The Twins Chose This Payroll Path

[DocBauer]

18 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

There were some unusual circumstances last year but there is one nobody seems to want to acknowledge.  They got $30M in BAM money.  Yet, unless I missed it, there has not been a single mention of this fact in any of the TD articles written on the topic.  If we expect them to push payroll up when they have an increase in revenue we should also expect it to go down if revenue goes down..   That said, I still think they have a little wiggle room for another addition.

 

You are correct. They did receive the $30 BAM money last year. Totally get that. And I'm sure it helped get the payroll to $155+.

But I think part of the point being made is that they signed Vazquez to 3yrs, extended Lopez, and re-signed Correa to his multi-year deal knowing the TV deal was going to be a question mark and the $30 BAM money was a 1 shot deal. So it would appear they aren't opposed to spending, and 2023 wasn't a one shot deal. 

 

[jorgenswest]

I am not OK with how they spent the dollars. There are too many decline phase veterans I fear they will not release if they drop any further. I would not have tendered Farmer. I would not have signed Santana. I would not have taken whatever they are paying for DeSclafani’s contract. I would have taken those dollars and spent it on one single player preferably a starter but an everyday bat would fit also. A bat or stater that would push others down in the line up or rotation. The remaining holes would be filled from within.

[Fatbat]

3 hours ago, Brandon said:

This season they can afford the salary. But in 2025 payroll spikes up quite a bit.  Only Kepler is coming off the books and Lopez’s increase in salary alone more than swallows up the savings there. And the arbitration class and I think Correa is at top salary that year too.  35 million.  So I think the bigger concern is next year.  I’m just surprised we didn’t try harder for Burnes.  But the trade deadline could be a factor for us this year.  We have more to trade.  Texas will have extra starters as they come back from injury.  Someone else may have a starter available too.  We can acquire someone on an expiring contract for the post season run.  There will be fewer starts for the new ace to get injured before the playoffs and we will know how likely we are to be in and if we are going to be competitive.

According to fan graphs. 2025 starts at $95M pre arbitration without Santana, Kepler, DeSclafani and Thielbar.  The $95 M includes options on Farmer, Alcala and Jackson

2024 is at 131M-8M cash = $123M

I do think the FO will get more/better pitching by the deadline but it does make one wonder why they didn’t go get someone at a more reasonable cost earlier this offseason. 

[DocBauer]

2 hours ago, Cris E said:

The chaos in revenue streams is real, and wide-spread.  Even if they know they only had to take a 15% haircut for this year there's still no certainty about 2025 and beyond, Chances are good that cable money will be even lower then so the next deal they get from Diamond could be lower still. This question is still open for the long term, and it's not clear that streaming money will completely fill that gap. I don't expect any answer for this until they open up the CBA after the 2026 season and work it out then, and that could be very messy.  Consider this:  no one has suggested a model that will replace all the lost cable money that's even remotely realistic. The best bet might be expansion fees, but that's a one-time cash infusion. Where is this magic 10% a year money coming from?

 

 

Unfortunately, you might be right about the CBA having an effect. Whether the players like it or not, and whether some owners like it or not, the move toward streaming is not going away, or slowing down. It's the new reality. Cable companies will still exist for their other product, and "cable tv" as we know it might still exist in it's own streaming form as just another option. But UNTIL it happens, it's just impossible to predict how much money will be available year one of say...oh, maybe 2/3 of the league initially, more later. Odds are, Amazon, Apple, whoever, is not going to pony up enough $B's first year to guarantee every team under it's umbrella $60M in guaranteed revenues. It might get there, and get better and better over time, but it won't happen over night. And again, players might not like it, and some owners won't either, but it's going to eventually lead to a more regulated/even spread of MLB finances. In other words, a drop in $, gradual raises over time as it grows, and the very real potential of a more balanced share of $ and maybe even a cap and floor situation. 

It's the just the nature of the beast, and it's not going to change.

As to a solution, I believe it IS going to be a streaming giant, possibly a couple in some sort of split/share. MLB will probably keep it's own APP as well so that radio and TV options are available to those not sitting at home to watch the games. Ideally, every team would still be allowed to have a limited partnership with a local TV network for a select number of games to be televised over the air so all locals would have at least SOME limited access to their local team with a subscription. Say a game a week, or a couple a month. The streaming companies shouldn't object as it may drive up subscriptions as local residents watch, enjoy, and want more. And we're only talking a few games, so there really is no large revenue loss. BTW, anyone else ever stop to realize that a streaming company gathering in subscription $ for MLB games will also probably have advertising as well?

