Is the Twins' Competitive Window Open Wider Than We Think?

[rv78]

I've been thinking their competitive window is just a year or two away for a long time now. Then after the season is over I think the same thing again. I've since come to the conclusion that it will never get here with the likes of Falvey, Rocco and Company running the team. Ownership hasn't helped either. Bringing in washed up veterans like Gallo and Margot and injured pieces like Mahle and DeSlafani continually year after year do nothing to improve the team and ONLY push things down the road another year. It's time to try a different method and that is to let the young guys play and develop so you actually know what you have for the next season, and the season after that and so on.

The older I get, every year that goes by, I sense I'll never see another Twins World Series Championship. Baseball needs to level the playing field amongst ALL the teams so the big market teams can't spend millions and millions more than small market teams. Or maybe I just need to be glad I witnessed the '87 and '91 teams because it will never happen again in my lifetime. 

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, rv78 said:

I've since come to the conclusion that it will never get here with the likes of Falvey, Rocco and Company running the team.

Falvey really hasn't done a thing in two years. He had a big January 2023 and hasn't done anything to improve the team since. 

1 hour ago, rv78 said:

Baseball needs to level the playing field amongst ALL the teams so the big market teams can't spend millions and millions more than small market teams.

There will not, and should not, be a Salary Cap implemented. 

[Doctor Gast]

IMO the best way to keep the window open is to maintain the core. If we compromise it & the chemistry we close the door. Catching in our system has been ignored. Drafting & development seem nonexistent. Jeffers was privileged to sit under Tanner Swanson but what has Conger done? Yankees have been trading catchers left & right. We are sitting at #18 at the MLB catching department with our tandem & zero depth & they want to subtract from that? Jeffers can't even handle equal tandem w/o tiring halfway through the season. If they can't draft & develop promising young bonafide catchers, then they have to trade for them, like years ago. Obtaining fringe non-MLB-ready catchers to our already fringe non-MLB-ready catchers doesn't cut it. Catching is a foundation for any competitive team, we need to strengthen it now for now & the future.

[Doctor Gast]

46 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

Falvey really hasn't done a thing in two years. He had a big January 2023 and hasn't done anything to improve the team since. 

He didn't do anything then because MIA approached him. Just Lopez for Arraez was a great trade but Falvey didn't want to trade until MIA included Salas & Courios, which could have jeopardized the trade. Glad it didn't.

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, Doctor Gast said:

He didn't do anything then because MIA approached him. Just Lopez for Arraez was a great trade but Falvey didn't want to trade until MIA included Salas & Courios, which could have jeopardized the trade. Glad it didn't.

I'll give him credit for trading for Michael A Taylor too. That's the kind of low risk trade he should be making. But he tried it again with Margot and that was a complete bust. Still should keep trying those types of trades because the potential reward is much higher than Gasper as 1B or Keirsey as CF. 

[bean5302]

You know there are 30 teams in MLB. So the "average" team would have 3.3 prospects in the top 100. The Twins finished 4th in the division last year, behind Detroit (who have 6 top 100 prospects), Kansas City (who have 3), and Cleveland (who also have 3). The White Sox also have 6 top 100 prospects.

I'm not excited about having 3 top 100 prospects. I'm not excited about the Twins' situation this year, either. I don't like what seems to be the front office's methodology and I really don't like Baldelli's decision making.

[Doctor Gast]

9 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

I'll give him credit for trading for Michael A Taylor too. That's the kind of low risk trade he should be making. But he tried it again with Margot and that was a complete bust. Still should keep trying those types of trades because the potential reward is much higher than Gasper as 1B or Keirsey as CF. 

They were lucky with MAT & in '24 they wanted to resign him & sign Hoskins, we were lucky they didn't. Gasper is an acquisition that does nothing. We'd been much better off last season with Keirsey instead of Margot or MAT. Keirsey is a true CFer who dominated AAA & deserves the right to prove himself on the MLB level as a LH option to sub Buxton. I don't want to take any chances on any more Margot/ Gallo types. I don't have any doubts about Keirsey. Who I do have doubts about is Miranda's backup, Julien & Gasper shouldn't be counted on. But it's all about politics.

[NYCTK]

17 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

They were lucky with MAT & in '24 they wanted to resign him & sign Hoskins, we were lucky they didn't. Gasper is an acquisition that does nothing. We'd been much better off last season with Keirsey instead of Margot or MAT. Keirsey is a true CFer who dominated AAA & deserves the right to prove himself on the MLB level as a LH option to sub Buxton. I don't want to take any chances on any more Margot/ Gallo types. I don't have any doubts about Keirsey. Who I do have doubts about is Miranda's backup, Julien & Gasper shouldn't be counted on. But it's all about politics.

I'm happy to see a 27 year old non prospect with a career ops of 760 in the minors get a chance. 

But with Buxton as your starter, you need to prepare with a proper backup. MAT was a brilliant backup for that reason, being a great defensive outfielder with a chance to make an impact with his bat occasionally. Margot was a good thought but the Twins hadn't gotten the memo that his defense had fallen off a cliff. 

Keirsey is fine. But I'm guessing his defense is average to below average and his ops+ is going to be 85 at best.

Him being replacement level isn't really the problem. Buxton being unable to play half a season is the real problem. 

[Doctor Gast]

2 hours ago, NYCTK said:

I'm happy to see a 27 year old non prospect with a career ops of 760 in the minors get a chance. 

