TwinsDr2021

He will be 23 this year, so he isn't old yet, but taking a college guy in the first round, you would hope for better results in year one, With that said, if he can duplicate what he did in A+ at AA this year, he will moving up the prospect list. And to piggy back on terrydactlys he seems like the perfect type of guy to include in a trade, while he may be a decent major league player for a long time he doesn't seem like the type that you will look back on and say, darn he was the wrong guy to trade.

For those thinking they should have spent money on pitching instead of Donaldson (which I tend to agree with but not sure who those pitchers are?), which pitcher haven't they been able to afford because of him and what pitchers should they have signed instead of him? The Twins aren't trading Donaldson any time soon, if they do it shows they are rebuilding again after saying that wasn't the case, they aren't eating the amount that would be needed to get anything decent back. (Imagine for a minute they trade him and have to eat 10 million for a couple of really young prospects, if they Twins have 10 million to spend on prospects I would prefer that would be on international ones), and finally because it makes the FO looks stupid for signing him in the first place. The front office pretty much got screwed because of all the injuries to to the pitching prospects, then decided it would be better to let vets pitch at the end of the season instead of putting the prospects on the 40 man or using service time without knowing how the labor dispute would go. (that may turn out to be a great decision because they can be working with a few of them in the mean time), but the problem is and was why are all of their prospects getting hurt?

Always exciting getting a 27 year old with an ERA north of 4 in AA.

For the most part I like analytics, but I hate watching baseball shifts, It makes me sick to stomach watching a player like Kepler pull the ball to the 2nd basemen with the whole left side of the field open, or watching Mauer at the end of his career continue to hit line drives up the middle that are just easy plays for the SS standing right there. Nobody wants a math lesson when watching baseball except the middle age men/women that post on boards like this; and then just maybe. Baseball analytics are so over the top complex nobody wants to hear how FIP is figured it or how how WAR is figured out and different depending on what sites you go to. People love easy math, how exciting is it when you can help a middle school or younger child solve math problems? That is why people loved ERA, W/L, BA, OBP, SLG, stuff that makes sense and you can see with your eyes, and know are being told by a few people they are wrong or worse yet stupid for thinking those things matter anymore . For example the NFL will throw out QB rating and everybody pretty much understands completion percentage, yards and TD's good, in-completions and INT's bad. The announcer doesn't need to explain well it is high because it was bad luck that WR dropped a pass, or ran the wrong route, or the defense showed zone but switched to man to man at the last second, and the QB actually had a good game but just unlucky. You know how many times I have watched a game and seen a pitcher get hit fairly hard, throw in some bloppers and maybe a Texas leaguer or two and gives up multiple runs in a few innings and was explained to how well he actually pitched and was just unlucky. Nobody wants to watch their favorite teams pitcher go 3 innings give up 5 runs and be told to their face, he was actually pretty good today just unlucky and I use analytics to prove what you saw with your own eyes is wrong. I am not an NBA fan but I know looking at PER and comparing players by it will give me a pretty good idea how good a player is compared to another. Baseball doesn't have that one stat, if you have to explain why Nicky Lopez was the 36th best non-pitcher in baseball while hitting .300, 21 2B, 2 HR, 43 RBI, 22 SB, and SLG .378, that is a huge problem. (I am not saying he wasn't the 36th best, but how many baseball fans have even heard of him or said oh yea he is one of the top players in the game) I guess what I am really trying to say is there is fine line between boring the tv fans and entertaining them and baseball probably has the hardest of all sports, they play a ton of games so how many times do you want to hear the same thing over and over? and the Analytics are so important to building a franchise from the bottom (minor leagues) up and projecting what might happen going forward, but who want to hear about spin rate? Certainly not my teen age son. He want to here how hard and how far his favorite player just hit that homer, or how fast his favorite pitcher is throwing and what is his pitch count so he know many innings he has left, so he tell his friends when he will be available because he doesn't want to watch the end of the game and all the commercials (I mean pitching changes)

After looking more closely the Twins from 2001 to 2010, probably fit both of our definitions. Made the playoffs 6 times, with never missing more than two years in a row. Only once with less than 80 wins, and only twice not finishing in the top two in the division. The last five years of the Twins have been close but two of the years were down and this year looks the same.

