How the Twins Are Mimicking the Brewers' Successful Strategy

[Cody Christie]

Image courtesy of Bruce Kluckhohn-Imagn Images

The Milwaukee Brewers have long been viewed as one of baseball’s most efficient small-market organizations. They win more often than they should, find value where others don’t, and remain competitive despite limited financial resources. However, their success does not stem from the conventional “draft and develop” model often associated with smaller franchises. In fact, the Brewers are among the least homegrown teams in baseball.

Of the 26 players who were on Milwaukee’s NLCS roster, only five would fit the traditional definition of being drafted and developed by the organization. That ranks among the lowest totals in the majors. The team’s first-round track record over the last decade has been surprisingly underwhelming, with only Brice Turang managing to provide meaningful long-term value. Even he has produced just six career WAR, a modest total that points to the challenges of drafting and developing players in an organization

By contrast, the Minnesota Twins have far more drafted-and-developed players contributing at the big-league level. Their roster to close out the season included Byron Buxton, Trevor Larnach, Luke Keaschall, Matt Wallner, Ryan Jeffers, Royce Lewis, Brooks Lee, Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Zebby Matthews, Kody Funderburk, Cole Sands, Cody Laweryson, and Pierson Ohl. The Twins’ internal pipeline has consistently supplied usable depth, though the ceiling of that group remains uncertain.

For the Brewers, homegrown success has been fleeting. It has been nearly two decades since the organization drafted an All-Star who reached that level while wearing Milwaukee colors. The last example came in 2018 when Jeremy Jeffress made the Midsummer Classic as an injury replacement, 12 years after being drafted. Across the past 20 years, only five Brewers draft picks from the first five rounds have produced six or more WAR for the team: Ryan Braun, Corbin Burnes, Devin Williams, Jonathan Lucroy, and Turang.

Minnesota’s record over that same stretch is even worse. Only Buxton, Jeffers, Kyle Gibson, and Eddie Rosario have cleared the 6-WAR threshold in a Twins uniform. That low return rate underscores how difficult it is for any team, even one that drafts well, to rely solely on internal development for sustained success.

Milwaukee has instead leaned heavily on trades to keep its roster competitive. Nearly half of the Brewers’ 40-man roster was acquired through deals, ranking fourth-most in baseball behind Tampa Bay, San Diego, and Seattle. They rarely engage in waiver claims and seldom chase top-tier free agents, instead focusing on finding undervalued players who fit their system. This strategy of polish-over-prospect has become their defining trait and a model for sustained relevance. 

Sure enough, just one day after the Brewers were eliminated, rumors are already floating about their willingness to shop starter Freddy Peralta.

The Twins appear poised to mirror that trade-heavy approach in the coming seasons. While the front office still hopes recent high draft picks will emerge as stars, the organization knows that relying solely on prospects is risky. Like the Brewers, the Twins may increasingly depend on trades to maintain roster depth and offensive balance.

On the field, Milwaukee’s success also offers a potential blueprint. Despite finishing with the 12th-best slugging percentage in baseball and ranking near the bottom in Hard Hit rate, the Brewers still scored the third-most runs in the majors. They achieved this by emphasizing aggressiveness on the bases and manufacturing runs rather than waiting for home runs.

Minnesota embraced a similar offensive style during the final months of the season. Players were more selective at the plate, more willing to take extra bases, and less reliant on sheer power. The results were promising, and the organization seems ready to double down on that strategy next year.

If the Twins can blend their emerging young core with Milwaukee’s brand of creativity and controlled aggression, they may carve out a path to sustained contention. The Brewers have shown that there is more than one way to win as a small-market club. Now it is up to the Twins to prove that Milwaukee’s playbook can work just as well on the other side of the Mississippi.

Can the Twins follow in the Brewers’ footsteps? Leave a comment and start the discussion. 

View full article

[Linus]

There are a lot of things posted about this strategy or that strategy for small and mid market teams. Obviously small - mid market teams aren’t doing it through free agency. After that, I believe the most important thing differentiating these teams are the person(s) executing the strategy.  All FO are aware of what the Rays do, or Cleveland or the Brewers. There is no secret sauce. If you are lucky enough to have a shrewd FO making good decisions you will find a way. IMO we do not have that. 

[Old Twins Hat]

Yeah, well, when it comes to strategy, hard to beat the Dodgers: buy the best players available, no matter the cost.

We all saw how the Brewers stacked up against that.

[Doctor Gast]

Can the Falvey follow in the Brewers’ footsteps? The answer is no.. 1st of all, MIL is aggressive in knowing what exactly they need, then aggressively going after it in trades. Falvey has no idea what they need & if he finally discovers what they need, he's unable to initiate & close on a good deal. Falvey likes to hold onto his prospects until they lose their hype & become worthless- MIL trades them to fill their needs. The way he produces trades is by having other FOs come to him to fill their team needs & they offer players they don't need that look good on paper & Falvey takes them even though they don't fill an imminent need.

Twins are far away & slow in picking up what's going on in the league so turning things around is like turning a big ship. Everything is too slow, too little & too late. What I focus on is catching. MIL has a great eye for catchers, for developing them (Jefferson Quero) & transforming acquired catchers into great defensive ones, MN is terrible at this. MIL constantly develops pitchers & trades them & has other pitchers ready to take their place. MN is getting better, but nothing close to MIL. It's hard to gauge intangibles like fundamentals, defense & baserunning; that's why MN is lagging way behind & MIL is way ahead.

IMO, MN is nothing like MIL, unfortunately.

[LambchoP]

You need a smart GM in order for your teams success to heavily rely on trades. I don't trust Falvey to make good trades. Aside from the Duran and maybe Bader trade at the deadline, I thought the overall return that we got was very underwhelming. Why on earth would we want Roden and Outman?!?