That's why I say, it's going to grow. It's just a question of how fast and how much $ do the teams get initially?

The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, etc, of the ML world might be he biggest sticking point going forward. 

[Brandon]

9 minutes ago, Fatbat said:

According to fan graphs. 2025 starts at $95M pre arbitration without Santana, Kepler, DeSclafani and Thielbar.  The $95 M includes options on Farmer, Alcala and Jackson

2024 is at 131M-8M cash = $123M

I do think the FO will get more/better pitching by the deadline but it does make one wonder why they didn’t go get someone at a more reasonable cost earlier this offseason. 

Lopez at 21 million 

Buxton at 15 million

Correa at 35 million 

Jackson, Alcala, and Farmer around 11-12 million 

Vazquez at 10 million 

Paddack at 7.55 million 

8 players for 100 million with around 30 million for the other 18 players on the roster.  
Arbitration next year for Ober, Ryan, Jeffers will get over 5 million with a good season this year, Jax, Stewart, Killeroff.  How is the budget for 2025 looking now?

[Fatbat]

40 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Lopez at 21 million 

Buxton at 15 million

Correa at 35 million 

Jackson, Alcala, and Farmer around 11-12 million 

Vazquez at 10 million 

Paddack at 7.55 million 

8 players for 100 million with around 30 million for the other 18 players on the roster.  
Arbitration next year for Ober, Ryan, Jeffers will get over 5 million with a good season this year, Jax, Stewart, Killeroff.  How is the budget for 2025 looking now?

I would say those arb salaries look about right and the Pohlads will need to spend more $$$ on Salaries going forward. It would not be surprising for them to replace the 4 FA’s with league minimum types from the farm/low FA salaries.  Unless the pitching pipeline pops out an ace this year and another viable starter, we absolutely need to go shopping for someone at market price. 
 

per fangraphs, 12 players are eligible for Arb 1,2 or 3

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, Blyleven2011 said:

It didn't have to be this way ...

I was saddened when I heard Joe Pohlad say they aren't selling the team ,  ...

But also, the devil you know...

Hypothetically, were I to buy the Twins I'd be perfectly comfortable sitting this offseason out as far as the big spending goes. I can make 10 cases for it, including letting everyone else get tangled up in bad money while keeping my powder dry.  The Twins actually have a one year headstart on the actual reality of the TV situation. I'd love to be in a good financial position when a bunch of other teams have dead money and less revenue.

The case for spending is FANBOY74925 is unhappy. That's it. The reality is that internet personality would, if they had the inside information, not be signing up for a lot of things they would be harping for on the internet. Once faced with a real cost, spending dries up.

You all would absolutely hate me as the owner, even though I'm a lifelong rabid fan.

Until I get terminal cancer that is, then Katie, Bar the door. We buyin. But just free agents, only money. Don't want to hamstring the franchise going forward.

Some of you would still hate me.

[jkcarew]

I’m thinking some payroll will be added still before the season starts.

Regardless, the ‘ownership is unnecessarily cheap’ discussions get old, at least for me. Always an argument for spending more from a fans perspective, always. And it’s not like there’s a pattern here of misalignment between revenue and payroll relative to the league. So, IMO, more interested in HOW (roster construction) the FO spends the payroll, regardless of the rationale for the final number. Plenty to pick apart there.

[DJL44]

7 hours ago, Oldgoat_MN said:

Unfortunately the Bally deal, at about 85% of last year's revenue, is the best they could do.

Surely they had people working on this for months. What did they have going on that was more important?

This suggests that revenue will fall again next year. This does not look good for the future of our favorite team. 

If you see something different please enlighten me. I'd love to hear a different tune.

They aren't even doing anything with their local streaming rights, which should be equally valuable as their broadcast rights.

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Jocko87 said:

The case for spending is FANBOY74925 is unhappy. That's it.

No, the case for spending is this team has a real shot at winning the whole goddamned thing if they add just a little more talent.

[Jocko87]

12 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

No, the case for spending is this team has a real shot at winning the whole goddamned thing if they add just a little more talent.

Sure, but does it have to spend for that chance? And does it have to be spent today?

No, both answers are no. 

