Don't Fret About Twins Prospect Rankings

[Riverbrian]

 

If everything goes perfectly, will we all be happier? Yes, yes I will. I can't speak for others. That seems like a big IF though. 

 

Cal Ripken was a big IF

 

Dave Parker was a big OF 

 

 

Ok... Nothing to see here. Carry On

[USAFChief]

 

If you take an early withdrawal from your 401k you are not breaching a contractual agreement. There's nothing in your 401k documentation where you promise not to make an early withdrawal. The CBA agreement, which I read, contained language, albeit poorly worded, whereby every team agreed to abide by the pool. The clear intent, from the beginning, was that every team would abide by the pool. Does anyone disagree with this premise?

 

The more important concept is this: if you withdraw your retirement funds and share it with your spouse, perhaps you've cheated no one. If you bust the IFA pool, it has a deleterious effect on those participants to the agreement who were counting on you to not breach the agreement. 

 

The penalties are completely irrelevant to the ethical argument about what constitutes a wrongful breach of a contract and what doesn't. Knowing you're going to get caught is also irrelevant. Why is it so difficult to see that, if you breach an agreement and it's harmful to other parties to the agreement, that a vast majority in our society would view the behavior as wrong, as unethical?

 

I'm perfectly fine with any of you having zero ethical problems with what teams who busted the pool did. Just don't cast dispersion upon those who decided against doing so if you're unclear as to whether their ethics played a role in the decision, okay?

Bird...I respect you, and I certainly respect your take on this.  I know for a fact you have some knowledge to draw from that many of us don't.

 

That said, perhaps I'm jaded but it's awfully convenient of ownership to draw the ethical line at the exact point where it intersects with spending.

[TheLeviathan]

Part of the reason I'm fretting the pitching is because, short of everything going right, it looks to be a problem.  And that's even if I accept these under 25 hitters are the bee's knees.

 

So, yeah, if the fairy tale comes true - great.  But reality is rarely happily ever after.

[nicksaviking]

 

Teams complied with the penalties, ChiTown. That's a little different than "following the rules", which many here believe is exactly the same thing as abiding by the stated terms of the CBA contract and acting in conformance with the spirit of the agreement.

 

I wasn't intending to be either inflammatory or disrespectful towards anyone. I apologize if anyone took offense to my use of the word "cheating" to describe the behavior. Calling it "following the rules" is so much more soothing. 

 

But the teams that you say weren't acting ethically also followed the rules. The rules implicitly allowed them to chose option B. How is it any different than a base runner trying to steal signs from the catcher? Or fouling a terrible free throw shooter in basketball? Or requesting an extension to file your taxes? Are those ethical problems as well?

[Guest]

Anytime you are saying veterans like Castro, Giminez, Breslow and Belisle are a reason for optimism, you're (1) good at advocacy, but (2) also lacking for good supporting reasons.

 

First draft pick might mean little with the current crop, esp. Buxton and Sano, if BPA, aka high schooler Hunter Greene, is selected.

 

Now, if they had taken Benintendi instead of Jay and Turner instead of Gordon, there'd be a lot more optimism.

[bird]

 

Bird...I respect you, and I certainly respect your take on this.  I know for a fact you have some knowledge to draw from that many of us don't.

 

That said, perhaps I'm jaded but it's awfully convenient of ownership to draw the ethical line at the exact point where it intersects with spending.

 

 

Thank you Chief, and likewise. I see speculation as to their motives to be perfectly understandable, especially in the context of their history, but I also find that conclusions about their motives are unwarranted despite the many ways they've managed to jade us. I'm not 100% convinced either, but I have this nasty tendency to defend the accused, regardless of who it is, against unfounded conclusions. And because of my experiences, I give Jim Pohlad the benefit of doubt in this instance, but don't expect others to do the same.

