The Root Cause of This Year's Collapse Points to the Challenge Ahead for Twins

[LastOnePicked]

12 minutes ago, ewen21 said:

Do those really even need to exist if we can draft and raise talent like some teams can? 

Excellent point. But they can't and don't do that. So the only hope for 2027 is some real spending to raise the floor.

[Dawgzilla]

Put forth a viable and fair product worth coming to and fans will show, don't....and see ya turnstiles, meaning attendance lower than this season's dismal one!  Owners spend thriftily fans do accordingly!  This isn't rocket science.  17 years with the "needed stadium or threaten to move" and payroll has gotten lower and lower!  Besides, baseball isn't fair anyway, being big markets (cough, like Dodgers and other ilk) outspend Guardians Rays, Marlins, Rockies, Royals, Twins

 

[Dave Lemke]

49 minutes ago, Cris E said:

When someone says "Check out his stats" about a 1B they are not going to be referring to a partial season DRS number.  Clemens might have lead the Al in triples (I know, bizarre, right?) but this is not a lineup that can give away 1B hitting.  Put Clemons 27HR at 2B and go get a real thumper.

This is no longer the 1960's and 70's. The idea then was to have great defense up the middle and the sluggers at the corners. Times started to change in the 80's. No longer do we have the Belanger type of shortstop. All D and no hit.  Strong defense up the middle is still desired but you take offense wherever you can get it.

[RpR]

7 hours ago, djvang said:

He can work on improving his fundamentals but unless he can do something about his weak arm I'll continue to say he should be in LF. I know, broken record.

He is weak and Inaccurate any where.

[Derojo]

There's no collapse. The Twins finished where they were expected to finish; under .500. They are not way under. Second, they had a lot of young talent, and that takes more time to develop. Contrary to a collapse, their batting with RISP reverted more to normal in the second half. The blistering pace of the first half was not sustainable. I think overall, given significant injuries the Twins outperformed a bit this year. 

[Dave Lemke]

8 hours ago, RpR said:

If you say so.

No. You said so. It was your take.

[bean5302]

The root cause is the Twins don't have any reliably good players.

Position players rank 300+ PA
1-30 = 0
31-60 = 0
61-90 = 2
91-120 = 4
121-150 = 0
151-180 = 0
181-210 = 3
That's how the top 9 WAR position players graded out for the Twins

Starters 80+ IP (145)
1-30 = 0
31-60 = 2
61-90 = 1
91-120 = 2
121-145 = 0
That's how our top 5 rotation arms grade

[Cris E]

15 hours ago, ewen21 said:

This idea that we must have "Plan B" in place for the "face of the franchise" is absurd when you put those two things next to each other, but that is precisely what we hear simultaneously.  He's the "face of the franchise" and yet the next day we need a "Plan B" for him.  What kind of arrangement is that? 

It's a very common arrangement. 

You know who else misses huge amounts of time? Mike Trout. Aaron Judge. Jacob DeGrom. Shohei Otani, Juan Soto, Francisco Lindor, Garrett Crochet, Ronald Acuna Jr, Jackson Holliday, Kris Bryant, Christian Yelich, Corey Seager, Nathan Eovaldi, Hunter Greene, Zach Wheeler, Oneil Cruz, Konnor Griffin, and about five guys on the As. That's not counting old guys like Verlander or Schetzer or merely expensive players like Stanton in New York.  

Top players with injury problems happen all the time. Teams walk through a minefield of player popularity, excellent performance, high cost and limited availability at the same time aging players are balancing loyalty with making one more big payday as their bodies start to break down. The entire Los Angeles Dodger roster is an exercise in piecing together half season veterans in the hope of having a full 26 man quilt in October. 

It's not a problem to have most of a good player, it just means you can't always tell when a gap might appear. It's only a problem if it hamstrings your whole payroll, but since real revenue sharing began after the 1994 CBA teams can afford a big star like Joe Mauer or Bobby Witt Jr and still support a good payroll around them IF OWNERSHIP SO DESIRES. Don't blame Buxton for the artificially low $109m payroll. there's more money than that coming from the central revenue sharing alone. 

[Cris E]

16 hours ago, Dave Lemke said:

This is no longer the 1960's and 70's. The idea then was to have great defense up the middle and the sluggers at the corners. Times started to change in the 80's. No longer do we have the Belanger type of shortstop. All D and no hit.  Strong defense up the middle is still desired but you take offense wherever you can get it.

Perhaps you didn't read the next sentence where I suggested moving Clemens' 27 HR to 2B and looking for a better 1B.  

