LA Vikes Fan

No, I think that's reality if you do the "trade all the vets with talent and get ther teams' really good young guys" approach. There's is a middle ground but it's a fine line to walk. If you want to trade vets for prospects and re-load for 2027 or even 2028, you have to be very careful about who you trade for. You have to trade for guys that are MLB ready now AND be willing to live the almost inevitable under-performance when they first come up. Even highly rated prospects will need the rest of this year and all of 2027 and probably at least some of 2028 to hit their ceiling. Lee is a great example. He's in his 3rd "full time" year and now we can see what he will be long term. There may be a little more there but we probably now see 80-90% of the ceiling at least. So we're talking about trading now for guys who may contribute in 2027, make a secondary contribution in 2028, but won't really be ready to be a big contributor on a contending team until 2029. You then run into a major problem with the timeline of your core guys now. Using their age reached during the season, by 2028 Buxton is 34 and at least on the way down, Larnach 31, Clemens 32, Ryan 32, Ober 34, Bell 36 and gone, Caratini 35 and gone, Jeffers gone in FA, etc., and you have to trade some or all of those guys to get the prospects so they won't even all be here. Then you're relying on Lee, Keaschall, Lewis, Bradley, Abel, Morris, and Gomez to be your veteran core for the young guys to augment. . The middle of the batting order has to be completely replaced by 2028 as well as 2 of the 4 top rotation spots and that's assuming Lopez and Bradley are still on the team, not hurt, and pitching effectively. So you can't gut the existing core group and expect to compete in 2027, and probably not in 2028 or even 2029, you really have to replace everybody with prospects, give them time to develop, and hope against hope you pick the right guys. THEN maybe you're competitive in the second half of 2028 and 2029 forward IF you get lucky. I think the competitive re-load is what they were trying to do last year by getting guys they hoped were MLB ready for this year. They hit on exactly 1 - Bradley. The rest are either not yet quite ready (Rojas, Roden), look ready or close to it but got their timeline pushed back another year by injury (Abel), may never be ready or already flamed out (Roden, Outman), could possibly be ready in late 2027 or 2028 or may just flame out(Mendez, Gallagher), or are at least another 2-3 years out from a debut (Tait, Armstrong). That's actually pretty par for the course, even better than the odds would suggest normally happens. So I think when you look at it s closely the choices are pretty stark. Option 1 - Buy into this group, try to augment the rotation and/or bullpen at the deadline by trading Jeffers and/or prospects for guys either in MLB already or ready to come up and contribute some NOW and contribute more in 2027/2028, and really try hard to re-sign Ryan by meeting the offers made to him at least. You then hope the AAA team has 2-3 more guys who can contribute starting next year. That's trying to compete in 2027/2028 forward. Anything that happens in 2026 is gravy. Option 2 - Trade all the valuable vets to contending teams, get the most talent you can regardless of time line, use 2027 to develop that talent, and maybe get lucky in the second half of 2028 to compete for a WC, but the window really doesn't open until 2029 IF you trade for the right guys AND the farm yields some real talent. Both are reasonable options but the option of trading several key vets like Ryan, Jeffers, and Larnach all this year for prospects and competing next year to me is a false paradigm. You could buy and sell by trading Jeffers (and even Larnach for the right return) and trade prospects for guys with 2.5 or more years of control or prospects ready now but that's Option 1. I choose Option 1 but get the choice of Option 2, particularly if this core goes something like 5-11 out of the gate from the ASB.

Agree with this except I would wait until the offseason to deal with Ryan. I think the return will be pretty comparable to what it would be now with the added possibility of getting MLB or MLB ready talent rather than just prospects. I think the reasons are as much business and culture as they are talent acquisition. Trading Ryan now would send absolutely the wrong message to the clubhouse and the fans. That's waving the white flag on 2026 and maybe 2027. Can't do it and expect the team to perform or the fans to show up. I would go farther on Ryan. I would have Tom stand up at a press conference and say "Joe Ryan is not available for trade in the 20026 season. We hope to get a playoff spot this year and he is a big part of that. We hope to re-sign him to a long term extension in the off-season and plan to make a very competitive offer to Joe. He could be a big part of a consistently competitive team. It is our hope that Joe will spend the rest of his carrier in a Twins uniform."" That's a message the fans and the team hasn't heard in a long time and would go a long way with both to signal that there's a new sheriff in town, there's a reason to care about this team. My brother's not in charge anymore, I am. Come check us out. The organization needs to send that kind of signal. You do that, and fans can understand when Jeffers is traded ands will cut you some slack on trading other vets for the right return.