[stringer bell]

I am trying to look at this thing and I’m squinting through management glasses. Is it possible they’re reducing payroll this year so that they can retain all their young players in 2025?

It appears they budgeted as if they would get $0 for local TV. Now with perhaps $45M, they should have some money to spend. 

[nicksaviking]

6 hours ago, Seth Stohs said:

I'm not sure how to take that, but... HA! 

If that's the number, and I'm sure it's somewhere around that, they're down about $15M in revenue, so about $7.5 million in payroll... But until Friday, they didn't know what that number would be. If it had been like $20 million, that would have been like $20 million drop in payroll. 

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Twins make 2-3 moves yet over the next 3-5 days. 

If the Twins couldn't reasonably estimate their TV deal within 25M, they need new leadership on the operations side of management.

They don't have 3 spots to fill unless sending down Willi Castro, Royce Lewis or Edouard Julien is in their plans. One pitcher, maybe one bat, but only if they trade a vet. I still want a Marlins pitcher, but I'll say this while also drawing eye rolls; they do seem to be short about what it will likely take to sign Jordan Montgomery, and this franchise does love to make all of us fans with the pitchforks look bad about this time of year.

[Whitey333]

The ridiculous money they gave Correa and Buxton will continue to hamper their ability and willingness to acquire and pay market value to quality players.  At least Correa has some quality years behind him.  We have had to endure Buxton for 8 years.  About 50 million per year between the two of them.  That's a lot of dough on a payroll now àt 124 million

[tony&rodney]

Someone in the organization must have been tasked with media options and negotiations. That somebody effed up. A multi-million dollar screwup seems like it might be serious enough for the powers that be need to make some evaluations and appropriate changes. Sure doesn't read like a .... "oh, we never saw that coming" .... or "nobody could have ever possibly guessed that cable was becoming a diminishing market."

When Jordan Balazovic failed to distinguish himself, he was DFA'ed. I'm wondering who gets the pink slip within the organization for this debacle?

[rv78]

15 hours ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

1 question for everyone,  do you believe ownership allowed the Twins to skyrocket payroll for 1 year last year after they had already pivoted away from Correa and then were able to sign him.  I fully think last year was a one off.  Add in the RSN issues and its a 1 off the other way.   Even still the team is in my opinion having better health and depth than last year, especially in the bullpen and then at this point with Buxton (knock on wood).  Yes I would rather have Gray than Paddack,  but with that being said Paddack may have even a higher ceiling than Gray especially in a playoff scenario (even though he hasn't shown it accept in fleeting moments).

For me a lot comes down to the health of Desclafani.  Is he even a pitcher we can count on this year or not.  If he is I feel a lot better on this season.  If not then we need to make another move at some point and may still need to make a move on the SP market even if he is healthy.    

The cat that is still in the bag is also Paddack. Most everyone here considers him to be a lock in the rotation this season. He's got one of the 5 slots locked up, Right? He's not going to show any ill effects of his TJ surgery. He's never thrown more than 140 innings in his 5 year career and that was 5 years ago. His 5.40 ERA last year with the Twins in his limited time back does NOT represent something to "bank" on. You are correct in questioning DeSclafani and his health, but he isn't being counted on as much as Paddack, who is just as much in question. 

[rv78]

I am not OK with how they spent the dollars. There are too many decline phase veterans I fear they will not release if they drop any further. I would not have tendered Farmer. I would not have signed Santana. I would not have taken whatever they are paying for DeSclafani’s contract. I would have taken those dollars and spent it on one single player preferably a starter but an everyday bat would fit also. A bat or stater that would push others down in the line up or rotation. The remaining holes would be filled from within.

This! Exactly. I understand the need for depth but spending dollars for depth instead of spending dollars to make your team better is a choice. Maybe the injury plagued season of 2021 has this FO going too far in the direction of depth and they are now over-looking the path to get better. 

 

[rv78]

Questions for you to consider..... instead of the Twins spending the dollars on older veterans to provide depth, they would spend it on 1 or 2 really good players in their prime, difference makers. Wouldn't they be a better team? Wouldn't those dollars be put to better use? Instead of investing in pitchers with injuries, like Mahle, Paddack, now DeSclafani, rewarding an always and forever injured Buxton with a $15M per year extension and so on.... Do you really think this organization does a good job allocating their payroll dollars? I think they could do a lot better, a whole lot better. This FO takes a lot of chances on injured players. Too many to my liking. How many times does that decision have to fail before they change their ways. Or won't they ever? Sure there are injuries to players all the time, but when you continually invest in players that are that way, you are only asking for failure. 

