewart). You need to spend some money on free agency (is there a catcher available). Of course, the management team needs to be part of the management team on the field and hire who they think will work wonders. You can have the best pitchers in the world, but lousy pitching coaches. You have to be prepared to spend money in advance to put a winning team on the field (which generates more money in the coffers). Don't base your 2017 budget on your 2016 results...please. Have a five year plan. Really, know your organization!

Jeff Manship pitches! Wasn't he a Twin...once!

Be interesting to see how the admin looks at the Rule 5. The Twins could very well carry a guy near ready for the majors yet who remains unprotected...possibly with a lot more upside than a minors free agent. Even if the guy has to go south in 2018 for more minor league time. The big question coming out of the chute is how much will the Twins be in rebuilding mode, or will they start to build a new team with trades, signings et al and go outside the organization for 50% or more of the roster.

I guess the idea situation would be to keep Dozier for two years at second with Polanco at shortstop. By then, Polanco will be entering arbitration. Gordon will be ready to play fulltime. You make a qualifying offer to Dozier and he accepts or doesn't -- hopefully moves on. You get a draft pick. Polanco moves to second. Gordon to short. And in three years Polanco is too expensive for what he brings to the table.

I'm not sure why Bert has to stay with the Twins. You'd think he could get a national commentator job for limited series, or the All-Star game, or something that would pay equally as well, leaving him more time for Hall of Fame events and such. Or even switch teams to be closer to home. At some point, between retirement, baseball pension, signing fees and such, he doesn't really have to work.

Plus, would he be worth at least a qualifying offer in 2019?

We are sitting here remembering that Joe Mauer is a lock at first base where so many current names could play (be it Sano, Park or Vargas). We talk of Dozier be moved as solving our problems. But we are still a ways from having Gordon at shortstop. Dozier talk (should he be moved, why isn't he being moved) is similar to the talk of Trevor Plouffe who, for all intent and purpose, is still in the Twins mix. And can any of them play the outfield, and where does that leave our three prospects of Rosario/Kepler/Buxton, not to mention names in the wings like Palka, Walker and Granite. And then you do start to look at the worth of ANY of the above names. We feel Dozier has worth, yet any team looking at him has to have a second base need (where else can he play) and do they think he is a viable player to resign in 2019 and beyond. I don't think we can move Park or Vargas or even Plouffe. Escobar is fumes. Teams would rather gamble on trading for Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco at this point. Rosario is on the bubble. Santana is a placeholder. Anyone really feels Grossman is needed with Palka/Walker/Granite in the wings? The team is a mess in pieces to send elsewhere. As a general manager, I would just wait to see who the Twins jettison, and worry about trading pieces with other teams, who may fulfill my needs equally if not better than the Twins, or just waiting for those waiver wire moments that may see more Twins than any of us imagine.

You have to remember that Dozier is still only a two-year player for the trading team and they would have to take the chance on extending him, or thinking he may not be worth it come age 31. That's a tough decision to make (the same the Twins have to make right now...trade him or extend him...as his trade value will decrease in some ways if they play him another year and, say, he doesn't mimic his 2016 season on the posiitive notes. And then we have to closely look at what comes back in return. We all remember the Santana trade with the Mets and the returns (with a gun barrel to our heads, supposedly) compared to what was thrown at the Twins (supposedly) by teams like New York and Boston, with the newswire grapevine telling us the Twins were holding out for better results, only to be stymied and ended up dealing with the Mets (and Getting Humber instead of Pelfrey, who they supposedly wanted in the first place). And then we have the Span trade for pitching of the future, not to mention the Revere trade for the same, and we see where that left us...down in the dumps in the outfield with pitching prospects that have yet to contribute. A team needs to have a need for a second baseman to go after Dozier. They have to figure him into some longterm plans (at second or elsewhere) to justify giving up certain players. Today, he is a plus piece for any team. The Twins have to decide how to gamble on the prospect level...get someone to contribute tomorrow or further down the line is the big question.

Yes, the biggest complaint is giving at bats to Schafer instead of Walker, both on the 40-man (or Schafer was actually added). You can argue that the Twins should find places for the pitchers who MIGHT be added to the 40-man, or give a look to other pitchers of the same quality as Dean/Albers (they did add Wimmers for a looksee and have to make a keep or go decision on him). Wheeler was the one who could've gotten a look to see if he was worth even considering for the 40-man in the off-season, or just going after as minor league depth. You could argue that instead of Beresford, the Twins should've elevated Goodrum, perhaps. Someone to consider keeping in the organization (they have, but he is still eligible for the Rule 5). But the Beresford reward was nice and he might stay with the team another season as minor league experience and depth, and speak highly of the Twins to fellow Australians. My problem is guys like Landa, Rosario and Melotakis. They were still unlikely to appear with the Twins in 2016. Now they also appear unlikely to appear in 2017? Yet the Twins lost Zach Jones (who they got back) and kept Pat Dean, and added Andrew Albers. Sheesh. A lot of names that went nowhere fast. At what point do you fear losing that 3-year player who still has dues to pay before reaching true prospect status.