I vote that he was tipping his pitches, but I suspect he's got a minor injury and will have to go on Il. No basis for my suspicion, just a feeling.

Sadly, you are probably right. The lineup and pretty good starting pitching got us back to .500. If the starting pitching is going to completely tank like it has the last three games, we have no prayer. We just played 4 games where you would expect us to win the two games started by Bradley and Ryan, lose the game started by Matthews, and that the game started by Ober would be a toss up. Instead, we got blown out in the Ryan and Bradley starts, crushed as expected when Matthews started, and only won the Ober toss up game. The other three games were simply not competitive from our end, which kills a teams' spirit. Absent a trade, our only hopes of getting even 5 games over .500 requires us to win most of the games that Ryan or Bradley start, more than half the games that Ober starts, and at least 40% of the games started from the last two spots currently occupied by Matthews and for the time being Prielipp (whose innings limits will his rotation time short relatively soon). Any even 10-15 game period like that from here out and we are toast. It is starting to look like we are entering one of those periods.

When do you see that future realized? Next year, 2028, 2029 or later? That's the evaluative decision you have to make first. If you think that the current group augmented by 3–5 players could be a championship contender, keep most of what you have and try to find those 3-5 players by promoting from the farm or trades of expiring contracts for controllable talent. On the other hand, if you think the talent level of the current roster plus those in AAA leave us at least 4-5 years out, you trade away pretty much everything we have that has value. The phrase "trade veterans and build for the future and create young core" suggests that you think we are at least 3 and probably 4-5 years out from a championship contender, probably more. I reach that conclusion because any prospect we trade for is at least two years away from making a meaningful contribution on a championship team, probably three or more because they have to get their feet wet for a year, can make strides their second year, and then become real contributors in year three at whatever level their talent allows them to reach. Brooks Lee now in year 3 is a classic example. If you think we are that far out, then I would agree – be willing to trade everyone on the roster except Lee, Prielipp, Morris, Gomez, Matthews, and Keaschall, as they are the only current players who will still be real contributors three plus or more years from now. If we do that, then basically call up AAA roster and weed through those players as you add in any prospects acquired in trade this year and over the 2027 – 2029 seasons. Endure the losing and low attendance for the future hoped for gain. It's a viable strategy if you think were that far away, blow it up and start over. I just don't agree because I think we are closer than that. We aren't a championship contender this year. The right moves, though, and we could be division championship contenders next year, and overall championship contenders by 2028. If you start there, which is where I start, I don't like your idea at all. All that does is push out possible contention even farther with no guarantee of success and eliminates the possibility of success from this core if properly augmented, something I see as possible. That's where we disagree I guess.

You take risk. If you wait to do anything until you know the exactly what the rules are, you may lose this and other opportunities or those opportunities may become more expensive. You have to be willing to take risk to reap any reward. My view is that the potential upside here of a long term extension has more value than the downside risk of the rules changing in a way that would make a long term contract less expensive (highly unlikely) or an injury (very possible but not likely). Here, the value of the upside outweighs the downside risk of loss.

Good explanation. MLB hitters can hit strikes so you have to be able to hit at least the correct quadrant, if not on a finer level to be effective. Mathews throws strikes, he just throws too many strikes in hittable zones.

Thanks for this these, much more fun talk about real possible trades rather than generalities. I like scenarios 2 and 3. I would strongly consider doing them if they were possible. Scenario 1 seems like paying too much for 1/2 season from Freddy Peralta unless there is some concept that we would have an inside track to re-signing him. I like Weaver, but would rather talk about a straight trade just for him, may be for an 8-12 prospect like Henry Mendez or Kendry Rojas.

Good catch on the rules. This does complicate things a little. I was advocating to get him up by August 1 or so. I was thinking promoting Jenkins right after the Twins do whatever it is they're going to do at the trade deadline basically. I guess waiting another 10 days to two weeks is not that big a deal so I get your point. Still, I'd like to have him up sooner rather than later.

