Does Anyone Want to Come Here?

[dxpavelka]

21 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

How'd the bottom eight payrolls do?

If we're counting three of the bottom 9 made the playoffs.

[bean5302]

The answer to this is "yes." There are thousands of players, including well known players who would like to have a contract with the Minnesota Twins. Especially rebound players. Going to a team without a lot of pressure in a mediocre division means there's a good chance I'll either be in the playoffs or traded to a team who is going to the playoffs.

Veteran who is a long term, big dollar contract candidate? Absolutely not, but throw enough money at them, and most will take it.

[Schmoeman5]

53 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

And four of those five will go home with as many trophies as the Twins.  It's easy to spend someone else's money.

Is that what I said? Rube. Your post was in regards to how many of the top spenders made the post season. 5 of 8 made it. Thats over 60%. So then I see how you said 3 out of the 9 lowest made it as well. So since YOU made it the top 8. Its only 7 out of the 22 other teams that got in. There are always going to be younger teams. Like the Tigers or Guardians or Twins or Royals or the Orioles who make it. Teams with a Skubal  or a Witt or a Gunderson/Holiday/Rutschman.who wont be there much longer and who have a short window. Because they wont pay the big bucks.The big spenders will be there most of the time on a regular basis. How many consecutive years have the Yankees and Dodgers been in the postseason? 2 teams occupying 16% of the spots nearly every year. I'm not spending anyone's money but if i could I would want have those teams budgets. Mr know it all. There's always going to be just 1 winner. And this year its the biggest spender of them all.

[Bodie]

On 11/1/2025 at 10:13 AM, Richie the Rally Goat said:

The Dodgers and Blue Jays?

Yeah, the Twins will shell out $200,000,000 for a years payroll...

[Major League Ready]

5 hours ago, DJL44 said:

They really don’t. MN has about $325M in revenue and St Louis is $375M. They’re both midmarket teams like Arizona and Detroit.

According to Spotrac the Cardinals have spent an average of 17.4M more than the Twins.  I would expect at least that with $50M of incremental revenue.  No subject gets more play on this site, yet not one TD writer has every bothered to write an article which quantifies the Twins percentage of spend or Revenue rank vs Payroll rank.  How much exactly should we expect.  If they spent exactly what the Cardinals spend we could expect to add 2 wins if we were replacing a replacement level player so why does this get so much attention?  

Just imagine if you ran a company with half as much revenue as your top competitor.  When asked by the board what you thought was key to competing and you answered increase spending to 50-60% of that top competitor.  How long do you suppose you would be in that position?  Point being more spending would be helpful but acquisition and development of prospects is far more important.  

[KirbyDome89]

5 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

BTW … Seattle has won two playoff series in the past two decades so not a great aspiration.

What teams aren't spending money and consistently winning playoff series? 

[bean5302]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

According to Spotrac the Cardinals have spent an average of 17.4M more than the Twins.  I would expect at least that with $50M of incremental revenue.  No subject gets more play on this site not one TD writer has every bothered to write an article which quantifies the Twins percentage of spend or Revenue rank vs Payroll rank.  How much exactly should we expect.  If they spent exactly what the Cardinals spend we could expect to add 2 wins if we were replacing a replacement level player so why does this get so much attention?  

Just imagine if you ran a company with half as much revenue as your top competitor.  When asked by the board what you thought was key to competing and you answered increase spending to 50-60% of that top competitor.  How long do you suppose you would be in that position?  Point being more spending would be helpful but acquisition and development of prospects is far more important.  

Agreed. Twins ownership has made an competitive amount of resources available, overall. Of course, ownership has also made lousy decisions on when to spend like the big cut after 2023. Most team owners are willing to open the wallets and double-down when it comes to the competitive window as a tool to increase revenues. What we don't know, and almost certainly never will is whether or not Falvey has asked for more and ownership has said no. Falvey is on record saying that hasn't happened, but those comments are not credible IMHO.

The Mets spent $400MM last year and missed the playoffs. Cleveland, Detroit, Seattle, Milwaukee all spent fairly similar to the Twins. Boston, Houston, and the Yankees spent similar in percentage of revenue vs. payroll.

