With the Taj Bradley Deal, Twins Might Have Fleeced the Rays Again

9 hours ago, bunsen82 said:

@Woof Bronzer, @KirbyDome89 

This is my initial post in this thread.  1 I stated most of the griping was after the trade deadline the grade thread and articles in the fall.  That clearly matches up with in a majority of the statements I quoted were made.  2 - Even in this thread Kirby I acknowledge Abel's rough start.  

To be clear, can emotions play a part in a persons evaluation of what occurred.  100%.  Does that still make some of the statements inaccurate.   Yes.   If you want to call me a contrarian - so be it.  I have been extremely consistent on the trades, the trade deadline and the effects on the team.  Its not something I will shy away from.  Regarding Bradley specifically even in this thread I have been very clear in what is weaknesses were.  1.  Is mechanics were off and he needed to bring back the splitter.  2. He needed to act prepare like a professional- effectively he needed to grow up and put the effort in.  There is an article last fall, where I got pretty aggressive continuing to state this.  3.  He has to avoid the crooked #'s- effectively due to high home run rates and just losing confidence ability in starts.   He needed to improve his processes and so far he has.    

As to the trade deadline what did it do.  It gave you more options to throw against the wall for starters in Abel and Bradley.   It increased your odds of 1. finding an elite pitcher 2. finding more quality pitchers to add to the rotation.  3.  It increased our catching depth.   4. Hendry Mendez who I think personally has the 3rd best bat to ball skills in the organization and lastly a higher draft pick in the draft.   I have well acknowledge the emotional cost is pretty high - I still think the Varland trade cost the team more personally than the return- even if on paper its a strong return.   For a small organization though you have to make these difficult decisions because its an unfair playing field.  I think the Twins could have continue to have mediocre to slightly above average teams through 2028 fairly easily.   However a +500. record is why Falvey and Joe are gone.   

Look I am not here to get in a pissing match.   You each can have your opinions fair enough.  I can as well.   What started off my issues with Woof were glaring inconsistences.   1. Stating no articles had been written in the offseason.  2.  There were no negative comments on Bradley.  When I post them then the goalposts suddenly moved to those were after a bad start.  Even though there were 3 negative posts from the December article but alas it really doesn't matter.  It still doesn't negate my initial statement that most of the negative opinions of him were directly after the trade and into the fall.  

In either case we have Bradley who yes is currently on a good stretch.  I will be the first to tell you he could easily blow up his next start.  1. Baseball is hard.  2. This has been an issue of Bradley's and I don't think it magically goes away.   Even still his approach to being prepared each game,  having better stuff and an extra pitch bringing back the splitter - will likely lead him to the best stats he has had as a major leaguer.  

Now elite is subjective,  but for me its a #1 or #2 pitcher.  I said if 1 of our pitchers could become elite it would make the trade deadline worth it.  As of right now Bradley's start looks promising.     

Radio silent meaning there's nowhere near the hyperbole surrounding Abel's rough start vs. Bradley's strong start. "I still like him," is certainly a valid position to hold on Abel, but you're framing other similarly valid quotes regarding Bradley as "most people were trashing him," which wasn't true on multiple levels.  

56 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Radio silent meaning there's nowhere near the hyperbole surrounding Abel's rough start vs. Bradley's strong start. "I still like him," is certainly a valid position to hold on Abel, but you're framing other similarly valid quotes regarding Bradley as "most people were trashing him," which wasn't true on multiple levels.  

LOL you have much different meaning of radio silence than I do -  pretty much par for the course with the 2 of you.   You also missed my statement where someone had said we had won 2 in a row and I said yeah but we have Ober and Abel coming up to pitch next.   I still stand by most people were negative on Bradley or the Jax trade in general.   That just more than 50%,   are you really going to continue to die on this hill?  There was a lot negativity, granted a lot of it was with frustration with the trade deadline and giving up what we viewed as good players - even still there was a ton of shade thrown at the trade and Bradley in general. @Major League Ready  was the one that brought the topic up questioning weren't most people negative on the trade and he has 8 likes.   So this isn't just a figment of my imagination or a few on this board.  From my point of view I should be asking you to prove that the majority of people viewed the Jax for Bradley trade as a good trade and then nitpick every post.   You go be you,  I am done with this banter.  

