Twins Land in MLB.com’s Lowest Tier for 2026

[Cody Christie]

Preseason rankings abound, but MLB.com recently delivered a bleak forecast for the Minnesota Twins. MLB.com’s Mike Petriello recently grouped every Major League club into tiers reflecting their potential to win during the 2026 season. Instead of ranking teams from 1 to 30, he grouped organizations into roughly 8 or 9 groups based on expectations, roster strength, and overall outlook.

At the very top sits a tier of its own occupied by the Los Angeles Dodgers. The next level includes a collection of clear contenders like the Toronto Blue Jays, Chicago Cubs, Seattle Mariners, Philadelphia Phillies, Boston Red Sox, Detroit Tigers, and New York Yankees. Minnesota, however, landed on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Petriello placed the Twins in the lowest league tier, with only the Angels sharing that spot. It's a grouping that raises a pressing question: What is the path forward?

To be clear, Petriello did not suggest these teams will necessarily finish with the worst records in baseball. In fact, he acknowledged that both the Twins and Angels still have talent on their rosters, including superstar players like Byron Buxton and Mike Trout. The concern is less about pure ability and more about the direction of the organizations themselves.

According to Petriello, the issue primarily concerns the vibe around the clubs. For Minnesota, the last several months have shaped those vibes. Uncertainty after last year’s trade deadline and injuries to key pitchers like Pablo Lopez and David Festa have created a sense that the franchise is straddling competing and retooling. Outsiders often struggle to interpret that ambiguity positively.

The data-driven projections do little to calm those concerns either. FanGraphs currently projects the Twins for the 23rd most wins (78 wins) in baseball during the 2026 season. The Angels sit even lower at 27th in those projections (73 wins). Only a handful of teams project worse, including the Chicago White Sox, Washington Nationals, and Colorado Rockies, who FanGraphs expects to finish with fewer than 70 wins.

Ironically, Petriello placed several of those clubs in a higher tier than Minnesota. The Cardinals, Rockies, Nationals, and White Sox all landed in the eighth tier rather than the ninth. His reasoning was that those organizations appear to have a clearer long-term plan in place, even if the short-term results may still be rough. That distinction highlights the real criticism facing the Twins right now. It is not just about wins and losses. It is about perception.

Minnesota still features a roster capable of surprising people if things break the right way. Young players could step forward, the pitching staff could stabilize, and a few early-season wins could quickly change the narrative around a team. But heading into the season, the national view of the franchise remains uncertain.

The Twins may not accept the assessment, but it clearly outlines the challenge they face as they enter 2026. If the organization wants to shift the conversation about its future, it must do so on the field once the games start.

View full rumor

[LastOnePicked]

"That distinction highlights the real criticism facing the Twins right now. It is not just about wins and losses. It is about perception."

With respect, it's not about "vibes" or "perception." It's about gravity and reality. A team in the Twins' position has only a few options for building a real contender. You have to draft exceptionally well, develop talent exceptionally well and trade exceptionally well. You have to accumulate top-tier prospects in the down years and open payroll spending when a core begins to gel. And you have to be absolutely laser-focused on building and recycling value.

A team that wanted to contend in the foreseeable future absolutely positively had to trade Buxton, Lopez, Ryan and Jeffers this offseason at the height of their value. The Twins couldn't take action, and were only left with a vague mandate from an out-of-touch owner to "win now." As a result, the Twins are still too far away from a full and productive rebuild and way too far away from being a contender. In other words, they're in the worst possible spot to be in heading into the CBA mess.

It's sad, but it is nice to have some national writers supply this much-needed splash of cold reality on the FO, and maybe the fanbase, too. I hope the Twins eventually turn things around, but they haven't even started the process yet.

[UpstateNewYorker]

Maybe the next wave of prospects (Jenkins, Abel, Gonzalez, etc) will have some impact this season, but otherwise this is the weakest roster the team has had in 10 years.  

[Dawgzilla]

No path forward, but to stink!  Putrid!!!!  Pohlads think fans will come...yea right...maybe to see stars on other team!   Nah.....to expensive to go even then!  Pass!

[Whitey333]

Interesting article in that it just validates what most of us have been thinking.  That this team has very little chance of being competitive now and no direction for the future development of the team.  I hope i am wrong but this could be one of the bleakest years and outlook in recent memory.

[Swing Batter-Batter]

ESPN put them at the absolute bottom of the list on off season moves, receiving the only F, they gave out.  This coming from MLB.com cannot possibly be a surprise to anyone paying even minimal attention.

[LambchoP]

This year should not be about chasing a wild ard spot, but analyzing our young talent. Find out who's ready for the bigs and where they fit on the roster. For pitchers, find out who stays in the rotation and who is best in the pen. Over the off-season, the roster needs to be better constructed and probably a lot of guys moved on from to make room for the next wave of guys like Jenkins, Rodriguez, Gonzalez, Culpeper and anyone else who looks ready. They have to move on from these big slow DH type guys who can't field for ****. Getting more athletic and aggressive style kind of guys on the team will make for a much more entertaining watch.