[dxpavelka]

4 hours ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Is that what I said? Rube. Your post was in regards to how many of the top spenders made the post season. 5 of 8 made it. Thats over 60%. So then I see how you said 3 out of the 9 lowest made it as well. So since YOU made it the top 8. Its only 7 out of the 22 other teams that got in. There are always going to be younger teams. Like the Tigers or Guardians or Twins or Royals or the Orioles who make it. Teams with a Skubal  or a Witt or a Gunderson/Holiday/Rutschman.who wont be there much longer and who have a short window. Because they wont pay the big bucks.The big spenders will be there most of the time on a regular basis. How many consecutive years have the Yankees and Dodgers been in the postseason? 2 teams occupying 16% of the spots nearly every year. I'm not spending anyone's money but if i could I would want have those teams budgets. Mr know it all. There's always going to be just 1 winner. And this year its the biggest spender of them all.

can't spend money you don't have.  We don't have Dodger money and never will under the current MLB economic system.

[Major League Ready]

32 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

What teams aren't spending money and consistently winning playoff series? 

“Consistently” is a relative term but outside of the Dodgers and Yankees, no team consistently wins playoff series.  This is especially true for all of the teams in the bottom half of revenue.  

If we talk about getting to the playoffs, Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee have significantly outperformed all of the other low revenue teams and half the teams in the top half of revenue.  Neither Milwaukee or Cleveland had a free agent that produced 1 WAR this year.  The Rays have not been good for a couple years but their 99-win 2023 team had one free agent (Zach Eflin) that produced 10% of their WAR.  Eflin was a tremendous value on a 3-year / $40M deal.  

The teams that have put the most good teams on the field were among the least inclined to spend.  They are the most inclined to trade established players for prospects.
 

[KirbyDome89]

14 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Agreed. Twins ownership has made an competitive amount of resources available, overall. Of course, ownership has also made lousy decisions on when to spend like the big cut after 2023. Most team owners are willing to open the wallets and double-down when it comes to the competitive window as a tool to increase revenues. What we don't know, and almost certainly never will is whether or not Falvey has asked for more and ownership has said no. Falvey is on record saying that hasn't happened, but those comments are not credible IMHO.

The Mets spent $400MM last year and missed the playoffs. Cleveland, Detroit, Seattle, Milwaukee all spent fairly similar to the Twins. Boston, Houston, and the Yankees spent similar in percentage of revenue vs. payroll.

This franchise had a generational talent at C, a future MVP at 1B, and a perennial CYA candidate heading the rotation in the mid 2000s. They were starting Phil Nevin, Jason Tyner, Nick Punto, and Rondell White in postseason games. Payroll didn't budge. It stayed stagnant again after they finally clawed out of all the losing in 2019. When have the Pohlads ever doubled down? 

[USAFChief]

17 hours ago, yeahyabetcha said:

The Twins are NEVER going to be able to spend at the levels that the Dodgers do.  They HAVE TO draft and develop some top line talent to compete.

NOBODY is asking the Twins to spend at the levels the Dodgers do. Nobody. 

But it's completely, totally unrealistic to think the Twins can win anything in MLB with nothing but internally drafted and developed talent. 

That's just wild fanboy nonsense. 

The Twins absolutely need to draft and develop top notch talent. They havent been so good at that.  I'd also say there's a huge hole in their international FA talent. We're like way behind in pulling talent from the Dominican and other Central/South American pools. Japan, Korea seem to be like....completely foreign to the Twins. 

Trades, of course, play their part.

And so do free agents.

Ignoring any talent stream is not how to run a successful MLB team.

You simply cant "draft and develop" your way to anything. 

[yeahyabetcha]

11 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

NOBODY is asking the Twins to spend at the levels the Dodgers do. Nobody. 

But it's completely, totally unrealistic to think the Twins can win anything in MLB with nothing but internally drafted and developed talent. 

That's just wild fanboy nonsense. 