[ohiotwinsfan]

Quote

 

Quoting Linus  8,283 "The Milwaukee Brewers have long been viewed as one of baseball’s most efficient small-market organizations. They win more often than they should, find value where others don’t, and remain competitive despite limited financial resources. However, their success does not stem from the conventional “draft and develop” model often associated with smaller franchises. In fact, the Brewers are among the least homegrown teams in baseball.

Of the 26 players who were on Milwaukee’s NLCS roster, only five would fit the traditional definition of being drafted and developed by the organization."

 

Makes me wonder who does better than that. Clearly, if everyone turns only 5 top 5 draftees into passable players, how does anyone ever field a decent team. Someone must be successful at drafting and/or developing their own players in order to have enough players to fill a league full of 26 man MLB rosters. 

If you don't do a good job of identifying available talent in other organizations, this strategy won't work, either. The Twins have done a fare job of identifying a few players like that, Joe Ryan leaps to mind. But, a lot of the other pickups of late have been dreadful, too.

[nicksaviking]

Sorry, but we can look at all of the over-achieving low payroll teams and find something they do different than everyone else. Prior to the Brewers (regular season) success, no one was able to copy the Rays (regular season) success and prior to that, no one was able to copy the Twins and the A's (regular season) success. The actual path is vague and can come from many avenues. A low payroll franchise has (regular season) success, which builds confidence and keeps the franchise floating on top for several years because confidence and learning how to use it breeds more wins. There's tons of ways teams can build that confidence and keep it rolling.

However, NOT developing your own homegrown talent is an incredibly inefficient way to build a team. This is most definitely not a path the Twins nor any other low payroll team should try to emulate.

[Major League Ready]

I think looking at the number of players on the 26 man acquired in a given way misses an important element.  How did they acquire the players that contributed the most?  Mediocre or below average players don’t make playoff teams.  The Brewers had 13 players that produced 1.5 WAR or greater.  Shouldn’t we look at how the productive players we acquired.

3 were drafted (Turang/Frielick/Woodrum)
2 were International signings (Churio/Uribe)

8 players that produced 1.5 WAR or greater were acquired in trades but we need to qualify those trades.  A trade for an establish player and a trade for an unproven player are very different strategically.  The difference in these two strategies is a major source of contention here all the time, right?  Should we trade for established players or should we keep our prospects and should we trade Joe Ryan for example.

1 player (Yehlicj) was definitely established when acquired.  Will Contreras had one 2 WAR season so most people would say he was not establish but was a notch above a minor league prospect.  The other 6 (Durbin/Collins/Peralta/Patrick/Priester/Megill) were unproven/prospects.  It's noteworthy that their 3 top producing pitchers were acquired as prospects.

Most of the successful Cleveland and Tampa teams are constructed similarly.  They tend to have 4 or 5 players they drafted and developed and just as many players that were unproven players acquired in trade or the occasional waiver wire guy that pans out.  These three teams have also done a good job of flipping expiring players for players that contribute for multiple years.

[DocBauer]

I appreciate what the Brewers do, and have done. For instance, they haven't been afraid to audition internal prospects, or give top prospects a chance to play early and live with some growing pains.

However, having a team built almost entirely from players from different organizations is a big mistake long term.

And just because the Twins played a more exciting brand of baseball the last 2 months of 2025 doesn't mean they actually scored more runs. The team needs balance, something they lacked during those final months. 

I think borrowing from Milwaukee, Tampa, and Cleveland makes sense. You MUST draft and develop. You can't be so paranoid about veteran depth of mediocre players that you ignore your own talent. And you do have to make some smart trades here and there to augment and shake up your roster at times. 

I believe the Twins have changed their draft philosophy the past few years and have brought in some very interesting talent. Their International Signings haven't provided much in years now. But they've also recently shaken up that part of the scouting department and we can hope for changes there that will help in the future, even though those players are years away.

As much as most of us greatly disliked the fire sale at the deadline...or at least a couple of the moves...the juice might end up worthy of the squeeze in the long run. Especially if they can add additional help through other moves by investing in the team in the short term, while developing the young talent on the team, in the system, and recently acquired.

The FO has to be smart in the following areas:

1] Is there a dysfunction in the developmental path of MILB players? Or has it been more bad choices that just weren't as good as projected? Or, is this more a change in approach from the "bomba" days to a more balanced approach that's still in flux? A combination of all 3? They need a step back and honest reflection of the system wide plan to recognize if they've missed something and make corresponding changes. 

2] Continue to look for "smart" options as they have done previously in players like Castro and Thielbar and Stewart, as just a few examples. But make sure you keep the right ones.

3] Don't micro manage your manager. Yes, you have a plan. Yes, you have information to be used to make decisions. Yes, you want and need to work together for the best plan, the best players, and find the best way to implement your plan and all your information.

But when you hire a new manager that you believe is a smart choice, allow him a STRONG voice not only in how he runs things, not only his roster, but also in building a staff that can accomplish how he wants to run the team.

Opinions will vary, but I openly state I have no idea if Baldelli WAS micro managed, or to what degree. The FO has the power, the right, and supposedly good knowledge for viable input to help accomplish this. But don't hire the next manager and then not let HIM put his STAMP on the team. Isn't that why you hired him in the first place?

In different careers with different companies, primarily sales, one thing I always advised new hires is to "steal" from everyone. Not sales! But when you see or hear something others do that you like, STEAL that idea/approach and use it. Refine and change it to meet your own personality and perspective as needed.

