JYTwinsFan

I like the idea of adding Eflin or Eovaldi due to their general consistency & experience and they are the most realistic targets discussed. And those of us who watch Ober know he's not a shutdown guy. But are we not giving him enough credit? Help me understand why Eflin and Eovaldi surpass the Ober threshold ("better than Bailey Ober" per the article)? ERA / FIP / Kper9 / WHIP Ober: 4.14 / 3.94 / 9.5 / 1.08 Eflin: 3.99 / 3.96 / 7.1 / 1.11 Eovaldi: 3.10 / 3.74 / 8.8. / 1.03 I see these guys as significantly helping the playoff run and attempt to push past the Guardians. But once we're in the playoffs they seem like tossups with Ober for who gets a playoff start based mostly on matchups and who is hot. I raise this because they Twins should not overpay for these two based on the idea it will improve playoff odds for a Game 3 at an individual pitcher level. Overall they'd provide depth during the lead up and potential options going into playoffs, which has value and can increase odds overall, I suppose. Am I missing something?

Reading a lot of the comments on this trade, I'm a little surprised by the reaction. A lot of people are overthinking this and reading too much into it. 1) The Twins just signed a right handed 4th outfielder for $4mm. That was gonna happen one way or the other. None of the signings were going to be exciting, All of the options were gonna be in that range if the Twins were to get them. The upside here is that he can play center, which not all of the options out there could, he is controllable in 2025 if they want him, and zero cost if they don't, and he's 29, significantly younger most of the other options. So...plus. 2) They traded a mid 20s ranked prospect for a different kind of mid 20s ranked prospect. Both are young enough and unproven enough that anything could happen. The upside here is that he fits the organizational need better and he's younger so his rep is less set in stone whereas Miller's is starting to develop (all glove, no bat). So...plus. Ready to move on and play ball.

I get the initial reactions to this trade, but it's pretty clear now that DeSclafani is essentially the throw in piece of the deal, not anywhere close to their target in the trade. The Twins are getting a depth starter for free basically (2mil according to MLB Trade Rumors) and overall they save some money which can then be reapplied to an actual starting pitch target or other hole to fill. So it's basically: Mariners are gonna pay Polanco essentially his $10mil + DeScalfani's $4mil - fair cost for Polanco's value Twins are gonna pay $2mil on top of the cost of whoever they get with the savings + a throw in depth starting pitcher as a flier, but let's assume he gets traded or cut + a good reliever + a top 100 prospect + a low A pitcher wild card. Once you get past the fact that DeScalfani's a throw in, kinda hard to argue with this trade. Though it will be best evaluated when we know how they deploy the savings.

I've been fascinated by the Severino story over the last couple years cause his stats were on the rise, but he was nowhere to be found on prospect lists despite being highly rated as a teenager and still being under 25yrs old. He's always reminded me of Edwin Encarnacion. Similar body type, defensive profile, whip-like swing that generates a lot of power from his hips, kinda labored gait around the bases on his home run trot. One can hope Severino could turn into as productive a player as Encarnacion was. Big difference I suppose is EE had good plate discipline.

Yea I debated that justification as well. What I came to, and perhaps flawed, was that I had a hard time wanting to give $25mil to any of the free agents as they felt like overpays based on a thin market, whereas, Castillo felt appropriate if not exciting. I would imagine on the open market he would now be worth $30mil+. But to your point...to trade value and take on $25mil in salary is a heavy price. So it only works if you really believe in Castillo's longevity over the next few years, and you believe he is essentially a better than Gray or even Lopez Ace during that time.

Appreciate that!