[Cris E]

(yikes - duplicate)

[LA Vikes Fan]

22 hours ago, Cris E said:

If you didn't like this team running down in 2026 then Edwards might not be your guy. He came out of the gate fast but slowed every month though the entire season. His OPS by month went .883 .870 .668 .617 .585 and .556 in Sept.  In his career his first/second half splits read .766/.690, so it's not a fluke. He'd cost a ton to acquire and you'll find him standing in front of Houston in two years.  I'd save the prospects to go get the big 1B bat and trust inhouse guys like Roden to line up behind Keaschall at the top of the lineup. (I honestly think Roden's got a chance to have a better year than one of Jenkins or ERod.)

Good point, but who's the big 1B bat we can get? He's not out there on the FA market. Maybe we can trade for one (Alec Burleson? Ryan Mountcastle?), but I'm not sure who that is. Another option might be to sign Brandon Lowe to play 2B and move Clemens to 1B, but he will be expensive. Lowe's 2026 line is .260/.331/.493 (.824), with 35 HRs, 96 RBIs for Pittsburg. He's a FA and the speculation is he will get 3 years, $20-25M a year at age 32.  

By the way, agree with you on Roden. He does have a chance to have the best year in 2027 of the 3 guys. A good chance IMHO. Maybe the answer is to put Roden at 1B and leave Clemens at 2B until Houston is ready. Kody will be 31 in May and Houston is probably a 2028 or later arrival so the timing may work. That doesn't give us a new big bat for 2027 but it does fully lean into youth by have Jenkins and EmRod part of the 4 OF/DH rotation with Keaschall and Buxton. I'd rather go get a big bat but I just don't see one out there for us to get. 

[Mike Sixel]

20 minutes ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

Good point, but who's the big 1B bat we can get? He's not out there on the FA market. Maybe we can trade for one (Alec Burleson? Ryan Mountcastle?), but I'm not sure who that is. Another option might be to sign Brandon Lowe to play 2B and move Clemens to 1B, but he will be expensive. Lowe's 2026 line is .260/.331/.493 (.824), with 35 HRs, 96 RBIs for Pittsburg. He's a FA and the speculation is he will get 3 years, $20-25M a year at age 32.  

By the way, agree with you on Roden. He does have a chance to have the best year in 2027 of the 3 guys. A good chance IMHO. Maybe the answer is to put Roden at 1B and leave Clemens at 2B until Houston is ready. Kody will be 31 in May and Houston is probably a 2028 or later arrival so the timing may work. That doesn't give us a new big bat for 2027 but it does fully lean into youth by have Jenkins and EmRod part of the 4 OF/DH rotation with Keaschall and Buxton. I'd rather go get a big bat but I just don't see one out there for us to get. 

Houston should be up next year. That's the same timeline as Culpeper. 

I see almost no realistic way to add a hitter to this roster. Not without a ridiculous trade. 

[LA Vikes Fan]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Houston should be up next year. That's the same timeline as Culpeper. 

I see almost no realistic way to add a hitter to this roster. Not without a ridiculous trade. 

I think you're probably right on adding a bat through a trade. I just don't see who we can trade that will get us the big bat we need. Even Ryan probably isn't worth that after last season's collapse on the heels of the same collapse in 2025. 

I hope you're right on Houston. He certainly hit at A+ and AA, not sure why he didn't get a taste of AAA at the end of last year. Part of me wants to make next year a complete re-set year, trade Ryan, Larnach, and Lewis, and play Lee, Culpepper, Houston, Roden, Jenkins, Keaschall, and EmRod along with Buxton, Clemens, and a catcher pretty much every day. I have no clue who the catcher can be, maybe someone we can get from trading Ryan or Lewis. I just hope it isn't Caratini 2 of every 3 games. Add Lopez to the rotation of Bradley, Kremer, Prielipp, and either Zebby or Abel, with the other one and Rojas starters 6 and 7 in AAA, re-sign Minter and put Ober in the Bullpen, and who knows, that could be a competitive team. Or it could be a lousy team. At least it would be more fun to watch than parading the equivalent of Larnach, Tristan Gray, Orlando Arcia, or even Josh Bell out there every day. I've seen that. It isn't that much fun to watch.   

[ewen21]

6 hours ago, Cris E said:

It's a very common arrangement. 