The Twins SHOULD look at the Brewers. That doesn't mean they should BE the Brewers. The Twins attempt to borrow from the Dodgers at times in roster construction. That's a fine idea. But the Dodgers can have a $300M payroll and the Twins can't. So borrow where you can, but always retain perspective. Borrow from Tampa and Cleveland, but don't believe you have to BE them either.

The last couple of years, despite efforts by ownership to handicap the FO, I can still see a general idea of change slowly taking place. My biggest complaint/issue is coming up with an actual IDENTITY as an organization and make decisions/choices to implement that identity. When I squint, I can see the formation of an identity. It takes time for change. And ownership may have messed up any plan or identity that the FO has in mind. But that just means you have to find different ways to carry through on that identity plan and see it to fruition.

But please, don't copy anyone. STEAL from everyone as you see fit. But have your OWN identity and make it stick.

 

[Brandon]

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

Sorry, but we can look at all of the over-achieving low payroll teams and find something they do different than everyone else. Prior to the Brewers (regular season) success, no one was able to copy Rays (regular season) success and prior to that, no one was able to copy the Twins and the A's (regular season) success. The actual path is vague and can come from many avenues. A low payroll franchise has (regular season) success, which builds confidence and keeps the franchise floating on top for several years because confidence and learning how to use it breeds more wins. There's tons of ways teams can build that confidence and keep it rolling.

However, NOT developing your own homegrown talent is an incredibly inefficient way to build a team. This is most definitely not a path the Twins nor any other low payroll team should try to emulate.

This is your all-time best post.

[TNtwins85]

4 hours ago, DocBauer said:

I appreciate what the Brewers do, and have done. For instance, they haven't been afraid to audition internal prospects, or give top prospects a chance to play early and live with some growing pains.

However, having a team built almost entirely from players from different organizations is a big mistake long term.

And just because the Twins played a more exciting brand of baseball the last 2 months of 2025 doesn't mean they actually scored more runs. The team needs balance, something they lacked during those final months. 

I think borrowing from Milwaukee, Tampa, and Cleveland makes sense. You MUST draft and develop. You can't be so paranoid about veteran depth of mediocre players that you ignore your own talent. And you do have to make some smart trades here and there to augment and shake up your roster at times. 

I believe the Twins have changed their draft philosophy the past few years and have brought in some very interesting talent. Their International Signings haven't provided much in years now. But they've also recently shaken up that part of the scouting department and we can hope for changes there that will help in the future, even though those players are years away.

As much as most of us greatly disliked the fire sale at the deadline...or at least a couple of the moves...the juice might end up worthy of the squeeze in the long run. Especially if they can add additional help through other moves by investing in the team in the short term, while developing the young talent on the team, in the system, and recently acquired.

The FO has to be smart in the following areas:

1] Is there a dysfunction in the developmental path of MILB players? Or has it been more bad choices that just weren't as good as projected? Or, is this more a change in approach from the "bomba" days to a more balanced approach that's still in flux? A combination of all 3? They need a step back and honest reflection of the system wide plan to recognize if they've missed something and make corresponding changes. 

2] Continue to look for "smart" options as they have done previously in players like Castro and Thielbar and Stewart, as just a few examples. But make sure you keep the right ones.

3] Don't micro manage your manager. Yes, you have a plan. Yes, you have information to be used to make decisions. Yes, you want and need to work together for the best plan, the best players, and find the best way to implement your plan and all your information.

But when you hire a new manager that you believe is a smart choice, allow him a STRONG voice not only in how he runs things, not only his roster, but also in building a staff that can accomplish how he wants to run the team.

Opinions will vary, but I openly state I have no idea if Baldelli WAS micro managed, or to what degree. The FO has the power, the right, and supposedly good knowledge for viable input to help accomplish this. But don't hire the next manager and then not let HIM put his STAMP on the team. Isn't that why you hired him in the first place?

In different careers with different companies, primarily sales, one thing I always advised new hires is to "steal" from everyone. Not sales! But when you see or hear something others do that you like, STEAL that idea/approach and use it. Refine and change it to meet your own personality and perspective as needed.

The Twins SHOULD look at the Brewers. That doesn't mean they should BE the Brewers. The Twins attempt to borrow from the Dodgers at times in roster construction. That's a fine idea. But the Dodgers can have a $300M payroll and the Twins can't. So borrow where you can, but always retain perspective. Borrow from Tampa and Cleveland, but don't believe you have to BE them either.

The last couple of years, despite efforts by ownership to handicap the FO, I can still see a general idea of change slowly taking place. My biggest complaint/issue is coming up with an actual IDENTITY as an organization and make decisions/choices to implement that identity. When I squint, I can see the formation of an identity. It takes time for change. And ownership may have messed up any plan or identity that the FO has in mind. But that just means you have to find different ways to carry through on that identity plan and see it to fruition.

But please, don't copy anyone. STEAL from everyone as you see fit. But have your OWN identity and make it stick.

 

Love this! Everyone talks about how the Twins need to spend like this team and that team. Complaining how they can’t compete. How they need to be able to spend. No, they need to create an identity, a culture. They had one. They hit HR’s. They brought in guys who could hit bombs and taught guys to hit bombs. They still bring in guys on the pitching side and develop them. They take guys who are failed starters or other teams scrap guys with upside and turn them into something. Then they tried to shift heaven and earth to bring in Correa. To bring the Astros identity in. Try to spend like the big dogs when even the Astros didn’t want to pay him. Bringing in Correa and spending, the big FA, to change the culture and identity instead of focusing on the identity. Then they switched the identity. Falvey needs to figure out who they are. The identity should last for a decade. Not a few years. In that identity you bring in guys to implement your strategy. They lost themselves somewhere between ‘23/‘24. One can blame the Pohlads but one can also blame everyone involved in not implementing the plan of their identity 

[In My La Z boy]

I remember coming away from the Brewers series home and away thinking they were the most exciting team I watched us play all year. I remember wishing we could be a team like this. Reminded me of the early 2000 teams. Fun to watch, and 2006 was our year. We could have gone all the way. Don't recall our place in the payroll standings that year, but it can be done. Strong team identity is a must as Doc points out. Under Falvey's leadership we haven't had a consistent identity. Bomba squad to this. Who are we? Teams like Cleveland, Milwaukee Tampa Bay are pretty good to very good most years. I do want to be like that, pretty good to very good most years. Why not us?