Agreed. Boras has a job to do. That job includes maximizing his clients' salaries and income security through guaranteed years, and putting his clients on teams they would like to play for. He does that job very well and that includes getting his clients deals with teams they are already on so they can have security and stay where they want to stay. The guy is kind of a egomaniac with a thirst for the limelight so it's easy to dislike him. Still, you have to admit that he does his job well for his clients. By the way, just because Jeffers is represented by Boras doesn't mean Jeffers has to leave the Twins. The team just needs to pay something close to the going rate to keep him. Some Boras clients have taken less than the absolutely last dollar because they want to be at a particular place, so if Jeffers really wants to stay with Twins maybe we can get him for a little less than say the Yankees or Mets would have to pay. The issue is not Boras. It's how much the Twins are willing to pay to get Jeffers, how long they're willing to guarantee that money, and what it would take to get him to stay whether that's top of the market or a little less because he wants to be with the Twins. I think he's gone because I don't get the sense that being in Minnesota matters a lot to him one way or the other and I don't think ownership is going to be willing to pay the four or more years at $15 million or more dollars a year necessary to sign him. That's on Jeffers and ownership, not on his agent.

I agree that moving Jenkins up makes sense in the context of what the Twins should be trying to accomplish the season, although I don't think now as compared to two or three weeks from now makes any sort of significant difference. This year should be about determining who can help us next year and thereafter, and whether or not the team has enough talent to be a "contender" next year or in 2028. I know we all have different different definitions of "contender". I'm talking about being in the hunt to win 85 or more games, win the Central Division, get at least one home playoff series, and have a chance to make a run in the playoffs, but I'm not talking about being a World Series favorite or something like that. All of our decision should be filtered through that lens. I think there is enough talent here if augmented by two or three players to be a contender as I just defined it in 2027 and 2028. One of the players we need is one more quality bat. I've seen enough to think that Martin may be a nice complementary player but is not that bat, and I have my doubts about Roden although he hasn't had much of an opportunity yet. Jenkins may be ready to be that guy. I'd like to see if that's true this year. We also need at least one more quality late inning reliever, and one more starting pitcher plus a healthy season from Lopez. I think our moves at the deadline should reflect those needs for next year after, not just this year, and should include providing opportunity for people we think can fill those roles. So what should we do? I think we should strongly consider trading higher end prospects or players with more than 1.5 years of control like Detmers, Soriano, Bachman, Sentzatela, Heliot Ramos, and Jake McCarthy. I'm sure there's many more names who might be available in the right deal. I could even get behind trading a mid-level prospect for a rental starter so that we can try Matthews the bullpen to see if he could be that late inning piece. I'm leaving Prielipp in the rotation next year, although he may need to go to the bullpen this year because of the innings limits required from his previous injuries. We should use this year to figure out what we're going to be doing 2027 and 2028, which then impacts upcoming decisions on guys like Joe Ryan, Josh Bell, and Trevor Larnach. To me, getting Jenkins up to the Bigs fits right in with this plan. Whether the opening is caused by an injury, a demotion or trade of Alan Roden, or an upcoming trade, I would like to see him up with the big club by August 1 and given some real playing time like at least three or four games a week. Let's see if he can help the middle of the order, or if he's still a year or two away. Same for Culpepper. I actually like Ryan Kreidler at short. Unfortunately, his glove says starter but his bat says utility infielder. Can Culpepper be the starting SS next year and the year after? Is Marek Houston a better choice? I think getting Culpepper up and in the lineup to really the best and perhaps only way to find that out. Find a spot for him and a spot for Jenkins. Culpepper is probably easy if/when he's healthy because we need another infielder and losing a catcher will get us that opening. Jenkins probably requires another move regarding the outfielders we have the let's do that in the next couple of weeks and provide that opportunity.

Good to see Buxton back in the lineup and I applaud them sending down Gray rather than the Roden. This will really help against the three left-handed starters I think we face this week.