[Guest]

If you take an early withdrawal from your 401k you are not breaching a contractual agreement. There's nothing in your 401k documentation where you promise not to make an early withdrawal. The CBA agreement, which I read, contained language, albeit poorly worded, whereby every team agreed to abide by the pool. The clear intent, from the beginning, was that every team would abide by the pool. Does anyone disagree with this premise?

 

The more important concept is this: if you withdraw your retirement funds and share it with your spouse, perhaps you've cheated no one. If you bust the IFA pool, it has a deleterious effect on those participants to the agreement who were counting on you to not breach the agreement.

 

The penalties are completely irrelevant to the ethical argument about what constitutes a wrongful breach of a contract and what doesn't. Knowing you're going to get caught is also irrelevant. Why is it so difficult to see that, if you breach an agreement and it's harmful to other parties to the agreement, that a vast majority in our society would view the behavior as wrong, as unethical?

 

I'm perfectly fine with any of you having zero ethical problems with what teams who busted the pool did. Just don't cast dispersion upon those who decided against doing so if you're unclear as to whether their ethics played a role in the decision, okay?

I don't see where it's an ethics issue. All 30 teams agreed to the program, including the luxury tax and loss of future participation for exceeding one year's budget. Staying within the budget is a financial choice, as is exceeding it. Maybe teams stayed within the budget because they didn't want to pay a luxury tax or because they didn't want to be limited in participating in future years. However, to tell yourself you're avoiding stipulated penalties for heavy spending because you're "ethical" is, at best, a rationalization, and in some ways a ready-made excuse for not being successful.

 

It's different from hiding injury data in trades, which is unethical. It's more like not offering a contract to your first round draft pick within the deadlines of the bargaining agreement because you're a "good guy" and his agent has asked you not to distract him during the college World Series.

[Steve Lein]

 

I think he meant to include MLB players under 25......of which the Twins have Berrios, Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco.

 

I don't have time to look at the rest of baseball, but if you filter on team WAR under 25 years old, the Twins were 15th last year.....and several of those players are no longer under 25.

 

Yes, this is what I was referring too. 

 

They have the following players under 25 starting in their lineup:

 

CF - Byron Buxton

LF - Eddie Rosario 

RF - Max Kepler

3B - Miguel Sano 

SS - Jorge Polanco

 

Berrios is in there too.

 

I actually think the Twins and this under 25 group could be very comparable to the Cubs (on the position player front, anyway), the Cubs are just a bit further along in MLB development then this group for the Twins is. (I don't expect Sano to be Bryant, but he basically was in 2015).

 

About that pitching, though...

 

 

 

 

[bird]

 

I don't think it's fair to call it cheating. The system was created and agreed to by all teams. And the smart teams realized that it was more beneficial to accept the costs of exceeding their allotment than it was to stay within it every year. It's not "cheating" because anyone else was free to do so too. They didn't break a firm rule and try to get away with it, like paying players under the table. They played within the definitions of the system. It's no different than going over the luxury cap and paying a tax to do so.

 

 

I respect this viewpoint. Our difference of opinion is all a matter of our two different  interpretations of the intent and meeting of the minds that accompanied the organizations' signing of this contractual agreement to each other. After reading it, and in talking to a few legal types I know well, I formed an opinion that the teams initially viewed the agreement more along the lines I view it and perhaps conveniently morphed their interpretation more to your description, which is the narrative that apparently stuck with the media and the fans. The slippery slope maybe? But again, I haven't spoken with any Twins owner or official to ask why they made this impactful decision to not bust the pool. They might be hurt by it for a long time, we don't know yet.

 

I will say that everyone is free to drive 90MPH on Highway 100, but that doesn't mean it's not speeding, even if almost everyone is going 90MPH. There are lots of speeders on Highway 100. I'd guess most of them believe they cause no possible harm to their fellow motorists. The slippery slope maybe?

 

[bird]

 

It's awfully convenient (and ridiculously improbable) that the only four noteworthy IFAs the team could have had happened in a 4 year island of Smith surrounded by a sea of 20 years of Ryan.

