The Latest Trade Rumors Regarding Joe Ryan and Pablo López

[tarheeltwinsfan]

11 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Groundhog Day for Twins fans with a you pick it theme:

Should the Twins trade, hold, or half-ass it with Lopez, Ryan?

Will the Twins roll it back again?

Can the Twins rebuild?

What is the budget? Is it $110M Is it $140M? Is it $80M? Nobody knows.

Will the Twins sit things out waiting for an answer of what to do and then say we tried but the market was difficult?

 

"It's de je vu all over again"  - Yogi Berra.

[Riverbrian]

Let me present another look at what needs to be considered. 

Pitchers get hurt. They get hurt often and sometimes severely. 

Here is the nightmare scenario. And it's a scenario that isn't out of the question because he's a pitcher... and pitchers get hurt. 

Joe Ryan feels some tightness... let's make it June for the worst timing possible... they check it out and say "Tommy John". 

This would be really unfortunate timing for Joe because he will be coming back right around the time that he reaches free agency and I'd feel really bad for him personally... because he would be losing a lot of money in free agency based on how he was performing when he went down. 

But... Forget about Joe. More importantly... Let's worry about me. My team... The Twins!!! 

Here's how that horrible event attaches itself like zebra mussels or landmines to the the Good Ship Riverbrian. 

1. He's out for this year and most if not all of next year... and then he is a free agent. He will have thrown his last pitch for the Twins. 

2. Was a 52.7 trade value on BBTV. When he gets back... All of that trade value is gone!!! 

3. That is the equivalent value of Bryce Eldridge... who is the equivalent value of Walter Jenkins. The loss to the Twins... the damage to my team... It's roughly the equivalent of Walter Jenkins suffering a career ending injury. That's what the loss of that value is.  The potential loss of that hypothetical horrible scenario is... ???... Like removing Walter Jenkins... Gone... vanished without a trace from our now and future. 

4. This isn't to debate if the Giants or Twins would make that trade nor to debate BBTV values or the value of the players themselves... Nor is it even to debate how many wins the Twins will have without Joe Ryan in 2026. 

It's to make the point... we get nothing. We have a player with upper end value that can return upper end value in a trade and the possibility of injury isn't far fetched. 

I respect the opinion of anyone who thinks we shouldn't trade Ryan... that means you Byron Buxton.

I just ask you to consider the injury risk.

I don't want to trade him but I'm trading him if his trade value is indeed that high. It takes value to get value! 

[tony&rodney]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

Let me present another look at what needs to be considered. 

Pitchers get hurt. They get hurt often and sometimes severely. 

Here is the nightmare scenario. And it's a scenario that isn't out of the question because he's a pitcher... and pitchers get hurt. 

Joe Ryan feels some tightness... let's make it June for the worst timing possible... they check it out and say "Tommy John". 

This would be really unfortunate timing for Joe because he will be coming back right around the time that he reaches free agency and I'd feel really bad for him personally... because he would be losing a lot of money in free agency based on how he was performing when he went down. 

But... Forget about Joe. More importantly... Let's worry about me. My team... The Twins!!! 

Here's how that horrible event attaches itself like zebra mussels or landmines to the the Good Ship Riverbrian. 

1. He's out for this year and most if not all of next year... and then he is a free agent. He will have thrown his last pitch for the Twins. 

2. Was a 52.7 trade value on BBTV. When he gets back... All of that trade value is gone!!! 

3. That is the equivalent value of Bryce Eldridge... who is the equivalent value of Walter Jenkins. The loss to the Twins... the damage to my team... It's roughly the equivalent of Walter Jenkins suffering a career ending injury. That's what the loss of that value is.  The potential loss of that hypothetical horrible scenario is... ???... Like removing Walter Jenkins... Gone... vanished without a trace from our now and future. 

4. This isn't to debate if the Giants or Twins would make that trade nor to debate BBTV values or the value of the players themselves... Nor is it even to debate how many wins the Twins will have without Joe Ryan in 2026. 

