Why I'm Choosing to Believe in Tom Pohlad This Offseason

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, Woof Bronzer said:

100%. I wish I wasn't so cynical!  

I don't think looking at this team, the timing of Tommy boy taking over, and their actions, which are literally the opposite of how successful teams act, is cynical. 

[Craig Arko]

I believe in Harvey Dent. 

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, The Great Hambino said:

Here's one question I have that I haven't been able to clarify:

When Joe was handed the team, he didn't really have control.  Jim was the one who still represented the franchise on ownership committees, and it was Jim, not Joe, that facilitated the Correa trade.  As it turned out, Joe was merely the public face of what was actually a family decision-making operation - and when push came to shove, a Jim-decision-making operation.

The question I have is this: do these sort of limitations also apply to Tom?  Is he the representative on league committees, or is he simply a new face on the same decision-making body?  Jim and his brothers are still on the board, and the board is still majority-Pohlad-controlled even with the limited partners in the fold.

I'd like to know these answers before I throw my belief behind Tom, even if he is honestly stating his true intentions.  What good is an aggressive mindset if the uncles can still overrule it whenever they feel like it?  If he truly is being given the autonomy to run the team as he sees fit, then I'd feel better - not good, but better - about buying what he's selling 

It is largely for this reason that they won't get my trust anytime soon.  Everything still feels like it has one intent and one intent only: how do the Pohlads get the price they want to sell the team.  I don't buy anything about long-term competitiveness because I don't believe them that they have any intent to be here in the long-term.

So it's hard to take all this corporate-babble seriously in light of that.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

I'm an a optimist by nature. I'd like to believe in Tom. But. like many here, I need to see action to believe that he will spend the money necessary to be competitive. 

The real problem here is spend it on who? The best available FAs are all over 30 except for Arraez. Our need are 2B, 1B, C, 1 SP, and bullpen help. Overpay or not, there is little chance Skubal would choose Minnesota over staying with the Dodgers, same for King and Morejon staying with the Padres or another West Coast team. I don't want Jazz Chisholm (and why would he leave the Yankees) and we got OFs so why spend big on Arozarena or Suzuki. Brandon Lowe is 32 but would be a good get for 2B (move Clemens to 1B) as would our old friend Arraez who's 29, but then there's no room at the Inn for Houston for at least 2 years. If you look at the available FAs, there really isn't a lot to like other than Morejon or Helsley for the BP or maybe one of the 2B. 

What would show me a lot would be for the Twins to re-sign some core guys that are or are soon to be FAs. The key guys are Jeffers, Lopez, Minter, and Ryan. Jeffers is the priority. He's the best FA C out there and can probably be had for less than $20m a year for 4 years. Lopez seems like he wants to stay - take a risk and give him 3 -4 years at $25M a year. Try to re-sign Ryan for 4-5 years at $30m a year and if you can't, trade him and don't be afraid to take on a big contract. Give Minter 2 years, $20-25M total if that's what it takes although he may be a little cheaper. Go to FA and sign Helsley or Morejon, or even David Bednar or Gregory Soto, and give them a 2 or 3 year deal. Don't worry so much about a guy like Houston who is still in AA - go out and sign Arraez or Lowe and give them at least 2 or 3 year deals. If Houston is the real deal sooner than 2029 you can make a later trade or be creative with the roster and move the older player to 1B.  I know some of you will say "those deals are overpaying at the end of the deal". You're probably right but that's the price of signing people. If you aren't willing to risk significantly overpaying someone at the end of a long term contract you cannot sign anybody any good. Period. 

I want to believe. Re-signing players who can be the core guys to build around, especially Jeffers, Lopez, Minter, and Ryan, would go a long way. 

 

What you are advocating is pretty much the same team (Ryan / Lopez / Jeffers / Minter) for $50M additional per year plus what whatever we would spend on 2B and a SP.   That would be close to an additional $100M/year if the SP is a front of the rotation starter and anything less would be pointless given the current depth.   I don't see that happening unless the CBA changes dramatically and the implementation is immediate.  It's not how successful teams have been built.  