[JD-TWINS]

17 hours ago, Brandon said:

I can see your first point.  but the Rangers have 7 starting pitchers on their roster and 6 of them cost money.  and the Rangers are still a possible landing spot for Montgomery.  If they sign him, I am sure they would like to shed salary and one of Heaney, Gray or maybe Dunning would be made available for a trade.  Heaney will be a free agent after the season and is someone we could target.  Gray is still on the books for 2025 and he doesn't make too much but we would probably want some cash to offset a part of his salary next year or include Vazquez in the trade.  

Rangers starters:

Scherzer 43.333 million with 20.83 million paid by Mets

DeGrom 40 million with 4 total more years guarenteed

Eovaldi  16 million with 3 million incentives and 2 million buyout of 20 million option.

Heaney  13 million

Gray 13 million in each or 24 and 25

Mahle signed a 2 year 20 million and not sure how that breaks out.  I think its 5/15 but I dont know for sure.  

Dunning is 1rst year arbitration he is the value starter here.  

Thats around 110 million for their rotation.  Are you sure they won't want to trade a starter as their starters return from injury?  

 

Never said they might not want to trade one or even two pitching pieces. Seems obvious they would IF everyone heals properly.

I don’t think they want to nor would consider trading them to a Top contender they may need to meet, beat in the Playoffs. Twins/Seattle/Yankees/etc. …….15 teams in the N.L. & probably 6-7 teams in A.L. to negotiate with that wouldn’t threaten them in the near-term.

[tony&rodney]

10 minutes ago, Whitey333 said:

The ridiculous money they gave Correa and Buxton will continue to hamper their ability and willingness to acquire and pay market value to quality players.  At least Correa has some quality years behind him.  We have had to endure Buxton for 8 years.  About 50 million per year between the two of them.  That's a lot of dough on a payroll now àt 124 million

The amount of payroll needed to field a really good team is probably somewhere around $80-120 million. Larger payrolls allow for mistakes and gambles on stars. Most every team will have a player or two on big contracts. It is a mistake to think that those contracts ruin the team. Teams that carry lower payrolls just need to make better decisions on trades, player development, and drafting. 

When the Twins decided to push the payroll to $150+ million last year (BAM $) it allowed them to carry Joey Gallo. If their budget had been $135 million last season there is no way the Twins even consider signing Gallo.

I'm fine with a payroll of $110-130 million. I would like to see a couple of proactive moves more similar to the Lopez-Arraez trade than the Mahle or Polanco deals. Naturally, it would be easier to see the Twins with a payroll about the same as the Cardinals or Rockies (similar markets), but that is well out of a fan's control thus not worth fretting about. 

[JD-TWINS]

12 minutes ago, rv78 said:

I am not OK with how they spent the dollars. There are too many decline phase veterans I fear they will not release if they drop any further. I would not have tendered Farmer. I would not have signed Santana. I would not have taken whatever they are paying for DeSclafani’s contract. I would have taken those dollars and spent it on one single player preferably a starter but an everyday bat would fit also. A bat or stater that would push others down in the line up or rotation. The remaining holes would be filled from within.

This! Exactly. I understand the need for depth but spending dollars for depth instead of spending dollars to make your team better is a choice. Maybe the injury plagued season of 2021 has this FO going too far in the direction of depth and they are now over-looking the path to get better. 

 

March/April 2023, having signed Correa to $35M/yr again - now for 6 years & Vazquez for $10M/yr & 3 years……..people complaining routinely about the Team’s lack of spending, poor roster, and FO futility.

Taylor - Solano - Farmer - Castro were added for depth for about $13M total and none of them were worthwhile for many here. Nothing but good results from these guys for 6 months.

The everyday roster is solid. Nobody’s roster is perfect. Can complain about whatever one likes but this roster is fine and there’s depth everywhere with youth nearly ready in St Paul as well.

Could use another starter to be high end competitive - no argument!

[DJL44]

10 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

Sure, but does it have to spend for that chance? And does it have to be spent today?

No, both answers are no. 

