um_stevenel

If you’re going to say that cutting payroll benefits the Twins, you need to show an actual benefit to the Twins organization that will eventually improve the performance on the field, because as a Twins fan site, what we predominantly care about is the major league team. The way I see it. cutting $10 million from the payroll benefits the Pohlad family, not the Twins. It would only benefit the major league team if the Pohlad family somehow reallocates that money to better use for the team. Are they going to go $10 million into the red on next year’s roster? Are they going to start spending huge on the international market? Are they going to spend $10 million on upgrading their facilities somewhere that they were otherwise unable to do? Are they going to start signing players to extensions that they might not otherwise do? Will they ink Walker Jenkins to an eight-year contract next week after these trades? In their 40+ years of ownership, I am not aware of them *ever* doing anything remotely like that. Payroll has frequently been $10s of millions below the league average payroll, and to my recollection. only a handful of times has it gotten to league average, only to quickly be slashed. Without stating the benefits to the major league team, they could give these players away for effectively nothing and the benefit of your argument would still be there. And we’d just be treated to lesser quality baseball for the rest of the summer and a lesser chance of making the playoffs and doing something there. It’s unclear to me how moving further *below* a potential salary floor is a smart move, for one example. I know this will sound harsh, but I don’t know a subtle way to dance around it, You don’t have to make billionaire’s arguments for why they should hoard more money for them. You don’t even have to launder their arguments for them. We all understand that Major League Baseball is a business. We know the Twins will not regularly compete with the Yankees and Dodgers for free agents. But there’s a reason professional sports teams never open the books when they come begging for public money for their stadiums, and it’s not because they’re embarrassed at how much they’re losing.

Came here to say, the buying ship is leaving the harbor right now, and accelerating quickly.

Thank you!

Thank you!

Not only that, but I think it would be unwise to try. I’m even worried that shifting to the bullpen and going max velocity for an inning at a time if he gets past 120 innings will be risky this year. If he hits that many total innings as a starter, I hope they call the season a great success for him and leave it at that. Don’t even worry about getting a few more innings from him or trying to keep using him in the playoffs.

I’m not sure what the restrictions are on recent draftees; but I assume the reason Lackey isn’t listed is that he will not yet be eligible to be traded. Is that correct?

In my version of this, I picture Tait as the LH catcher with Lackey getting most starts. and both of them getting ample time at DH, Keaschall’s probably the fourth outfielder, Would love for Mendez to be in the picture and possibly getting time at 1B as a LH bat there, but it seems they already gave up on that? I’d say you’re missing Rojas from the bullpen. And for me Quick would still be a starter (at least for most of the season - a late season switch to reliever would work for the stretch run and playoffs).

I’m not saying Roden’s a can’t miss prospect. I’m more saying that they have five guys who have probably earned a shot or are very close to that point, and with at most two spots that might have an opening. Jenkins, Rodriguez, Gonzalez, and Mendez are the other four. Roden’s merely the first in line for me given the time he’s already spent in AAA and that he’s on the 40 man roster already. Give him half a season of regular playing time to show what he can do in the majors and see if you have a potential ML contributor. I assume he’ll be a step down from Larnach’s offense, but a step up in defense. And I mainly don’t want him to get squeezed and leave for no return if he’s an MLB-caliber player (thinking of adding Brent Rooker as a trade throw-in as an example).