You know who else misses huge amounts of time? Mike Trout. Aaron Judge. Jacob DeGrom. Shohei Otani, Juan Soto, Francisco Lindor, Garrett Crochet, Ronald Acuna Jr, Jackson Holliday, Kris Bryant, Christian Yelich, Corey Seager, Nathan Eovaldi, Hunter Greene, Zach Wheeler, Oneil Cruz, Konnor Griffin, and about five guys on the As. That's not counting old guys like Verlander or Schetzer or merely expensive players like Stanton in New York.  

Top players with injury problems happen all the time. Teams walk through a minefield of player popularity, excellent performance, high cost and limited availability at the same time aging players are balancing loyalty with making one more big payday as their bodies start to break down. The entire Los Angeles Dodger roster is an exercise in piecing together half season veterans in the hope of having a full 26 man quilt in October. 

It's not a problem to have most of a good player, it just means you can't always tell when a gap might appear. It's only a problem if it hamstrings your whole payroll, but since real revenue sharing began after the 1994 CBA teams can afford a big star like Joe Mauer or Bobby Witt Jr and still support a good payroll around them IF OWNERSHIP SO DESIRES. Don't blame Buxton for the artificially low $109m payroll. there's more money than that coming from the central revenue sharing alone. 

All entirely valid and well laid out.   Now cast aside injuries for a moment and take a look at performance over the life of one of those contracts.  There is the other reason not to tread in that pasture.  The Mets will be choked out by the Soto contract and the Jays will be with Vladdy's, etc...etc....  If you extend that timeline out far enough everyone outlives their usefulness.  The long contracts are absurd.  I am stuck with a dud year seven?  Maybe limit the term of the contract, but contribute to an annuity during the life of the contract?  To have to commit to paying a player guaranteed money five years into the future is absurd,  It is beyond what is reasonable

 

There have been examples everywhere of teams not having a large payroll IN OUR DIVISION winning in the playoffs since the new millenium.  In fact, all of them have and we have not.  If a team can assemble enough young cost controlled talent, that team should then grab up available free agents.  If you have enough young talent that was drafted and developed inside the organization then you have an exciting team.  I am particularly frustrated with the inability to draft and develop starting pitchers that are dogs.  Someone, some year, coming up with a legit well-earned buzz to start on a Friday night or a weekend day game.  That guy doesn't cost and we just cannot in an way seem to draft, develop and oversee the growth of someone.  In over 20 years we really have only seen Garza and Berrios have that juice coming up and actually be something.  Take a look at whichever team you want with payrolls near or below ours if they have better records than us.  What do all of them have in common?

[D.C Twins]

On 9/28/2026 at 6:57 PM, ewen21 said:

Do those really even need to exist if we can draft and raise talent like some teams can?  Money isn't going to solve this problem.  You want Vladdy Jr or something?  I don't pine for huge long term contracts at all.

You need a balance of both. Huge fan of the young'ins but if we want to compete next year, we do need to pay for a big line up bat (1B preferred). We do need to pay for a catcher. We do need to pay for Bullpen support

[Cris E]

16 hours ago, ewen21 said:

All entirely valid and well laid out.   Now cast aside injuries for a moment and take a look at performance over the life of one of those contracts. 

Hark, on furthest hilltop, tis the goalposts! 

You and your your squad spend more time than seems healthy complaining that Buxton is a weight crushing this team, that he's a problem because of his injuries and availability, that he must be moved for the team to move forward, and yet now we should cast aside injuries for a moment. No.

Buxton's got very real availability issues, but his contract has fairly protected team assets from it and he's been a fine player when available. There's no one else in the system that has his power and ownership is not going to spend what it takes to get another, he's great in the clubhouse and the community, and there's no history of him making demands or pushing the team into difficult corners. As franchise faces go he's a good one.  

But then there's this:  " He's the "face of the franchise" and yet the next day we need a "Plan B" for him.  What kind of arrangement is that?"  

And the answer is that half a loaf is better than none, that we need a plan B for everyone, that the team lacks top level players, that we are paying a very good rate for the production we receive and we should be celebrating all the "face" guys, so treat BB the same way we do Lopez.   

[Cris E]

16 hours ago, ewen21 said:

There have been examples everywhere of teams not having a large payroll IN OUR DIVISION winning in the playoffs since the new millenium.  In fact, all of them have and we have not.  If a team can assemble enough young cost controlled talent, that team should then grab up available free agents.  If you have enough young talent that was drafted and developed inside the organization then you have an exciting team.  I am particularly frustrated with the inability to draft and develop starting pitchers that are dogs.  Someone, some year, coming up with a legit well-earned buzz to start on a Friday night or a weekend day game.  That guy doesn't cost and we just cannot in an way seem to draft, develop and oversee the growth of someone.  In over 20 years we really have only seen Garza and Berrios have that juice coming up and actually be something.  Take a look at whichever team you want with payrolls near or below ours if they have better records than us.  What do all of them have in common?

