Riverbrian

My assumption is that there is no way he can be specific in regards to what his words mean. I simply take it as a declaration of intent to go for it because I can't imagine those words to mean anything else. I then take that assumed declaration of intent to mean that our starters will be leading the way and we won't be trading Joe Ryan for prospects. I also assume (my assumptions get a little less solid at this point) that there is a decent chance that Larnach will be back. I also assume that if Larnach is back. It will be primarily DH work and I also assume that means Martin will be back to handcuff to Larnach and I also assume that barring injury... Jenkins will start in AAA because OF will be set with Buxton, Keashcall, Emma, Larnach and Martin. I also assume that they will add free agents to improve our chances... Primarily Bullpen but possible 1B or 2b. However, I have no assumption that the free agents we are able to acquire will be top of pile so I then assume that the free agents that we do add will be the same mid-pack passed over by the big team additions that we typically do on one year contracts. Ultimately... Tom Pohlad will need to show us what he means.

I'm agreeing with you. My suggestion would be to surround cough cough Caratini with other guys who can hit. Focus on strengthening 1 through 8 in the batting order by focusing on 1 through 11 on the roster. Punt the catcher position. Can't do that when we are putting every single egg into the Royce Lewis basket and dying with the consequences and Caratini is the only place to turn. Bottom line... if we are trying to improve our offense with the Catcher position. We are idiots.

I really don't understand this conversation. Jeffers is gone. Just accept it. He is gone. When Caratini was signed to a TWO year deal we knew then that Jeffers was gone. Caratini is owed 10 million and is almost untradable as a result without pouring millions down the toilet. He is nearly 100% returning to the role the Twins envisioned when they signed him to a TWO year deal for more money than other teams were willing to pay him. He is our replacement for Jeffers and he will be our primary catcher next year because they already bought the car. And now we have continued fixation over who will back him up because we don't like Caratini as a primary. Those who don't like Caratini as the primary are willing to continue pouring money into the same rabbit hole that produced Caratini in the first place. Some of the same people who have no problem filling roster spots 11 through 13 with pure crap or incomplete specialists and hope they never play are now obsessing over burning more limited financial or trade capital to get a backup catcher hoping he is good enough to make Caratini a 10 million dollar backup. How many times do you have to slam your head into the glass before you realize that the patio door is closed. Just punt the Catcher position. I said it last year... I'm saying it again. Get out of this damn rabbit hole. Sleep in the Caratini bed that you made for one more year and then get out of the over paying for limited playing time business and get out of the damn rabbit hole. Get a defensive catcher who can't hit for the backup C position. Alex Jackson is just fine. Listen to what @tony&rodney is saying. In the past decade... Castro 24 million, Avila 4 Million, Sanchez 9 million. Vazquez 30 million, Caratini 14 million. 81 million spent in outside help over the past decade. Y'all want to keep spending. 81 Million has bought us: 208 games (69 games a year average - to be fair. He was hurt for most of 2018) over 3 years of Castro and a combined OPS .715 OPS. .715 OPS is slighty below average for a hitter but really decent for a catcher. (Bang into the patio door glass) 23 games out of Alex Avila. 23 games because of a Covid shortened isn't entirely fair as I continue to make a playing time point in the past decade. 62 AB's isn't exactly fair either but I will list his .641 OPS anyway so I can continue with the point. (Bang into the patio door glass) We did squeeze 128 games out of Gary Sanchez in 2022. That's a good thing because it's hard to squeeze 128 games out of any catcher. The bad thing is that he was an offensive catcher who produced a .659 OPS. 9 million got us that. (Bang into the patio door glass) Vazquez who played in a total of 260 games. (87 games a year average) producing a .577 OPS over 3 years. (Bang into the patio door glass) And of course 14 million for Caratini has so far bought us: 106 games - .627 OPS. (Bang into the patio door glass). STOP DOING THIS!!! Look at your head wound. The door isn't going to open. Just punt the catcher position. It's Caratini and Jackson is just fine. Your third catcher is whoever is closest to the majors leagues in the minor league system. And if they fail once again to produce a candidate from the minors for another year. Hit the damn waiver wire and sleep in the bed that you have made. I'll bet anyone money... that we will get similar offensive output from whatever defensive no hit catcher we sign. If it's Jackson or whoever we install to play behind Caratini. We will get similar offensive output that we have gotten in the past decade of 81 million in investment. We paid Vazquez almost as much as we paid Nelson Cruz. Think about it please. Get out of the Rabbit Hole.