The Twins absolutely need to draft and develop top notch talent. They havent been so good at that.  I'd also say there's a huge hole in their international FA talent. We're like way behind in pulling talent from the Dominican and other Central/South American pools. Japan, Korea seem to be like....completely foreign to the Twins. 

Trades, of course, play their part.

And so do free agents.

Ignoring any talent stream is not how to run a successful MLB team.

You simply cant "draft and develop" your way to anything. 

I NEVER said the Twins should not spend any money.  I guess I just get tired of the constant TD bitching for the Twins not spending 130, 150 or 200 million when it is not warranted.  
 

Wouldn’t developing Jenkins and one or two of the young starting pitchers into top line players be preferred over dropping $50 million in free agency??

[Trov]

I would take what Paddock said with a grain of salt, he always struck me as a guy that would always talk crap against his ex.  I am sure there are some things they could to on that front to help.  Top FA will not come here generally because we cannot offer the money other teams will, outside of what we did with CC, but the big deal was the 3rd time a charm thing.  Middle road guys are ones that may not just go with the biggest paycheck and will look for the little things.  Lower level guys or guys that are trying to make team from minor league deal may actually want to come here though.

Being that AAA is across the street they never have to worry about packing up and moving when they get called up, or have a second place.  However, those are not really the guys we want to target. 

[KirbyDome89]

2 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

“Consistently” is a relative term but outside of the Dodgers and Yankees, no team consistently wins playoff series.  This is especially true for all of the teams in the bottom half of revenue.  

If we talk about getting to the playoffs, Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee have significantly outperformed all of the other low revenue teams and half the teams in the top half of revenue.  Neither Milwaukee or Cleveland had a free agent that produced 1 WAR this year.  The Rays have not been good for a couple years but their 99-win 2023 team had one free agent (Zach Eflin) that produced 10% of their WAR.  Eflin was a tremendous value on a 3-year / $40M deal.  

The teams that have put the most good teams on the field were among the least inclined to spend.  They are the most inclined to trade established players for prospects.
 

You were just dogging on Seattle for their lack of postseason series wins, now that Cleveland, TB, and Milwaukee enter the chat we're sliding the goalposts to simply making the playoffs? Naw....

Since 2000:

Cleveland: 5 series won

Milwaukee: 3 series won

Tampa Bay: 4 series won, 2 of which were single game WCs. 

I'm not counting anything from 2020 (sorry Dodgers fans) but we don't use individual stats from that abbreviated season (for good reason) and the same applies to a watered down postseason. For all the flowers Milwaukee is getting, they have exactly one more series win than the Twins (a team synonymous with postseason ineptitude) this century. 

Spending next to nothing in FA is going to net you next to nothing in FA. It's not a "value," play; by definition you're paying for past performance. Ty France was "good value," if we want to use the meaningless WAR to $$ metric. 

The idea that you can simply spend your way to competitiveness is asinine. You need to draft and develop well. Denying that payroll doesn't also factor in heavily is just as dumb. 

[KirbyDome89]

10 minutes ago, yeahyabetcha said:

I NEVER said the Twins should not spend any money.  I guess I just get tired of the constant TD bitching for the Twins not spending 130, 150 or 200 million when it is not warranted.  
 

Wouldn’t developing Jenkins and one or two of the young starting pitchers into top line players be preferred over dropping $50 million in free agency??

It is warranted, that's the entire point. 

You need a foundation from which to work, but if you're not willing to spend the necessary $$ on materials the quality of the home is going to suffer. 

Jenkins becoming a solidly above average big league player would be a huge step towards relevancy, but if you're going to surround him with stopgap vets on bounce back deals, or a starting rotation full of back end guys, or whatever, that's a failure. 

[twinsfansd]

On 11/1/2025 at 12:15 PM, gman said:

I suspect that the Twins can't sign any free agent for a price they can get anyplace else. Which of course means they need to pay a premium. Secondly when their reputation was good, or at least ok, they still didn't sign Correa or Donaldson until near the end of spring training and they still paid a premium. And with that Correa still opted out after 1 year. 

Or wait out the market.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, yeahyabetcha said:

Wouldn’t developing Jenkins and one or two of the young starting pitchers into top line players be preferred over dropping $50 million in free agency?

