I'm not sure if it's selective understanding, reading, or some combination of both at play here. Again, I've already stated what I thought this team could've done prior to the beginning of last season to compete within the division. Salary numbers and names are irrelevant. We're dealing in hypothetical scenarios here. Your insistence on "specifics," is a straw man. It doesn't invalidate any part of how those weaknesses could've been addressed. Like I said before, if you need names feel free to dig through 40 man rosters and to find a 4th OFer, C, and a few bullpen arms. It's comical that you're demanding "specificity," from others and at the same time your solution is "draft like Houston and trade for talent like Cleveland."
It's no secret that the Twins aren't on the level of Houston, Boston, or NY. It wasn't that long ago that Buxton and Sano headlined a farm system that was one of, if not the best, in baseball. We've seen firsthand how inconsistent prospect development can be. Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now? I'll also reiterate, in the hopes that this time it sinks in, that none of what I suggested the Twins do prior to the season would've required giving up high level prospects. Those teams you listed above didn't get better by simply waiting for prospects to reach the major league level. They all moved young players for proven talent. Part of getting to that "stratosphere," requires making similar moves.
If it bothers you that posters question decisions made by the Twins organization then a forum probably isn't the best place to frequent.
Let’s start with the suggestion this is a strawman argument. My argument is based on your post that the FO could have done much better last off-season. Is this not your belief? Asking for specifics is anything but a strawman argument. Unless you provide specifics, we can’t possibly measure the relative merit or impact of what you are suggesting. There are also many cases where fan insist on solutions that are not really available. You need to demonstrate viable solutions were available and at least estimate the impact. For example, had the signed a different catcher, what could have we anticipated in terms of WAR, for example. The Twins needed to improve by 14 games to win the division. I would love to see the transactions that would have gotten us to that point.
Why do you ask “Why should this team rely solely on Royce Lewis & co. to all hit the ground running a few years from now”? How did you possibly conclude this is my position? That would be a good example of a strawman. This argument can only be made while convenientlyignoring most of what I wrote given we have been debating the merit of savvy trades, usage of international bonus pool, drafting and development, as well as free agent signings. I also framed my position with two elements. One is that the context was top prospects as opposed to "Royce Lewis". The other is the timing of trading top prospects. GMs don't trade top prospects until they have a proven core in place. Our core is not only unproven, they are quite suspect. It's ironic that you highlight the risk of prospects and then insist that it's a sound strategy to make long-term decision based on the assumption the current suspects are all going to emerge. That is anything but sound management practice, especially given they would need to emerge as superstar in order for us to contend.
BTW … If you don’t include cost, we can’t possibly determine if the solution is feasible. The statement that costs are not relevant is extremely naïve.
Draft like Houston was meant conceptually not literally tank and get several #1 and #2 picks. It means draft well. Mid-market teams must draft well that is no secret. The previous regime missed on some extremely important picks. How much better would last season and our future been had they taken Benintendi and Nola. I can’t blame them too much for Rodriguez but these are the decisions that you have to get right to contend with teams that have made great personnel decisions and have bigger budgets.
Trade like Cleveland does not literally mean go out acquire an entire staff of SPs as prospects and trade relatively little to get them. I would guess they believe some of the deadline acquisitions have this potential. Just one such acquisition is big. The success of teams outside the top revenue producers requires effective identification of potential and some savvy trades to acquire players that develop exceptionally well.