Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Making the Playoffs Would Change the Twins’ Offseason

    A postseason berth would force the Twins to think differently about 2027, and ownership has already signaled that standing pat is no longer the plan.

    Cody Christie
    Image courtesy of © Jesse Johnson-Imagn Images

    Twins Video

    For most of the 2026 season, the Minnesota Twins have lived in an uncomfortable middle ground. They aren't rebuilding in the traditional sense, but they also aren't loaded with enough established talent to be considered a clear contender. Instead, they've spent much of the year hovering around the American League playoff picture while trying to figure out exactly what this roster can become.

    That uncertainty was understandable. The Twins entered 2026 coming off a massive organizational reset with a new general manager in Jeremy Zoll. Plenty of young players needed opportunities, veterans needed to prove they belonged in the next competitive version of the roster, and ownership faced questions about how aggressively it was willing to invest.

    Then something interesting happened. The Twins started winning enough games to make the postseason a realistic possibility. With the final month of the season approaching, Minnesota remains within striking distance of the American League playoff field. And that changes the conversation.

    A playoff appearance wouldn't simply give the Twins a few extra games in October. It would change the expectations surrounding the organization entering the offseason.

    The Twins Have Already Changed Their 2027 Expectations

    There is a temptation to view 2027 as another year of development. That was reasonable earlier this season.

    The Twins could have used 2026 to evaluate their young core, determine which prospects were ready to graduate and continue building toward a better team down the road. Even their trade deadline approach reflected that balance. Minnesota added A.J. Minter, Dean Kremer and Jeff Hoffman without surrendering its top prospect capital, preserving a farm system that remains one of the organization's biggest advantages.

    But the Twins also spent money. More than $8 million in prorated salary was added for the remainder of 2026, while Hoffman and Kremer created financial commitments for 2027. Hoffman is owed $11 million next season, with the Blue Jays paying a portion of that amount, while Kremer is positioned for an arbitration raise after making $5.75 million this year.

    That isn't the behavior of an organization preparing to spend another year simply waiting for its prospects to arrive. More importantly, Tom Pohlad has already made the organization's 2027 intentions clear.

    “I’m not hoping -- it will be higher,” Pohlad said when discussing whether the Twins' payroll would increase next season. He added that if the organization wants to become a consistently competitive postseason team, it has to invest in the roster.

    That statement came before the season was decided. If the Twins actually reach the playoffs, it becomes even more important.

    A Playoff Berth Changes the Free-Agent Conversation

    There is a big difference between telling free agents, "We think we're going to be good someday," and being able to say, "We just made the playoffs."

    The Twins won't suddenly become a premier free-agent destination because they win a Wild Card Series. Minnesota will still deal with the realities of playing in a smaller market, and there will always be financial limitations compared to baseball's biggest spenders.

    But a playoff appearance provides evidence. It gives Zoll something tangible to sell. It allows the front office to point to a young core that already competed against established clubs. It gives ownership an opportunity to argue that additional investment isn't about buying hope. It's about supporting a team that has already demonstrated it can win.

    That should make the free-agent market more interesting for Minnesota. The Twins don't need to chase every expensive name on the market. They shouldn't. Their best opportunity may be using payroll flexibility to target specific weaknesses while allowing their young players to continue taking larger roles.

    But there is a difference between making one or two modest additions and actually trying to build a roster capable of winning a postseason series. A playoff berth should push Minnesota toward the second option.

    The Twins have spent years building organizational depth, and they're finally beginning to see some of that investment reach the major leagues. Walker Jenkins is the obvious example. Vahn Lackey is another important piece of the long-term picture. Kaelen Culpepper has already reached the majors, while Luke Keaschall is part of the organization's young core. There are still plenty of prospects behind them.

    That creates an interesting problem for Zoll, and it's a good problem to have. The Twins don't need to buy an entirely new roster. They need to determine which positions require established major-league help around the young talent already in place. That's a much different offseason. A team that finishes outside the playoffs can rationalize another year of patience. A team that reaches October has a much harder time explaining why it shouldn't push the roster forward.

    The prospects don't become less valuable because the Twins make the playoffs. In fact, they become even more valuable because Minnesota can use those players to fill some positions while spending money elsewhere. That could be the organization's sweet spot: Develop internally, spend externally where necessary and don't be afraid to move an asset if doing so clearly improves the major-league roster.

    This might be the biggest consequence of all. The Pohlads have faced plenty of criticism about payroll since 2023. Some of it came from declining spending, while some stemmed from the perception that the organization wasn't willing to invest aggressively enough when opportunities presented themselves.

    Tom Pohlad's comments about increasing the 2027 payroll are an important starting point, but fans will ultimately judge the organization by what happens when the offseason arrives. That's where a playoff appearance could matter. If Minnesota reaches October and then enters the offseason with essentially the same financial approach it has used in recent years, the questions will come quickly.

