Tom Pohlad Promised He Wasn't a "Half Measures" Guy. This Trade Deadline Proved It.

[DJL44]

4 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I think the disconnect here is the difference between doing very defensible things at the deadline and "going big" at the deadline. The article isn't about whether or not the trades are defensible, they got fair value, or they were buyers. The article is about Tom Pohlad proving he wasn't a "half measures" guy and that he "went big." 

He didn't. He didn't go big. He went half measure. Which makes sense. It's the type of investment this team deserved. What I (and I believe others, but won't speak for them) am disagreeing with is the premise that the Twins "went big." They didn't. By any measure. This deadline was absolutely a "half measure." The article claims it wasn't. That's what I disagree with. Tom Pohlad didn't at all prove he'd "go big" over the last couple weeks.

Thank goodness. Going big would have been stupid for a team with a losing record at the trade deadline.

[LA Vikes Fan]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm going to stick with my answer from the last article about Pohlad proving himself, he can't prove himself in anything in a year. 

Isn't the idea supposed to be that there was some drastic change in how the Twins will be run now that Tom is in the big chair? 1 deadline can't prove that. The Mahle/Lopez deadline was a bigger "go big" deadline than this. They've done a stand-alone "go big" deadline before. The question isn't whether or not Pohlad will "go big" for a deadline, it's whether or not he'll go big year after year after year when it makes sense. 

Hoffman, Kremer, Minter, and Nance sets a pretty low bar for "going big," so, if this is what will impress fans, he has a great opportunity to "go big" for many years. Assuming they aren't just setting themselves up to sell the team after the new CBA. 

And 1 last note on the money thing. Well, 2 last notes. 1. The payroll is still at an embarrassingly low number. Again, if this is what impresses fans, good for him. 2. They still gave up more in prospects (likely Hill instead of a lower arm) to get money back. So, even his "go big" included getting money back. So, one last time, if this is what impresses fans, he's in a great spot to impress them for a while because the bar has not been set high.

It's funny, I find myself "liking" the first 3 posts, even thought they express pretty different viewpoints on whether this deadline was better, whether it was an "improvement" or a "drastic change". And I think those two phrases explain the difference in viewpoints. Was the Twins behavior this deadline an "improvement" over the last couple of years? Absolutely for the reasons explained in the article and I don't think anyone can cogently argue otherwise. Was that behavior a "drastic change"? Absolutely not. A drastic change would have been emptying the farm system for a pitcher like Skubal, trading multiple top 15 ranked prospects for a Soriano and Zeferjahn package, or trading serious prospects for guys like Luis Arraez or Adley Rutschman. So in a sense, everybody is basically correct – this was an improvement but not emblematic of a drastic change.

I would argue that the Twins took exactly the right of approach, although I might quibble a little about value given versus value received. To start off with, this team is decent but it is not a contender or even really very good. The Twins' record very accurately reflects what they are, a slightly above average team with enough holes that brings them back to average or slightly below. This is not a team that you empty the farm system to augment. It's a team where you try to fill some of the holes, see if that lifts you to an above average team, and try to take advantage of the weak division and league to sneak into the playoffs and add some excitement at the end of the season. This team simply isn't good enough for you to mortgage the future in the hopes of reaching the World Series or even the league championship series. Maybe that team is next year if guys like Jenkins, Emma, and Culpepper come up and immediately produce, maybe it's in 2028 after they've had some seasoning and have been joined by the likes of Houston and Quick, or maybe it's never for this group. One thing we know for sure, it ain't this year. 

I like what they did. The bullpen was a clear weakness and they traded for two of the top five relievers traded (maybe even two of the top three with the Weaver being the other), and three of the top eight traded. They did it by giving up one good prospect in Hill, one decent/maybe possible MLB prospect in Klein, and a bunch of lottery tickets with upside. In return, they got Hoffman who was the closer for a World Series team last year, Minter who was in the Braves bullpen when they won the World Series in 2021 and had seven strikeouts in 4.2 innings in that WS, and Nance who had a 1.99 ERA in 2025 and also pitched in last year's World Series. They also picked up a starter who has been a middle to back end rotation guy in the past and is now kind of a crapshoot. Not a bad haul for not giving up a whole lot. If that's not an improvement over the last couple of years, I don't know what is. Whether it's a "go big or go home" moment (whatever that's trite phrase actually means) depends entirely on your perspective.

Now it's up to the players. To get to 85 wins they need to go 29 – 20 the rest of the way, a .592 winning percentage. 85 wins should get them into the playoffs and has a better than 50/50 chance of winning the division. They were 15 – 9 in July, so essentially the need to repeat July twice in August and September. Is it possible? Absolutely, they've shown they can play at that level. Is it likely? I wouldn't say it's the most likely result, I see it more as a 50/50 proposition. I think their record from this point forward is going to be heavily dependent on the bullpen's performance which is in turn dependent on the three bullpen arms they just got, continued performance from the rotation (something very much in doubt), and Lewis, Keaschall, Bell, Jeffers, Lee, and Clemens all having an OPS of at least.750 for the rest of the season with at least three of them over .800. At this point, anything we get from Buxton has to be considered gravy. All possible, but failure in one area probably dooms them to a .500 or less season. Still, all in all, much better than at least I thought going in and much more interesting to watch. Usually by this point in the season, I started to tune out the Twins and focus my attention more on the Dodgers inexorable run to yet another division title (yawn) but this year I will keep with Twins, at least for now. Big step up. 