They will wait for Houston to take over SS and move Culpepper to 2B.  They also are not going to give Jeffers a 4-year contract when they have Lackey / Tinney and Diaw on the horizon.  If they extend anyone the priority should be players like Jenkins and Culpepper.  That's a far more sustainable model with greater upside.

[Mike Sixel]

8 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

What you are advocating is pretty much the same team (Ryan / Lopez / Jeffers / Minter) for $50M additional per year plus what whatever we would spend on 2B and a SP.   That would be close to an additional $100M/year if the SP is a front of the rotation starter and anything less would be pointless given the current depth.   I don't see that happening unless the CBA changes dramatically and the implementation is immediate.  It's not how successful teams have been built.  

They will wait for Houston to take over SS and move Culpepper to 2B.  They also are not going to give Jeffers a 4-year contract when they have Lackey / Tinney and Diaw on the horizon.  If they extend anyone the priority should be players like Jenkins and Culpepper.  That's a far more sustainable model with greater upside.

Jeffers is my first baseman after 27.....

[HerbieFan]

What Tom needs to do is somehow get people in place that can fully develop players.  I've said it a million times...the biggest issue is not how much money the Pohlads will or won't spend.  It helps to be able to go get a guy to fill a spot or two.  The biggest issue for this team is their inability to develop players....way too many players reach the majors and fail.  Player development is why the Brewers and Rays had the best records in the NL and AL.  It's why Cleveland continues to win the Central seemingly every dang year.  It's how a team like the Twins become a consistent winner.

[sweetmusicviola16]

People can believe whatever they want. I could care less. But what proved to me that Tom is a Pohlad is the deadline deal for Hoffman with the Jays. The Twins had the Jays pay 3.75 mil of salary. We all know that when significant cash is included in a deal the prospect anty goes up. This is the way of the Pohlads. When I stop seeing this way of doing business then I can evaluate if anything has changed. 

[sweetmusicviola16]

Either way this 2027 Twins team should not go on a foolish spending spree. If there was any chance of that happening. This team needs to grow and develop and when it is closer to ready then by all mean up the spending significantly. 

[Mike Sixel]

26 minutes ago, HerbieFan said:

What Tom needs to do is somehow get people in place that can fully develop players.  I've said it a million times...the biggest issue is not how much money the Pohlads will or won't spend.  It helps to be able to go get a guy to fill a spot or two.  The biggest issue for this team is their inability to develop players....way too many players reach the majors and fail.  Player development is why the Brewers and Rays had the best records in the NL and AL.  It's why Cleveland continues to win the Central seemingly every dang year.  It's how a team like the Twins become a consistent winner.

It looks better in the last few years..... Lee, Jenkins, Culpeper, Matthews, preilip, Morris. Then you have Houston and Lackey, maybe ERod. Those are just the drafts, and doesn't include anyone they traded for. 

[bean5302]

@Dave Lemke explain your rationale for disagreeing with me. I've noticed you seem to follow me around the forums and "dislike" or "disagree" with every single post I make because you have nothing better to do?

I find it to be strange to put a faith into a person you don't know and have little visibility into historical conduct.

I also think Tom Pohlad's results have been pretty mixed. It's hard to argue the Twins were competitive as promised or that the team had a reasonable path to being competitive from the opening of the season.

I think the ownership's relatively minor bump in payroll at the trade deadline was also modest and reflected a middle ground approach to being competitive. Not truly going for it (upgrading any bats or a playoff caliber rotation arm which were both sorely needed to be competitive in the playoffs), but not standing pat by bringing in obvious bullpen upgrades.

[chpettit19]

"if he has conviction about a move that’s going to improve this roster and help us accomplish our goals, that this ownership group is prepared to support him with the financial resources he needs."

Jeremy Zoll should have conviction that Tarik Skubal, Seiya Suzuki, and Luis Arraez can "help (them) accomplish (their) goals." He should also have conviction that at least Bo Bichette could help accomplish some goals if he (very unlikely) opts out. Should also have conviction that Ryan Jeffers coming back on a short-term deal could help. And at least 3 of the best relievers on the market.