It has to spend either money or prospects (or both) to get more talent (starting pitching) that will help in 2024. They could spend at the trade deadline instead of the offseason but it will cost more at the deadline.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

47 minutes ago, rv78 said:

Questions for you to consider..... instead of the Twins spending the dollars on older veterans to provide depth, they would spend it on 1 or 2 really good players in their prime, difference makers. Wouldn't they be a better team? Wouldn't those dollars be put to better use? Instead of investing in pitchers with injuries, like Mahle, Paddack, now DeSclafani, rewarding an always and forever injured Buxton with a $15M per year extension and so on.... Do you really think this organization does a good job allocating their payroll dollars? I think they could do a lot better, a whole lot better. This FO takes a lot of chances on injured players. Too many to my liking. How many times does that decision have to fail before they change their ways. Or won't they ever? Sure there are injuries to players all the time, but when you continually invest in players that are that way, you are only asking for failure. 

Didn't they do that with Correa, Buxton, and Lopez.  With a payroll our size there is only so many of those contracts you can have.  I think managing a ball club is a lot harder than most here think.  

Who would you have signed this year, and then we will discuss if it was a realistic option.  As to injured players, in my opinion they got Desclafani for free or in my opinion actually a negative asset in the trade. If he is injured he is put on the 60 day and we are in the same spot.  Lets see how Paddack does this year.   Maeda performed pretty well for us all things considered.  Mahle was a train wreck.  For your concern spending on a player like Joey Gallo- you also had players like Donny Barrels, MAT and Castro sign for low money or even a AAA contract and perform well above expectations.  The dollars spent on depth last year won us the division.  So I find that a weird angle to go after.  You will hit some on Gallo like players - but most times won't.  In reality we took the same risk the cubs did with Bellinger.  Its just Bellinger paid off.  

Honestly, regarding payroll dollars I wouldn't have signed Correa the 2nd time.  I would have traded him at the all star break.  Now that may work in our favor keeping him,  but I wanted Lewis as our shortstop.  We may end up though with an elite infield.   Lewis, Correa, Lee.  Correa can slide over and one of young bucks take over for Correa if his defense starts to decline.  

They have rebuilt a team, organization and farm system.  The Twins are expected to win the Central again.  Is that truly failure even if in a weaker division.  Although I will say the Central appears to be on an upswing.  Of mid to small markets, I think only the Rays have done better in the last 7 years.   When you look at the farm system we have a ton of promise coming up,  we will see if it comes to fruition.  

[Major League Ready]

14 hours ago, DocBauer said:

You are correct. They did receive the $30 BAM money last year. Totally get that. And I'm sure it helped get the payroll to $155+.

But I think part of the point being made is that they signed Vazquez to 3yrs, extended Lopez, and re-signed Correa to his multi-year deal knowing the TV deal was going to be a question mark and the $30 BAM money was a 1 shot deal. So it would appear they aren't opposed to spending, and 2023 wasn't a one shot deal. 

 

These are two quite different issues IMO.  Of course, we all want them to spend as much as possible. I was simply pointing out that there is a tendency here to only acknowledge the elements that suggest they are not spending enough.  This group knows they got $30M in BAM money.  Yet, only a couple people acknowledged this very simple fact throughout all of these discussions.  I really do appreciate fanaticism for our team right up to the point where people become irrational to the point of ignoring something this simple.

Where previous spending is concerned, they did exactly what people are asking for.  The spent aggressively.  I would also point out that they understood they had several contracts coming off after 2023 and therefore could afford Correa, Lopez, and Vazquez.   Gray, Mahle, Maeda, Gallo, Taylor, Pagan, and Solano were all coming off and Polanco/Kepler were options for additional reductions.  Those signings were needed and I am sure none of us would have preferred they avoided them because it might make things tight a couple years later.  
 

[Paul D]

Your narrative on the next few year of payroll planning with 2024 being low, and the next few years showing bumps tells me that they can: 1) give a big 1 year contract to a current FA (either pitcher or Bellinger), or 2) front load a multiyear contract to ease future payroll.  No player/agent is going to balk at getting paid early when the current trends are deferrals.

[tony&rodney]

Who is taking the over at a 2024 payroll to begin the year of $127 million?