[Doctor Wu]

I don't think that whole "Bomba Squad" thing a few years back was any sort of team/front office philosophy or a grand scheme of some kind. It just happened, and that was cool, but I don't think that makes it any sort of blueprint to follow. We've been drafting some interesting players (both pitchers and position players) in the past couple of years. If we are patient, some of these guys might turn into real difference makers. 

[Riverbrian]

Hopefully... nobody is going to follow Cody down this narrative path. I'd hate for anyone to come away with the impression that the Brewers don't draft and develop. 

1. The International Free Agents were ignored. Chourio, Quero and Uribe are pretty significant IFA's. Only a mention of Turang in the article because he was a 1st round pick. This tends to minimize Misirowski, Henderson and Frelick who were not first rounders. It doesn't matter...  It's still development. 

2. In order to acquire talent in trades... you have to have talent to trade. Talent that actually interests other teams... enough that they are willing to give up significant talent. Developing high end talent that other teams really really want is very helpful. Burnes was sought after, Williams was sought after. The better the player that is traded, the better the return. It's still development.

3. This is an important point. There are 3 primary methods used to staff rosters. Free Agency, Trades and Draft/Develop. If a team uses all 3 avenues equally... it comes to 33% for all 3 acquisition methods. If a smaller market team for example just doesn't do the free agency thing... let's say zero percent. Trades and Draft/Develop will have to compensate for not using free agency. Now we have 50% equally divided. If a team tends to make trades like Steer and CES for Mahle compared to a team that trades Burnes for Ortiz and Hall. That 50% is going to shift in either direction accordingly. 

The Twins have 14 home grown. Well, If you don't trade well and you don't have a budget in regards to free agency. What do you have left to work with? Drafted dudes. 

Either way... it's all about development... All of it... Development. Development determines what you get in trades and how much space must be filled by free agents. 

It's all development and the Brewers are kicking the Twins ass. 

 

 

 

 

[Doctor Gast]

1 hour ago, In My La Z boy said:

I remember coming away from the Brewers series home and away thinking they were the most exciting team I watched us play all year. I remember wishing we could be a team like this. Reminded me of the early 2000 teams. Fun to watch, and 2006 was our year. We could have gone all the way. Don't recall our place in the payroll standings that year, but it can be done. Strong team identity is a must as Doc points out. Under Falvey's leadership we haven't had a consistent identity. Bomba squad to this. Who are we? Teams like Cleveland, Milwaukee Tampa Bay are pretty good to very good most years. I do want to be like that, pretty good to very good most years. Why not us?

IMO. it's not only having an identity but also having the right identity that maximizes what is going on in the league. The "Bomba Squad" identity came about organically when players noticed that they were playing with a "juiced ball". They helped each other to maximize the effect. After the "juiced ball" was gone, Falvey artificially adopted his "all-or-nothing" approach to every hitter. Drafting & promoting slow, defense-deficient big bats that fit this mold. Falvey stuck with that identity for years, even though the advantage was gone before he started, which we are still suffering from. 

Even Falvey is waking up to the fact that his concocted identity isn't working. It took Baldelli & Popkins in early '24, to try to reverse this idea to better ABs & baserunning. Instead of manipulating hitters to hit solo HRs when we don't need them & strike out when we do, let them find their own swings & instruct them to have better ABs & be better clutch hitters. Many analysts still think that these big bat types are still our salvation. These big bats types are not only inefficient, but they are also expensive, money & prospects-wise. The fast athletic players are not only better baserunners, they tend to be better defensively & are more cost-efficient. Baldelli, to his credit, has let the players loose to develop their baserunning skills & they are improving.

Yet, where does MN stand defensively? How many GG candidates does MN have? Strangely enough, MN only has only one, France. France? They traded him & never took him seriously defensively. They still aren't taking defense very seriously. They position players by their bats, even though they are a big defensive liability, which costs us big time, especially up the middle. They still think they can hide defense-deficient players at 2B. As a small-mid market, it's imperative that we have the right identity that fits us, not always trying to copy NYY. I don't want to be like NYY. Along with a FO that has the right player evaluation & development & is able to make essential trades. Which we don't. Comparing us to MIL is a joke!

 

 

[Jeff K]

18 hours ago, DocBauer said:

I appreciate what the Brewers do, and have done. For instance, they haven't been afraid to audition internal prospects, or give top prospects a chance to play early and live with some growing pains.

However, having a team built almost entirely from players from different organizations is a big mistake long term.

And just because the Twins played a more exciting brand of baseball the last 2 months of 2025 doesn't mean they actually scored more runs. The team needs balance, something they lacked during those final months. 

I think borrowing from Milwaukee, Tampa, and Cleveland makes sense. You MUST draft and develop. You can't be so paranoid about veteran depth of mediocre players that you ignore your own talent. And you do have to make some smart trades here and there to augment and shake up your roster at times. 

I believe the Twins have changed their draft philosophy the past few years and have brought in some very interesting talent. Their International Signings haven't provided much in years now. But they've also recently shaken up that part of the scouting department and we can hope for changes there that will help in the future, even though those players are years away.