Those are some pretty easy convictions to have and stories to sell to ownership about helping accomplish their goals. Should I assume the Twins are about to drop $100 million in free agency for 2027? I'm going to go ahead and guess "no." 

I'm very squarely in the "believe it when I see it" camp when it comes to Pohlad talk of investment. Which I'm sure surprises nobody here. If I were a betting man, I'd bet the Twins "were in on" a lot of guys this offseason and very few of them were willing to take the Pohlad "financial resources."

[Dave Lemke]

44 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

@Dave Lemke explain your rationale for disagreeing with me. I've noticed you seem to follow me around the forums and "dislike" or "disagree" with every single post I make because you have nothing better to do?

I find it to be strange to put a faith into a person you don't know and have little visibility into historical conduct.

I also think Tom Pohlad's results have been pretty mixed. It's hard to argue the Twins were competitive as promised or that the team had a reasonable path to being competitive from the opening of the season.

I think the ownership's relatively minor bump in payroll at the trade deadline was also modest and reflected a middle ground approach to being competitive. Not truly going for it (upgrading any bats or a playoff caliber rotation arm which were both sorely needed to be competitive in the playoffs), but not standing pat by bringing in obvious bullpen upgrades.

I don't follow you around. I don't watch whose posts I disagree with or agree with for that matter. If I have disagreed eith severaal of ypur posts it means we differ in our ideas about the Twins. I disagree with some, agree with some and some I've done both depending on topic. Most likely to disagree with posts that use hindsight on any moves and transactions that don't work. I happen to think when you have a shot at playoffs, that Twins had at trade deadline, you don't give up on the players and tell them you don't have faith in them. You can disagree with my take same as I can disagree with yours. 

[weitz41]

I'm not ready to completely buy in on payroll going up all that much. There's a lot that needs to be sorted out before even thinking about free agents.

1st the team needs to scatter, around the league, some of the 26 corner outfielders on the roster.

Then trade for a 1st baseman that will start most of the games. (Burleson?)

Now figure out what you're going to do about starting pitchers in 2028.

Is Jackson and Caratini really your catchers for 2027?

Now...Thow in a lock out...

Lock out ends and you have about 2 weeks to "spend"...I'm in the wait and see about that.

[MeleMouth]

3 hours ago, The Great Hambino said:

Here's one question I have that I haven't been able to clarify:

When Joe was handed the team, he didn't really have control.  Jim was the one who still represented the franchise on ownership committees, and it was Jim, not Joe, that facilitated the Correa trade.  As it turned out, Joe was merely the public face of what was actually a family decision-making operation - and when push came to shove, a Jim-decision-making operation.

The question I have is this: do these sort of limitations also apply to Tom?  Is he the representative on league committees, or is he simply a new face on the same decision-making body?  Jim and his brothers are still on the board, and the board is still majority-Pohlad-controlled even with the limited partners in the fold.

I'd like to know these answers before I throw my belief behind Tom, even if he is honestly stating his true intentions.  What good is an aggressive mindset if the uncles can still overrule it whenever they feel like it?  If he truly is being given the autonomy to run the team as he sees fit, then I'd feel better - not good, but better - about buying what he's selling 

mlb.com says the Chairman and Control Owner of the Minnesota Twins is Jim Pohlad.

Other Board members are Bill Pohlad, Bob Pohlad, and Dave St. Peter. None of the new limited partners are listed.

Tom Pohlad is listed on a lower line as Chairman & CEO.

Another title for this article could be "I'm Charlie Brown. Here's why this time I believe Lucy."

[MeleMouth]

15 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

"if he has conviction about a move that’s going to improve this roster and help us accomplish our goals, that this ownership group is prepared to support him with the financial resources he needs."

Jeremy Zoll should have conviction that Tarik Skubal, Seiya Suzuki, and Luis Arraez can "help (them) accomplish (their) goals." He should also have conviction that at least Bo Bichette could help accomplish some goals if he (very unlikely) opts out. Should also have conviction that Ryan Jeffers coming back on a short-term deal could help. And at least 3 of the best relievers on the market.

