killertwinfan

Disappointing to say the least.  There is not a lot to criticize the front office other than the fact that they haven't done much.  Maybe they liked what they saw deep in the farm system and felt they had something to build on for the future.  So they get 5 years to show something while the fans get 5 years of middling baseball at best.  People need to vote harder with their dollars to change things.  

I know they struggle with Duffy, but the Twins looked like the had been in a slumber right up until game time.  Sluggish start from a team that should be feeling a sense of urgency.  Seems like we'll be sellers soon, I hope management isn't waiting for these guys to show their true colors, we have already seen them.  Streaky at best, but below a .500 team.  We need to shake up the culture of that club house.  This is on the players.  

Do you mean last year?  That was one ~quality prospect and two long shots. Hindsight proved they were wise not to pull the trigger on the deal.  

For this team to progress, they need more pitching.   It's going to hurt, but we need to give up good prospects for a quality starter.  

Meeting the projection for this team is probably a big challenge.  I guess we would have to take it but I am not sure that makes us competitive, even in a weak Central Division.  Two years ago we over-achieved. Last year we under-achieved.  I guess it would be nice to know if we are on the right path with the new management more than anything else. That won't be clear until the middle (or end) of next season.  

Unfortunately our handling of Buxton has been the premier chapter from the book, "What No To Do".  I like what your are saying and for the most part it appears the Twins are following that advice.  All of but one of Buxton's PA's were good in the opener with Texas and all looked really good last night. I really liked his last AB even though it resulted in an out.  He took a pitch on the outside part of the plate and hit hard the other way.  Very Nice!  Of course, the pitching last night for Texas left much to be desired, but progress nonetheless.  

What concerns me the most about the Twins is the leadership. I would be more comfortable with them if their actions aligned with performance on the field.  I will give them a pass on Buxton because he is in a slump. Everybody has one of those.  However here are three things that concern me...
1. It appears that Polanco, although not ideal, can play short next to Dozier.  The only offer we got for Dozier was very poor and although I thought we had to move him, I agreed with the decision not to.  Why did we not know either of these things?
2. Hughes has been hit hard, for two years now, including this spring. If they play the infield in again somebody is going to get killed. He has not proven he can pitch, yet he gets a starting spot. Somebody paid this guy too much now somebody is trying to play him before he is ready, and he may never be.  We have a glut of pitchers, he is not part of the future. Make him prove he can pitch before you give him the ball.
3. Mauer is not improving, he is regressing.  He is a one trick pony and the opposition has recognized that fact. Molitor talked about protecting Joe against lefties this spring yet come opener we did not bring up a position player to accomplish that feet.  One bad decision on the pitching staff, leads to another with a field position.  
 
I know this is a new and promising leadership group. At this point, albeit in a tough situation, I really don't see improved decision making translating into improved performance on the field.  
 

What concerns me the most about the Twins is the leadership. I would be more comfortable with them if their actions aligned with performance on the field.  I will give them a pass on Buxton because he is in a slump. Everybody has one of those.  However here are three things that concern me...
1. It appears that Polanco, although not ideal, can play short next to Dozier.  The only offer we got for Dozier was very poor and although I thought we had to move him, I agreed with the decision not to.  Why did we not know either of these things?
2. Hughes has been hit hard, for two years now, including this spring. If they play the infield in again somebody is going to get killed. He has not proven he can pitch, yet he gets a starting spot. Somebody paid this guy too much now somebody is trying to play him before he is ready, and he may never be.  We have a glut of pitchers, he is not part of the future. Make him prove he can pitch before you give him the ball.
3. Mauer is not improving, he is regressing.  He is a one trick pony and the opposition has recognized that fact. Molitor talked about protecting Joe against lefties this spring yet come opener we did not bring up a position player to accomplish that feet.  One bad decision on the pitching staff, leads to another with a field position.  
 
I know this is a new and promising leadership group. At this point, albeit in a tough situation, I really don't see improved decision making translating into improved performance on the field.  
 

Obviously we have the flexibility to accommodate our current situation injuries and development. I really would like to understand the end game. It seems we are postponing decisions for something?? Hughes health and ability? The emergence of Berrios, Chargois, Wimmers, Tepesch, Park or Vargas??   I think that if you had a strategy for this team these decision would be clearer.  I don't see how Santana fits into the future in any scenario.  Probably the same could be said for others.