• Big trade with the Mariners sending Polanco, Thielbar, Winder, and Larnach to the M's in return for Emerson Hancock, Prelander Berroa, and Tyler Locklear (Baseball Trade Values says this is a slight overpay by the Twins, but basically even). Mariners dealing SP and RP from depth while giving up a good prospect in return for 4 MLB ready players three of which are controllable for multiple years. Solves their second base and OF gaps. Hoping the core of it works, but perhaps some adjustments on the margins? • Non-tendering Farmer or trading him. Essentially his 6mil goes to Pagan (or similar) relief pitcher at $6mil. • I'm feeling good about Alcala, Canterino, Berroa and Funderburk as BP arms right out of the gate all with wipe out stuff, but I know I have less exciting depth options to cycle in as well (Moran, Headrick, Henriquez, etc.). • Hancock is my Gray replacement, at league minimum and controllable for multiple years. That's 4 controllable arms in the rotation over the next 3- 5 years. Varland starts in AAA but is the first man up in the rotation if needed. If he's stalling out as a SP in AAA, I'm converting him a reliever and he's immediately in the Twins bullpen. Festa isn't far behind, and then I've got SWR Festa, and Headrick to spot start if needed. Lewis and Raya in AA pushing with good seasons would be a nice problem to have. • I've signed Hoskins to play DH and platoon with Kiriloff as needed at 1B. Big right handed power in the middle of the lineup for a couple years. Buxton is in CF or DH, but I've also signed Kiermaier. So we've got optimal mixing and matching with a right and left hander at both spots if everyone is healthy. And waiting in the wings is Miranda in AAA who is proving he's back to normal and pushing for a callup at first sign of injury at 1B / DH. • I'm giving a utility spots to Castro and Martin. Tons of position flexibility with both as well as speed. If Martin proves to be an on base machine we start finding ways to get him in the lineup every day. First sign of infield injury to Julien, Correa, or Lewis, then Brooks Lee gets the callup. • I like the catcher duo and don't mess with it. We'll have an injury at some point and Camargo is up and we don't skip a beat. • We come in right at 135mil. At the July trade deadline if no one has emerged as a #2 playoff starter, we seek one out and pull the trigger with some of our prospect or controllable MLB depth. C: Christian Vazquez ($10.00M) 1B: Alex Kirilloff ($1.70M) 2B: Edouard Julien ($.77M) 3B: Royce Lewis ($0.77M) SS: Carlos Correa ($33.33M) LF: Matt Wallner ($0.77M) CF: Byron Buxton ($15.00M) RF: Max Kepler ($10.00M) DH: Rhys Hoskins ($18M) Utility: Willi Castro ($3.20M) Utility: Austin Martin ($.77M) 4th OF: Kevin Kiermaier ($11M) Backup C: Ryan Jeffers ($2.30M) SP1: Pablo Lopez ($8.25M) SP2: Joe Ryan ($0.77M) SP3: Bailey Ober ($0.77M) SP4: Chris Paddack ($2.53M) SP5: Emerson Hancock ($0.77M) RP: Jhoan Duran ($0.77M) RP: Brock Stewart ($0.77M) RP: Griffin Jax ($0.77M) RP: Jorge Alcala ($1.00M) RP: Prelander Berroa ($.77M) RP: Matt Canterino ($0.77M) RP: Emilio Pagan ($6M) RP: Kody Funderburk ($0.77M) Payroll is 1.99% under budget

I've been wondering if Luis Castillo might actually be an available and worthwhile target. Given Seattle's young pitching depth and reported interest in Ohtani, would they value a Castillo trade that could free up salary and plug some other holes on the field? I don't know much about the dynamic in Seattle, nor Castillo's prospects for continued success into his mid 30s, so maybe not realistic, but crossed my mind.