I don't think they are obsessed with moving Prielipp to the bullpen permanently, at least I'm not, but is going to have to go to the bullpen this year if you want him pitching past August 1. He has not pitched enough innings in the past to build himself up for even 120 innings this year without breaking down. He is already at 85 innings. I say give them about four more starts, about 20 to 25 innings, and use his remaining 20 after that in the bullpen. Otherwise, is a pretty good chance that he will break down again before the season is out. I agree that Prielipp should stay a starter as long as possible in his career and I would love to see him have 30 starts next year. Not going to get 30 starts this year, and won't get even to 25 without very high injury risk. Moving him to the bullpen is a temporary measure. We can stretch them back out as a starter next year. The Dodgers do this all the time and do it very successfully

Interesting idea. It would probably would cost us a guy in the top 15 to the Mets, and a guy back half of the top 30 to the Blue Jays, but it would add a lot. It depends on the cost.

I prefer a bigger trade of a better prospect for a guy 2.5 years of control like like Detmers or Soriano, but I also know that's going to be hard to pull off. This approach actually could kill two birds with one stone and allow us to trade a lesser prospect for a rental starter like Robbie Ray or Kevin Gausman. As always, the big question is the price. Ray has pitched extremely well this year, Gausman less, and Ray is getting better as the year goes on while Gausman is getting worse. Would a prospect in the 10 – 20 range like Henry Mendez, Brandon Winokur, Kyle DeBarge, or someone similar the enough to get Ray? Maybe one of those guys and an A+ guy like Henrique Jimenez or Yasser Mercedes? Gausman assumedly would be cheaper, maybe a prospect in the 20-30 range or even a non-top 30 guy. I would definitely explore getting Robbie Ray. Gausman doesn't excite me a lot but might be worth having the price is right. What I like about this is that it moves Zebby and possibly Prielipp the bullpen for the rest of the season. And before somebody complains about why are we making these guys relievers, we aren't making them relievers, were making them relievers for the rest of this season only. There is nothing that stops the Twins from bringing these guys back and stretching them out as starters for next year. This is just for now to strengthen the 2026 bullpen. Prielipp needs to go there or go home relatively soon anyway because he is on a justified innings limit as he is ramping up from major arm surgery. The bullpen may be Matthews' destiny but we don't know that. One thing we do know is he is not performing well as a starter this year, and seems to have the right kind of pitches be a lockdown, late inning guy. Another thing we know is the bullpen needs help, these guys could provide some help, and getting help from outside is going to be expensive like a decent prospect for a reliever in his mid-30s. Look, I would like to have a bigger, more headlining trade of one of our top 10 prospects as part of a package for Detmers or maybe a little less as part of a package for Soriano. I also think that's probably not going to happen. This is a good fallback option to help the 2026 team without giving away the farm. It's definitely worth exploring.

I feel like the article and the comments are missing some nuance. If the question is should we trade for rental starter or reliever, I think the list is good. The other hand, if the opportunity is there to trade for a frontline starter with plus years of control remaining debtors or Soriano (I'm sure there are others), then my mind the list changes. Culpepper or Houston than to become available. One, not both. Trading Riley Quick would you be very difficult would have to be outstanding package of say a controllable starter and a controllable younger reliever. Still, if that's available you have to consider that possibility. I do agree that Jenkins is never on the table I think we sometimes get bogged down in the paradigm of prospect for older, rental player. I agree that this team is not good enough to make that kind of a one year only move by trading nay of the good prospects . However, there are a lot of articles suggesting that younger, controllable players might be available from Angels, Giants, Rockies, or even the Royals. Now you're balancing proven upside with unproven, possibly higher upside and much higher chance of failure. Then, I would consider trading pretty much anybody except Jenkins in the right deal. I do think this team's competitive window is actually opening for the next 2 to 4 years. It doesn't really open until next season, although some minor moves so that this year's team has a chance to sneak in and get some playoff experience makes sense. Say, trading a 20 – 30 prospect for a guy like Robbie Ray or Kevin Gausman, or a 15 – 30 prospect for Luke Weaver who has a year left on his contract after this one. If we could trade for someone that has the next two seasons of control that might line up well with the timeline of some of our other players like Ryan, Buxton, Lewis, Keaschall, Lopez, Lee, etc., all of whom have at least one controllable good year left if not more.