How are developing Jenkins and dropping $50M in free agency mutually exclusive?

Believe it or not, teams can, and do both. 

The Twins don't have a MLB caliber 1st baseman, 2nd catcher, or much of a bullpen. Personally I'd add SS and 3rd as needing better play. 2 of 5 starters, minimum. 

Walker Jenkins isnt filling all those spots.

The point is to win.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

You were just dogging on Seattle for their lack of postseason series wins, now that Cleveland, TB, and Milwaukee enter the chat we're sliding the goalposts to simply making the playoffs? Naw....

Since 2000:

Cleveland: 5 series won

Milwaukee: 3 series won

Tampa Bay: 4 series won, 2 of which were single game WCs. 

I'm not counting anything from 2020 (sorry Dodgers fans) but we don't use individual stats from that abbreviated season (for good reason) and the same applies to a watered down postseason. For all the flowers Milwaukee is getting, they have exactly one more series win than the Twins (a team synonymous with postseason ineptitude) this century. 

Spending next to nothing in FA is going to net you next to nothing in FA. It's not a "value," play; by definition you're paying for past performance. Ty France was "good value," if we want to use the meaningless WAR to $$ metric. 

The idea that you can simply spend your way to competitiveness is asinine. You need to draft and develop well. Denying that payroll doesn't also factor in heavily is just as dumb. 

If you look at exactly what I said instead of interpreting for your convenience.  I said that no teams win consistently in the playoffs and "IF WE LOOK AT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS" which is a measurement with far more data points, Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee have been the best.  In other words, playoff success is a pretty nuanced measure so perhaps we should also look at the thousands of regular season games in order to use a far bigger sample size.

I have also made many posts about the advantages of a larger payroll and the impact of revenue disparity.  I have supported any posters who point out the obvious advantage.  However, what I have none done is ignored the reality of the ability to spend being dependent upon revenue.  I also have not ignored the overwhelming evidence that winning with below average revenue is far more dependent on drafting and trading for prospects.  Free agent spending has had a miniscule impact in comparison.   

[RpR]

1 hour ago, yeahyabetcha said:

I NEVER said the Twins should not spend any money.  I guess I just get tired of the constant TD bitching for the Twins not spending 130, 150 or 200 million when it is not warranted.  
 

Wouldn’t developing Jenkins and one or two of the young starting pitchers into top line players be preferred over dropping $50 million in free agency??

You do not develop any one into a top line player; they either have the ability or they do not. Coaches in AAA and the Majors are not some miracle potion to make honey out of vinegar.

You have to shop to top line athletes, either when they come to the minors or hit the Bigs.

[Riverbrian]

On 11/1/2025 at 11:33 PM, DocBauer said:

Honestly, there are times where I hate being an optimist in general. Especially when it comes to the Vikings, or in this case, the Twins.

I so want to believe Falvey is honest when he states he wants and expects Lopez and Ryan to be on the Twins opening day. Right THERE you have a chance to compete with a sound SP staff with some depth of a healthy Ober followed by SWR and maybe Bradley. We'll see how that shakes out.

Crazy at it may sound, I may be more worried about the offense than the bullpen. Can Lewis stay healthy throughout 2026 and get his attack and AB profile regulated? Can Lee figure out his difficulties, which he says he has, and make corrections to at least be a quality super utility INF at some point? Can Rodriguez JUST STAY HEALTHY enough to finally debut and start to flash his talent? 

And Jenkins, Gonzalez, Culpepper, and some arms and additional prospects are so close to debuting.

Like you, I don't like a bunch of 1yr deals. They have their place. The organization should be in place to have enough younger talent with control in place. But aren't we close to that?

I'm OK for ONE more season for Falvey and his staff to figure 1B out with a few interesting options internally. 

Reference to someone like Williams on a 1yr deal for the pen is exactly what I've been talking about. And I'm certain there has to be another RH BP option also looking for a comeback season. How about 1 more year of Coulombe, for example.