I haven't read every comment here yet, so forgive me if this sentiment has been stated already. Like most I'm not thrilled to see payroll go down, they have a real chance to build a knockout punch with even modest additions. But I'm also not seeing it as dire for the same reason. The real problem as I see it, is that the FO has constructed a world class spine to this team of superstars at at least four (or five) of the most valuable/critical positions: Buxton in Center, Correa at Short, Lopez an ace on the mound, Jeffers emergence as a top tier catcher, and Duran as a shut down closer...but the most established superstars of that group who need to play most regularly are not contributing like superstars. If they were, we'd be talking about how the Twins can best overpay this offseason for some high octane reliever or other nice-to-haves. We'd be less worried about replacing Gray w/ Giolito or even Maeda because our offense would be top shelf. On paper they have exactly what they need and no free agent or trade candidate necessarily represents any added guarantee of performance better than what Correa or Buxton are capable of. This year's FA class in particular is weak or risky beyond Ohtani. But their plan for 2024 seems to be echoing their plan for the second half of 2023. We have the pieces, we have the superstars, we have balance, we have flexibility, we have long term control, we have MLB ready prospect depth, and we can deploy our strategy in game...but the players have to be on the field and execute. So our focus is on that. They do need to replace Gray in some form and should have the payroll options to do that to an acceptable degree. And I'm reasonably confident they have enough trade bait to improve the roster in some key spots without mortgaging the future, but neither of those offseason boxes to check will alleviate the fact that they seem to be stuck with (or stubbornly sticking to) relying on their superstars to make good on the investment they made. It's hard to argue with that. It's also painful to watch when it doesn't work.

Curious to hear Twins Daily's POV or anyone from the general forum on the best tool for assessing trade values. Want to make sure as I play around, I use the methodology with the most consensus, or at least caveat where I need to if I'm using values that carry some risk of accuracy in the real world.

This was a great show. Perfect setup for the content and he's a fantastic guest who communicates very thoroughly and plainly. Make this a regular thing!

Yea I'm assuming they will pitch their best available starter. So hopefully it does come down to the last two days and they blow through their top starters and bullpens. Good news is that all 4 teams in the final weekend series could all be playing for something significant: Texas vs Seattle & Houston vs. Arizona.

An interesting thing to watch will be if the AL West comes down to the last game or two, will any of the teams feel compelled to throw their best starter at it just to get into the playoffs, and thus taking them out of starting game 1 of the Wild Card series against the Twins. For example, Houston has Verlander and Seattle has Castillo lined up to pitch Monday and Saturday, so they'd be out for Tuesday. Houston also has Valdez lined up to pitch Wednesday and then Tuesday (Game 1) but if it's win or go home on their final game Sunday, would they pitch Valdez on 4 days rest (and take him out for Game 1 of Wild Card series).

Ted, since you set up that his issue was launch angle, it would be great to understand how Kepler has achieved this success since June. It seems the key factor in whether to pick up the option is not the stats, but whether the changes he's made are sustainable. It seems to me that if there's a hint of it being sustainable, it is worth picking up the option: a) you're just not going to find much better out there for that price, b) you can always trade Kepler after picking up the option, c) a motivated Kepler to repeat this success in 2024 given it will be another "contract year" at a prime 31 years old, is probably a worthwhile bet, d) trading a controllable and younger w/ potential Larnach probably has a lot more value to convert into a longer term piece elsewhere on the diamond. On another note...I felt this since spring training, but Kepler looks physically bigger to me. Has there been any reporting on him putting on weight/muscle?

I agree. If he's hurt, then this is really bad managing because his output doesn't justify him being out there hurt. Secondly, he just looks absolutely lost. It's nearing a repeat of Sano-level lost. Chases everything. Can't hit fastballs down the middle. Constantly pitch guessing (incorrectly) on third strikes instead of reacting. He has some of the fastest hands in baseball. He should be able to react at an above average rate. I feel for him. I love him as a player and a human. I want him to figure it out for his benefit and ours. I won't stop rooting for him. But batting him 2-4 consistently and occupying the DH spot is inane at this stage in the season and given what is at stake. On the flip side I do NOT think he should play center (unless that does magically unlock his hitting ability). Save him for the playoff run, then stick him in center for Oct. But make adjustments to the lineup now to get to the playoff run...obviously :)