I agree that we shouldn’t trade players because we think we’re gonna win the championship this year. But to me, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t consider a trade. I would be more interested in a pitcher that’s got a couple plus more years of control. This is why I keep coming back to Reid Detmers and Jose Soriano. I’m sure there are others. We should certainly explore the market. But I’m with you, let’s not trade a good prospect for some 32 year-old plus reliever or for some older rental starter. If we can get one of those guys for somebody not in our top 20-25 prospects, OK, but otherwise, no. I would look in on the price for a guy like Robbie, Ray or Kevin Gausman because who knows, maybe a guy at the way back end of the top thirty or beyond that might be enough. If not, not this year.

I think where we disagree is I’m actually fine with Kreidler starting at shortstop for the rest of the season and into next year. Gray can and should go, but we can pick up a veteran utility guy who can play shortstop in free agency or even promote Ben Ross. I would only trade Culpepper for a controllable front line starting pitcher like Reid Detmers. I wouldn’t put him in a package for a reliever or a rental starter by any stretch, or even for an older starter with another year left but if there is an available frontline starting pitcher with 2+ years of control left I would consider trading Culpepper, and someone towards the back end of the top 30. Alternatively, I wouldn’t mind putting Houston in that kind of trade as part of a package. My general feeling is that pretty much anyone except Jenkins should be available but only in the right trade. We have a well stocked farm system at the moment on the hitting side, not so much on the pitching side after the injuries. We particularly have a lot of outfielders, especially left-handed hitting outfielders, and we actually have two shortstops who look like future major league players. I would love to keep them, but I would be open to trading one from either of those positions if, and only if, the return is a controllable established Frontline starter.

I agree that everybody in the farm system should be available this year for trade except Jenkins. I frankly be OK with trading Culpepper now that Houston is showing so much promise. Still, the cost for Miller is probably too high and taking on Bogaerts deal is a non-starter hard no. I would love to get Miller if he was available for even a top five prospect like Culpepper or Emma plus someone else in the top 20 towards the back half without taking on the Bogarts millstone of a contract. I think that’s not enough so I don’t think he’s a realistic target.

Well said. I’d like to see controlled aggression. Keep who we have, and make two trades of prospects for pitching, one starter and one reliever. Everyone’s on the table except Jenkins. Houston makes Culpepper available, but only in a trade for a controllable frontline starter like Detmers. I want either him, Soriano, or a lesser mid top 30 prospect traded for Robbie Ray. Then trade 2 15-30 prospects for Luke Weaver. The let’s see what happens.

I like the idea here but like many wonder about the cost. I’ll throw out three scenarios and wait for the raft of sh&! I get in return. Before I do that,, I’m going to put anyone on the table in the right trade except Jenkins. With the emergence of Houston, Culpepper could be traded. Same for Tait with the draft of Lackey.. So here are the scenarios. 1- Trade for front line starter with 2 plus years of control. I’m willing to give up two top 15 prospects and another at the top 30. My trade is Emma, Kendry Rojas, and Ben Ross for Reid Detmers. If they will throw in Sam Bachman or Kirby Yates, I will add another prospect in the 20–30 rage like Diaw or Amick. Best way to go. 2- Trade two mid top 30 prospects for a rental starter. Here, two of Ryan Gallagher, Sam Armstrong, Amick, or Diaw, for Robbie Ray. Kevin Gausman only gets one of the two, plus a guy not in the top 30 in A or A+ ball. 3- Trade one good prospect in the top 15 plus one near the back end of the top 30 for a solid, middle of the rotation guy or erratic, but younger starter each with multi year control. Here, I trade Henry Mendez or Gallagher and Amick, Armstrong, or Ross for Jose Soriano. By the way, I would also be willing to trade a top 10-30 prospect for Luke Weaver for the bullpen. Two if they’re 18-30. Attack away.

Like the concept, not sure I want Hoffman. By the way, chances are pretty good that Emma will be granted a 4th year of options if he plays less than 90 days hits year. Here's betting that his injury takes long enough to heal that he plays less than 90 days. I'd like to use Emma to headline a package to the Angels for Detmers and either Bachman or Yates. We'll have to include more, say someone at the Mendez or Young level, and probably a Ben Ross or Sam Armstrong level guy. I would do it.

We need Buxton back pretty badly to handle a LH starter.

Maybe they have a trade in the works that will get them a starter for Tuesday? Hey, a guy can dream . . .

Nope, my bad again. Prielipp isn't eligible to come off the IL by Tuesday.