Brock Beauchamp

Yes, they declined the Dodgers' offer and it's damned near impossible to say they made the wrong decision thus far.

That’s a bit of a strawman. All I’m saying is that this org would look a hell of a lot different if even one of them projected to be an adequate #3. That’s a relatively low bar to set.

I agree that pitchers are a quantity game but I believe in collecting that quantity in round two or later. It's part of the reason why I was such a fan of the Twins' last draft.

Sure, the reality is that getting a good reliever from almost any pick is a decent return on the pick. But that’s not your goal with the fifth or sixth pick or wherever Jay landed. Jay and Stewart are part of the reason why I’ve come around on the idea of avoiding arms at the top of the draft.

Missing on Jay in the sense that he was drafted to be a starter and will not start games in Minnesota. He can still be valuable, just not as valuable as his draft placement.

For starters, it'd be nice if they stuck to their own threshold by spending 52% of revenue on payroll. They've been way under that number for six years now. I don't expect the Twins to take a loss on the team in a season. But the reality is that they've been pocketing tens of millions of dollars per season since moving to Target Field and it's time to repay the fans by picking up the required pieces to turn this team into a legitimate contender. I don't expect them to field a $150m payroll. I'd be happy with $125m right now. After all, I'm one of the people who is paying for that nice new stadium that allows them to make that profit.

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

The only reason I can think the Padres would be interested is because their MLB team is not very good and most of their organizational depth (which is pretty good) is still in the low minors. But that seems like a bit of a stretch me.

They've proven time and time again they're not going to do that so I don't see the point in getting upset about it anymore. They've chosen to run this team at a profit - which is beyond irritating at times - but that's just a cold, hard reality of the situation.

Sure, they want to win. Their fanbase wants them to win. But "all or nothing" is a frustrating way to be a fan of anything. Personally, I enjoyed the hell out of the 2017 season and the relatively meager 85 wins from Minnesota. If I can't enjoy the process and only celebrate the result, I'll be a truly happy sports fan once every couple of decades. Do what you can to get there and give yourself a legitimate chance to win it all. That's all I can ask. Whether you get that 63rd out or fail at 62 is not going to dictate whether you succeed or fail.

Closers are overrated. I think we can all agree that Molitor would be a better manager if he looked a lot more like Terry Francona. Andrew Miller is not Cleveland's "closer". He's their best bullpen arm. He entered the game in the ninth inning six times in 2017. He had 57 appearances.

Well, they're not going to spend $30m in free agency unless they liquidate some valuable players (Escobar, maybe Gibson is "valuable" if you squint). Removing Gibson maybe gets you to $25m. That's still not enough to pay two relievers and a starter.

It's a single offseason. I'd be satisfied with one and one. I don't think this team really needs two relievers given how some guys stepped forward late last season and how there are intriguing arms in the upper minors. I don't think the Twins have the payroll flexibility to get a good starter and two good relievers (the upcoming handbook has hard numbers on payroll and there isn't $30m to spare... maybe $15-20m, tops).

It's hard to say their time was wasted. They made the postseason a bunch of times, some years when they had the best pitcher in all of baseball. And they still lost. If you have two MVP-caliber position players, the best pitcher in baseball, and you still lose in the first round... *shrug*

I still think chasing an "ace" as the cure to all the Twins' woes is unnecessary. Go get a good pitcher, period. Sure, we'd all like an "ace" but what the Twins need is a reliable, above average arm. If you find an ace, it'll likely come from inside the organization, either via trade and development or draft/sign and development. But how much better would the 2017 Twins have been if you replaced Colon's and Santiago's starts (net 0 fWAR) with a 3 fWAR pitcher? Not only do you bank something around three wins but you ease up the load on the bullpen and allow your better relievers to pitch innings. Between Colon and Santiago, they had EIGHT starts where they went fewer than four innings. And most of us said Colon "wasn't that bad" (and he wasn't). Making that one swap could net the Twins as many as 5-6 wins on the season, not counting any potential improvement and/or callups from pitchers already in the organization. Aim for an ace pitcher in FA or trade but be ready to fall back quickly and pick up a good pitcher if that plan doesn't appear to be feasible. The last thing I want to see the Twins do is go big on Darvish, battle with five other teams for his services, lose out to the Cubs in January, and then miss a chance to pick up a lesser pitcher like Lynn (just an example, not crazy about him but he'd be an adequate choice).

If you're good enough to be one of the best regular season teams and also make it to the World Series, you have close to a coin flip's chance of winning the series. I'm not going to say Cleveland is a failure because they failed to get one more out after the ~60 outs they already got in the 2016 Series.

Yeah, no single miss hurts. But when combined... Just missing on both Jay and Stewart stings. And then there's all those other picks.