Because the Twins had a bad first half compared to their potential and the weak division, they've essentially used up all of their wiggle room. So no one at this stage deserves the benefit of the doubt to "work things out" on the field of play. This is essentially what they are rolling out every day: A fourth outfielder defensive replacement/specialist in right (Kepler) A 2 true outcomes lower third of the order hitter in left (should be right, but because of Kepler) (Gallo) A DH who can't hit...I mean can't make contact...batting 2-4 in the lineup every night (Buxton) A 4th outfielder defensive specialist starting in centerfield every night (Taylor) 4/9 of the day to day lineup consistently batting near .200 BA / .300 or below OBP / .700 or below OPS. And when one of them needs a break...Willi Castro plays in the OF who is same or worse. You accept that a lineup will have one or maybe two of these kinds of guys somewhat regularly in a lineup in today's game (e.g. Vasquez at catcher), but when your entire outfield + DH...all positions where you should be getting the opposite of this output... My argument on the margins can be debated...but generally, this is nuts to be rolling this out every day in the way that it is.

I'm really baffled by this entire hitting collapse from the Twins and how it's being handled. The majority seem to be concluding (myself one of them) that there is a systemic problem given the poor performance across the board from the team and some select situational numbers (bases loaded, called third strikes, vs. Lefty pitchers) that are maddeningly consistent. Most of this criticism seems to conclude that their is an approach problem. In this day and age it shouldn't be all that hard to figure out what the approach is from teams performing well in hitting metrics where the Twins are failing. Just mimic that approach seems to be the obvious answer, or at least use it as a counterpoint to adjust the Twins approach. There's gotta be enough available data publicly for even the media and amateur statheads to make some pretty solid conclusions to at least move this team from being inept at hitting to being adequate. With our pitching staff, adequate would allow us to capture this bad division pretty easily I'd think. So if the approach is the problem....then uhhhh...change it? If it's not, then for god's sake a) change the lineup based on talent / ability to execute / ability to adjust or b) change the coach based the the ability to inspire execution or adjustments. This whole "head scratching" reaction from the Twins is kinda nuts. No one on this team deserves the benefit of the doubt. This is a Vikings-level choke on the horizon.

It's a very emotional thing for fans to evaluate these situations and we treat them as zero sum games as if Correa is either a perennial All Star or one day he vaporizes walking down the street ceasing to exist and rendering the contract a complete failure. I would guess that since these 30 teams are businesses each worth $1 - $6 billion that they are quite scientific in how they evaluate and manage their risk. Certainly an insurer is VERY scientific in managing their risk. A 1 year vs. 3 year vs. 10 year vs. 13 year contract at different AAVs, total values, and medical ailments ...when combined all carry varying degrees of total risk that they can quantify pretty well. At some point, whatever actuarial process they use, the calculation tips from being in your favor (for fun let's say 10 years @ $285mil was 51% in your favor) to being not in your favor (let's say 12 years at $315mil was only 49% in your favor). Each team has their own threshold and gut, but any sophisticated business these days understands the Sunk Cost Fallacy or in poker terms the err of being Pot Committed. So yes with every incremental change in the variables, the risk calculation changes. The total risk for the Twins in 2022 with a 1-3 year contract given their knowledge of the medical history may have been pretty low. I highly doubt "they missed something" or "they are being cheap" as they negotiated in this offseason. My guess is that for any of the 30 teams, but definitely what we are seeing with the Giants and the Twins, their data is clearly telling them that they are on the losing side of the risk if they go above X. I would also guess that when they are weighing "risk" it is not just the risk of Correa being good or hurt. It is a holistic evaluation of risk that includes all of the potential variables that lead to a) a winning team, and b) a profitable business over some period of relatively predictable time. Anyway, I think it is far less emotional inside their board rooms than we think it is.

