Han Joelo

I've always seemed to enjoy this team more whenever they've got a Hall of Fame type DH on board. Baylor, Chili, Winfield, Molitor, Thome, Hunter(?). This will create lots of good fuzzy feelings.

The Javier value makes me think back to the first Dozier to the Dodgers trade talks. Deleon was the higher ranked (externally, anyway) prospect. It seemed like the deal might have been hanging on up the secondary piece. Seems like if the roles were reversed, the Twins would be more reluctant to give up Javier in a trade than Gordon. Javier could be a difference maker to build around, while Gordon looks to be a solid complementary piece.

You listed all my favorites. As far as Wells--still room to break out--i.e., for him to become a Kluber like out of nowhere ace. Given the dearth of free agent activity, I have to find hope somewhere.

And just think, in 2009, the Twins took Kyle Gibson, while Jared Mitchell (a high school outfielder) was still available and taken just one pick later by the White Sox! And one pick later, the Angels took Randall Grichuk, while Mike Trout was still available. At which point they then took Mike Trout. Man, the White Sox really bungled that pick! Not dissing you--hindsight is actually fun! That pick by the Angels, btw, was compensation from the Yankees for signing Texeiria. Now there's a hindsight dilemma--was that move worth it? But I digress from the thread topic. Apologies.

If you read that linked BA article, Jay's name is mentioned in a list of "other notables." A long list. When you take it in that context, I'm not surprised he wasn't picked. He's a long ways from being the only "notable" prospect who hasn't panned out.

It's weird, but I think my Christmas Season Strategy with my boys, now 9 and 7, is to also basically stand pat. Last year we signed...er bought a free agent trampoline. This just isn't the year to get a pool, and to be quite frank, the Lego bin is currently overflowing with prospective creations--if you put in the time to sort them out and do the work. The boys are obsessed with the idea of getting their own phones, but they don't understand how long term contracts with cellular companies can hamstring your budget. The one thing we might get for them is a used tablet if we can find an affordable one to Scoop up, and as long as it can run Google Cron. Not the most exciting Christmas, but if you want excitement, wait till this spring, when I have them start digging a hole in the back yard for the "pool" they are never going to get. Their pool will just be a shallow, muddy hole in the ground.

Make it 11. Woohoo! I took something to eleven. Anyway, what if you change 'leap of faith" to "calculated risk?" How about then? Depending on your definition of success, a business predicated upon attempting to be the 1 in 30 that can truly be considered a success each year seems like a bad business to be in in the first place.

I like the idea of Kepler gaining some positional flexibility. If Cave is the real deal, and Buxton comes back, and that long line of OFers in the minors keeps creeping up, it wouldn't be a bad thing. Like Nick said--not full-time; just on days where they want a lefty heavy lineup. I cringed at the idea of moving Romero to the pen, but then grudgingly have to admit it might not be a bad thing. Then I dreamt the Twins acquired both Gray and Greinke. They should just change the team name to the Minnesota Astudillos already. The kids got moxie. Here are his winter league stats. Hitting even better with men on base, and better when in scoring position. This guy is the Chosen One we've been searching for. You were expecting a 1st Round Pick Knight, you got a hobbit. That is the way these stories go. (I took a deep breath and tapped the breaks before writing this paragraph.)

Derp. True enough. But the point still mostly stands. Whatever the point was.

I'm torn on what thread to make this comment in. Though he is an ex-Twin, he's inextricably linked to Busenitz, who was a part of this thread, so...anyway...Alex Meyer DFA'd. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/11/angels-designate-alex-meyer-for-assignment.html

I've defended the Jay pick plenty, and would continue to from a theoretical standpoint. On the other hand, it was ultimately a big fail. And heads rolled. And now the new guys are ready to move on. As am I. Which likely won't even happen--Jay will remain a Twins farmhand. Instead, take a look at the 2016 draft. Are any of those guys taken before AK ranked higher than he is now? I'm thinking not. Of course, at least on MLB.com, Forrest Whitley, taken two picks later, is ranked higher...

I'm glad they protected Arraez. I'd have hated having to read the stories about the Twins finally paying their karmic debt for nabbing Santana in the rule V. The Rule V draft seems to be happening already, and instead of $100,000, the best(?) prospects will cost you a different, marginal, non-40 man prospect. And save you the 25 man roster juggle. Glad Busenitz and Anderson have found semi-stable spots where they'll get a chance to put some money in the bank for a while.

That whole Pressly thing maybe galvanized Falvey. Lots of churn. Every case is unique, but my preference would be for them to find a way to keep and value experience. The Norstetter deal is troubling, for someone who is on the cusp of being halfway to 60 (from 30, that is). Why not just let him do his thing? I just saw there is a Monopoly for Millenials. I assume property is just impossible to buy, so you just go round and round in circles paying rent. Instead of jail, it is probably Your Parents Basement.

Completely unrelated, but now I know why they keep Eddie Rosario in left field--he fulfills the prophecy of this old metaphor perfectly.