Heh, I did a search on some of my De Leon posts from last offseason. Here are a few: "I think De Leon's performance in 2017 very much matters, as he's entering his age 24 season and will likely spend most or all of 2017 on an MLB roster. To put it differently, does Jose Berrios' 2017 matter? Of course it does, and Berrios is a full two years younger than De Leon. If either player stumbles badly in 2017, does it mean their career is over? No, definitely not... But if a 24 year old pitching prospect posts 100+ really bad innings, that prospect's future is rightly called into question. As for Dozier, his 2017 performance isn't about drawing fans (well, probably not, anyway), it's about establishing future value. Another 5 WAR season out of Dozier and we'll no longer be squabbling whether he's the 7th or 9th best second baseman in the game, we'll be arguing whether he's the 2nd or 3rd best second baseman in the game. The only knock on Dozier right now is that he's coming off a career year. If he storms out out of the gate in 2017, that's no longer in question and no one will be able to deny he's one of the best middle infielders in all of baseball. And that means Dozier is worth a hell of a lot, even if he's down to 1.5 years of controlled service time." "That's why I added "Final judgment on De Leon will take time." at the end of the statement. But a bad start to his career at 24 years old drops his stock and it drops it a lot. De Leon is somewhat old-ish for a top 50 pitching prospect graduating to MLB. http://www.baseballa...hjziGkwLKoQD.97 On BA's preseason prospect list from last season, only three prospects in the top 50 were 24 years or older. Seven in the top 100 were 24 years or older. Plenty of people have questions about Berrios because he pitched 55-ish bad innings as a 22 year old." "One thing I think we all can (or at least should) agree on: This is the first test of Falvey and Levine. The trade, for good or bad, did not happen. Now we get to see if they were right or wrong. - If Dozier is a 5 WAR player in 2017 (or on his way at the break), Falvey was right. - If De Leon is a negative WAR player in 2017 or back in the minors, Falvey was (likely) right. Final judgment on De Leon will take time. - If Dozier is a .700 OPS player in 2017 (or on his way at the break), Falvey was wrong. - If De Leon is a 4 WAR player in 2017, Falvey was wrong. Of course, there are combinations that muddy the situation (a good/good or bad/bad outcome) but overall, the scouting and decision-making acumen of Falvey and Levine should make themselves apparent in relatively short order. That will not definitively declare whether they're awesome or terrible at their jobs but they'll be the first real indications of what to expect in coming years."

So you're advocating the Twins trade away a guy they paid $1.2m per win in 2017 (!!!!!!) so they could take an oft-injured pitcher in a lopsided deal. Wow.

I'd like to hire you for a job. I'll pay you $1,000 a year. I bet you haven't gotten another job offer today. This is the best offer you've received, you should take it.

I think this is kind of picking nits, Parker. While some overrate Dozier's defensive value, it should also be noted that he played more innings than a couple of the guys who were in the negative but "above" Brian in those listings. When we're talking the difference of 1-2 runs over the course of 1300 innings, whether a guy finishes with -1.3 or -0.6 doesn't really matter (even more so when the lower player put in more innings at the position). Overall, I think Dozier falls into the nebulous area of "average". Sure, he was slightly lower than Joe Panik in UZR but also played 120 more innings. He was slightly below Hernandez and Lowrie in DRS but played up to 220 more innings of defense to get that lower rating. I think too much attention is given to the exact placement of a player and whether the number is negative or positive. A 3 run swing in DRS or a 2 run swing in UZR doesn't really amount to much in a full season. It should also be noted that Dozier's overall Fangraphs' Def rating was slightly in the positive (0.9).

I think it’s wrong-headed to believe the closer is the top of the bullpen pecking order in the first place. I hope the front office feels the same way. Find a good reliever for the ninth but he shouldn’t be the best reliever in the pen.

I still maintain that your closer should be your third best reliever so no, I don’t believe the Twins need a “dominant” closer.

You always try to find the next Arrieta but that doesn't impact you acquiring more reliable, above-average players. Searching for the next Arrieta is a side job, one every GM should spend a little time working on every offseason.

As I've said what seems to be a thousand times, every pitching prospect is a risk. Some are so risky that you just stay away and it appears De Leon is one of those guys, particularly if you have to give up one of the best second basemen in the game to get him. I'm not sure if you're trying to argue the Twins should have agreed to the De Leon deal here... but in hindsight (though for reasons many of us pointed out), it was the correct non-move and that shouldn't even be up for discussion. The guy didn't even cross 50 innings this season. Without Dozier, the Twins likely finish under .500 on the season. And given how De Leon would have contributed absolutely nothing, I'll take that 85 win season every time, thanks.