As much as most of us greatly disliked the fire sale at the deadline...or at least a couple of the moves...the juice might end up worthy of the squeeze in the long run. Especially if they can add additional help through other moves by investing in the team in the short term, while developing the young talent on the team, in the system, and recently acquired.

The FO has to be smart in the following areas:

1] Is there a dysfunction in the developmental path of MILB players? Or has it been more bad choices that just weren't as good as projected? Or, is this more a change in approach from the "bomba" days to a more balanced approach that's still in flux? A combination of all 3? They need a step back and honest reflection of the system wide plan to recognize if they've missed something and make corresponding changes. 

2] Continue to look for "smart" options as they have done previously in players like Castro and Thielbar and Stewart, as just a few examples. But make sure you keep the right ones.

3] Don't micro manage your manager. Yes, you have a plan. Yes, you have information to be used to make decisions. Yes, you want and need to work together for the best plan, the best players, and find the best way to implement your plan and all your information.

But when you hire a new manager that you believe is a smart choice, allow him a STRONG voice not only in how he runs things, not only his roster, but also in building a staff that can accomplish how he wants to run the team.

Opinions will vary, but I openly state I have no idea if Baldelli WAS micro managed, or to what degree. The FO has the power, the right, and supposedly good knowledge for viable input to help accomplish this. But don't hire the next manager and then not let HIM put his STAMP on the team. Isn't that why you hired him in the first place?

In different careers with different companies, primarily sales, one thing I always advised new hires is to "steal" from everyone. Not sales! But when you see or hear something others do that you like, STEAL that idea/approach and use it. Refine and change it to meet your own personality and perspective as needed.

The Twins SHOULD look at the Brewers. That doesn't mean they should BE the Brewers. The Twins attempt to borrow from the Dodgers at times in roster construction. That's a fine idea. But the Dodgers can have a $300M payroll and the Twins can't. So borrow where you can, but always retain perspective. Borrow from Tampa and Cleveland, but don't believe you have to BE them either.

The last couple of years, despite efforts by ownership to handicap the FO, I can still see a general idea of change slowly taking place. My biggest complaint/issue is coming up with an actual IDENTITY as an organization and make decisions/choices to implement that identity. When I squint, I can see the formation of an identity. It takes time for change. And ownership may have messed up any plan or identity that the FO has in mind. But that just means you have to find different ways to carry through on that identity plan and see it to fruition.

But please, don't copy anyone. STEAL from everyone as you see fit. But have your OWN identity and make it stick.

 

Great post!  Pretty close to my work philsophy as well.

[chpettit19]

54 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

Hopefully... nobody is going to follow Cody down this narrative path. I'd hate for anyone to come away with the impression that the Brewers don't draft and develop. 

1. The International Free Agents were ignored. Chourio, Quero and Uribe are pretty significant IFA's. Only a mention of Turang in the article because he was a 1st round pick. This tends to minimize Misirowski, Henderson and Frelick who were not first rounders. It doesn't matter...  It's still development. 

2. In order to acquire talent in trades... you have to have talent to trade. Talent that actually interests other teams... enough that they are willing to give up significant talent. Developing high end talent that other teams really really want is very helpful. Burnes was sought after, Williams was sought after. The better the player that is traded, the better the return. It's still development.

3. This is an important point. There are 3 primary methods used to staff rosters. Free Agency, Trades and Draft/Develop. If a team uses all 3 avenues equally... it comes to 33% for all 3 acquisition methods. If a smaller market team for example just doesn't do the free agency thing... let's say zero percent. Trades and Draft/Develop will have to compensate for not using free agency. Now we have 50% equally divided. If a team tends to make trades like Steer and CES for Mahle compared to a team that trades Burnes for Ortiz and Hall. That 50% is going to shift in either direction accordingly. 

The Twins have 14 home grown. Well, If you don't trade well and you have a budget in regards to free agency. What do you have left to work with? Drafted dudes. 

Either way... it's all about development... All of it... Development. Development determines what you get in trades and how much space must be filled by free agents. 

It's all development and the Brewers are kicking the Twins ass. 

 

 

 

 

FYI, Frelick was a first rounder. And he has over 6 career WAR. No idea why he wasn't included with Turang. Some arbitrary notion of "long-term value" despite both of them being in their 3rd year. Frelick was actually the higher pick (15th vs 21st), but Turang has been the better major leaguer. But Frelick has been a good player.

People are so excited about this and want the Twins to follow this strategy but they are also losing their minds at the idea of trading Ryan. They're pissed they traded Duran and Jax. That's exactly what this strategy is. Trade Burnes. Trade Williams. Would've traded Woodruff if he wasn't hurt. Trade Josh Hader. Now they're talking about trading Peralta. Bring back players like Cortez and Durbin for Williams. These same fans would be ripping Falvey apart for that return for Duran. They'd be livid. People hate Roden (full disclosure, I'm not a huge fan), but he's who this is about. Were fans around here super jealous the Twins didn't get Caleb Durbin? Everyone around here clamoring for Andrew Vaughn as the difference maker we needed? All people are actually excited about is the idea of being good. And the Brewers have been really good during the regular season recently.

As @nicksaviking pointed out, the Twins had this run. The Rays had their run. The Brewers get bounced very quickly from the playoffs almost every time they make it. This year's series win jumped their total playoff series wins during the 21st century to 3 (1 in 2011, 1 in 2018, and 1 this year). They've won 4 in their entire team existence. 