This is why I still find myself hoping they don’t put too many chips into the pot for this year, and that they sell on a few players rather than losing them for nothing. As Matthew notes, not all will pan out: but the sheer volume of outfield prospects they have at AAA, many of whom appear to be very good defensively as well, gives them an extremely good chance of having a very good outfield defense and offensive production from those players. The infield is close to the same story - it’s plausible to see an excellent infield defense of Culpepper, Houston, Lee, Lewis, and Lackey, with Tait as a perfect platoon-side backup / DH, for many seasons, with above average offense from four of the five. They’ve got a solid core of starting pitchers with Ryan, Bradley, Prielipp, Matthews, Ober, Lopez, and Abel. but that area’s looking a little thinner in the minors now. Beyond Quick, I’m not sure who else projects to have a good chance to be a quality ML starter in the next two years. Some people will say that the return for trading somebody like Josh Bell is a low level prospect and seemingly dismiss the chances of that player being an eventual contributor, but I see two problems with that. One is that a small number of them will, so I’d like to have as many of them in the system when the team gets good as possible. I remember Dave Hollins being traded for David Ortiz before he was David Ortiz (literally and figuratively, I think his last name was Arias when traded). Or trading a low level prospect of Luis Gil for Jake Cave. It might be infrequent, but it happens. The other is that I’d rather have a deeper farm system when the team is a contender expected to do something in the playoffs, not just a contender to make them, so there’s more depth and better prospects to trade from to improve those teams. Trading Jeffers could easily land a top 100 prospect pitcher and more. Trading Bell and Larnach could land some solid pieces, especially if they target players a bit further from the majors (like primarily A ball). It’ll hurt this year’s chances, but probably not that significantly (especially if they trade for 1-2 more low-cost relievers to bolster their biggest weakness). And I’d even add Ryan to the list to strongly consider the offers for trading him at the deadline. Unless they extend him first, if they get an offer headlined by a couple top 100 prospects plus more, I hope they take it. To the extent they’re worried about the blowback about being cheap, start signing guys to extensions now. Bradley, Jenkins, and more. Sign a high quality FA pitcher in the offseason to replace Ryan if need be. This year is providing good reason for optimism, and I am not advocating for trading like last year. But switching from Larnach to Roden, Bell to a DH by committee (probably including more Buxton in the second half) are probably at most negligible changes to the postseason chances. Even trading Jeffers is probably not much more. But those moves could bolster their chances for the next five years, when the team is likely expected to be competitive for the whole time. .

Oh man, Jacob Cavern was right there for the taking.

Ah, thanks. That’s an angle I hadn’t considered or looked at his stats. That does sound extremely low, but if he’s got the arm and athleticism to play center field as well, I still would guess there’s at least a good chance that could improve greatly with coaching and repetition. Hopefully he gets more reps at catcher now that he won’t be splitting the position with the top prospect in the organization.

I noticed Aaron Gleeman seemingly downplayed Diaw’s potential as a major league starter in his last post: “Their best catcher prospect, Eduardo Tait, is 19 and batting .204 at Single-A. No other Twins prospect profiles as a starting catcher, although that could change soon.” I’ve wondered why Diaw doesn’t seem to get much hype for his catching potential. I don’t recall any concerns about his defense ever being highlighted. Anybody know why Diaw might not be considered a viable ML catcher (at least as a regular starter)? Because in the event they don’t get Lackey, I still hold out some hope that perhaps Tait/Diaw might form a good L/R tandem behind the plate one day in the not-too-distant future. Regardless, it seems like he’s due for a promotion to AA.

If other teams have taken note not to swing and it’s become more obvious as the season progresses, it doesn’t sound like the command has necessarily worsened, just that the walks have (until, as the author noted, he shows he can throw strikes consistently). So I don’t take the struggles as a worry per se. What would be the bigger worry is if he’s seeing the results and not learning that it’s an imperative thing to improve on. In that regard, the sooner he has these struggles, the better for his long term outlook.

Why on earth would they trade Gomez? Unless somebody comes offering an overwhelming package, he’s exactly what the team should be adding (younger relief pitchers with many years of team control and considerable upside). As they’ve demonstrated, you don’t rebuild a bullpen overnight in the manner they’re likely to try. So why immediately get rid of the pieces that could make them competitive in the near future and for several seasons?

Wondering if they could just raise the amount they pay the minimum and arbitration eligible players - $2 million extra per player in arbitration or pre-arbitration would add up quickly and wouldn’t commit beyond one year.

Figured it out - the 2005 game wasn’t a shutout. He allowed a run.