Even if the Twins aren't going to spend a lot, there's room to MAYBE construct a relatively cheap pen for 2026. That gives more time for Lewis, Raya, and others to make their move. 

SWR and Bradley are out of options.  Push will come to shove. Especially if Matthews or Abel suddenly starts throwing great. SOMEONE ELSE moves to the pen we might not have expected initially.

But bullpen wise, that's a potential good gain. Potentially. 

So while we are generally in agreement about a preponderance of 1yr deals,  I'd state if the Twins had ANY idea of competing AT ALL, a couple 1yr deals would make perfect sense. 

 

 

The only honest answer that Falvey can give is... I don't know. Fans will not tolerate... I don't know... for an answer. Fans will continue tearing him a part. Falvey is therefore put in an impossible position when he is asked the question before he could possibly know the answer.

Let's say he intends on trading Ryan but doesn't get the value he is seeking. Ryan stays and he told everybody including Ryan that he intends on trading him when prematurely asked the question. I see no good coming out of that.

Let's say he intends on keeping Ryan but gets blown away by an offer. Fans will tear him a part for that. 

With that said. 

The Twins need to trade Ryan whose value will not get any higher than it is right now.

You have to trade him this off-season and hopefully acquire a young 1B in return. 

If not... the Twins should spend the off-season converting an OF'er to 1B. I won't offer names for suggestions. 

If not... Go with Julien or Sabato or Fedko or me and live with the results. I'm sick of paying for the same mistake over and over again. 

One year rentals can make sense at times. They no longer make sense when we are in the 7th year of plug and play. 

They no longer make sense when Ty France is not only rostered but playing EVERY DAY!.

Whey Ty France is playing every day after he signed for a million bucks non-guaranteed because nobody else wanted to pay him 1.5 million. You are no longer eating nutritious meals. You are drinking Soda to stay alive because nothing is coming out of the tap.

You are not going to win drinking Mountain Dew instead of water. 

DIG A DAMN WELL. 

 

[Riverbrian]

On 11/1/2025 at 10:13 PM, DocBauer said:

Pardon my language ahead of time, but this is what has pissed me off the most about ownership and FINALLY convinced me how horrible and petty and misguided they are.

Joe, supposedly, took over for Jim. And Joe clearly spoke about a bright future where he could see a $180M payroll. And then it all came tumbling down. And when Houston came calling about Correa, it was JIM who the Astos called to make the deal!

I guess we can thank Joe for actually WANTING the Twins to do well. And I guess we can thank him for the extra $ push in 2025 to get the Twins payroll to around $142M. And MAYBE Joe can find a way to push the payroll to $120-125M to give the Twins at least a fighting chance in 2026, but we clearly have an ownership/family in complete disarray. No matter their spin on bringing in minority owners and still have control of the team, they are CLEARY looking to still sell after the next labor deal, hoping for a higher value.

They THINK they are being smart. They THINK the Twins value will increase somewhat with a different agreement. Meanwhile, they seem content to allow their product to lower itself in value based on fan interest and tickets sold and then STILL have to lose about $500M in payment back to the minority owners when a final sale takes place around 2028.

Even IF the team is sold for $2B in 2028, after the payout to the new minority owners, they STILL "only" walk away with the original $1.5B they could have sold the team for this past offseason. So what was ultimately accomplished?

 

When it comes to the dynamic between Ownership and the Front Office... I have no idea. I don't know who to blame but... it's the people who hire the people so ultimately it's the Pohlads but specifically why it's the Pohlads... I have no idea. 

I just have suspicions resulted from roster decision actions over the years. 

That's why I'd like the answer to that specific question. Why did the Front office think that money wasn't going to be a problem in the future?

Payroll was climbing upward steadily. When you are not developing or you don't trust your development. You got to keep going back to free agency in the face of rising salaries on your current roster. It is going to climb to over the line without development to keep the payroll in check. 

Even the Red Sox reach the point where the money runs out. When they do.... they fire a World Series winning GM like Dombroski because they end up in a position where the only answer for improvement is to spend more money and they don't have it anymore. The Yankees run out of money. Any team not the Dodgers or Mets will run out of the money. 