 

You should probably take heed of your own take on this.  This likely had far less to do with "opportunity" and more to do with "philosophy".  And that's fine, Ryan's philosophy can eschew that angle of talent acquisition on whatever grounds he wants, but that has consequences.  And for this team those consequences are largely not positive.

 

You're welcome to list all of Ryan's grand international accomplishments, both in scope and success.  I mean, if he really was doing the same thing there should be ample examples from his 20 year run compared to a 4 year run.  My memory says your list will be short, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

 

Well, in an exercise of utter and complete irrelevance, I suppose we could print of a list of every IFA currently in the system or the player assets received in trade for them. Then you could export your Smith darlings onto page two of the spreadsheet, and presto, you'd have your list of "Ryan's grand international accomplishments." If they're not on Smith's irrelevant list, are they not on Ryan's irrelevant list?  And then you could choose to continue to entirely ignore my point and to further feed your own belief that Ryan or Smith matters a whole lot in a discussion of IFA signings. 

 

You want to manufacture some story about two different philosophies? Be my guest, but you'll be making it up. And if you want to review some 20-year history of the Twins' foray in the international markets, please don't pretend that success and failings boiled down to a difference in "philosophy" between those two guys. 

 

Are you seriously going to fail to consider ANY other factors that have and are influencing the failure and success of IFA efforts? Can you find it within you to at least concede that other factors, such as budget, staffing levels, facilities, strategic focus as an organization with a 60-person scouting department, happenstance, the scouts on the ground themselves, etc. have more impact than the GM? If not, I suppose you can carry on with a discussion of the critical difference in philosophy between these two GM's who had so very little to do with getting the kid to the contract table.

 

 

[bird]

 

But the teams that you say weren't acting ethically also followed the rules. The rules implicitly allowed them to chose option B. How is it any different than a base runner trying to steal signs from the catcher? Or fouling a terrible free throw shooter in basketball? Or requesting an extension to file your taxes? Are those ethical problems as well

IIRC, the explicit language in the contract is much different than how you describe it in implicit terms, but it's all about the contract baby. About the promise you made to another. About the harm done to another when you don't make good on your promise. About the truth, about honesty, about being a trustworthy partner.

 

If no one agreed to stay within the pool, fine. If no promises were explicitly made or implied, fine. If no one was harmed, fine. If all parties acted in good faith toward one another, fine.

 

There's room for interpretation here, both regarding what teams agreed to and whether the behavior of some was ethical or not. 

[Taildragger8791]

 

IIRC, the explicit language in the contract is much different than how you describe it in implicit terms, but it's all about the contract baby. About the promise you made to another. About the harm done to another when you don't make good on your promise. About the truth, about honesty, about being a trustworthy partner.

 

If no one agreed to stay within the pool, fine. If no promises were explicitly made or implied, fine. If no one was harmed, fine. If all parties acted in good faith toward one another, fine.

 

There's room for interpretation here, both regarding what teams agreed to and whether the behavior of some was ethical or not. 

 

The fact is that professional sports is a business, in fact it's big business. It's competition. And big businesses bend every rule and contract they can to get an edge. Just because there's a stipulation in a contract doesn't mean it's going to be followed, it just means there needs to be a favorable cost-benefit analysis prior to breaking it. You don't have to like it, but if you want to compete then you have to be willing to accept it. And if you don't want to continue accepting it then you have to negotiate for stricter terms to shift that cost-benefit back to the disfavorable side of the ledger. Which is eventually what happened.

 

The way rookie players have their service time toyed with wasn't within the original spirit of the CBA either, but all teams do it to some degree because they can get away with it (to an extent). Or Pujols getting all kinds of extra "marketing" agreements with the Angels extending beyond his player contract so they can avoid the luxury tax. Or the top drafting team every year leveraging the #1 pick into taking less than slot money so they can spend more of the pool on later picks. Where do you draw the line on fair and unfair?