Those are some pretty easy convictions to have and stories to sell to ownership about helping accomplish their goals. Should I assume the Twins are about to drop $100 million in free agency for 2027? I'm going to go ahead and guess "no." 

I'm very squarely in the "believe it when I see it" camp when it comes to Pohlad talk of investment. Which I'm sure surprises nobody here. If I were a betting man, I'd bet the Twins "were in on" a lot of guys this offseason and very few of them were willing to take the Pohlad "financial resources."

I remember when Terry Ryan used to say the spending - or non-spending - decisions were his, that he believed the owners would support him when he made a case for additional spending. 

[MeleMouth]

The back-and-forth by ownership over the last few years could negatively affect how free agents view the Twins.

First they sign Donaldson with hoopla about a new day for Twins competition, then they complain about him and give him a railroad ticket out of town.

Then they sign Correa with hoopla about a new day for Twins to be a destination for top free agents, then fail to fill in the rest of the team the way they implied when they signed him, then they persuade him to leave by telling him they are going to go in a different direction (cost-saving) than what they told him when they signed him. 

No free agent is going to be persuaded by any talk of a new day in Twinsland, because they know that whatever the Twins say today could change by the middle of next year. 

[LyleCole]

The real problem is even if there is a lot of intent for ownership to step up their spending, they have put the team into a situation where in the coming offseason they simply will not have enough options to get to even average spending in major league baseball.

And,  I think that the team really missed their opportunity to sell high on veteran players like Buxton, Ryan, Jeffers, and even Larnach.  The trade values of Buxton and Ryan have taken major steps backwards, and Jeffers as a free agent can only generate a comp pick, about half of his value if traded at the deadline.

Lets say the Twins ownership wants to incrementally spend $40 million, plus $20 million to retain Ryan Jeffers.  How do they even do it in ways that will improve the team?   The Twins will have a hard sell convincing players who have other options to come here and the biggest factor is they have nickled and dimed their way to be the bottom feeder of the league.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, HerbieFan said:

What Tom needs to do is somehow get people in place that can fully develop players.  I've said it a million times...the biggest issue is not how much money the Pohlads will or won't spend.  It helps to be able to go get a guy to fill a spot or two.  The biggest issue for this team is their inability to develop players....way too many players reach the majors and fail.  Player development is why the Brewers and Rays had the best records in the NL and AL.  It's why Cleveland continues to win the Central seemingly every dang year.  It's how a team like the Twins become a consistent winner.

It's also how the Dodgers succeed and why the Mets don't. Development is the #1 driver of every successful team. The extra money to spend is the difference between being able to fill holes externally with a premium player or a mediocre one, and being able to retain your developed players or having to rely on the next developed player with little safety net.

The Dodgers have been spending for a while. They've only been successful since they went and got the best FO exec in the sport who turned them into a development machine. Development is the key to everything.

[chpettit19]

14 minutes ago, MeleMouth said:

I remember when Terry Ryan used to say the spending - or non-spending - decisions were his, that he believed the owners would support him when he made a case for additional spending. 

It's been the same line for decades. Falvey said the same thing for the vast majority of his tenure. Until the last couple years when it switched to "I have no idea what my budget is because ownership hasn't told me."

[TheLeviathan]

21 minutes ago, Dave Lemke said:

I don't follow you around. I don't watch whose posts I disagree with or agree with for that matter. If I have disagreed eith severaal of ypur posts it means we differ in our ideas about the Twins. I disagree with some, agree with some and some I've done both depending on topic. Most likely to disagree with posts that use hindsight on any moves and transactions that don't work. I happen to think when you have a shot at playoffs, that Twins had at trade deadline, you don't give up on the players and tell them you don't have faith in them. You can disagree with my take same as I can disagree with yours. 

I think part of the problem is that we have a lot of that but the disagreements aren't yielding good conversations.  The truth is....it doesn't require hindsight to see some transaction being bad moves.  Yes, sometimes we do have to wait and see and we're all proven right or wrong at various times.  But to be blunt: many of the people you are tagging "disagree" on are not relying on hindsight and are merely reinforcing what they've been right about all along.

