I never used the phrase utterly failed. I'm happy to have conversations if people want....but let's not exaggerate positions to make points.
I think it will be hard to find trades like Odo, because when you look at trades for good SPs, you don't see many like it.
As for Perez, if Wes Johnson can do this every year, he should be paid about 100MM per year. Again, it just doesn't happen all that often that a guy is so bad he's cut by a team desperate for pitching, has an ERA in the high 5s, and then becomes a good pitcher the next year.
I don't see either as consistently repeatable because it doesn't happen across the league every year, let alone for one team every year.
Mike, you're using a rhetorical mechanism when you do the"no one ever said" and "I never said" and it doesn't serve us well. Latching onto one word instead of addressing the full underlying basis of the other person's argument isn't helpful. Nitpicking about a word like "utterly" deflects from the real argument. Focus on the points being made please? Thank you.
To your points: Odorizzi was not a "good pitcher" in Tampa if we use your own standards regarding the Twins IMO. As I described him, he was "middling". I'd maybe describe Pineda's performance to-date as middling, wouldn't you? So I disagree with you. They got Odorizzi because his value declined with his performance, and because his team wanted to trim costs.
I believe those kind of conditions will actually increase. Therefore teams like the Twins who have kept some powder dry will continue to have opportunities to win trades like that.
You will continue to view Perez differently than many of us. We believe that he got coaching and turned things around. Your portrayal of Perez is just plain inaccurate. Texas declined to extend him, and other teams were in the bidding for him. He was broken, but other teams thought he was fixable too.
He and Odorizzi are far from the only two pitchers on the staff experiencing a sort of Renaissance. Heck, even rejects like Harper, Magill, Duffey and Morin are resurrecting lost careers.
But back to your constantly-stated point: You have argued insistently and for the longest time that unless the Twins select potential #1-2 starters in the Rule 4 draft, they will fail (perhaps not utterly, lol) to get the "high-end" pitching you infer is missing for the most part from this roster.
A bunch of us disagree with your premise. First, as we have stated many times and backed our views up with solid examples, they already DO have high-end pitching (we never fail to acknowledge they need more) AND are using multiple strategies successfully to add more: IFA, resurrections via both trade and FA, the IFA market..not to mention that they DO have TWO Rule 4 first rounders in their rotation in Berrios and Gibson, so it's hardly a case of them refusing to add high-end pitching via Rule 4.
Which pitchers in this draft do you thinik have #1-2 starter ceilings?
Is Kevin Gausman performing like a #1-2 starter? Was it not your opinion that Gausman made more sense than Buxton based on your premise here?