It's to make the point... we get nothing. We have a player with upper end value that can return upper end value in a trade and the possibility of injury isn't far fetched. 

I respect the opinion of anyone who thinks we shouldn't trade Ryan... that means you Byron Buxton.

I just ask you to consider the injury risk.

I don't want to trade him but I'm trading him if his trade value is indeed that high. It takes value to get value! 

To all this above, add that the 2026 Twins are not a playoff team with a payroll below $150M. Reality.

[AceWrigley]

10 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

I may be the only person who follows baseball on this site who doesn't believe the Tigers will trade Skubal.

That makes 2 of us. I don't think Detroit trades Skubal, The team would be in an uproar. Tiger fans would crucify GM Greenberg. Skubal is such a difference maker. He can beat you any day he pitches. Skubal stays in Detroit.

As for the Twins, I think any talk about competing is fruitless. I think ownership will continue to pare payroll, first by trading Ryan this winter and then Lopez during the spring when some hopeful contender loses 2 starters to injury and will cough up for Lopez. But then again, I know nothing.

[TopGunn#22]

I think Detroit will do everything they CAN to extend Skubal.  But sometimes it's just not meant to be.  As a comparison, consider Johan Santana.  I think the Twins desperately wanted to keep Santana, but the reality was that there was such a bigger salary waiting in free agency that it just wasn't realistic for the Twins to keep him at that price point.

On top of that, pitchers are notoriously "breakable."  The Twins were forced to trade Santana to the Mets for a package of prospects.  None of them really worked out.  But it was either trade Santana and have something to show for it, or let him walk and get nothing.  Santana only lasted 3 seasons for the Mets, who weathered that storm the best they could, but could you imagine the Twins trying to do that in 2008?  With Joe Mauer's big payday around the corner? 

Both Detroit and Pittsburg are in the same boat.  They each have the BEST pitcher in their league and it's almost impossible to determine which one is better.  But in the economic landscape MLB is in right now, there are definite "Haves" and "Have Nots." 

I see the Pirates backed up against the same wall as the Tigers.  The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Giants or Mets would appear to be where both Skubal and Skenes will someday end up.

The difference between Pittsburg, Detroit and Minnesota is that the Pirates and Tigers MUST come up with better trades than the Twins did for Santana.  And the risk to the Tigers or Pirates if they agree to a $500 million dollar contract with either of their star pitchers and they suffer an injury that causes their Ace to miss a season or worse, end a career is a financial hole that a Pittsburg or Detroit can't dig out of.

To a Dodgers or Yankees, with the resources they have, they could find a way to mitigate the damage.  Not so for Pittsburg and Detroit.  It's an unpleasant reality to the economic landscape in MLB that will either be addressed before the 2027 season or left unresolved in some version of the status quo for the future.  

[Woof Bronzer]

15 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Baseball plays every day, 162 games. The NBA and NHL play half that many games, the NFL just a bit more than 10% of the games. All media contracts are national in the three other leagues. In the case of the NBA, there are suitcases of money arriving from their international presence. MLB does not take in nearly as much money via national deals. MLB wants to move towards more of a 'one pile' media money deal, but local markets are very diverse and there isn't the attention paid to every game like the once a week NFL.

Thanks for the response, a lot of this makes sense.  

I guess what bothers me about the whole salary cap conversation is the idea that nothing can ever change, and we must always just accept things as they are.  I disagree with that idea wholeheartedly.  We can actually improve things.  We can make things better.  We just have to try.  And we don't have to just live with whatever most benefits our billionaire overlords.  Oh no, a salary cap might somehow lose some billionaires a few million dollars, the humanity. 

Baseball is a game.  It only exists as an extremely lucrative business because of fans.   It's ok to make changes that benefit fans from time to time.  The fact that teams like the As and Rockies and Pirates are actively trying to lose in order to further enrich a single billionaire is not sustainable, and more and more teams (ahem...) are going to do this if they can.  Something needs to change and I refuse to believe that change is impossible.  