    Why not add another starter? Why not improve the bullpen? Why not address the positions that have been obvious weaknesses? Why not take advantage of a young, relatively inexpensive core? A playoff team creates expectations. Once those expectations exist, it becomes much harder to sell patience for patience's sake.

    What Happens If They Miss?

    This is where things get complicated. Even if Minnesota misses the playoffs, the 2026 season could still be viewed as a success if the young core takes meaningful steps forward and the team proves it can compete. But missing the postseason after spending much of the year in the race would make the offseason decisions more nuanced.

    The front office could reasonably argue that another year of development is necessary. The other argument would be that the team got close enough that a few targeted additions could have made the difference. If the Twins finish two games out, lose a handful of winnable games in September and watch the bullpen implode down the stretch, the offseason conversation will be very different than it would have been after a 65-win season.

    Context matters. So does momentum. And the Twins are building both. That's why the final weeks of 2026 matter beyond the standings. Every win isn't just another step toward October. It's another piece of evidence that the Twins are ready for a different kind of offseason.

    For the first time in several years, Minnesota may enter the winter with more than hope. It may enter with expectations.


    How will the team's offseason be impacted by making or missing the playoffs? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

    Want more Twins in your Google results? Add us as a preferred source.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    2 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    so they should invest in this team for 2027, not because they might make the post season in 2026, but because you never know the competitive landscape for 2027 and beyond, and you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take

    This 2027 team will need at least two top-tier starters, a closer and a 30+ bomb slugger to even sniff contention, though. The cost of those contracts will be far, far more than the Pohlads will pay.

    Anything less leads you right back to .500 baseball. And that's not going to put butts back in seats. And then you've got the same revenue problems all over again.

    You miss 100% of the shots you try to take when you can't even see the basket.

    1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

    If the Twins had moved Buxton, Lopez, Ryan and Jeffers on top of the bullpen trades, that's what a true rebuild looks like. It's totally a valid strategy to maximize value.

    No team had ever traded away 10 major leaguers at the deadline before. It was and still is, historic.

    no hyperbole, literal history

    trading excess value for future value is a strategy to maximize value. When you don’t have excess value, trading away said value is actively making your team worse.

    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is bad business.

    6 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    Free agency isn’t THE answer, development isn’t THE answer, trades aren’t THE answer. A good team uses all three acquisition tools to assemble a team. The payroll budget needs to be high enough that the GM can use all three tools to be competitive. A mid-range budget (20th to 15th ranked payrolls in baseball were $150m to $175m roughly) gives the gm the free agency tool that can acquire good free agents and trade prospects for veterans already on a contract.

    The league quality as a whole is volatile and really hard to predict.

    the prediction models nailed the Twins record, but I never saw a preseason prediction with a below .500 team making the post season.

    i think the lesson learned from this season is that a scorched earth rebuild is never a good strategy. Sure, we could have learned that from Pittsburgh and Colorado and their decades of futility, but Falvey and The Pohlads did their budget slashing veteran trading do nothing offseason waffling in indecision and lost a golden opportunity to be an actually good team in a season of really bad teams.

    so they should invest in this team for 2027, not because they might make the post season in 2026, but because you never know the competitive landscape for 2027 and beyond, and you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take

    I disagree.  If you are going to rebuild, tear it down to the studs.  Going half-way like the twins did just promotes perpetual mediocrity.    The strategy to go for it or rebuild both look to concentrate assets in a given period of time.  So, the question is ... would the twins have a better shot at post season success by investing in this Team as they did or building for the future. 

    I agree you miss 100% of the time when you don't take a shot.  This includes not taking a shot at amassing assets in a rebuild.  They are going to let Lopez and Jeffers go for nothing.  They might still trade Ryan but they could have had Tolle and Arias.  They would have gotten something like Eyanson or LeGrange for Jeffers having already added Abel and Rojas.  IMO, they would have had a better shot at being good for several years vs being mediocre this year and next.  They were in a position last year to rebuild quickly and contend for several years and they blew it.  Milwaukee and Tampa would have never missed this opportunity. 

    Speaking of Milwaukee.  They have 17 players that are going to produce greater than 1.5 WAR.  One somewhat established player (Contreras) was acquired via trade.  The were eight others that were acquired via trade but they were prospects/unproven players.  They don't have any players that were acquired via  free agency that will produce 1.5 WAR..

    Tampa has one player (Martinez) that was acquired via free agency.  They have no players that were traded for as established players.  By established I mean ever produced 1.5 WAR or greater in a season.