[DJL44]

If Jeffers told them he would turn down a QO as rumored, he did the team a huge favor. He said, keep me for the pennant race and you will still get your draft pick. 

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

7 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Kremer was a half measured.  What they did in the bullpen was perfect really.  The pen went from being one of the worst if not the worst to better than average.  The rotation just got a filler.  I hope Kremer pitches like his career norms and how he pitched for the Orioles this season is just getting rid of the rust.  Kremer in years past is still a number 4/5 starter.  There were better starters available with not too much more cost.  

If we liked Kremer,  he was a likely DFA candidate at the end of the year.   You could have given up a cheaper prospect to get him at the end of the season.  

[LA Vikes Fan]

16 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I think the disconnect here is the difference between doing very defensible things at the deadline and "going big" at the deadline. The article isn't about whether or not the trades are defensible, they got fair value, or they were buyers. The article is about Tom Pohlad proving he wasn't a "half measures" guy and that he "went big." 

He didn't. He didn't go big. He went half measure. Which makes sense. It's the type of investment this team deserved. What I (and I believe others, but won't speak for them) am disagreeing with is the premise that the Twins "went big." They didn't. By any measure. This deadline was absolutely a "half measure." The article claims it wasn't. That's what I disagree with. Tom Pohlad didn't at all prove he'd "go big" over the last couple weeks.

What does it even mean to "go big or go home"? I think that is one of those hackneyed business phrases like "creative synergies" or "we're going to think outside the box". I don't think any of these phrases actually mean anything in particular. They are completely contextual. They mean very different things to different people, and mean very different things in different contexts. I actually "liked" your post because I think we agree in concept - the Twins did good things to improve the team but they didn't swing for the fences or take big risks by any stretch. I also agree that this is not the team for which you swing for the fences or take big future risks for this year. Is that "going big" in context? I have absolutely no idea. Nor do I care. All I know is the team is better today than it was yesterday and that will make the season more fun.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Thank goodness. Going big would have been stupid for a team with a losing record at the trade deadline.

1000% agree. This team didn't deserve going big. Which is what makes it weird to me they'd publish multiple articles in the last week about Pohlad "proving himself." I don't have any real complaints about what the Twins have done. It's not what I would've done, but I think it's all defensible. But Tom didn't show he wasn't "a half measure guy." 

[PuckettProtector]

This sudden Pohlad glazing is just as ridiculous as the Shaduer Sanders glazers. 

[Brandon]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

If we liked Kremer,  he was a likely DFA candidate at the end of the year.   You could have given up a cheaper prospect to get him at the end of the season.  

Kremer was the only move I didn't care for but I loved the bullpen additions.  I still give the Twins an 8-8.5 score for the deadline deals I wasn't expecting the Twins to go after the top rotation arms, but one of a higher mid level tier 

[LA Vikes Fan]

5 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

If Jeffers told them he would turn down a QO as rumored, he did the team a huge favor. He said, keep me for the pennant race and you will still get your draft pick. 

I think this is very insightful. I actually think that may be what Jeffers was trying to accomplish. He wanted to stay with this team for this season because it's a very tight group and he thought they could have some at least modest success, while still giving himself the chance to go on the FA market next year and get a longer-term high-value deal that will set him up for life. This was the way to get that accomplished while still showing some respect to the team that nurtured him through his development and to the guys in the clubhouse. I respect him for doing this if that's what happened. 

By the way, nothing wrong with Jeffers wanting to go on the FA market next year and get a longer-term high-value deal.  These guys are lucky to get one shot set themselves up for life with a big contract. 90% of them never get that opportunity and only a handful get more than one chance. I can't begrudge anyone for taking that shot if they get it. He's earned it and he should take advantage of the opportunity.

[chpettit19]

6 minutes ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

What does it even mean to "go big or go home"? I think that is one of those hackneyed business phrases like "creative synergies" or "we're going to think outside the box". I don't think any of these phrases actually mean anything in particular. They are completely contextual. They mean very different things to different people, and mean very different things in different contexts. I actually "liked" your post because I think we agree in concept - the Twins did good things to improve the team but they didn't swing for the fences or take big risks by any stretch. I also agree that this is not the team for which you swing for the fences or take big future risks for this year. Is that "going big" in context? I have absolutely no idea. Nor do I care. All I know is the team is better today than it was yesterday and that will make the season more fun.