31 minutes ago, bunsen82 said:

ra·di·o si·lence

1. an absence of or abstention from radio transmission.

   "at midnight, the enemy went on total radio silence"

   • absence of communication from a person or group from whom communication might have been expected.

LOL you have much different meaning of radio silence than I do -  pretty much par for the course with the 2 of you.   You also missed my statement where someone had said we had won 2 in a row and I said yeah but we have Ober and Abel coming up to pitch next.   I still stand by most people were negative on Bradley or the Jax trade in general.   That just more than 50%,   are you really going to continue to die on this hill?  There was a lot negativity, granted a lot of it was with frustration with the trade deadline and giving up what we viewed as good players - even still there was a ton of shade thrown at the trade and Bradley in general. @Major League Ready  was the one that brought the topic up questioning weren't most people negative on the trade and he has 8 likes.   So this isn't just a figment of my imagination or a few on this board.  You go be you,  I am done with this banter.  

"There's nowhere near the hyperbole surrounds Abel's rough start vs. Bradley's strong start," i.e. your level of panic after a couple Abel starts doesn't come close to matching your level of excitement after 3 Bradley starts if we're going to accept these sample sizes i.e. you're quiet (silent) regarding Abel. Semantics though right....

Not liking the trade ≠ "trashing Bradley." Viewing Taj Bradley as a fringe starter or BP candidate to start the year ≠ "trashing Bradley." If I told you Brooks Lee hasn't been a productive MLB player am I "trashing," him? You're misrepresenting where Taj Bradley was at the end of the 2025 season because it makes your silly little victory lap look better. There's no hill buddy, it's just you on a soap with a megaphone while most walk by with ears covered....

On 4/8/2026 at 8:02 AM, bunsen82 said:

No you aren't imagining anything.   Most people trashed the trade in the trade thread,  the grade thread (C-)   and later articles in the fall.   It wasn't until around December where a few more positive articles or posts came out.   Now several did acknowledge getting 4 1/2 years of a starting pitcher for 2 1/2 of a reliever seemed like a great deal.   

  

@KirbyDome89

1. My quote is most people "trashed the trade"   not "trashing Bradley."  That differentiation seems to be big in your book so I wanted to make sure you had that right.   

2. My argument is we shouldn't be making broad based emotional statements based off of small sample sizes- good and bad.  You are simultaneously defending claims of bust, magic beans and a pile of poop based on few games while wanting to claim small sample size for Bradley's start.  You have to see the logical fallacy. One can easily state Bradley is a potential all-star, cy young candidate based off his start and there is nothing factually wrong with that statement based off of three games.   In either case I agree with pumping the breaks,  even still he is definitely trending in the right direction. I think your misrepresentation statement is wrong. I have had a very good representation of Bradley last year in my Sept 29th post - having improved performance,  the stuff was getting better and by his own statements he was starting to do scouting reports prior to games.   His real test was going to be the offseason.   

3. I am glass half full guy,  so the fact I post more about positives than negatives will always occur.  My posts so far this year based on mentions is probably 1. Bell 2. Bradley 3.   Gray 4. Orze  5. Caratini.   All players who have played well this year.   Its not to say I am unwilling to openly talk about weaknesses of players.   Abel - had good results yesterday. There were 2 notable improvements.  1 FB back up to neat 96mph vs the 93 mph he had in his last start.  2. Is he threw 69% strikes vs something like 50% in his first start.   There is still work to do.   There is no level of panic here.    Its just a realistic assessment of the situation.  To be fair Bradley needed to have this start more than Abel did.  Bradley is pushing into his 4 year in the big leagues.  This is Abel's 2nd.  Abel had a much longer roadway to show he can be an effective pitcher at this level even though they are similar age.  Ultimately all these players are lottery tickets.  The question is going to be which ones are going to hit.  That is why increasing your odds for a team that acts like a small market like the Twins is such a big deal.