[JD-TWINS]

3 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

These are two quite different issues IMO.  Of course, we all want them to spend as much as possible. I was simply pointing out that there is a tendency here to only acknowledge the elements that suggest they are not spending enough.  This group knows they got $30M in BAM money.  Yet, only a couple people acknowledged this very simple fact throughout all of these discussions.  I really do appreciate fanaticism for our team right up to the point where people become irrational to the point of ignoring something this simple.

Where previous spending is concerned, they did exactly what people are asking for.  The spent aggressively.  I would also point out that they understood they had several contracts coming off after 2023 and therefore could afford Correa, Lopez, and Vazquez.   Gray, Mahle, Maeda, Gallo, Taylor, Pagan, and Solano were all coming off and Polanco/Kepler were options for additional reductions.  Those signings were needed and I am sure none of us would have preferred they avoided them because it might make things tight a couple years later.  
 

Honestly, not aware of what BAM money is? Not researching it today - however, I do know the Twins spent $$ in line with market size in ‘23 in relation to the rest of MLB. They were 17th in spending in ‘23.

If that’s the case, not sure, now that TV $$ have been secured at a defined level for ‘24, how they could justify staying at current $124M total payroll. Normalcy is increasing payroll 5% annually, at a minimum. $124M is a reduction of 20% from last year’s $154M. It’s a 25% reduction from the 5% increase total of $162M.

With ticket sales up due to successful outcome last season, one would think that spending would be in line with last season (commensurate to market size) at near $150M………why wouldn’t it be similar?

[Fatbat]

11 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

Honestly, not aware of what BAM money is? Not researching it today - however, I do know the Twins spent $$ in line with market size in ‘23 in relation to the rest of MLB. They were 17th in spending in ‘23.

If that’s the case, not sure, now that TV $$ have been secured at a defined level for ‘24, how they could justify staying at current $124M total payroll. Normalcy is increasing payroll 5% annually, at a minimum. $124M is a reduction of 20% from last year’s $154M. It’s a 25% reduction from the 5% increase total of $162M.

With ticket sales up due to successful outcome last season, one would think that spending would be in line with last season (commensurate to market size) at near $150M………why wouldn’t it be similar?

It’s not commensurate because the Pohlads are on the silly side of risk adverse. 

[tony&rodney]

BAM is short for MLB advanced media. Short story (poorly told), MLB had a good idea for streaming and Disney decided they could make money on it. They bought 33% and then another 33% for a ton of moola. The money was distributed to the teams which invested it, spent it, or put it in their pockets. Poof .... and it's gone. Teams need to now adjust their payrolls or cover that money in another fashion.

To get an educated idea - read the 10-15 minutes read, because my summary sucks. This has been known information for several years.

[Doctor Gast]

I agree Ted, Twins certainly chose their path, & it certainly was the wrong path. They broadcasted their financial woes & that they were hoping to dump the salaries of possibly Kepler, Farmer, Vazquez & Polanco. What they actually did was put up a sign that reads "Fire Sale", preventing any possible viable offers.

We entered this off-season with only one main need & that was a postseason SP. That need wasn't addressed but they jammed already full areas at 5th SPs, RPs & 1B positions, giving priority over our in-house viable candidates with out-house candidates.

I disagree with you Ted about the Polanco trade. On paper, it looked like a good trade but it did nothing to fill any real need. We traded away our healthy primary 2Bman to be replaced by good-bad subs (because Lee shouldn't be counted on to establish himself as a MLB 2B in '24),  weakening our position there.

Now social media is resurfacing to focus on trading Vazquez. leaving Jeffers to man the primary position again. W/o the Vazquez safety net, Jeffers will flounder again because he doesn't have what it takes to be a primary catcher. So they'll sign an expensive leftover back-up which negates any savings from trading Vazquez while seriously weakening our catching position. You might say they're not that stupid to trade away Vazquez. That's what I said about Polanco.

Polanco & Vazquez are due for a significant rebound, Jeffers & Julien are due for a regression & under these conditions, I'd expect even greater than predicted. We are under budget whether we trade Vazquez & Polanco or not. The main reason why we hang unto Jeffers & Julien is the Twins love their bats. Vazquez & Polanco's trade value is very low not able to begin to obtain any players to meet any of our needs. Jeffers & Julien's trade value are peaked very high where we can obtain Luzardo from MIA to meet our primary need of a postseason SP,  creating a team that can compete in the postseason.

We have already compromised 2B by trading Polanco, trading Vazquez will seriously compromise our catching situation & put in doubt our ability to put away the Central Division.