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Cal Ripken was a big IF

 

Dave Parker was a big OF 

 

 

Ok... Nothing to see here. Carry On

 

And then there was Miguel Cabrera. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Are you seriously going to fail to consider ANY other factors that have and are influencing the failure and success of IFA efforts? Can you find it within you to at least concede that other factors, such as budget, staffing levels, facilities, strategic focus as an organization with a 60-person scouting department, happenstance, the scouts on the ground themselves, etc. have more impact than the GM? If not, I suppose you can carry on with a discussion of the critical difference in philosophy between these two GM's who had so very little to do with getting the kid to the contract table.

 

Your litany of excuses (and I'm sorry, that's what they are) would possibly work if we were talking about two relatively short periods of time.  But we're not.  One period of time was very long and includes an example of an IFA that was perhaps the best of the last 20 years.  A gentleman we know the Twins could have had, under Ryan, with a willingness to spend more.  Instead that gentleman signed with Florida.  Over money.

 

Best of my recollection Luis Rivas is the best player Ryan ever signed.  We (not even arguably in my book) have at least four significantly superior guys signed by Smith on the Twins 40 man roster right now.  We don't need your list.  It doesn't exist.  It stinks.  That's the whole point.  And if you want to blame the scouts - who the hell is in charge of them?  Did they just suddenly become competent for an oasis of 4 years and then, magically, go back to incompetence?

 

To suggest Terry Ryan was general manager of the team for nearly 20 years and merely, by some bad luck, had no similar "opportunities" to use dollars to sign better IFAs strains credulity.  And that's putting it very, very nicely.  And that's not even including the facts we know about the gentleman above.  Or the nickel and dime approach to FA for 20 years.  Or the 20 year track record of unwillingness to spend money being a recurring theme under his tenure.

 

Why?  Why work so hard to basically stare the simplest explanation in the face and reject it?  We have reason to fret, in part, because the guy's effort you're working so damn hard to spin hasn't utilized effectively all options available to a GM. 

 

I hope we have magical luck this year and everything comes up roses.  I really do.  Otherwise this young offensive core we have will be wasted.  I hope our new FO does what the previous regime was so damn reluctant to do - explore ALL options.  Aggressively.  

[PseudoSABR]

 

Yes, the Yankees did a great job of leveraging their money to impact their farm system.

Well, perhaps not that year they truly busted their international pool. At least according to John Sickels.

This is obviously a very deep system thanks to good drafting and recent trades. Interestingly enough, the huge pile of money dumped into the international market in 2014 is not bearing much fruit yet, though it is not too late for "Grade C with higher potential" guys like Wilkerman Garcia and Dermis Garcia to pan out.

 

 

[PseudoSABR]

I think the main reason for the minor league thinness is that the Twins, for nearly a decade, squandered (or lost to injury*) their major league assets until they were bereft of value (Lohse, Valencia, Liriano etc.); those that retained their value became free agents (Cuddyer, Hunter).  And the trades they did make just haven't panned out (Span, Revere, Santana).    

 

When the Twins crashed after 2010, they crashed suddenly and precipitously; leaving the team with little minor league or major league assets from which to rebuild.   Competing in 2010, when the need to rebuild was probably foreseeable, may have been the worse thing for any possible quick turn-around. 

 

*Mauer, Morneau, Baker, Koskie, etc.

[DocBauer]

I think the main reason for the minor league thinness is that the Twins, for nearly a decade, squandered (or lost to injury*) their major league assets until they were bereft of value (Lohse, Valencia, Liriano etc.); those that retained their value became free agents (Cuddyer, Hunter).  And the trades they did make just haven't panned out (Span, Revere, Santana).    

 

When the Twins crashed after 2010, they crashed suddenly and precipitously; leaving the team with little minor league or major league assets from which to rebuild.   Competing in 2010, when the need to rebuild was probably foreseeable, may have been the worse thing for any possible quick turn-around. 

 

*Mauer, Morneau, Baker, Koskie, etc.

I think this post is pretty damn awesome and exact! Wish I could like it more than once!