Wow, project much? I haven't claimed to figured out anything, you are the one that has said that. I said low revenue teams haven't sustained success over an extended period, and you proved that pointing out low revenue teams that have went in cycles. I am not and I believe nobody else has ever said the core of a team isn't based on what comes up though the farm. I have said when your window opens take advantage because it will close again fairly soon. Since 2002 the Cleveland (been in one world series since the Twins last been in one, and 4 of their main starting pitchers didn't start in their organization) team has 7 90 wins season. (and 4 of them were in a row between 16 and 19) Tampa Bay has 8 in their history - and they basically came in two 4 year runs (two world series and in their last one 2020, 3 of their main starters didn't start in their organization). Oakland (who hasn't been to a world series since the Twins were last in one)has 10 since 2000, and 6 of them game between 2000-2006, which my math tells me they had 4 others, and both of them came back to back with 4 years between them. This is the kind of success you are claiming? The Twins have 6 since 2002. My point was when the Twins were in their cycle they should have done more to put them over the edge, not having Lewis, Duran, or another prospect or two wouldn't change much as of today (well except maybe hope) probably the 2022 season, and maybe 2023 we have no idea.

I guess mine is pretty much being in the playoffs almost every year for a decade or so, but never missing more than one year in a row or having a run of 5 or 6 missing two years and rattling off another run. Having a bad year here and there happens, but sustained success IMO means you are right back the next year.

What happened in the last 2,3,4 years is how the twins got to were they are today. 0 playoff wins, and terrible 2021 season and a 2022 that looks like a rebuild season and huge question marks on 2023 at this point. You have asked over and over again, and there are no examples, why because NO below average revenue team has ever sustained any success for more than a few years. Milwaukee has been to 4 in a row, but only 2 others since 1983 Cleveland has been to 4 of the last 6 and 2 others since 2002 Tampa Bay as been to the playoffs 3 years in a row but missed the 5 previous years. Oakland 3 of the last 5, after missing 3 years, after making it 3 years after missing 5 years. The Twins have been in 3 of the last 5. All this building though the draft not signing FA or not trading prospects is recency basis. What people are trying to say is that the Twins will be the first team in history to have sustained playoff success doing it this.

That doesn't make sense if winning 72 instead of 70, hurts you don't the line. And teams in MLB don't tank in the true sense of the word. They are building for the future knowing there will be rough times, IMO real tanking would be sending out AA type pitchers that have no real change and no future and trying to lose, I don't see that happening. Also a floor isn't going to do what everybody wants, unless the goal is take money from the owners and give it to the players.

100% agree it can't be all years. sometimes the stars don't align, injuries and prospect or two don't work out. But when you are a core of Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Kepler, Cruz, Berrios, Garver, Arraez, Berrios, Gibson, Duffey, Rogers and May. All home grown talent except Cruz, you have to supplement that core with some other top end talent. The Twins didn't and instead Cruz, Berrios, Gibson, Rosario, May are gone, and they now the hope is they will supplement that with prospects. And if those prospects turn out to be good in a year, two or three, the whole original core will be gone minus Buxton, and they will be back trying to supplemented the prospects that worked out. and the Cycle will continue ( and quite of bit of MN Twins fans will rejoice because of the hope and promise of the next group of prospects), because always relying on prospects to continue success will never work long term. And I would ask for examples where that has worked long term. 2020 was the season for the Twins to go all in, they just had come off a 100 win 2019 season. So what did this front office do? They resigned Pineda to a cheap 2 year contract, singed Homer Bailey to an even cheaper 1 year contract, signed Rich Hill to an even cheaper contract and wowed the fans with a Tyler Clippard signing. Swapped out Castro for Avilia for a 2.5 million dollar savings, and let Gibson, Cron, Schoop and Perez go (probably all smart). At this point they made a 100 win team worse, then because they failed at everything else and there was no way the fans would accept making the team worse and not spending money; in late January they signed Donaldson to a huge contract. But knowing the team was still worse and lacked pitching they traded for Maeda (the one thing that really worked out) in early February. And because of that crappy arse offseason the Twins put themselves in the position for what happened in 2021 and where they are today. (if they couldn't have signed top talent they had trade capital with prospects, because two years later all of those prospects are you guessed it still just prospects)

I agree I shed no tears for either of these two. But it is things like this that baseball continues to do that drives me further and further away from the game. Lets put David Ortiz in the HOF on the first ballot with suspicion of PEDS (it isn't lost on me he played along one of the biggest PED cheaters in the history of the game) but keep out some of the players that actually brought fans to to the game after what happened in 1994. While also putting players like Pudge, Piazza or Bagwell in and claiming some moral high ground, Now this labor dispute, on top of the stupid shifts.