So lots of frustration here, about reaching the playoffs, about home-grown rosters and ace pitchers, and how the franchise is being run.  All over the place. 

So let's start with this: KC has been to the playoffs three times between 2001-26, vs ten for the Twins. They did cash in better than we did, reaching the WS in 2014-15, but otherwise they have finished in fourth or fifth place 17 of 26 years. The Twins are the inverse, only being in fourth or fifth 8 times in that period with 18 in the top three spots. 

The difference between most of those Twins' playoff rosters and the break-through Royals teams of 2014-15 is that they were built on run prevention and featured a ridiculous bullpen. They scored enough to get by, but out-performed their pythagorean expected wins by five games both years, mostly by not giving away any games late.  Since 2015 many top teams, most really, are built more around air-tight bullpens than starting pitching, and the Royals really should get a lot of credit for that leap in thinking. 

 

The Twins, OTOH, have had a lot of run scorers, or some good pitchers, or a decent defense, but have never really lead the league in much of anything. 2019 was the HR year I guess, but like 1987 everyone was hitting HR and scoring that year and they didn't have much in the way of stopping anyone else from putting runs on the board. If they want to step up in 2027 then more effort needs to be concentrated on the pen, and firing  poor Pete Maki is not a real move in the right direction. (If he was the guy who built that great 2025 pen then he should be able to do it in 2027, and if he wasn't the guy last year then why scapegoat him this year? Performance art, motion as progress, blech.) 

Given that and your other concerns, the Twins are mostly doing what they need to, with the significant exception of paying what it costs to complete or maintain their roster.  They have amassed a good pile of young talented arms. They have a lot of OK to possibly excellent young players and are sorting through them. In the past few years they've chickened out on writing real checks, but Jeffries gives them another opportunity to step up or shut up. Same with 1B, where they can't get Royce Lewis to stay hot and have to look outside the organization to fill that role. (That's another temptation of middling front offices: insisting on staying within the org when the cupboard is truly bare.) 

Anyway, this got away from me as badly as your comments did. It's that time of year I guess. 

 

[RpR]

21 hours ago, ewen21 said:

There have been examples everywhere of teams not having a large payroll IN OUR DIVISION winning in the playoffs since the new millenium.  In fact, all of them have and we have not. 

None of them had to deal with the Gardenhire gremlin.

[ewen21]

16 hours ago, RpR said:

None of them had to deal with the Gardenhire gremlin.

I am not a Gardenhire fan and he takes a chunk of the blame for the playoff losses, but he is hardly THE reason why we did not win in the playoffs.  The reasons are numerous.  We lacked depth, to be real.  We never really hit in the postseason.  There was an attitude where the winning the division was good enough.  For example, MIchael Cuddyer called 2010 a "successful season" because we "won the division" and I thought that was very telling of the mindset.  Carl Pavano (of all people) said we did not really accomplish anything because we were swept out of the first round.  The Yankees were good but they were not THAT GOOD.  Gardy had a A LOT to do with the mindset of the Yankees being unbeatable.  The Tigers (multiple times), Indians, White Sox, Angels, and Texas Rangers ALL beat the Yankees in the playoff during the "Gardy years" so it was not because of payroll or because of one single reason even though Gardy was no help.  IN fact the Yankees mostly lost in the playoffs when they were not playing us.  

[ewen21]

16 hours ago, Cris E said:

Anyway, this got away from me as badly as your comments did. It's that time of year I guess. 

 

How so?  We are just talking baseball.  GO off!  

You're saying my post was "all over the place" but where was I wrong?  I do not care about making the playoffs only to get eliminated in round one over and over again.  We have seen that rerun over and over again and I am beyond done with that.  Had you asked me in 2000 the same question I might have a different answer for you.  

 

I used other teams in our division to highlight the absurdity of how bad it got with this organization and it reflects on literally EVERYTHING about this organization (fanbase included).  The fact still remains, our team never advanced in the playoff after the initial rise in 2002.  After that it was flat out pathetic and we were both there to see it.  I would throw five playoff appearances away to get a WS series ring, or two trips to the series like KC had.

 

We clearly have different views on this and we can both have valid opinions at the same time even if they are different.