I've been trying to monitor the reporting all day on this, so it's possible I've missed something, but I am surprised by the conviction a lot of people have around presuming to know what happened here. There's a pretty real chance that Correa has a significant medical risk that we will never know about (nor should we). For the time being, until further reporting or leaks, it seems worth considering that whatever it is... It was enough for the Giants, under significant pressure with their fanbase, to walk away from the deal unapologetically risking egg on their face, relationship with Boras, a lackluster 2023 season, and criticism from their fan base equal or greater than the Twins. I suspect they did not do that lightly. It was significant enough for Boras/Mets to settle on a deal worth $35mil less than the Giants offer. It's entirely possible the Twins know this mark on his medicals and perhaps led them to cap their offer where they did. Or perhaps Boras did approach the Twins after the Giants backed out and they stood firm with their offer. I don't know much about insuring star athletes, but is it plausible that some actuary presented a case for insurance up to a certain amount based on Correa's medical risk and that is a factor that teams have to legitimately weigh. For arguments sake, what if they will only insure up to $285mil? Also...the deal with the Mets is not done...and I would think most would agree that the Mets offer here is not a sign of their confidence that the medical risk is insignificant. They are literally throwing money around and the physical is there to protect them too if they calculate differently between now and then. They'd suffer much less backlash because they'd be the second team to pull out validating the Giants move. Anyway...fun reading everyone's speculation. But man, there's a lot here we don't know.

With this signing, and partly because it is hitting closest to home, it solidifies for me that the 2022 offseason is a watershed moment for MLB. The size or length of any individual contract doesn't bother me. The AAV is set by the market, and kudos to the players for getting what they can, so that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is the stacking of rosters with superstars by relatively few teams. That's a real problem for baseball when a select few teams go through modes of just buying everything they can. It's essentially the opposite end of the "tanking" spectrum. They have every right to do it, and I don't think they are being foolish with their money (they have plenty, and are finally showing their cards on that fact), but for baseball, it makes a mockery of competition and fandom via sport, and instead it starts to feel like a rigged game (I'm not saying it is rigged, I'm just saying as a fan it leaves you with the same dirty feeling of watching something rigged). In the moment when it's your team and you've had a long drought, sure it can feel good, but honestly who wants to watch that every year? What fun is there in a reward if the risk has no substantive effect on behavior? It simply isn't tenable for the sport to have all of its superstars on just a few teams. It isn't tenable for all of the drama of a baseball season to be bounced around within the confines of 5-6 teams out of 30. The wider the gap gets between exciting baseball (teams) and boring baseball (teams) the worse it is for baseball. We'll see what happens with the Twins' pivot. And I still love the Twins no matter what. But sadly this will be the first year where I'll honestly half watch baseball because it's just not setup to hold my attention anymore.

Ah thanks for this @jdgoin. I'd not seen those details when those deals were made. I suspect we may see more of this.

Over Thanksgiving, I was pondering something just like this, thanks for crystalizing it so well. If the Twins won 1 world series in that first four years and Correa was an average contributor the rest of his career (or left after 4), that would be well worth it. If you proceed with a strategy like this, I think you start with a bottom line at $300mil and let another team push you up to the $325mil (which is likely to occur). I'm also curious about something from the forum community. Opt Outs are clearly around for good barring some larger shift in economics or strategies. Why haven't we (or will we?) start to see Team Options attached to the Opt Out year...essentially the equivalent of a "right of first refusal" for teams...embedded into contracts? It would work something like this as an example: Player Opts out of deal after year 4 Team can automatically resign player (like an option) at a pre-agreed price (e.g. the established run rate of $40mil) before they hit the open market. This way the player has the ability to leverage their performance potential and seize the market rate, but the team is also protected from outright losing the player to the competitive market if they are still performing at the high level, reducing fan anxiety and continuing player/team partnerships that are genuinely working. You could also get creative with what that option looks like. It could trigger multiple years or just one. It could be a pre agreed price or something similar to the "qualifying offer" where it is an average of the top X players salaries.