Congrats to Big Pappi, for being a likeable cheater, that is way better than an un-likeable cheater. (I think that is a great lesson to teach the youth, if you are going to cheat do it while smiling and arse kissing the high and mighty media) The idiots that vote for the hall of fame are an embarrassment to baseball.

Starters on the 40 Man Balazovic, Bundy, Dobnak, Duran, Enlow, Jax, Maeda, Ober, Ryan, Sands, Strotman, Thorpe, Vallimont, and Winder. That is 14, We can remove Enlow and Maeda, making it 12. So I am going to go out on a limb and say just about every prospect is going to pitch out of the pen at least to start, unless they start out in the minors so red hot and actually pitching a decent amount of innings each start. Duran is 24, and never really had great results in the minors and has pitched 16 innings the last two years, he is destined for the bullpen, unless you want to stretch him out in the minors (and on the 40 man) for the next two years. Sands is 24 going on 25 (July 17th) has never pitched 100 inning but did pitch 80 last year and if he starts out hot in AAA he could come up as a starter. SWR will be 21 all of next year and isn't on the 40 so there is no real chance for him being in the majors next year, so he should be starter in the minors all year.

Kind of makes you think, how did this FO let this team get into this position. Oh I know not trading some assets when they were competing to go deep into the playoffs and having a bunch of vets pitch last year in a completely lost season. The deeper you dig the more questions come up about what this FO has really been planning or lack of planning. There really shouldn't be a question why Tampa traded Ryan Stroman last year, they were sitting in a similiar position and they passed their question marks off for a veteran hitter to try and make a deep run.

If the Twins think Martin will be up quick, they are going to have to figure out how they are going to work the 40 man since he isn't on it. Of all the players listed only Miranda, Celestino and Lewis are on the 40 man so besides Martin, I believe none of the others will be up in 2022. And to be honest most of this list does nothing for me, I hope Miranda and Martin turn out, I think Lewis will probably have a long career similiar to Cuddy, and I have no idea on the rest, but trading offense at the major league level for pitching doesn't look like the wise thing to do.

For those wanting to trade Donaldson, what are you expecting as a return? (a couple of flyers that are 4-5 years away or another teams prospect that they probably don't want to put on their 40 man anyway?) Also I read his money could be spent better in other places, but there is already more then enough money to be spent but wasn't. Sure he is probably overpaid but the over pay amount is probably the amount the Twins will have to eat anyway. IMO if the twins feel the need to trade Donaldson because of salary, all fans should be done with them. If they are willing to trade Donaldson and eat money to open up 3rd for Miranda, I could understand that logic, but their back up plan better not involve Arraez at 3B and Gordon at SS, because they leaves them with NO plan C. My final thoughts are trading him would be a HUGE negative on this Front Office, How could they sign him to a 4 year contract and be in a rebuilding mode in year 3 and have to eat a bunch of that contract and lets be honest the year 2 was already a huge negative on this FO. Now if a couple of this pitching prospects are the real deal and our offense isn't good because we traded away a possible 4 WAR player for a rookie that ends up struggling, again how much worse does this FO want to look.

I am going to go with the guys on the 40 man as first up. Ryan is a no-brainer, the only way he isn't on the opening roster is if he is hurt. As for the order I guess it will depend on what they need Drew Strotman IMO he is only on the 40 because he came over in a trade, I would think he is the first up and possibly the down and off the 40. Then Cole Sands because he pitched 80 innings this year and should be go for 110 or so. The Vallimont and Duran because I think they will come up for the Pen. Then Josh and Jordan. Then I believe Canterino will force the Twins hand to be added the 40. I don't think we see any of the others, because I believe there will be other minor league pitchers that will need to be added to the 40 to cover bullpen spots though the year. I don't think Twins can afford to put any more prospects on the 40 man this year then they already have. Just my 2 cents.

"But if the "solution" to their problem is signing someone like Iglesias or Simmons as a stopgap, and then struggling to find at-bats for better players buried on the 2B depth chart behind Polanco" When is the last time the Twins struggled to find at-bats for better players buried on any depth chart?