 

Life happens. Stuff happens. Injuries happen. And people can talk about curses, bad luck, poor drafting...whatever. and I'm not going to play the "poor us" card as Twins fans, not am I going to try to blame anyone in particular for failure here and there...even though it would be easy to do so in some instances. The simple truth is, woulda, coulda, shoulda, the Twins didn't reach the top of the mountain but did have sustained competitiveness for several successful seasons. The truth is they did have some terrible, unexpected injuries to guys like Mauer and Morneau who were at the top of their game. They also lost a couple really good FA. They also made a couple of aggressive trades that didn't work out the way anyone wanted or hoped. (Truth is you win some and you lose some). Again, not pointing any blame fingers here, but all of this lead to a downturn for the entire Twins organization, including several years of selecting later in the draft due to a period of success.

 

But another truth is that through the draft and international signings, the Twins HAVE accumulated such young talent as Rosario, Buxton, Kepler, Sano, Polanco, Berrios and others. Is the jury still out? Yes. But no instant stardom for such young, talented players is not only a reason not to panic, it's pretty normal. I think we sometimes get so wrapped up in the sudden emergence of guys like Trout and Harper, for instance, that we ignore or forget the norm. We wail about a few disappointing years of futility and disappointment but forget about quality years of competitiveness that the Royals, Nationals and the Cubs, to just name a few, were probably envious of considering how many losing seasons they had before making their mark.

 

I'm just saying, a little perspective is in order. We lose...we have a top milb system...the kids "graduate" but aren't immediate all stars...suddenly our milb system is ranked lower...and some want to throw in the towel. Patience sucks, I get it. I'm fighting patience in my own life. But just because there aren't the immediate dividends we want to see NOW aren't meeting expectation, and there isn't a second crop of similar prospects ready to deliver based on other people's rankings immediately shouldn't be so disheartening. There is an ebb and flow to this.

[DocBauer]

If everything goes perfectly, will we all be happier? Yes, yes I will. I can't speak for others. That seems like a big IF though.

 

I get your "IF" Mike. I really do. But we do have 3 of the top 34-35 picks in the upcoming draft. Romero really is an exciting talent. Jay really does have some great stuff to work with. Gonsalves doesn't "measure" the way some want him to, but he has done nothing but perform. I was really down on Stewart until I saw his improvement at times last season and realized how young he was. The list goes on. Listen, I know not everyone is going to make it. But if abundance of talent in the milb system is some sort of measurement or barometer of future success, I think we are OK. There is some real potential still working it's way up. It just happens to be both close and far away, with less in the middle. I would honestly not be surprised to see the Twins have 5-6 top 100 prospects this time next year.

[The Wise One]

 

Yes, the Twins have a lot of interesting guys in the low minors, and it is certainly true that the Twins system might look a lot better in a year or two if these guys all develop like we hope. But the problem is that the Twins are not unique in this regard. There are probably 20 teams that have half-a-dozen or more interesting guys in rookie ball or instructional league, and each one can make the same arguement that there farm system will be so much better if these kids just develop like they hope.

The 2012 Padres were ranked as the second best farm system  that year. Alonso, Grandal, Rymer Liriano, Gyorko, Erlin, Wieland and Sampson were their touted prospects that earned them their rating.    Gyorko moght be the only above average player in that bunch. Rankings do not mean that much. Now the Mets that year were 15th. Matt Harvey,  Zack Wheeler,  and Familia.  Now granted arm injuries have not been kind, but a healthy Wheeler, Harvey and Familia is better for a team than what San Diego produced. Houston, ranked 25 that year  had Singleton, Springer, Cosart ,  and Vilar among others.  The end product was not that much different than the number 2 team

 

[Thrylos]

 

Sure, I get that. 

 

But when you're drafting that high, you draft the best available player and sort it out later. I don't think Tyler Jay is a bust. But the Twins had the chance to draft Benintendi and didn't. That's a failure, any way you cut it. 