So that means the Twins could spend upwards of $130 million on payroll, which they won't, in 2017. They have Mauer on the books for two mroe seasons. They also have Santana and Perkins for two more years and Hughes for three, and that's about it. You might expect a considerable drop in revenue next season, but if the Twins can excite the fan base, maybe not. Still, whatever isn't spent one years doesn't seem to carry over to other years (why not). And, thusly, you have to weigh your prospects well, signing some sooner rather than later with the longterm gamble. But the question will always remain, do you ever again make someone a franchise player (like Mauer) and do you ever overspend for mid-level talent longterm (like most of the rotation of late).

Not totally. They could have Park back there at first base. Goodrum could be an infielder. Beresford could return. I would hope you would advance D.J. Hicks, Ryan Walker, Engelb Vielma. Levi Michael needs to show his stuff (or might just be released). I would keep Wilfredo Tovar if he would resign. You'd think Nick Gordon MIGHT make it that far next season. But, yes, sadly NO TRUE third baseman at this time.

There is not enough upside for a team to grab a Thorpe, unless they think they can carry him for the season (they can't). Wait to see what happens to him and remember, because of high draft picks,the Twins may still have difficult roster decisions for 40-man adds for a couple more years!

The Twins have a number of pitchers who could just walk away if not kept on the 40-man - Wimmers, Boshers, Light. With their performances last year, and the number of same/significant arms in the system, almost want to say so long. The only tough choice is Wheeler. Should you or not. Baxendale MIGHT be grabbed, but I would take the chance that he won't be. The truth is that the pitching staff is a shambles and can be rcreated with same bodies out of the 2th or 41st men that msot teams will elt walk in the off-season with hopes that SOMEONE from the minors will fill 2-3-4 of the holes sometime in 2017. There is zilch trade value from all bodies except for Santana. Even Kintzler. there seemed to be no biters during the regular season. Sad that you have to think about protecting these guys.

Nike Goodrum is one to consider. Believe he will also be a minor league free agent, thus he could just walk to another team. Is he more valuable to the organization than, say, Danny Santana or Robbie Grossman. It's these fringe guys, or a couple of players lower down in the minors that won't be AA/AAA guys right now but could be rgabbed in the minor league portion. Someone mentioned turner. Happily, the Twins didn't advance him. He is still too rough to be held all season as a third catcher even. Adam Walker? If the Twins removed him from the 40-man, some team would grab him immediately, which rubs salt in the wounds that the Twins didn't expose him to major league pitching in September to just see how good/bad he may be.

Drew Butera will be available, right?

You don't keep a man o a 40-man roster because he is valuable to the minor leagues. You put him on the 40-man because you think he will contribute to the club on the major league level in a year or two (three at the ultimate worse) and that he is valuable to keep as a prospect in your organization, not just as a roster holder in the minors. Not only does that work against the player, but it ties up a valuable spot.

He gets whatever contract he can sign. Might be a major/minor split. The major portion could be pro-rated higher, but usually isn't. You also get paid more if you are actually on the 40-man. But whatever team signs him, once he comes to the majors he still gets service time. If he doesn't enter free-agency with that service time, his arbitration clock is still in play and he would have arbitration if his new team keeps him in the off-season. But he would have to be better than good, and it wouldn't probably pay as much as earned, say, last season. He's in limbo land. His best bet would be to try and grab a 2-year low millions deal, if possible, at this point. And he just might be able to do it (think Mike Pelfrey).

Polancho will be the shortstop in 2017. But the Twins have to move on Dozier before he enters his walk season, or sign him longterm, and not sure if that is a geat idea. Or is it? And do you move Dozier, plant Polanco at second then, and have Gordon at shortstop. Of course, the future of Sano is also the question. Is he a third baseman longterm (doubtful). Do you want him at first, or do you make him a designated hitter. But the shortstop answer comes from the longrange vision of where Brian Dozier is with the organization...the lifelong second baseman, a fixture at first base or the outfield, or a dynamite tradechip today when his value is high, as we have no idea how far down -to-earth he may come in 2017 and no longer be the bargain other teams could grab!

But you could've also had Logan Darnell in that category, who again didn't make it thru the season, not that he deserved a callup.

Right now, no one needs to trade for a Minnesota Twin player. Period. The Twins will ask for the moon for the couple that have possible worth (salary, experience = Dozier, Ervin Santana). Anyone else, they can find equally substantial candidates pretty much anywheres for a fraction of the cost.The Twins are a mess. Players will slump again (as many do in their second year). The Twins have to think and play and trust longterm in their system. Period. They do have to make some decisions on where guys are playing, and start doing it early and getting a depth chart (realistic) going instead of experimenting.