[RpR]

1 hour ago, LambchoP said:

Over the off-season, the roster needs to be better constructed and probably a lot of guys moved on from to make room for the next wave of guys like Jenkins, Rodriguez, Gonzalez, Culpeper and anyone else who looks ready. 

Wow, I remember when this was being said about Larnach, Waller, Julien, Kirilloff etc., etc., etc.  😵‍💫

[JADBP]

On 3/6/2026 at 10:17 AM, RpR said:

Wow, I remember when this was being said about Larnach, Waller, Julien, Kirilloff etc., etc., etc.  😵‍💫

Yeah....that didn't work out well because Twins development process sucks big time!  I hate to say this, but the time is right to start the rebuild process....I just don't know if we have the right coaches, up and down the MLB and affiliate teams.  I can't say because we recently replaced many of them, but the track record over the last few years SUCKED.  Maybe with the exception of pitching....we did OK there, not great, but at least OK.  In position players, we sucked!

[Major League Ready]

On 3/6/2026 at 11:17 AM, RpR said:

Wow, I remember when this was being said about Larnach, Waller, Julien, Kirilloff etc., etc., etc.  😵‍💫

You really don't grasp the difference between failed execution and good or bad strategy.  They got an F because they followed a strategy that was highly likely to fail.  To now follow an inferior strategy because they failed to execute strategies that have proven to be essential would be gross incompetence.  Thus, they got the only F because they illustrated their incompetence.  By they, I mean ownership because this is Tom Pohlad's doing.  The organization failed to execute but taking this direction and following this strategy is on ownership. 

[RpR]

12 hours ago, JADBP said:

Yeah....that didn't work out well because Twins development process sucks big time!  I hate to say this, but the time is right to start the rebuild process....I just don't know if we have the right coaches, up and down the MLB and affiliate teams.  I can't say because we recently replaced many of them, but the track record over the last few years SUCKED.  Maybe with the exception of pitching....we did OK there, not great, but at least OK.  In position players, we sucked!

Most likely the players were simply not good enough.

[RpR]

5 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

You really don't grasp the difference between failed execution and good or bad strategy.  They got an F because they followed a strategy that was highly likely to fail.  To now follow an inferior strategy because they failed to execute strategies that have proven to be essential would be gross incompetence.  Thus, they got the only F because they illustrated their incompetence.  By they, I mean ownership because this is Tom Pohlad's doing.  The organization failed to execute but taking this direction and following this strategy is on ownership. 

Or the players showed how good they really were.

As the old saying goes, you cannot get blood out of a turnip.

[Hubie29]

On 3/5/2026 at 1:47 PM, LastOnePicked said:

"That distinction highlights the real criticism facing the Twins right now. It is not just about wins and losses. It is about perception."

With respect, it's not about "vibes" or "perception." It's about gravity and reality. A team in the Twins' position has only a few options for building a real contender. You have to draft exceptionally well, develop talent exceptionally well and trade exceptionally well. You have to accumulate top-tier prospects in the down years and open payroll spending when a core begins to gel. And you have to be absolutely laser-focused on building and recycling value.

A team that wanted to contend in the foreseeable future absolutely positively had to trade Buxton, Lopez, Ryan and Jeffers this offseason at the height of their value. The Twins couldn't take action, and were only left with a vague mandate from an out-of-touch owner to "win now." As a result, the Twins are still too far away from a full and productive rebuild and way too far away from being a contender. In other words, they're in the worst possible spot to be in heading into the CBA mess.

It's sad, but it is nice to have some national writers supply this much-needed splash of cold reality on the FO, and maybe the fanbase, too. I hope the Twins eventually turn things around, but they haven't even started the process yet.

Problem is, our trades bring back less talent than what we traded. That isn't going to get you ahead. We need to add to the talent we have, which is not much, or get out of the business. 

[Riverbrian]

The Angels tier... Has to be the absolute worst tier. 

If you are on this tier... It's not a tier you want to be on.

 

[Major League Ready]

8 hours ago, RpR said:

Or the players showed how good they really were.

As the old saying goes, you cannot get blood out of a turnip.

Let's just follow your logic here.  The players turned out to be bad so let's keep them because the next wave of players also might also turn out to be bad. 

[RpR]

18 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Let's just follow your logic here.  The players turned out to be bad so let's keep them because the next wave of players also might also turn out to be bad. 

Not even close, but, if that is true, you make sense.

[USAFChief]

5 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

The Angels tier... Has to be the absolute worst tier. 

If you are on this tier... It's not a tier you want to be on.