I think we are on the same page. It kind of leads back to the topic of this article. Money gives you a better chance of reaching the playoffs. Money gets you through 162 games. The longer the game the bigger the advantage that money has. Therefore... If more teams with money makes the playoffs than teams that don't. The odds of a team with money winning the world series will reflect that. This year 8 out of 12 teams in the playoffs were top ten in payroll. With all things being equal (They are not equal)... the odds are 66.7% that a top ten payroll team will win the world series because 8 of them got in compared to 4. The Brewers and Rays kind of screwed all that up... didn't they. Small Samples... you just can't trust em.

I am familiar with it. Wasn't sure which way you were applying it. In a fair game. The odds don't change. If they are starting with equal bankroll. If the bankroll is unequal. Me against Elon Musk or Me against the Casino. Elon Musk or the Casino is going to eventually bankrupt me if I stay at the table too long. In an unfair game. a 51% to 49% advantage of winning for someone would result in around a 90% chance of bankrupting over a significant period of time. Obviously based on the size of the bankroll and the number of rolls or games. The Gamblers ruin theory while not designed for baseball is part of the reason why I'm pretty insistent that none of us can predict what will happen in the small sample of playoffs compared to the larger sample of 162 games. It's why I'd like to teams to focus on the 162 games and just get their ass in the playoffs somehow someway. Anyway... I was just trying to figure out your interpretation and if it was rooted in the Gamblers Ruin theorem.

This sentence of yours is beautiful. Not sure it it was your intent but it made me think of something that I think is somewhat applicable. In regards to spending the same X millions every year. A trucking company with 100 trucks will have about 70 drivers who stick around to fill 70 seats. And about 30 seats that they fill over and over and over and over again. Then they will tell you that there is a truck driver shortage. If you need to fill with job hoppers. That's the result. That's how it works. I simply can't express strong enough how important it is that we employ for a longer term. Develop or Die!

Is this the Gamblers Ruin Theory? If so... I'm not sure you are explaining it correctly. If you are not implying that... I apologize for going on. The Gamblers Ruin basically says that if you play with a negative edge or equal edge long enough you will eventually go broke. If you have 50 dollars and you are playing against Elon Musk who puts up 1 trillion dollars. Play the game long enough and you will eventually you go broke because a bad streak will eventually wipe you out. While Elon Musk stands. Now if the game is not fair where there is a 51% chance of winning against 49% of winning every time The 51% chance of winning combined with the law of large numbers will have an 90.1% chance of bankrupting the guy who only wins 49% of the time. I'm not sure if this is where you were going or not?

Well... This kinda why I hate using names for examples. Sometimes these 7 million dollar 1 year guys work out and sometimes they don't. Sometimes the 20 or 30 million dollar guys don't work out. In the case of Josh Bell... He did fine. In terms of RBI's he did great. In terms of other stats... he was average but he turned out to be an OK investment at 7 million dollars. My problem with Josh Bell was two-fold. Please keep in mind that this is a money allocation discussion and not a Josh Bell specific discussion and with that disclaimer. The Two fold problem with Josh Bell. He clogged up the DH position and that DH position could be used for expanding the talent on your roster if you don't dedicate it to one player who is performing basically average. My bigger issue with Josh bell is the same issue I have with every 1 year rental that we try to survive on year after year. He won't be back next year. In order to field a competitive team every year like Cleveland, Tampa and Milwaukee... In order to keep payroll in check... this team needs cheaper options that can do what Josh Bell can do. Other teams are able to do this. The Twins have not shown the ability to do this and this failure to do this is costing us 30 million a year and leaving no money to sign the 20 million guy who sometimes doesn't work out.