    Now, no doubt, smart free agent signings are advantageous.  At times the Rays have gotten great production for modest investment.  The same for the Brewers.  Their role however is far less essential that developing players acquired through drafting and prospect trades.  The value of Trading for established players is tweaking a roster and filling a hole but it's only valuable if a team like the twins can develop young/inexpensive talent.

    34 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    When you don’t have excess value, trading away said value is actively making your team worse.

    This is a head scratcher. The Twins didn't have excess value at DH when they traded Nelson Cruz. They bet on future value. And they won.

    Players are drafted on future value. Four tiers of baseball exist to develop future value. If you don't have a roster that can win or ownership that can effectively sign free agents, future value is really your only wise investment.

    3 hours ago, LastOnePicked said:

    This 2027 team will need at least two top-tier starters, a closer and a 30+ bomb slugger to even sniff contention, though. The cost of those contracts will be far, far more than the Pohlads will pay.

    Anything less leads you right back to .500 baseball. And that's not going to put butts back in seats. And then you've got the same revenue problems all over again.

    You miss 100% of the shots you try to take when you can't even see the basket.

    Joe Ryan, Pablo Lopez, Taj Bradley, Kremer and Prelipp are still on the team (as is Ober, but he looks cooked). A good mid-rotation starter would be ideal, but not a necessity.

    they can and should extend Ryan

    agreed, they need a really good reliver

    they need hitting, but they don’t need elite, they need someone better than Brooks Lee to play third.

    3 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    No team had ever traded away 10 major leaguers at the deadline before. It was and still is, historic.

    no hyperbole, literal history

    trading excess value for future value is a strategy to maximize value. When you don’t have excess value, trading away said value is actively making your team worse.

    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is bad business.

    In a very narrow, immediate sense...yes.  Maybe, that's not even a given.  In the case of the players listed you are responding to...Jeffers has started 14 out of 20 games we've played since the deadline, Ryan has been basically non-existent, and Buxton has been terrible.  Throw Trevor "I'm hitting like peak Pedro Florimon" Larnach on the pile too.

    I could absolutely make the case the team would've been better having dealt all of them.  Plus they would've recovered assets and payroll room to supplement any assets acquired in the deals.  

    So I fail to to see how this blanket statement applies the way you seem to be applying it?  What am I missing?

    2 hours ago, LastOnePicked said:

    This is a head scratcher. The Twins didn't have excess value at DH when they traded Nelson Cruz. They bet on future value. And they won.

    Players are drafted on future value. Four tiers of baseball exist to develop future value. If you don't have a roster that can win or ownership that can effectively sign free agents, future value is really your only wise investment.

    Before the Trade deadline 2021 Cruz put up 1.9 WAR April to July. After the trade deadline Donaldson put up 1.2 WAR as the DH August to September. Per game they got more production and got a prospect.

    10 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

    In a very narrow, immediate sense...yes.  Maybe, that's not even a given.  In the case of the players listed you are responding to...Jeffers has started 14 out of 20 games we've played since the deadline, Ryan has been basically non-existent, and Buxton has been terrible.  Throw Trevor "I'm hitting like peak Pedro Florimon" Larnach on the pile too.

    I could absolutely make the case the team would've been better having dealt all of them.  Plus they would've recovered assets and payroll room to supplement any assets acquired in the deals.  

    So I fail to to see how this blanket statement applies the way you seem to be applying it?  What am I missing?

    2025 deadline was a firesale and scorched earth rebuild, of which last offseason the team did not address until 2026 trade deadline. They did jack last offseason, and if they had actually tried to field a good team, 2026 was non-competitive for half of the AL. If 2026 had been a better team out of the gate, we wouldn’t be looking at a 64 win team. The bullpen is still a bottom 5 pen in the league and there are only 2 players from opening day still in it.

    The point for 2027, is make the team better, not worse, because they can compete in the AL again next year just by fielding a mid-range payroll.

     

    1 hour ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    2025 deadline was a firesale and scorched earth rebuild, of which last offseason the team did not address until 2026 trade deadline. They did jack last offseason, and if they had actually tried to field a good team, 2026 was non-competitive for half of the AL. If 2026 had been a better team out of the gate, we wouldn’t be looking at a 64 win team. The bullpen is still a bottom 5 pen in the league and there are only 2 players from opening day still in it.

    The point for 2027, is make the team better, not worse, because they can compete in the AL again next year just by fielding a mid-range payroll.

     

    I think there are some things I agree with here and one deeply problematic assumption.  I agree - if you wanted to be an actual contender the time to do that was not August 2nd of 2026 or even March of 2026.  It was right from the end of 2025.  But they didn't do that and, for me, chasing something you never even tried to build is silly.

    But it is a really unlikely assumption to think the 2027 AL is going to look like this because, statistically, this year is a huge aberration.  I mean, this year isn't anything like last year is it?  I don't think assuming another field this weak is at all a fair take.  