I had the same question.

Yeah, I agree with all of that. Seems like Morris has shown enough promise already to start moving toward a regular bullpen role and for Klein to replace him as the long reliever still stretched out for an emergency spot start if need be. Just adding how I’ve been thinking about it, and curious if people disagree with any of those guys as candidates to switch right now.

Seems like for the foreseeable future (specifically 2027), they have their optimal starting rotation pretty well on the roster now. Even if Ryan gets traded before the deadline for next year they’ve got Lopez, Bradley, Prielipp, and Abel, and possibly Matthews that they’ll be hoping to have in the rotation. Possibly SWR and Ober will still be in the mix, but I certainly wouldn’t count on both. Injuries will probably happen, but they’ll have the offseason to sign replacements for any if need be. Not to mention the possibility that Rojas, Quick, and Hill could be knocking on the door by next spring or mid-summer, that a mid season sell-off brings back more solid pitching prospects, and that a pitcher at the third pick in the draft quickly goes to the front of the line. Without a competent bullpen, they won’t be competitive even if the starters stay healthy and productive and the offense does relatively well - this year or next. So having 8+ guys that are borderline 5th starters for a year or two at most staying stretched out as “maybe we’ll need them for some spot starts” just seems preposterous. They don’t have to switch all the guys at once, but they should have at least 1-2 in an extended trial at all times. Those that succeed or at least show some promise stick in the bullpen this year to keep developing there, those that don’t go back and can stretch back out to starting. Morris already seems to be in the first camp. A quick list (not in any real order) that I think has a minimal chance of starting 10+ games for the Twins but could be worth a look in the bullpen seems pretty long and actually promising, and if you need 30+ starts in total this year from this group, with the current bullpen, the season’s going to be officially over well before the trade deadline. At AAA - Adams, Klein, Lewis, Culpepper. At AA - Armstrong, Bengard, Langenberg, Nowlin, Ryan. Later in the season (August-September), Rojas and Gallagher could get a look after a mostly full season of starting and staying pretty well stretched out. But out of the first nine, are any realistically thought to have a good chance of having a multi-year run (literally just two at least) as a starter, especially for a competitive team? If not, start switching one or two at a time right now and give them the chance to work with the major league staff and figure out what they might look like in the bullpen. If 2-3 more of them pan out, with Morris and Funderburk and maybe a little more spending on free agents, you maybe have at least competence as early as next year. And maybe you actually find a Jax or Varland (or multiple). If you hit on more, maybe you even have a good bullpen by later next year.

Another option might be rotating the piggy-backed starts, and having each starter occasionally get a start where they only do one time through the lineup or three innings to give them a lighter day, and have the sixth ostensible starter come in for as much of the rest of the game as they can to give the bullpen a break.

I've often wondered about a slightly different approach to this. No idea if there's any reason this would be different than a six man rotation in effect, but is there a reason not to cycle through skips in the rotation to give starters an occasional break within an otherwise normal routine? Rather than aiming for 32-34 starts for a starter that doesn't miss any time, have them start 28-30, with a skipped start once every month or two. For this team, with Hill and Pineda joining a couple months in, use ~6 starters, but cycle a skipped start in if all are healthy (and if not, go with the five that are, supplemented by Thorpe, Dobnak, etc. as needed). Berrios skipped first time through, Odorizzi second time through, etc. I think they did this with Pineda at least once or twice last year to keep him fresh, and I really hoped they would with Berrios when he struggled. Just a thought.

I love this article. Any chance you could go back for the previous couple years as well? I don’t even remember what the Twins did at the 2016 deadline, and 2017 is fuzzy. But this should be a regular deadline piece each year.

What do you think the approximatprospect cost would be if Minnesota ate Kennedy’s salary for the rest of the contract? Could they get him for basically nothing?

I forget the origin of the saying, but everybody wins 54, everybody loses 54. It’s what you do with the other 54 that matters. They never said the expected wins or losses happened with any predictability.