 

Brings a tier to my eye.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

On 3/8/2026 at 8:04 AM, Major League Ready said:

They got an F because they followed a strategy that was highly likely to fail.  To now follow an inferior strategy because they failed to execute strategies that have proven to be essential would be gross incompetence.  Thus, they got the only F because they illustrated their incompetence.  By they, I mean ownership because this is Tom Pohlad's doing.  The organization failed to execute but taking this direction and following this strategy is on ownership. 

Competitive advantage and capability to execute are the critical inputs to strategy selection. If a strategy is good on paper, but you aren’t capable of doing it and your competitors are better at it than you are, is it a good strategy?

in other words, the CEO should know that the board backs their strategy and fails at their job if the board doesn’t. Tom owned up to the Pohlad family failure to go for the jugular. I think Falvey failed by putting himself and the Twins in a position where the rug got yanked out from under him. He should have had a better rapport with the ownership group than that.

deeper into the strategy weeds, this team has shown capability to develop outfielders and pitchers, and terrible capability to develop SS and 1B. So why the hell do they keep acquiring outfielders, trade away their one and only good SS in 20 years, and never actually invest in 1B? It’s not just that they aren’t executing it. These are purposeful holes and surpluses on the roster that the surplus isn’t very valuable and the holes are extremely valuable relative to the league.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Competitive advantage and capability to execute are the critical inputs to strategy selection. If a strategy is good on paper, but you aren’t capable of doing it and your competitors are better at it than you are, is it a good strategy?

in other words, the CEO should know that the board backs their strategy and fails at their job if the board doesn’t. Tom owned up to the Pohlad family failure to go for the jugular. I think Falvey failed by putting himself and the Twins in a position where the rug got yanked out from under him. He should have had a better rapport with the ownership group than that.

deeper into the strategy weeds, this team has shown capability to develop outfielders and pitchers, and terrible capability to develop SS and 1B. So why the hell do they keep acquiring outfielders, trade away their one and only good SS in 20 years, and never actually invest in 1B? It’s not just that they aren’t executing it. These are purposeful holes and surpluses on the roster that the surplus isn’t very valuable and the holes are extremely valuable relative to the league.

Drafting and Development is very important to MLB success for any team, even high revenue teams.  It's absolutely essential for teams in the bottom half of revenue.  If a team is not successful at an essential part of success, the answer sure is hell is not to ignore that essential element of success.  They need to improve that element of success, not ignore it.  If you want to test this premise, we should examine the teams in the bottom half of revenue that have been successful without developing prospects.  The problem is they don't exist.  Trading for established MLB players and free agency has supplemented these teams but at least 75-80% of WAR typically comes from players that were drafted or acquired as prospects.  

There has been exactly 1 mid-market teams in the past 20 years that garnered a significant portion (46%) of their success from FAs and trades for established players if you consider Josh Reddick to have been an established player when acquired.   Reddick had 1 2 war season prior to being acquired.  They also acquired  Bartolo Colon, Yoenis Cespedes, Coco Crisp, Grant Balfour and, Jonny Gomes in free agency.   The 5 players collectively cost $19.5M.  They signed 3 modest price FAs and 2 cheap FAs and they all performed well.  That's the one example in the past 20 years.  Is this the strategy we should pursue or should we get better at development?

BTW ... The next best example is the 2019 Twins.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

Drafting and Development is very important to MLB success for any team, even high revenue teams.  It's absolutely essential for teams in the bottom half of revenue.  If a team is not successful at an essential part of success, the answer sure is hell is not to ignore that essential element of success.  They need to improve that element of success, not ignore it.  If you want to test this premise, we should examine the teams in the bottom half of revenue that have been successful without developing prospects.  The problem is they don't exist.  Trading for established MLB players and free agency has supplemented these teams but at least 75-80% of WAR typically comes from players that were drafted or acquired as prospects.  

There has been exactly 1 mid-market teams in the past 20 years that garnered a significant portion (46%) of their success from FAs and trades for established players if you consider Josh Reddick to have been an established player when acquired.   Reddick had 1 2 war season prior to being acquired.  They also acquired  Bartolo Colon, Yoenis Cespedes, Coco Crisp, Grant Balfour and, Jonny Gomes in free agency.   The 5 players collectively cost $19.5M.  They signed 3 modest price FAs and 2 cheap FAs and they all performed well.  That's the one example in the past 20 years.  Is this the strategy we should pursue or should we get better at development?

BTW ... The next best example is the 2019 Twins.

So the plan is to fail on purpose at the two fielding positions outside of catcher who touch the ball most for 5-6 years to find out if the strategy worked? Typically a strategy has a time horizon involved.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

So the plan is to fail on purpose at the two fielding positions outside of catcher who touch the ball most for 5-6 years to find out if the strategy worked? Typically a strategy has a time horizon involved.

If that's what you took from this discussion, I don't know what to tell you.  It's not that complicated and history is crystal clear.  Success for mid/small market teams has been driven by the acquisition and development of low cost / controllable assets.