Frankly Scarlett, I could give a damn weather the Twins spend 80 million or 180 million dollars. Talent is what matters and the Twins routinely don't get enough talent for who they spend dollars on... meanwhile they routinely fail to develop talent at a lower price point. Let's provide some food for thought on the numbers you provide from MLB.com. Because they sound awfully impressive on the surface and there are plenty of people ready to gobble them up. 1. It's probably safe to assume that the "Upper Half" is #1 through #15 - Lower Half would be 16-30. 50% above - 50% below. Can we please recognize the enormous differences between Seattle's #16 Payroll of 170 Million and #30 Cleveland's' 74 Million. I would also like everyone to recognize the difference between #1 Mets payroll at 347 Million and and the 182 Million spent by the #15 ranked Angels. I'm not sure that cutting the rankings in half is a good placement of the arbitrary line to prove the point. 2. 12 teams make the playoffs. 1.7 Times more likely is 7.56 out of 12 playoff teams. So 7 teams in the top half and 5 teams in the bottom half. The horribly placed arbitrary line that creates 15 teams on each side results in ONE EXTRA MONEY TEAM making the playoffs (every other year). One extra top 15 team doesn't sound as impressive as 1.7 times more likely. That's what top half money bought ya. One extra team. Two extra teams every other year. 3. If you want to make the money point. It's there to be made. Move that arbitrary line to a more sensible location. Make it TOP TEN. The 33% of teams that are in the top 10 and compare the 33% to the 67% that are not and you see the disparity. Teams #11 through #15 are typically closer to middle class and will drag your numbers down to 1.7% and this weakens the money point. The TOP TEN money... lowers the percentage to 33% elite spenders but doesn't significantly lower the overall number of playoff teams. The truly elite level spenders are 2.6% more likely. The 33% elite will take up 57% of the playoff spots compared to 63% for the top 15. If you want to make the money point... Let's make the money point. Let's talk about the 200 million necessary to play in that real estate. 4. The Twins can't play at that level. I repeat... the Twins can't play at that level. Therefore... The Twins WON'T play at that level no matter how many encouraging words are uttered publicly by Tom Pohlad. The Twins can't do what the Phillies are doing... there is a huge difference between signing Bryce Harper and signing Josh Bell who is only available because Philadelphia doesn't want him. 5. Thankfully, Milwaukee, Cleveland and Tampa have done a nice job showing them how to do it and articles like this can be very misleading. 6. Not trading Joe Ryan last off-season was a mistake. Not trading Joe Ryan last off season was ignoring the above 5 points. Not trading Joe Ryan was thinking that Bell and Caratini was the accumulation of enough talent to overcome a team struggling to produce young talent with a gutted bullpen that was going to be rebuilt on the fly starting at GROUND ZERO on OPENING DAY! 7. Develop or Die. Search for talent. Young talent is talent and it's available to everybody. Give development opportunity to those who have service time to become better. Don't give development opportunity to those who will not be back next year. Do not commit to average and pretend like average or below average is irreplaceable. Develop talent and trade for talent because YOU CAN"T AFFORD TO BUY IT DEVELOPED BY OTHER TEAMS. This is why not trading Joe Ryan last off-season was a big mistake. 8. Don't waste roster spaces on role players, Don't strip mine your prospects for parts. If the team decides to strip mine Emma and Jenkins for parts and they will because they have shown no indication of stopping the practice. If that is how they are going to move forward with our critical young prospects. Our only long term hope will be a leveling of the financial playing field in a future CBA because the Twins will be truly trying to compete with the Yankee and Phillies on their terms and they CAN'T DO THAT. Because Bell is not Harper. 9. Thankfully Milwaukee, Cleveland and Tampa have been showing everyone a way to do what needs to be done. 10. You do sum it up nicely with the following sentence.

I agree with a lot of what your saying. In my opinion... Jeffers/Caratini next year does not make the team better. It makes it the same because we had them both last year and spending 23 million on Jeffers means Lewis at 1B because Jeffers will take consideration of Bauers or someone who can hit the ball off the table. This means Lewis at 1B is the same. Clemens at 2B... the same. All eggs will be in one basket. Culpepper, Emma, Jenkins will have to lead us to glory. Our improvement from 2026 to 2027 will rely upon Culpepper, Keaschall, Emma, Jenkins, Lee being exactly what we need them to be. Don't get me wrong... development is the way forward. I want Lee, Keaschall, Culpepper, Emma, Jenkins to lead us to glory but I'd sure like Bauers in the lineup with them. Cant' get Bauers and Jeffers. It won't happen no matter what Tom Pohlad says about investing. This team will invest more money... I believe it but there is a limit... there is always a limit. Do keep this in mind... I could be right... I could be wrong but reading between the lines. With Tom stating publicly that we will go for it in 2027. There is a good chance Larnach is retained. Probably play DH so Emma can play OF and we know Emma will be on the roster. If Tom is going for it. Your 5 OF's will be Buxton, Keaschall, Emma, Larnach and Martin. This will put Jenkins in St. Paul to start the season barring injury. That's not my plan but that is a possible scenario with the declaration of going for it.

At the post season presser. Tom Pohlad has basically told us all that we are going for it. If he is going for it... This time... I'd like to see them actually go for it. Caratini and Bell with a bullpen torn down to the studs was not an impressive attempt. We had Jeffers and Caratini on the roster last season for 10 million total. I'm not sure that Jeffers and Caratini for 2027 at 29.75 is an improvement.