If someone could somehow summarize the discussion between MLBReady vs. the Others, and let me know if it is really interesting and edifying, I might go back and read all those posts, if my coffee doesn't run out. Not being all that snarky; seems like some interesting stuff, maybe. In the meantime, there are more dead limbs on Boras' Mockery Tree to address: In a way, Boras was actually complementing the Twins. Bear with me, as I am about to do maths. And keep in mind that old axiom about statistics being lies and damn lies. If one Twin attends a baseball game, 50% of Twins are at the game. Extrapolating this line of reasoning out to other teams, we can make the following statistical confunderies (made up that word just now.) If only one Astro showed up for a game, say, Buzz Aldrin, that would mean 532 Astros didn't show up, although that number accounts for ALL humans who have ever been to space, living or dead. Some fans are dead inside, to be sure, but probably not Astros fans right now. 1 out of the 533 people who have been in space is not good. Doing slightly better is San Diego, depending on how you slice it-- If only one Padre showed up for a game, maybe Father Mulcahey, that would represent about 1 of the 200 or so Catholic Military Chaplains currently serving in the military were at the game. If you expanded the meaning of 'padre' to its literal Spanish definition, but confined it to just actual Spanish speakers, it would mean that only 1 out of approximately 150 million Spanish-speaking males that have children (a guess, at best) in the world--el mundo--made it to the game. Pathetic. Lastly, if only one Indian showed up for a game in Cleveland, that would mean 1,338,999,999 Indians did not attend the game, as they were presumably more interested in a cricket match. I would say that having half of your fans at the game is the highest percentage any team is capable of producing using this turn of phrase-- depending on how you define "socks"--one pair of socks, or all of the socks of a certain color in the entire world? By the latter definition, I'd have to surmise the the Chicago White Sox have the worst fans in the entire world.

Great contribution--content aside, I enjoyed your well-thought out but not overly serious style. Name puns are always a plus. "Mind you Busenitz" and "Subtraction by Addison" are both gold. The layout and charts worked great for me. Which is a long way of saying I enjoyed the writing enough to actually read the plan. You've convinced me pretty well. I'm an irrational prospect hoarder, so trading for Goldie is tough. I wonder what who it would take. The Palacios trade "worked out," but he was a favorite of mine anyway, largely because of Jermaine from Flight of the Concords, but still. I take no satisfaction that he had a bad year, but I guess it makes the trade go down a little better. I'm liking the idea of getting Miller or Kimbrel into the bullpen, whichever is the most Belisle like off the field. Someone who can stiffen the backbone as well as the funny bone of the crew. Probably overrated, but I like the idea of getting some veteran "winners" on to the team. Lowrie might be a good get in that department as well. Wasn't the Deleon-Dozier deal two years ago? Not sure what, if anything, was being offered last offseason. Again, great entry!

Unless he goes into coaching, his children may find that baseball will only be a footnote in their relationship with him. My dad was just dad the farmer, the golfer, the American Legion guy. It wasn't until long after he was gone that I realized how much of a badass he was in his twenties. And that is how it goes with most, or at least how it is going with me as well. Circle of life stuff. I admire the decision. Holding on is easier than letting go.

Let me have a stab at some of those jokes: When you go to a game in Anaheim, only St. Peter shows up. When you go to a game in Seattle, only Jacque Cousteau shows up. When you go to a game in Milwaukee, only Adolphus shows up. When you go to a game in Colorado, only Pike's Peak shows up. You're right, there is a lot of low hanging fruit there.

As this series unfolds, I would love to see the "Really Big Spender" plan, and the "Moderately Big Spender Plan" as well. What could you do with $195 million? Just $125 million? As it is, I think looking at Nick's proposal is useful, in that I see it as a viable, comprehensive plan to contend that avoids that mediocre middle, where the Twins found themselves last year. If $150 isn't viable this year, I'd rather see the $80 million team...with the caveat that they eventually shove those chips into the pot.

Too true. And what makes baseball so fun is that even when you've got your Lamborghini floored--see Kenley Jansen in the WS--sometimes it just isn't fast enough.

Imagine IF Buxton and Sano were already who we hoped they could be, and not coming off of broken seasons, and the Twins went out and acquired them for nothing this offseason and added them to last year's team. That would be exciting. Would that even be enough, though? At any rate, I don't advocate that being the plan, but I'd say there is about a 10% 5% .5% chance that B and S both establish themselves as stars this year, so I guess it is one plan for contention.

Yeah...and are we talking a paved racetrack here, or a dirt road through the jungle?

To me, rebuilding would entail trading Buxton and Sano. Trading Gibson and Kepler would be close, though. I agree with Tom, and think Michael Reed might be the biggest move of the offseason (yet.). I've never heard of any of the minor leaguers coming back in the proposed trades, so they aren't good enough. Instead, of trading guys for other teams prospects that won't pan out, my plan would be playing the prospects we already have that won't pan out. On the other hand, some roster churn might be in order.

I don't know if there is any Max Muncy or Justin Turner in this guy, but maybe there is a little Aaron Hicks in him. Or maybe it's apples and oranges. As long as he doesn't preclude signing a surefire improvement somewhere else on the team, I guess I like the move.

Nice take. As many mentioned in other threads, Rocco will eventually get roasted one way or another for his in game decisions--every manager does. I would hope that one of the traits they were looking for in their hire was a guy who could help Buxton and any other young guy reach their potential. Having a confident, performing Buxton on the field would instantly make Rocco a better manager.