Based on actions... It is my opinion that the front office thought they could keep increasing payroll. I want to know why they thought that. There is nothing in the history of the Minnesota Twins that should suggest that they can keep raising payroll upward... even if Joe Pohlad is the one who suggested it. 

[SteveLV]

Leftovers.

You know, the ones that get pushed to the back of the fridge and you forget about for 10 days and then notice when you are looking for something else.  You take a look and give it the sniff test and cringe a little, but figure it is probably still good.  So you eat it, and it tastes off but you survive.

That is the caliber of FA's the Twins will be getting.

After the Dodgers and Yankees and all the other real teams have skimmed off the cream of the FA crop that is what we are left with.  Leftovers.

The only real hope for the Twins to be truly competitive is to trade off Lopez and Ryan for youngsters (and Buxton too if he wants to abandon ship and have a chance to play relevant games), play the youngsters and hope multiple ones turn out to be good/great players and HOPE that MLB can fix the sport with a new CBA in 2027 after an inevitable work stoppage.

On the new CBA, I had another thought:  the new CBA could allow teams that re-sign their own players to pay a higher figure than competitors.  In a salary floor/cap environment, that would encourage teams and players to stay married to each other for their careers.

And I am convinced a fair MLB will never happen.  Unless someone with enormous FU money buys the Twins--and why would they?--we are doomed to a AAAA franchise.

Finally, I am simply stunned that the underdog, plucky Dodgers won the WS.  Just flabbergasted!  Who could have seen that coming?

[Heiny]

On 11/1/2025 at 3:47 PM, LA Vikes Fan said:

I don't agree. With the good FA it will only come down to money if the Twins offer a significant over pay. Good players get paid wherever they go. If you're Josh Naylor and you get roughly the same offer from 3 or 4 teams including the Mariners, Astros, and the Twins, why on earth would you go to Minnesota? You wouldn't. You would go to the team that gives you the best chance to win and be in the playoffs. That isn't the Twins. In fact, you would probably take less to stay in Seattle because they actually competed for a WS berth in 2025 and might again in 2026 and probably take less to go to Houston and compete for the playoffs.  

Sorry, but I think your take that "money is the only thing" is way too cynical and not in line with the way things actually work. 

 

I'm curious.  Can you give me a list of players who were offered more money to play for the Twins but went elsewhere?  For any reason?  I'm not arguing, but I'd really like to know which players do that.

[Riverbrian]

15 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Believe it or not, teams can, and do both. 

Yes they can and it's actually a necessity that they do both.  

Actually... they need to take advantage of all 3 primary methods of staffing a roster. Trades being the third. 

If you fail or struggle in one the three facets... you have to compensate with the other two methods.

Due to budget... Free Agency was already compromised to a degree and will be compromised in the future.  Development and Trades will need to pick up that slack and as you accurately point out. We have no 1B, No SS and I'll say we have also failed in CF. To make things worse... Catching is perhaps the worst failure of all. We have only produced Jeffers and he is gone next year... If not this off-season if the Twins want to cash in. 

When you have all of these development holes. Your limited budget must be spread around to acquire lesser free agents... 4 million here... 4 million there... 7 million here and 10 million there. Instead of taking that combined 25 million or whatever it is and plugging one hole maybe two with a needle mover.  

Our budget dictates that the Twins must prioritize development so they can afford decent free agents.

We must develop or die as we stand here in the emergency room looking at all of the machines, tubes and nurses attending to our club. 

EDIT... I see that you posted almost the same thing earlier. 

[Doctor Wu]

On 11/2/2025 at 12:28 AM, tony&rodney said:

All ideas are welcome. O'Hearn might be ok. Arraez is strictly a DH with no power and no speed. If the Twins were flush with power, speed, and good defenders then Arraez would be at least a consideration. As is the Twins are flush with DH players. Mendez can hit. He is also a DH. I'm ready to see any or all of Jenkins, Rodriguez, Fedko, and Culpepper. I really like Gonzalez but he is a DH also until he gets more repetitions. Change should happen. It is difficult to know when the youngins will be ready. 