But with Buxton as your starter, you need to prepare with a proper backup. MAT was a brilliant backup for that reason, being a great defensive outfielder with a chance to make an impact with his bat occasionally. Margot was a good thought but the Twins hadn't gotten the memo that his defense had fallen off a cliff. 

Keirsey is fine. But I'm guessing his defense is average to below average and his ops+ is going to be 85 at best.

Him being replacement level isn't really the problem. Buxton being unable to play half a season is the real problem. 

You have no idea who Keirsey is, do you? He's no MAT of old so you write him off. You are guessing & you're wrong. He's a well above-average fielder & that is for sure & will play well at the MLB level. Maintaining a .760 OPS through each level for a CFer at each level & last year at AAA a .845 OPS is pretty darn good. He has hit at each level, he will hit at the MLB, How fast & how well we don't know. He is a 0 risk/ possible high reward,  He won't block Emma from joining the club, an outside Margot will even if he stinks. We have nothing to lose with Keirsey. If he comes up & breaks out we have some options when Emma comes up, like maybe trading Larnach. He proves he's a MLBer hitter (IMO will happen) he can be a valuable LH CFer with options or a trade piece. For sure his glove plays, if his bat doesn't, `we lose nothing & rush Emma through.

You are like everyone else including the Twins, so this isn't pointed at you, I'm just ranting.

[LastOnePicked]

10 hours ago, rv78 said:

The older I get, every year that goes by, I sense I'll never see another Twins World Series Championship. Baseball needs to level the playing field amongst ALL the teams so the big market teams can't spend millions and millions more than small market teams. Or maybe I just need to be glad I witnessed the '87 and '91 teams because it will never happen again in my lifetime. 

Sadly, I agree with this 100%. The Twins absolutely needed to go all in on the last playoff push, and they didn't. The big market teams have now the massive payroll advantages they always had AND all of the modern "moneyball" advantages in terms of development, analysis and strategy. The chances of winning it all for a team like the Twins are going to be increasingly small.

They may make another minor playoff push over the next few years, but if it's led by the same people - or even the same philosophy - it will be a nibbling approach that maybe gets the team a wild card series win or two, nothing more. Rebuild until you build a juggernaut, but as we see with the Orioles, even that may not be enough against the elites.

[rv78]

1 hour ago, LastOnePicked said:

Sadly, I agree with this 100%. The Twins absolutely needed to go all in on the last playoff push, and they didn't. The big market teams have now the massive payroll advantages they always had AND all of the modern "moneyball" advantages in terms of development, analysis and strategy. The chances of winning it all for a team like the Twins are going to be increasingly small.

They may make another minor playoff push over the next few years, but if it's led by the same people - or even the same philosophy - it will be a nibbling approach that maybe gets the team a wild card series win or two, nothing more. Rebuild until you build a juggernaut, but as we see with the Orioles, even that may not be enough against the elites.

The biggest difference is that the big money teams or "elites" as you like to call them, can buy that proven player and teams like the Twins have to bank on a player having a career year or the Hope and a Prayer method. Back in 1991 the Twins went and got a guy named Jack Morris who carried the team to a Championship. Now, not only can they NOT afford to acquire someone like that, as the big market teams gobble them up, but the way theprices on all the other players get raised by what they do, makes it even harder for the rest of the teams to even be able to afford the average players. Something has to be done or eventually we'll have about 6 or 8 teams that will be the REAL major leagues and the rest of them will all be AAAA teams with no hope to ever reach a World Series.

[jorgenswest]

8 hours ago, bean5302 said:

You know there are 30 teams in MLB. So the "average" team would have 3.3 prospects in the top 100. The Twins finished 4th in the division last year, behind Detroit (who have 6 top 100 prospects), Kansas City (who have 3), and Cleveland (who also have 3). The White Sox also have 6 top 100 prospects.

I'm not excited about having 3 top 100 prospects. I'm not excited about the Twins' situation this year, either. I don't like what seems to be the front office's methodology and I really don't like Baldelli's decision making.

I am excited about Jenkins. A prospect at number 3 overall is very meaningful. It is great to have Rodriguez at 37 though a player at 37 is probably closer in talent level to the #100 prospect than the #10 prospect. Once it gets beyond the top 40 or 50 there may not be much separating those guys from the top 250.

The Tigers have 5 and 6. I would trade our prospect pool for their prospect pool. I don’t think I would do that with any other team in the AL Central.

[bean5302]

10 hours ago, jorgenswest said:

I am excited about Jenkins. A prospect at number 3 overall is very meaningful. It is great to have Rodriguez at 37 though a player at 37 is probably closer in talent level to the #100 prospect than the #10 prospect. Once it gets beyond the top 40 or 50 there may not be much separating those guys from the top 250.

The Tigers have 5 and 6. I would trade our prospect pool for their prospect pool. I don’t think I would do that with any other team in the AL Central.

Jenkins could be good. I've done the analysis on how his peers have performed, and Jenkins is sandwiched in the middle of a guys who were great or washed out. Jenkins is not among the group who were all successful.

[jorgenswest]

8 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Jenkins could be good. I've done the analysis on how his peers have performed, and Jenkins is sandwiched in the middle of a guys who were great or washed out. Jenkins is not among the group who were all successful.

The data I have is such a small sample to make comparisons. It would be small after just one full season but his was cut shorter than that.

I value the eyes of the skilled scouts much more at this age and limited play.  Of everyone in the minor leagues he was number 3  (actually number 2 since Sasaki was not a minor leaguer). That is really significant.