People are excited because they're fun to watch, but their strategy doesn't actually win playoff games. I'd much rather be winning right now than losing, but the Brewers aren't some multi-decade powerhouse threatening for rings every year. Because, like the Twins, Rays, Guardians, or whoever else people are going to point to next, they don't have stars. They develop them and then they trade them to the teams that can afford them. You need stars. A whole collection of them. And you need to be developing them. And then you need to give yourself the best chance to develop more, which includes trading some of the ones you've already developed.

The Twins don't need to be the Brewers. They don't need to be the Guardians. Or the Rays. They can afford to keep Ryan and Buxton or sign Correa or trade for Lopez and extend him. They have a financial advantage over these teams. But they need to mix those strategies in. And fans need to step back and actually think about what they're praising about the Brewers right now. They built their team by trading their 2 superstar relievers (Hader and Williams) and their stud starter (Burnes). They signed a massive contract for 1 player (Yelich). It's everything these same people are complaining about the Twins doing and claiming the problem is. They're bringing in the same level of players the Twins are (Durbin vs Roden). They used openers, bullpen games, and short starts the entire postseason. They traded for Yelich, McCutchen, Taylor Rogers, Carlos Santana, Mark Canha, and Nestor Cortes. They signed Rhys Hoskins in free agency.

They're doing the same thing the Twins are doing. But they're backing it up with Frelick, Turang, Chourio, and Misiorowski instead of Lee, Julien, Miranda, and Festa. The Brewers aren't doing anything differently than any other team when it comes to acquiring players. They're drafting players. They're trading vets for prospects. They're trading prospects for vets. They're trading vets for both prospects and vets. They're signing international free agents. And they're signing free agents. They're just getting more out of their players. In the regular season. And then they're doing like every other mid- or small-market team and getting bounced from the playoffs quickly and with little trouble.

[Riverbrian]

On 10/20/2025 at 6:39 AM, In My La Z boy said:

I remember coming away from the Brewers series home and away thinking they were the most exciting team I watched us play all year. I remember wishing we could be a team like this. Reminded me of the early 2000 teams. Fun to watch, and 2006 was our year. We could have gone all the way. Don't recall our place in the payroll standings that year, but it can be done. Strong team identity is a must as Doc points out. Under Falvey's leadership we haven't had a consistent identity. Bomba squad to this. Who are we? Teams like Cleveland, Milwaukee Tampa Bay are pretty good to very good most years. I do want to be like that, pretty good to very good most years. Why not us?

As I watch the playoffs... I'm struck by the same realization every single year watching the playoffs

The effort from the players is significantly more than you get during the regular season. The extra base, the head first slides, actually leaving their feet to make plays.  

Now this comment includes the fans. The stadium is packed and loud and that certainly adds a significant portion of the excitement level of watching a playoff game compared to game 94 of a 162 game schedule with 15,000 in the stands. 

The reason I mentioned this: 

I wonder if younger players with something to prove... I wonder if they would tend to be a little more 100% effort in game 94 compared to the guy with a secure job playing in his 5th, 6th or 7th game 94. 

When you see players going after it. Baseball tends to be fun to watch.  

 

[nicksaviking]

4 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

As I watch the playoffs... I'm struck by the same realization every single year watching the playoffs

The effort from the players is significantly more than you get during the regular season. The extra base, the head first slides, actually leaving their feet to make plays.  

Now this comments includes the fans. The stadium is packed and loud and that certainly adds a significant portion of the excitement level of watching a playoff game compared to game 94 of a 162 game schedule with 15,000 in the stands. 

The reason I mentioned this: 

I wonder if younger players with something to prove... I wonder if they would tend to be a little more 100% effort in game 94 compared to the guy with a secure job playing in his 5th, 6th or 7th game 94. 

When you see players going after it. Baseball tends to be fun to watch.  

 

Well if true, and I suspect you are right, than the teams with the star players who give 100% effort during the playoffs, will get a bigger boost than teams who get 100% effort from their scrappy but less talented players.

Which would explain why the top 10 payroll teams absolutely dominate when it comes to winning the World Series.

[Riverbrian]

6 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

All people are actually excited about is the idea of being good. And the Brewers have been really good during the regular season recently.

These are the two sentences. 

In the end, FA? Trades? Drafting? Rule 5? Waiver Signing?  

Whatever the acquisition method... It's about being good in the end.  

 

[TNtwins85]

17 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

FYI, Frelick was a first rounder. And he has over 6 career WAR. No idea why he wasn't included with Turang. Some arbitrary notion of "long-term value" despite both of them being in their 3rd year. Frelick was actually the higher pick (15th vs 21st), but Turang has been the better major leaguer. But Frelick has been a good player.

People are so excited about this and want the Twins to follow this strategy but they are also losing their minds at the idea of trading Ryan. They're pissed they traded Duran and Jax. That's exactly what this strategy is. Trade Burnes. Trade Williams. Would've traded Woodruff if he wasn't hurt. Trade Josh Hader. Now they're talking about trading Peralta. Bring back players like Cortez and Durbin for Williams. These same fans would be ripping Falvey apart for that return for Duran. They'd be livid. People hate Roden (full disclosure, I'm not a huge fan), but he's who this is about. Were fans around here super jealous the Twins didn't get Caleb Durbin? Everyone around here clamoring for Andrew Vaughn as the difference maker we needed? All people are actually excited about is the idea of being good. And the Brewers have been really good during the regular season recently.

As @nicksaviking pointed out, the Twins had this run. The Rays had their run. The Brewers get bounced very quickly from the playoffs almost every time they make it. This year's series win jumped their total playoff series wins during the 21st century to 3 (1 in 2011, 1 in 2018, and 1 this year). They've won 4 in their entire team existence. 