 

That is the common wisdom and the "Twins' Way".   Have you seen the Twins been able to "sort it later" the last couple dozen seasons?   I have not.  Other than Santana (and pre TJ Liriano for parts of a season) who fell into their arms, they haven't had an ace.  

 

Have you seen them trading high rated prospects for positions of need?  Would they do the trade that the Red Sox did to get Sale, for example?  Will they go after Kershaw or Syndergaard when they hit free agency?

 

That's sorting it out.

 

I just do not trust them to "sort it out later", so they must draft for need

[Thrylos]

 

 

 

When the Twins crashed after 2010, they crashed suddenly and precipitously; leaving the team with little minor league or major league assets from which to rebuild.   Competing in 2010, when the need to rebuild was probably foreseeable, may have been the worse thing for any possible quick turn-around. 

 

Compare the 2011 Twins and the 2011 Astros

Compare the 2015-16 Twins and 2015-16 Astros

 

There is a path to competing again.  It is called total rebuild, which is what the Astros did in 2012 and 2013 and it is painful.  The Twins did dumpster diving.  Kinda disappointed to tell you the truth that the new regime is not committed to a total rebuild, but will use 2017 as an evaluation season; hopefully they should rebuild starting in 2018.

 

There is zero reason that tradeable veterans like Santana, Dozier etc are still with the team.  Zero.

[markos]

 

I get your "IF" Mike. I really do. But we do have 3 of the top 34-35 picks in the upcoming draft. Romero really is an exciting talent. Jay really does have some great stuff to work with. Gonsalves doesn't "measure" the way some want him to, but he has done nothing but perform. I was really down on Stewart until I saw his improvement at times last season and realized how young he was. The list goes on. Listen, I know not everyone is going to make it. But if abundance of talent in the milb system is some sort of measurement or barometer of future success, I think we are OK. There is some real potential still working it's way up. It just happens to be both close and far away, with less in the middle. I would honestly not be surprised to see the Twins have 5-6 top 100 prospects this time next year.

I wouldn't be surprised either if the Twins end up with 5-6 top-100 prospects next year. But as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, the fact that the Twins have 5 or 6 talented guys doesn't differentiate them from the majority of teams in baseball. Most teams have 5-6 players that could be top-100 guys if things break right. So what is going to be the differentiater for the Twins over the next 3-5 years? What is their path to 95+ wins and winning the AL pennant with the current state of the big league team and their current farm system? While I don't think the current squad is as bad as their record from last season may indicate, this is still a below-average big league roster right now. They have a long ways to go to get to the point where they are legitimate playoff contenders, and even further to go to be considered one of the top five teams in baseball. So my biggest question is how exactly is this organization, with this farm system, going to bridge that gap. Especially when you factor in that this organization is not going to be signing elite free agents.

 

So the farm system will need to
1) produce above-average players to transform the current roster to a 95 win team.
2) back fill the talent lost as Dozier, Mauer, Santana get worse and/or leave the organization.
3) pick up the slack if any of the current young MLB players stagnate or get injured.
4) provide the high-upside prospects necessary to trade for good-to-great veterans to fill in gaps.

 

I don't think the farm system has anywhere close to the depth necessary to do all four of those things without just hoping that the vast majority of the prospects will hit their ceilings. That is why I fret.

[markos]

 

Compare the 2011 Twins and the 2011 Astros

Compare the 2015-16 Twins and 2015-16 Astros

 

There is a path to competing again.  It is called total rebuild, which is what the Astros did in 2012 and 2013 and it is painful.  The Twins did dumpster diving.  Kinda disappointed to tell you the truth that the new regime is not committed to a total rebuild, but will use 2017 as an evaluation season; hopefully they should rebuild starting in 2018.

 

There is zero reason that tradeable veterans like Santana, Dozier etc are still with the team.  Zero.