Personally, I'd rather someone disagree with me with a reply in such a way that contributes to the conversation rather than hit the thumbs down.  So much of that is petty behavior.  Though I appreciate you sharing these thoughts, it helps to know you have real reasoning behind that and aren't just doing it in a mean-spirited way.

So, in the spirit of my post - Where do you stand on what Tom said?

[SteveLV]

Development is easy when you hardly ever (Skubal the exception) have to trade any of your talent to get GREAT players on your roster.  You have an open checkbook, the ridiculous sweetheart deal shielding significant portions of your revenue due to an owner divorce resolved 15 years ago, and now have the fantastic loophole of deferred comp to exploit.

Oh, and you have a great team in a great market with a great climate.

How on earth could that franchise succeed?

[MeleMouth]

14 minutes ago, SteveLV said:

Development is easy when you hardly ever (Skubal the exception) have to trade any of your talent to get GREAT players on your roster.  You have an open checkbook, the ridiculous sweetheart deal shielding significant portions of your revenue due to an owner divorce resolved 15 years ago, and now have the fantastic loophole of deferred comp to exploit.

Oh, and you have a great team in a great market with a great climate.

How on earth could that franchise succeed?

Good, humorous points, but 14 of the players on the Dodgers' 40-man came by trade, including Betts, Glasnow, and two relievers, besides Skubal.

FWIW, Brewers have 22, Rays have 24, Guardians have 12, and Twins have 16.

[LA Vikes Fan]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

What you are advocating is pretty much the same team (Ryan / Lopez / Jeffers / Minter) for $50M additional per year plus what whatever we would spend on 2B and a SP.   That would be close to an additional $100M/year if the SP is a front of the rotation starter and anything less would be pointless given the current depth.   I don't see that happening unless the CBA changes dramatically and the implementation is immediate.  It's not how successful teams have been built.  

They will wait for Houston to take over SS and move Culpepper to 2B.  They also are not going to give Jeffers a 4-year contract when they have Lackey / Tinney and Diaw on the horizon.  If they extend anyone the priority should be players like Jenkins and Culpepper.  That's a far more sustainable model with greater upside.

Your math is wrong, it doesn't take into account what we're already paying or will have to pay these people through arbitration or the cost of a replacement if they're gone. Thee change is much closer to $40-50M a year, not $100M a year. With my suggestions, the payroll goes from this year's roughly $100M to roughly $140M, not to $200M. 

If your point is that tearing it down and starting over with the young players is a better option, I'm not so far in disagreement.  We could let Jeffers and Minter go now, trade Ryan and/or Lopez now or let them play out their contracts this year and then go, dump Laranch and 1 or both of Ober or Kremer for whatever prospects we can get, and turn things over to the younger group with Buxton, Clemens and Caratini as essentially the returning vets. We could field an everyday lineup of Jenkins, Keaschall, Lee, Culpepper,  EmRod, and Roden, augmented by Caratini holding a place until Lackey is ready, Buxton playing out his contract, and Clemens as the veteran core. Houston comes up midseason The rotation is Bradley and some combo of Prielipp, Zebby, Abel, and Rojas, etc. The BP is basically the same as we had at season's end minus Rogers and Minter, probably replaced by Acton and Paredes. Probably a pretty bad 2027 team but could be better in 2028 or 2029 depending entirely on how many guys hit and don't get injured, and how the minor league depth gets augmented by trading the vets we now have. That Team could also could stay bad if the young players don't develop or key guys get hurt or flame out. It's a plan and not a bad one. 

It's just not the plan I would use because I think that younger players develop better and faster if stitched around a core veteran group. The vets raise your floor without compromising the ceilings of the young players. I like the idea of two stalwart starters in Lopez and Ryan fronting a rotation as Bradley, Zebby, Abel, etc. improve over time behind them.  I like Jeffers and Buxton in the middle of the order with Culpepper, Jenkins, etc. developing under less pressure in the 6 or 7 spots, or even the 2 hole. I like Morris and Gomez pitching high leverage but not called upon to pitch every 8th and 9th inning and not being the primary closers closing every game. I think that approach works better in the short term and better in the long term. I can see a roster with those core vets still here, and the mediocre vets like Larnach and Ober gone replaced by young players,  going from 77 to 80-85 wins next year and better in 2028 as those younger players develop. Hey, reasonable minds can differ. 