People are excited because they're fun to watch, but their strategy doesn't actually win playoff games. I'd much rather be winning right now than losing, but the Brewers aren't some multi-decade powerhouse threatening for rings every year. Because, like the Twins, Rays, Guardians, or whoever else people are going to point to next, they don't have stars. They develop them and then they trade them to the teams that can afford them. You need stars. A whole collection of them. And you need to be developing them. And then you need to give yourself the best chance to develop more, which includes trading some of the ones you've already developed.

The Twins don't need to be the Brewers. They don't need to be the Guardians. Or the Rays. They can afford to keep Ryan and Buxton or sign Correa or trade for Lopez and extend him. They have a financial advantage over these teams. But they need to mix those strategies in. And fans need to step back and actually think about what they're praising about the Brewers right now. They built their team by trading their 2 superstar relievers (Hader and Williams) and their stud starter (Burnes). They signed a massive contract for 1 player (Yelich). It's everything these same people are complaining about the Twins doing and claiming the problem is. They're bringing in the same level of players the Twins are (Durbin vs Roden). They used openers, bullpen games, and short starts the entire postseason. They traded for Yelich, McCutchen, Taylor Rogers, Carlos Santana, Mark Canha, and Nestor Cortes. They signed Rhys Hoskins in free agency.

They're doing the same thing the Twins are doing. But they're backing it up with Frelick, Turang, Chourio, and Misiorowski instead of Lee, Julien, Miranda, and Festa. The Brewers aren't doing anything differently than any other team when it comes to acquiring players. They're drafting players. They're trading vets for prospects. They're trading prospects for vets. They're trading vets for both prospects and vets. They're signing international free agents. And they're signing free agents. They're just getting more out of their players. In the regular season. And then they're doing like every other mid- or small-market team and getting bounced from the playoffs quickly and with little trouble.

Kinda reminds me of those 2000’s Twins teams. Always one big pitcher or one big bat short for the title run. Play the game right all season only to not have enough to push them over the edge for a true title run. 

[Riverbrian]

3 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Well if true, and I suspect you are right, than the teams with the star players who give 100% effort during the playoffs, will get a bigger boost than teams who get 100% effort from their scrappy but less talented players.

Which would explain why the top 10 payroll teams absolutely dominate when it comes to winning the World Series.

It would stand to reason. Milwaukee would have an effort advantage erased by the Dodgers all of sudden dialing it up. 

However, it also stands to reason that it will be equal in the end. Toronto is trying harder... So is Seattle during the playoffs. Toronto isn't trying as hard game 92 of the season. Neither is Seattle.

I think the top 10 payroll teams dominate because more of them make the playoffs due to being a top 10 payroll. The odds are usually going to favor the top ten teams because they make up the majority of the playoff teams. 

I'm just floating the possibility that Milwaukee and Cleveland are more entertaining to watch because of the youth that is still willing to leave their feet o catch a ball in game 92. 

 

 

[TNtwins85]

1 minute ago, Riverbrian said:

It would stand to reason. Milwaukee would have an effort advantage erased by the Dodgers all of sudden dialing it up. 

However, it also stands to reason that it will be equal in the end. Toronto is trying harder... So is Seattle during the playoffs. Toronto isn't trying as hard game 92 of the season. Neither is Seattle.

I think the top 10 payroll teams dominate because more of them make the playoffs due to being a top 10 payroll. The odds are usually going to favor the top ten teams because they make up the majority of the playoff teams. 

I'm just floating the possibility that Milwaukee and Cleveland are more entertaining to watch because of the youth that is still willing to leave their feet o catch a ball in game 92. 

 

 

Also, being able to keep a guy like Enrique Hernandez around all year with a middling OPS and barely playable all year just to know once the playoffs come around he’ll be a nearly .900 OPS in the playoffs year in year out. Guys like that who always seem to be found and kept on the roster all year by these big teams just baffles me. But they all have them when they make those runs.

[chpettit19]

3 minutes ago, TNtwins85 said:

Kinda reminds me of those 2000’s Twins teams. Always one big pitcher or one big bat short for the title run. Play the game right all season only to not have enough to push them over the edge for a true title run. 

Not beating yourself goes a long ways during a 162 game schedule, but when you get into a short series with big payroll teams that have stars all over the field the talent just takes over far more often than not, unfortunately.

[Riverbrian]

3 minutes ago, TNtwins85 said:

Also, being able to keep a guy like Enrique Hernandez around all year with a middling OPS and barely playable all year just to know once the playoffs come around he’ll be a nearly .900 OPS in the playoffs year in year out. Guys like that who always seem to be found and kept on the roster all year by these big teams just baffles me. But they all have them when they make those runs.

There is no doubt that the Dodgers front office and manager are fans of Kike. 

Come playoff time. The heroes are not always the superstars. 

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

Hopefully... nobody is going to follow Cody down this narrative path. I'd hate for anyone to come away with the impression that the Brewers don't draft and develop. 

1. The International Free Agents were ignored. Chourio, Quero and Uribe are pretty significant IFA's. Only a mention of Turang in the article because he was a 1st round pick. This tends to minimize Misirowski, Henderson and Frelick who were not first rounders. It doesn't matter...  It's still development. 

2. In order to acquire talent in trades... you have to have talent to trade. Talent that actually interests other teams... enough that they are willing to give up significant talent. Developing high end talent that other teams really really want is very helpful. Burnes was sought after, Williams was sought after. The better the player that is traded, the better the return. It's still development.

3. This is an important point. There are 3 primary methods used to staff rosters. Free Agency, Trades and Draft/Develop. If a team uses all 3 avenues equally... it comes to 33% for all 3 acquisition methods. If a smaller market team for example just doesn't do the free agency thing... let's say zero percent. Trades and Draft/Develop will have to compensate for not using free agency. Now we have 50% equally divided. If a team tends to make trades like Steer and CES for Mahle compared to a team that trades Burnes for Ortiz and Hall. That 50% is going to shift in either direction accordingly. 