[twinstalker]

19 hours ago, DJL44 said:

Doubtful. That would mean they didn't even shop him around to find the highest bid. Lopez would be coveted by multiple teams.

Coveted, yes, but they're not getting anything good for him.  They could get someone who has a great slash line in the minors but has underlying statistical issues that many people here ignore.  Kala'i Rosario is an extreme example of this, but it will probably be someone more like Owen Caissie or Dalton Rushing, guys whose similar issues are less obvious and covered up by some of the dunderheads who rate them highly.  Teams (most of them, anyhow) know who their real future regulars/stars are, and the Twins aren't getting them by sending out Lopez' salary, as good as he's been.  Ryan would get that.

But here's a possible deal for Lopez that would be really good for the Twins:  Lopez for Yankee's SS/OF Dax Kilby.  

Basically, the Yankees know he's far away, they can probably take on Lopez' salary, and Kilby has a real shot at being good.  Straight out of high school, he was placed in the low A FSL (pitcher's league) and struck out only 14% of the time while putting one of the nicest slash lines in the entire draft class at age 18.  If the Twins were smart, that would be their target for Lopez.  Aiming too high or going for guys with high K rates (Caissie) or guys who were old for their leagues and played in systems with only bandboxes (Rushing) is probably more likely.  I doubt the Twins have someone like Kilby at the top of their list for Lopez, and he should be.  I doubt they get better.

[tony&rodney]

1 hour ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Thanks for the response, a lot of this makes sense.  

I guess what bothers me about the whole salary cap conversation is the idea that nothing can ever change, and we must always just accept things as they are.  I disagree with that idea wholeheartedly.  We can actually improve things.  We can make things better.  We just have to try.  And we don't have to just live with whatever most benefits our billionaire overlords.  Oh no, a salary cap might somehow lose some billionaires a few million dollars, the humanity. 

Baseball is a game.  It only exists as an extremely lucrative business because of fans.   It's ok to make changes that benefit fans from time to time.  The fact that teams like the As and Rockies and Pirates are actively trying to lose in order to further enrich a single billionaire is not sustainable, and more and more teams (ahem...) are going to do this if they can.  Something needs to change and I refuse to believe that change is impossible.  

Many people would like change and are tired of billionaires, but look at our government and the people we elect at the national level. Anywhere from $30-50+ Billion has been shifted from the middle and lower classes in the last 50 years. Until there are changes in voting habits things will get worse as far as affordable in sports, housing, food, medical care, and more. Power is the driving force. Sports are our drug of choice. It cost me very little money. Mostly I'm hopeful of positive change but I have zero control. It's just entertainment.

[Woof Bronzer]

4 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Many people would like change and are tired of billionaires, but look at our government and the people we elect at the national level. Anywhere from $30-50+ Billion has been shifted from the middle and lower classes in the last 50 years. Until there are changes in voting habits things will get worse as far as affordable in sports, housing, food, medical care, and more. Power is the driving force. Sports are our drug of choice. It cost me very little money. Mostly I'm hopeful of positive change but I have zero control. It's just entertainment.

You speak truth my man.  It's so tiring living in a world for and by billionaires.  But let's not despair.  I'm hopeful of change too.  And go Twins.  

[Woof Bronzer]

4 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Many people would like change and are tired of billionaires, but look at our government and the people we elect at the national level. Anywhere from $30-50+ Billion has been shifted from the middle and lower classes in the last 50 years. 

And I'm sure you know this but it's $30-$50 TRILLION.  I've seen a study suggesting as much as $80 trillion in wealth redistribution since 1975.  Communism for the rich.  

[tony&rodney]

24 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

And I'm sure you know this but it's $30-$50 TRILLION.  I've seen a study suggesting as much as $80 trillion in wealth redistribution since 1975.  Communism for the rich.  

Yes, trillion. It is indeed communism for the poor. I was trying to be very conservative with the 30-50 trillion dollar number but have seen an economic report in the last year that did use $80 trillion. Don't remember the exact source. I read way too much. One of my goals for 2026 is to daydream more often and play the piano.