He had a similar amount of PA's with us in 2026 as he did with Houston in 2025. He hit good for a catcher. He has never hit well enough for the 1B and DH work the Twins had planned for him. Outbidding other teams for his services while planning on keeping Jeffers wasn't a good idea. They were looking for Jeffers replacement when they signed him to that two deal. With that said... I'm willing to believe that he could bounce back to a 100 OPS+ guy next year but I just don't care anymore about the catcher position. Players go up and down and down and up. They rarely display a static baseline. Catchers are just consistently over pays and we keep over paying. We gotta get out of that rabbit hole. Punt the position until the farm produces viable options that will make the minimum. Cleveland did just fine with Bailey and Hedges not hitting in the catcher position. Caratini and Jackson and then wait for Lackey and Tait or whoever. Any offense we get would be gravy.

I'm perfectly content punting the catching position and just getting a defensive catcher to join Caratini. That way we can take any money we have to spend and add an actual needle mover to shore up 1 through 8 in the batting order. Pohlad has already announced we are going for it again. Jeffers and Caratini would mean Goldschmidt for 5 million on a one year deal at 1B. Or rolling out Lewis again and living or dying with whatever he does. None of this would move the needle.

You might be right on what it would take to get away from Caratini. That's why I'm pretty sure that he is with the Twins next year. I'd also guess that the terms of the Correa trade would outlaw a lump sum payment so it will be 10 million for the next three years. Even if they could lump that entire Correa bill into this year. The next problem is that Tom Pohlad is making public declarations on 2027 intent. Not just playoffs but world series and he is promising some sort of ownership support to reach that lofty goal. 20 extra million dollars to the Astros in 2027 is going to make those 2027 promises hard to keep.

Here's what is depressing me. We owe Caratini 10 Million. 6.5 million for 2027 and a 3.5 million buyout in 2028. How much money would the Twins have to eat to trade that? Caratini is going nowhere.

As he speaks publicly. He should be careful in regards to how much paint is being applied to the room and where the escape routes are.

I'm a big fan of Ryan Jeffers. Let him go. Uff Da People Spending 30 million on the catcher position would be horrible use of limited resources. If you offer the QO... you will all have to prepared of his accepting it and subsequently draining the entire budget. At catcher. JT Realmuto led the league with 122 starts. Matt Olson led the league in starts at 1B with 162. Ryan Jeffers started a career high of 81 games in 2024 and we want to make Jeffers the highest paid player on the Twins roster in 2027. If Tom has 23 million to burn. You might be able to land Teruaki Soto with 23 million. 17 Million got Murakami. Does anyone think Jeffers will get a 23 million AAV when he signs with another club. I don't... Yet we want to just close our eyes in desperation and pay it anyway. For 81 Starts at catcher? Hopefully we can push him to 100 starts for that kind of money. Maybe even 120. That way we will have spent 7 million for 42 starts... 62 starts. The willingness to ignore these things and plunge forward is astounding.

I am under the assumption that his trade value has dropped significantly. Almost to the point that we might be better off keeping him. Moment is kinda gone. Ryan did not put up Freddie Peralta type numbers so we are not going to get Sproat and Williams for his final year. It's fun to dream and all but... I fear that we will all be disappointed in what we get back. As for the Giants. I'm not sure why they would rob Peter to pay Paul. They shouldn't be trading prospects.

I thought Kreidler had an option left. I stand corrected.

84 innings is the most he has thrown in a season so far. 39 innings last year certainly wasn't progress.

They need 8 to 10 Starters to get through a season. Rojas will be counted on in 2027

The Twins have some young pieces to build with. Please let them develop. Let's not screw this batch up. I would take all of your suggestions. Get A 1B with talent.

I think we will need him in the rotation in 2028. If you turn him into a reliever. The trade with the Blue Jays becomes a loss. Trading a young talented reliever for a younger you hope is as talented reliever is a loss. If he's a starter we can count on in 2028. Than you will have gotten sufficient value back maybe more value back. Starter please.

He's got stuff. I think he's going to be great. Bring some more arms up like him. Keep developing.

That's a good way to say it. We wouldn't even lose Kriedler. He has options left. There is really no reason to toss Lewis aside. He will take care of that himself or he won't. He has this year to prove himself. If he goes into his last year of arb with another year like the last two. He will be on the waiver wire. It's up to Royce now. But... you got to make him earn it. You gotta bring in a 1B... longer than a one year deal. One that can HIT and I mean HIT in capital letters. No one year because you can't get a two year deal type players.