You have been advocating for a full rebuild on several different threads. How do you see the timeline working out in your scenario? The way I see, going the route of the Astros circa 2011 will guarrantee that the Twins will be among the worst teams in baseball for at least two more years, probably three. So when are you expecting them to return to contention? 2020? And if that is true, how do you fit Buxton and Sano into this plan? Their service clock is ticking, and both will potentially be free agents after the 2021 season.

[Doomtints]

 

Disagree. This team will never compete by signing big time FAs, 

 

Why not? Other teams compete by doing that.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Why not? Other teams compete by doing that.

 

40 years of history? A smaller TV contract?

[gunnarthor]

 

Why not? Other teams compete by doing that.

Pohlad isn't going to pay for Machado or Harper or Kershaw.  The 4/55m type FA deals are probably the biggest they feel comfortable doing.  

[Doomtints]

 

Pohlad isn't going to pay for Machado or Harper or Kershaw.  The 4/55m type FA deals are probably the biggest they feel comfortable doing.  

 

Yes, but this is saying the "won't" do it -- not that they "can't" do it.  

 

I don't know about you, but I get tired of fans saying that the organization "can't" do these things that other teams do. They most certainly can. There's no reason to defend the "won't" ideology.

[gunnarthor]

 

Yes, but this is saying the "won't" do it -- not that they "can't" do it.  

 

I don't know about you, but I get tired of fans saying that the organization "can't" do these things that other teams do. They most certainly can. There's no reason to defend the "won't" ideology.

Yeah but it's also pointless wishing that the Pohlad's operated any differently.  I hate our owners and I think they should sell the team.  But I've been bitching about these guys since 94 and it gets old. The Twins don't get to act like other teams in part because of market size but also because of ownership dictates.  Fans should probably realize that.  We can bitch - for instance - about some of our draft moves prior to 2012 but we should always remember that the Pohlad family had placed limitations on signing bonuses.  We can bitch that we don't go over the international pool but we should probably note that ownership isn't going to allow it in the first place.  

[Thrylos]

 

You have been advocating for a full rebuild on several different threads. How do you see the timeline working out in your scenario? The way I see, going the route of the Astros circa 2011 will guarrantee that the Twins will be among the worst teams in baseball for at least two more years, probably three. So when are you expecting them to return to contention? 2020? And if that is true, how do you fit Buxton and Sano into this plan? Their service clock is ticking, and both will potentially be free agents after the 2021 season.

 

 

2019 with smart drafting in 2017 and 2018 and quick promoting.   And that would even mean that they wouldn't have to throw in the towel for 2017 and 2018

 

The good thing about this team is that it has several back of the pen arms who are ready or near ready.  They could have gotten rid of the veterans in the pen and still be the same or even better.  I'd take a pen of a combination of Burdi/Reed/Hildenberger/Chargois/Rosario/Pressly/Duffey/Jay/Melotakis/Rogers over what they will have this season 

 

As far as position players go, Mauer cannot be moved until he is gone, so the only 2 differences would had been someone like Vielma or Escobar over Dozier and Garver over Castro.   I don't see much drop off there, because I don't trust Dozier.  Maybe 2 wins.

 

Rotation has to have Hughes, at least until he can be moved.

 

The rotation would be something like:  Berrios, Gibson, Hughes, May, Mejia, with Gonsalves, Jay, Jorge, Romero, waiting; which means that Berrios and Mejia would be there over Santana and Santiago.

 

In summary: only 4 changes between rotation and lineup: Out Dozier, Castro, Santana, Santiago in Escobar, Garver, Berios, Mejia.  Also a revamped pen that would have been better than the one in 2017

 

As you can see, the proposed young team would not be that much weaker than what they will bring up North this season.  Also trading Santana, Dozier and Santiago would have brought about 2-3 very good prospects who could have contributed right away.

 

But it is a philosophical discussion at this point... 

[Doomtints]

 

Yeah but it's also pointless wishing that the Pohlad's operated any differently. 

 

I completely agree that it's pointless to say they should do it differently. It is equally pointless to say they "can't" do it any differently.