    Part of my argument is that you're not good in this crappy AL field.  When regression kicks in....how far are you behind on Opening Day 2027 with all else being the same?  To me, you're already behind where you are right now.  Now you're down Jeffers.  You won't have two months of Larnach being hot.  Who knows what we should count on Buxton for.  Even if some other things go right (Lopez, Keaschall, Jenkins, etc.) you've still got an uphill battle to climb.

    One which I personally would've rather had more assets in the tank to help with rather than wasting them on this doomed-from-the-start pipedream.

    And again...the re-emphasize....all the folks that the pipedreamers were SO adamant we had to keep have been non-factors, terrible, or part-time players on this supposed contention run of ours.  We passed on peak value for this slog.

    56 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

    I think there are some things I agree with here and one deeply problematic assumption.  I agree - if you wanted to be an actual contender the time to do that was not August 2nd of 2026 or even March of 2026.  It was right from the end of 2025.  But they didn't do that and, for me, chasing something you never even tried to build is silly.

    But it is a really unlikely assumption to think the 2027 AL is going to look like this because, statistically, this year is a huge aberration.  I mean, this year isn't anything like last year is it?  I don't think assuming another field this weak is at all a fair take.  

    Part of my argument is that you're not good in this crappy AL field.  When regression kicks in....how far are you behind on Opening Day 2027 with all else being the same?  To me, you're already behind where you are right now.  Now you're down Jeffers.  You won't have two months of Larnach being hot.  Who knows what we should count on Buxton for.  Even if some other things go right (Lopez, Keaschall, Jenkins, etc.) you've still got an uphill battle to climb.

    One which I personally would've rather had more assets in the tank to help with rather than wasting them on this doomed-from-the-start pipedream.

    And again...the re-emphasize....all the folks that the pipedreamers were SO adamant we had to keep have been non-factors, terrible, or part-time players on this supposed contention run of ours.  We passed on peak value for this slog.

    Fair, I have no idea what 2027 will look like, I didn’t mean to say that 2027 will be the same as 26. agreed, it will likely be more competitive than 2026.
     

    7 of the last 10 WS winners won it with a $150m to $175m payroll. Yeah, roster construction matters more than spend, but mid payroll teams are competitive year in and out.

    while I’m glad this team added at the 27 deadline, I do very much agree on trading Larnach, this team is loaded with outfielders. It’s the position that they can trade away veterans for prospects and not get worse.

     

    1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

    all the folks that the pipedreamers were SO adamant we had to keep have been non-factors, terrible, or part-time players on this supposed contention run of ours.  We passed on peak value for this slog.

    Sad that so many - including team ownership - just cannot understand this. It's very possible that this '26 team could have traded and promoted wisely - could be without Jeffers, Ryan, Lopez and Buxton - and still be in this same WC hunt. All while watching other high-end prospects work their way into 2027 plans.

    But there's no vision here for building a real contender. There's just hope, an overprotectiveness of a mid roster and some vague notions of "winning now" from an owner who admitted that he knew nothing about baseball as recently as eight months ago.

    2 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    The point for 2027, is make the team better, not worse, because they can compete in the AL again next year just by fielding a mid-range payroll.

    This I agree with, only because there is no other choice. There's no offseason value in Lopez, Ryan, Ober or Buxton. Jeffers will walk for nothing. There's no one left to trade.

    However, there will be a work stoppage next year, even if it just impacts Spring Training. When free agency finally begins, the Twins will be slow on the trigger as they always are, and will be seen as a much less desirable landing place than competitive teams like the White Sox and Guardians. 

    15 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

    Fair, I have no idea what 2027 will look like, I didn’t mean to say that 2027 will be the same as 26. agreed, it will likely be more competitive than 2026.
     

    7 of the last 10 WS winners won it with a $150m to $175m payroll. Yeah, roster construction matters more than spend, but mid payroll teams are competitive year in and out.

    while I’m glad this team added at the 27 deadline, I do very much agree on trading Larnach, this team is loaded with outfielders. It’s the position that they can trade away veterans for prospects and not get worse.

     

    Teams rebuilt before they went to the World Series. I've done this before. Nobody GAF about deadline trash like middle relievers or relievers on expiring contracts. 

    Jhoan Duran and Carlos Correa were the only two assets moved with cachet. That's it. The rest (including middle reliever Louie Varland were meh)

    Does the entire rebuild have to happen at the deadline? No. But rebuilds are almost always in the near past for non-elite market payroll teams who make it deep into the playoffs.

    Diamondbacks. Rangers. Royals, Blue Jays, Astros, Braves. In the case of the Astros, they literally build the tank/rebuild model starting in 2010. It's worked pretty well for them...




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...