 

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, HerbieFan said:

What Tom needs to do is somehow get people in place that can fully develop players.  I've said it a million times...the biggest issue is not how much money the Pohlads will or won't spend.  It helps to be able to go get a guy to fill a spot or two.  The biggest issue for this team is their inability to develop players....way too many players reach the majors and fail.  Player development is why the Brewers and Rays had the best records in the NL and AL.  It's why Cleveland continues to win the Central seemingly every dang year.  It's how a team like the Twins become a consistent winner.

It's not as simple as The Rays and Brewers do a better job developing players.  They manage the roster and their assets better giving themselves more chances to produce cheap talent.  The 2026 Rays had 13 players that produced 1.5 WAR or greater.  7 were acquired as prospects.  5 were drafted and one was a free agent.  The 2026 Brewers had 16 players that produced 1.5 WAR or greater.  8 were drafted 7 were acquired in Trade as a reasonably established player.  That player being William Contreras who had one season with 2 WAR.  

The Brewers traded away a Cy Young SP in year where they were expected to be good and had the best record in the league the next year.  The Twins kept Ryan.  We miss the core of the differences if we ignore how these teams manage assets.

[Major League Ready]

12 minutes ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

Your math is wrong, it doesn't take into account what we're already paying or will have to pay these people through arbitration or the cost of a replacement if they're gone. Thee change is much closer to $40-50M a year, not $100M a year. With my suggestions, the payroll goes from this year's roughly $100M to roughly $140M, not to $200M. 

I think you need to look back at my post.  I said keeping those players would cost an additional $50M based on the numbers you suggested.  If you add a front-line starter and an impact INF as you suggested, that's in the neighborhood of another $50M for a total of $100M.  Now, you did not say "front of the rotation SP"  but as I said previously, anything less would be pretty inconsequential given the SP depth.

[Major League Ready]

3 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Jeffers is my first baseman after 27.....

That's a creative and viable option.  

[LA Vikes Fan]

6 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

I think you need to look back at my post.  I said keeping those players would cost an additional $50M based on the numbers you suggested.  If you add a front-line starter and an impact INF as you suggested, that's in the neighborhood of another $50M for a total of $100M.  Now, you did not say "front of the rotation SP"  but as I said previously, anything less would be pretty inconsequential given the SP depth.

OK, now I see where we aren't communicating. My suggestion that we need 1 SP is abased on the assumption that Ryan will be traded in the off season or at the deadline if not re-signed. I wasn't suggesting we need extensions for Lopez and Ryan AND 1 more SP. We got that 3rd SP last year when we traded for Bradley. Also, Lopez is already on the books for $21.5M in 2027, so signing him to a 4 year extension at a $25M AAV only adds $4.25M to the payroll in 2027 and is probably cheap in 2028-30 IF he comes back to what he was before he got hurt. Granted, that's a big If. 

I'm perfectly comfortable going into 2027-2030 with a rotation of Lopez, Ryan, Bradley, and a combo of Prielipp, Zebby, Abel, Rojas, and Kremer. I'm less comfortable moving everyone up a spot if trade Ryan and lose his projected $12-14M salary for 2027 and $30m likely salary for 2028-2030.  I'd take a chance on Freddy Peralta if we trade Ryan, much less excited about the other FAs other than Skubal and he is likely to be a Dodger next year. I think the move is to re-sign Ryan if we can. 

I hear you on the idea of long term contracts to young guys but I think it's to early for a guy like Jenkins. We have him for 5 more years, let's see him have a good 2027 and 2028 first. Maybe its time for Keaschall or Lee, but still probably too soon for both. I would look into what it would take to buy out Bradley's arb years but he isn't a FA until 2030.  probably a year early on him.