And that's why PR people tell guys like Tom to use those kinds of phrases. This isn't what I'd have done at the deadline, but I have no real problem with it. I think the Kremer deal is questionable in terms of value, but it's not outrageous by any means. I wouldn't have had any disagreement with an article along the lines of both of your responses to me. I don't know why the author felt the need to claim Tom proved anything about the "half measure" and "go big" quotes. It changes the context of the article and discussion.

Tom didn't face plant in his first deadline in charge, but he hasn't shown anything drastically different than any other Pohlad. He couldn't have. In any realistic world, Tom had no shot at doing anything to show he's meaningfully different than Joe or Jim or Carl. It's why I questioned the article a few days ago about him proving himself and why I question this one. He couldn't prove anything unless he did something drastic which would've proved incompetence. It's going to take him years to show he's any different than the rest. Joe was getting praised a few years ago for being different when he spiked the payroll. That took an awfully quick turn.

This article should've just been a nice tip of the cap to the Twins at the deadline. Just stick to discussing the trades, how defensible they are, and where the Twins can go from here. Making it into a praise piece on Tom confirming he's a "go big" guy was a poor decision.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

11 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Kremer was the only move I didn't care for but I loved the bullpen additions.  I still give the Twins an 8-8.5 score for the deadline deals I wasn't expecting the Twins to go after the top rotation arms, but one of a higher mid level tier 

I think the Kremer deal will be viewed as the best of the 3 most likely in hindsight 2-3 years down the road.  I think he will be a solid player for the next year and 2 months and could possibly be flipped going into next year. I also think Reyes has a high probability of washing out.    Hoffman I like,  but Dasan Hill with a little more control is a top 20 arm in the minor leagues.  

[LA Vikes Fan]

1 minute ago, chpettit19 said:

And that's why PR people tell guys like Tom to use those kinds of phrases. This isn't what I'd have done at the deadline, but I have no real problem with it. I think the Kremer deal is questionable in terms of value, but it's not outrageous by any means. I wouldn't have had any disagreement with an article along the lines of both of your responses to me. I don't know why the author felt the need to claim Tom proved anything about the "half measure" and "go big" quotes. It changes the context of the article and discussion.

Tom didn't face plant in his first deadline in charge, but he hasn't shown anything drastically different than any other Pohlad. He couldn't have. In any realistic world, Tom had no shot at doing anything to show he's meaningfully different than Joe or Jim or Carl. It's why I questioned the article a few days ago about him proving himself and why I question this one. He couldn't prove anything unless he did something drastic which would've proved incompetence. It's going to take him years to show he's any different than the rest. Joe was getting praised a few years ago for being different when he spiked the payroll. That took an awfully quick turn.

This article should've just been a nice tip of the cap to the Twins at the deadline. Just stick to discussing the trades, how defensible they are, and where the Twins can go from here. Making it into a praise piece on Tom confirming he's a "go big" guy was a poor decision.

Well said. Hey, let's have fun the rest of the season with this team. It might actually be a fun season. Less on Tom Pohlad, more on baseball.

[thelanges5]

Not sure if I’d say he went BIG, but at least he went this year. I’m glad they pushed in some chips and made the bullpen better while also giving the rotation more depth.

49 games left and anything can happen. Meaningful ball in August-September, LFG!

[Brandon]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

I think the Kremer deal will be viewed as the best of the 3 most likely.  I think he will be a solid player for the next year and 2 months and could possibly be flipped going into next year. I also think Reyes has a high probability of washing out.    Hoffman I like,  but Dasan Hill with a little more control is a top 20 arm in the minor leagues.  

Dasan Hill needs a lot more than a little.  He needs to cut his walk rate in half.  That also means he is wild in the strike zone.  That will cause problems as he plays against higher competition.  But yes he has the potential to be great.  I have him pegged for bullpen duty, if he comes up.  

[bean5302]

I'm not impressed with taking on what we did in payroll. Like whoop de doo.

Mintner $3.4MM
Hoffman $7.3MM
Kremer $1.75MM

The Twins were in the bottom 5 of MLB in terms of moves made. They had an obvious need for a playoff caliber starter and didn't do it. The only legitimate reason Gausman is not on the roster is because the Pohlads didn't want to spend.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

1 minute ago, Brandon said:

Dasan Hill needs a lot more than a little.  He needs to cut his walk rate in half.  That also means he is wild in the strike zone.  That will cause problems as he plays against higher competition.  But yes he has the potential to be great.  I have him pegged for bullpen duty, if he comes up.  

He is 20 with extremely long limbs.  With his stuff he just needs to get down to around a little higher or lower than 4 walks.  His last start he threw 54 pitches with 43 strikes and zero walks.  He had 6 strike outs in 3 innings.   He has an absurd 15k/9.   So yes there is some bullpen risk,  which so be it - that would be a hell of a weapon in the bullpen.   If he gains a little more Control he is a #1/#2.  Thats the risk Brandon.   You gave up 6 years of a dynamic arm,  for 1 year and 2 months of a closer.