So if Pressly pitches close to the way he does in Houston, The Twins win 100 hundred plus games and offer him 20.4 million over 3 years (contract the Astros gave him) he says no? (because Houston or Texas might come calling?) , or are you saying the Twins wouldn't have offered him that? Both say more about the Twins and their organization than it does about Pressly.

So you are saying the Astros got just over a year an half of an allstar for 3 years of two minor league performances? That is makes the Twins look worse as of today.

I like to think of it as, what would you give up for Royce Lewis if he was on a different team. I know what I would have given for him as dropped quite a bit the last few years. Would you give up Garver for him now if say Lewis was a Marlin? Would you give up Ryan or any of the other top prospects? I don't if I know if I would consider him a headliner anymore in a deal? He has a lot prove this year IMO if he doesn't want to go the way Gordon went.

hmm, Ok, we are going to pretend the Twins didn't trade a future two time all star pitcher (so far). and we are going to pretend Alcala in 2020 was so good the Twins put him position exactly once to save or hold a game and he blew it? or in 2021 he failed to hold or save 25% of his opportunities. But he was in the pen for two years. don't mind that he was replacement level at best, the Twins picked up Juan Minaya (just one example) off the scrap heap and he out performed Alcala last year as just one example. (On top of the 40 man rosters spots these two players have taken up) You can make all the assumptions you want, I will take what has actually happened and compare at this moment. If you want to argue that Twins couldn't have afforded the extension he signed or that he hasn't lived up to the extension, feel free, I mean it would be foolish but at least it would be an discussion on something that has actually happened. If you want to argue there is no way the Twins would have gotten Pressly to pitch as well as he has, well than that might explain Alcala issues so far. Trading veterans for prospects is always based on hope and promise, and almost always it takes a few years for the trade to pan out (unless you are trading a terrible player for prospects then the trade can work out well right away and even better in the future) and as of 1/21/22 the Twins have gotten little to nothing out of the trade, doesn't mean that this was a bad trade yet or the wrong move at the time, it just means if the Twins want to have it turn out for them they are going to have to start seeing some good results at the major league level.

Well either I don't write well or you just refuse to understand. Where have I said it was a bad trade? I have said repeatedly at this point they have lost the trade, and I believe at some point the trade will look good, but it hasn't yet. And to continue down the investment path is pointless. Your comparison with Shields and Tatis makes less sense than anything else you have said. The Padres traded away an overpaid and not all that good starter, who went on to produces .1 WAR for the Sox over three years (-.1.9, .3, 1.7) so basically getting any return for a negative WAR pitcher that was paid over 30 million by the Sox is a win for the Padres. At the same time Shields was terrible Tatis moved up into the top 10 overall prospect rankings, but even if Tatis never turned out to be anything the Padres won this trade. But the Twins didn't trade away a terrible overpaid starting pitcher, they traded away a really good cheap relief pitcher that would go onto two all star games (at least) and help his team to two of the last three world series and signed a pretty good extension for both the player and team. In year 4 the Padres got 4.2 WAR from Tatis and like I said the Sox ended up with .1 WAR, so maybe you are making the Twins even look worse by such a comparison.

This makes no sense, if Alcala was actually good in 2020 and really good in 2021, with the expectation of being at the top of the rotation in 2202, or Celestino came up last year and played above replacement level, you couldn't take what has actually happened into account? and you could only use forecasting on the next 4 years of the trade? That is complete BS, you and everybody else (including me) would be saying how great of trade this was Twins, and what a great job this FO did with that asset, but instead you and others want to run cover for the poor lowly twins because they haven't gotten a darn thing out of the asset yet. And your stock analogy also makes no sense, if you sold Microsoft stock while is was going up to buy a start up, and it took 5 years to return, yes year 4 would be bad. You could have held onto Microsoft longer and waited to sell and invest in the future amazon at a later date, you OC would be high doing it your way and your ROI would be lower.

I am confused on how at this point and time you can say it is a no brainer good trade? The Twins have literally gotten next to nothing in the majors and the Houston got a two time all star. It sure looks like the Twins will start getting some real contribution from the trade this year and hopefully years beyond, but that hasn't happened. Can you believe it was a good trade and still say at this point the Twins lost the trade, absolutely. I thought at the time it was a the right move, I still think it was probably the right move but at this point I can also say the Twins have absolutely lost this trade. Until hope and promise turn out, that is all it is hope and promise.