The Twins have 14 home grown. Well, If you don't trade well and you have a budget in regards to free agency. What do you have left to work with? Drafted dudes. 

Either way... it's all about development... All of it... Development. Development determines what you get in trades and how much space must be filled by free agents. 

It's all development and the Brewers are kicking the Twins ass. 

Agree with 1 and 2 and partially with 3.  I think when looking at drafting success, we should look at International and the regular draft separately only as a matter of determining areas of strength and weaknesses.  For example, if they are drafting well but doing nothing internationally, there is an opportunity for improvement.  The Twins have not done much since Polanco/Kepler/Sano.

I have said it before so pardon me for repeating myself but trades for established players and trades for prospects should not be lumped together.  They are strategic opposites.  One vs the other is constant point of contention on this site so how can the two be considered the same.  Looking at them together does not illustrate how and where a team has succeeded or failed in terms of acquisition strategy and execution.  IMO, looking at how successful teams have balanced the two strategies is telling.

[jmlease1]

10 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

People are excited because they're fun to watch, but their strategy doesn't actually win playoff games. I'd much rather be winning right now than losing, but the Brewers aren't some multi-decade powerhouse threatening for rings every year. Because, like the Twins, Rays, Guardians, or whoever else people are going to point to next, they don't have stars. They develop them and then they trade them to the teams that can afford them. You need stars. A whole collection of them. And you need to be developing them. And then you need to give yourself the best chance to develop more, which includes trading some of the ones you've already developed.

It's a fair point. The fewer stars you have, the more you're relying on guys that raised your floor in the regular season to get hot during the playoffs. And part of what made MKE so successful in the regular season was not giving innings and ABs to bad players. (116 starts went to guys with an ERA+ over 100, and that doesn't include Misiorowski's 14 with an ERA+ of 95) They had a deep and quality bullpen; the only really bad guys in there that pitched for them were Alexander & Pavamps, who had 60 innings between them. None of their position players with more than 100 PA's had a bWAR at replacement level. (Joey Ortiz was the only real dog in the starters) They were also very healthy...which is something that makes a huge difference for every team and has nothing to do with style.

But they didn't have a lot in terms of star power, which seemed like the wall they ran into against the Dodgers, who were able to get their pitching healthy (enough) for the playoffs and have plenty of stars in the lineup to generate runs.

[jorgenswest]

 

22 hours ago, Cody Christie said:

They rarely engage in waiver claims

While true that the were not acquired by waiver claim it is mostly a function of their record. If a player is worthy of claiming, teams with good records like the Brewers won’t win the claim. Instead a trade is needed.

They built their bullpen largely on players DFA’d by other teams. The give up cash or minor leaguers with little to no prospect status to avoid the risk the claim won’t get to them. The Twins DFA’d Trevor Megill. The Brewers sent them cash and Taylor Floyd. Floyd was a 25 year old reliever in high A with the Brewers. He has since been released by the Twins. They acquired Grant Anderson in trade after he had been DFA’d by the Rangers. Nick Mears had been DFA’d twice before the the Brewers made a trade with the Rockies. He had a 5.56 ERA with the Rockies. One of the players they traded was released by the Rockies. The other was a major leaguer and had a 9.36 ERA in 12 starts for the Rockies this year. Koenig was released by the Padres and picked up a a minor league free agent. The other two relievers in the bullpen were developed by the Brewers. Uribe was an international signing and Ashby a fourth round draft pick.

The Brewers spent virtually no capital to build a bullpen. The 4th round pick might have been the most valuable asset they used. That is the Brewers model the Twins must follow. It will take an elite ability to identify and develop pitching talent that is unwanted and unrecognized by other teams. 

 

[jmlease1]

9 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Not beating yourself goes a long ways during a 162 game schedule, but when you get into a short series with big payroll teams that have stars all over the field the talent just takes over far more often than not, unfortunately.

The converse can be true; several role-players get hot at the time same in a short series and suddenly the team with the $200M+ payroll is at home wondering what the hell happened. It's why if you have a chance to make the playoffs you should always go for it because things can get weird in a short series.

But the elite players are more likely to be able to hold up when the benches, rotations, and bullpens tighten up. It certainly seemed to hurt the Brewers ability to put runs up on the board against the Dodgers, when Durbin was the only guy that was hitting. And if you're relying on getting baserunners and aggression to get you extra runs, that definitely seems to get harder in the playoffs.

[Riverbrian]

5 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Agree with 1 and 2 and partially with 3.  I think when looking at drafting success, we should look at International and the regular draft separately only as a matter of determining areas of strength and weaknesses.  For example, if they are drafting well but doing nothing internationally, there is an opportunity for improvement.  

I have said it before so pardon me for repeating myself but trades for established players and trades for prospects should not be lumped together.  They are strategic opposites.  One vs the other is constant point of contention on this site so how can the two be considered the same.  Looking at them together does not illustrate how and where a team has succeeded or failed in terms of acquisition strategy and execution.  IMO, looking at how successful teams have balanced the two strategies is telling.

It makes perfect sense to separate the drafted player and the IFA. They are clearly separate methods of acquisition. I lump them into point 3 for the sole purpose of separating them from trades and free agency. 

The overall point of point #3 is that they actually all tie together. The percentages of player acquisition will have to add up to 100% in the end. 

If you are light in your utilization of the free agent market and if you are light in the utilization of the trade market.

Home Grown (Draft and IFA) players will have to make up the difference to get to 100% of your roster composition.

Regardless if they have talent or not.