Seems like O'Hearn would be a good get, but I see him more as a first baseman or DH. But I'd love to give some of our minor league guys a shot at a MLB job too. If they are knocking at the door, let 'em in!

[jorgenswest]

The Twins can fit a Naylor type bat in the budget.

I would argue that signing a good bat for the middle of the lineup helps with the development of the young players. Jenkins is going to see better pitchers in a good bat is up in a batter or two. He will see better pitches if more runners are one base.

I don’t think it helps to sign a player in the tiers below Naylor. Players that will take team friendly one year deals. Players that last dominated 3 or more years ago. Players that only hit well on one side of the platoon.

If the budget is truly that prohibitive I would prefer one significant signing instead of spreading it on one year deals across a handful of positions.

[DJL44]

17 hours ago, USAFChief said:

NOBODY is asking the Twins to spend at the levels the Dodgers do. Nobody. 

But it's completely, totally unrealistic to think the Twins can win anything in MLB with nothing but internally drafted and developed talent. 

That's just wild fanboy nonsense. 

The Twins absolutely need to draft and develop top notch talent. They haven't been so good at that.  I'd also say there's a huge hole in their international FA talent. We're like way behind in pulling talent from the Dominican and other Central/South American pools. Japan, Korea seem to be like....completely foreign to the Twins. 

Trades, of course, play their part.

And so do free agents.

Ignoring any talent stream is not how to run a successful MLB team.

You simply cant "draft and develop" your way to anything. 

I will add, it's especially true if you don't offer contract extensions to your internally drafted and developed talent. Players take a season or two to get established and when they're finally good it's time to trade them for the next round because they're getting expensive in arbitration and losing seasons of team control. Somehow they have to line up all of their draftees and trade acquisitions in a 2-year window where the roster is both talented and cheap at the same time. If you give Falvey 30 years he might be able to do that once.

[KirbyDome89]

30 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

If you look at exactly what I said instead of interpreting for your convenience.  I said that no teams win consistently in the playoffs and "IF WE LOOK AT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS" which is a measurement with far more data points, Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee have been the best.  In other words, playoff success is a pretty nuanced measure so perhaps we should also look at the thousands of regular season games in order to use a far bigger sample size.

I have also made many posts about the advantages of a larger payroll and the impact of revenue disparity.  I have supported any posters who point out the obvious advantage.  However, what I have none done is ignored the reality of the ability to spend being dependent upon revenue.  I also have not ignored the overwhelming evidence that winning with below average revenue is far more dependent on drafting and trading for prospects.  Free agent spending has had a miniscule impact in comparison.   

Nothing convenient about it, I quoted and replied to exactly what you said...

You chose to use playoff series wins as your metric for postseason success, and you said Seattle was a terrible example of both spending and winning. Playoff success is too nuanced? Now we're sliding further to regular season records...smh pass.

Zero tears about an inability to spend for these clubs with revenues exceeding $300M and payrolls barely (if even) cracking $100M. Nobody is disputing the importance of drafting or developing. This entire line of conversation started with a post that claimed payroll doesn't matter. It very much does; spending also correlates with winning. 

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, DJL44 said:

I will add, it's especially true if you don't offer contract extensions to your internally drafted and developed talent. Players take a season or two to get established and when they're finally good it's time to trade them for the next round because they're getting expensive in arbitration and losing seasons of team control. Somehow they have to line up all of their draftees and trade acquisitions in a 2-year window where the roster is both talented and cheap at the same time. If you give Falvey 30 years he might be able to do that once.

Exactly.  There are fallacies with going after free-agents and other established players, but the fallacy with relying on youth is the idea that you get "6 years" when you develop from within or trade for MLB-ready players.  You laid out why you lose a couple years at either end.

Add to that the fiction, when Target Field was being sought by ownership, that a brand spanking new ballyard would allow them to sign their own stars - just a little public funding, please..

[DJL44]

An article on contract extension candidates for the Twins would be interesting. Here's my list of potential extension candidates

Ryan Jeffers

Simeon Woods Richardson

Taj Bradley

Royce Lewis

Luke Keaschall

Walker Jenkins