(and being the cool cat that he is, he was eating a sandwich in the OF)

I tend to think that there are lots of factors in Span's improvement. The LASIK probably helped some, but I think it's getting way too much credit for his improvement. And he doesn't even have two full seasons under his belt, so even if the LASIK did help, he could have been over his head the last couple of years, too. His PrOPS this year was just .751, so there's at least some indication that he's been a little lucky to this point.

Delmon could improve at the plate just like Gomez could improve (though scouting-wise, I'm more convinced about Gomez's bat speed than Delmon's bat speed.) What sucked about that trade was that we took on all of the risk, didn't free up any payroll, and gave up two good players for one guy who was really, really, really far from his potential. Gomez at least has the fielding part of his potential taken care of, Delmon hasn't really filled any part of his potential.

There was a sign this year though. He had career best FB rate and HR/FB rates. Of course, once that does come around, he's then as valuable as Gomez. Le Sigh.

Cuddyer also got LASIK in the previous offseason. I wonder if there's been any research about the effects for a player.

It just seems to me that the timing of his eye surgery too closely matches his big improvement in his minor league performance. I think past performance in DSPAN's case isn't necessarily meaningful because of this.

(Also, regarding Span, there's something of a SSS caveat still in place. 1000 PA seems like a lot, but there's still a chance he could end up as a lower-than .800 OPS player for the next few yers.) Torii Hunter is another guy who has seen a better major league OPS than minor league OPS. If the Twins had traded Hunter after 2000 (coming off of 73 and 80 OPS+ seasons), they would have missed out on a ton of value.

that said, I'm with you on the general point. "Potential" is the somehow-weighted total of past performance and "informed" guesses about developmental path.

Not true. Please reference the original post. Gomez hit for a .738 OPS in the minors. He could do that in the majors.

Plus, if you just outright dismiss the concept of potential, you'll allow all the other teams to get the diamonds in the rough, which would put your club at a significant disadvantage. (For instance, Span would have been gone long ago, and Nathan/Bonser/Liriano would never have donned Twins uniforms.) Potential matters.

And that's really IF he adds the power you are expecting.

Hardy:
K%: 11.42
BB%: 8.74

Gomez:
K%: 19.05
BB%: 5.31

Gomez could be a similar hitter. Not sure that I like this trade (if they gave up Perkins for Hardy I would have been ecstatic, btw...)

Or do you think that's feasible?

I absolutely believe it is feasible. Power is the last tool to develop and Gomez's potential is to be an all-or-nothing hitter who doesn't walk much, strikes out a lot, but can put the ball out of the ballpark. What is the difference between Carlos Gomez and Alfonso Soriano at the same age? They have the exact same approach at the plate and Gomez has the bat speed and size to do it. You could also look at Jacque Jones as another example of a guy who had no clue at the plate, barely walked, but managed a career .776 OPS. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Gomez could do that. And if he could average that, one year or two he could luck into an .800 OPS.

There is every chance in the world that Gomez could never improve. That's why the Twins dealt him--they wanted what they consider to be a more certain commodity. But the next four years of Gomez could still be worth more than the next two years of Hardy, especially when you factor in the money. Based on some of the comments you made at your blog, I think you are reading way too much into two years of performance. Gomez is by no means doomed to repeat what he's done the last two years. He could, but he's not locked in to that just yet.

When you're a small budget team, sometimes you have to roll the dice on guys like Gomez. Sometimes you hit the jackpot (like, say, Joe Nathan, who no one could have predicted would be this good) and sometimes you roll snake eyes. But taking that chance is cheaper than trying to acquire players with more distinguished resumes, and you're often stuck taking those chances when you can't spent $120M+.