Yea love this. Couple notes: Trade Ober + Prospect for Jansen from Toronto and you'll save a little money and upgrade the lineup even further. Though you'd lose a little on the Narvaez advantages that you've called out, seems an upgrade overall. If you want to still spend 154mil (ok with me!) then move Maeda back into the rotation and spend the 2-3mil catcher savings on another decent reliever. If ownership will go to the level of spend you've projected here (which they no doubt should) this would be a very exciting team to watch for the next few years. And each year they'd still have options to free up little bits of cash (Polanco, Arraez, Gray) to keep fine tuning gaps if needed.

Yea good call. Chalk that up to my laziness in not swapping their position on the roster builder! But yea...Jansen would be the primary catcher in all likelihood if not certainty. Which hopefully lights a fire under Jeffers or at least allows him to relax a bit.

Notes on the thinking behind this roster as follows: • Trading Ober and Covacco to Blue Jays for Danny Jansen to turn our catching core into an asset. I'm personally a fan of split catching duties, irrespective of platoon batting advantages. If we need to throw in one more prospect to get the deal done, fine, but nothing of significant value. • Varland takes the reins of the 5th starter role with SWR and Balazovic as the near term replacements if anyone in the rotation falters early. Paddock comes back late in year as well if needed. Not counting on any of the other upper minors pitchers, but hopefully someone surprises us and makes it a three man race to be first up. • Love Winder, but moving him to the bullpen full time given the recurring shoulder issues and turning him into a weapon there. If we don't have confidence he's healthy, we give the nod to Megill instead. • Resign Michael Fullmer or someone similar with $3mil. Then go out and get the best veteran reliever you can for $5mil. Admittedly I don't know who to target in a trade or even FA, so I'll just stick to a dollar amount and consider it an upgrade. I'd love some feedback from the forum on potential names to target within this parameter and I can update. • I'm not targeting a stud SP until the trade deadline. Let's see this roster get us to the point where we need the late addition. Since we've signed Correa in this scenario Lewis/Lee become our trade bait to land that top SP addition if we see a good fit. We target someone with multiple years or someone we can sign for multiple years and then put the Gray/Mahle/Polanco money toward that pitcher in 2024 and beyond. • I traded Kepler and Urshela for a low to mid minors pitchers with upside to clear some salary space and hand the right field keys to Wallner. Or if we can get more for either of them or include in the Toronto trade, even better. • A lot hinges on Kiriloff being back to normal. If that fails I've got Arraez jumping back into 1st Base with back up addition signing below also a consideration. • The big additions are resigning Correa for the long term, then adding Abreu as fulltime DH for veteran leadership and solid middle of the order bat on a one year deal (perhaps takes two years to get it done, similar to Nelson Cruz Twins era). Alt could be Josh Bell for a slightly longer contract, but feels like the 1-2 year deal is the right play here for the Twins. • I'm leaving the budget a tad over, but my wiggle room is in Luis Arraez and/or Jorge Polanco. Both of which I'm fine to trade if it means a potential stud addition in the bullpen or some added salary space to add the starting pitcher at the deadline. I love both Arraez and Polanco, but Arraez' stock will never be higher and Polanco is the easiest player to replace long term at 2nd Base from the minors (Julien, Martin, Lewis, Lee). • Alternatively, if I must be at 140MM tops, then we lose the reliever at $3m (Fullmer) commit to both Winder and Megill at 700K, and then whatever is remaining goes to a BP FA or trade acquisition (roughly $4M). The day-to-day lineup then looks something like: 1. Buxton CF 2. Kiriloff 1B 3. Correa SS 4. Miranda 3B 5. Abreu / Arraez DH 6. Larnach LF 7. Polanco 2B 8. Wallner RF 9. Jeffers/Jansen C C: Ryan Jeffers ($0.70M) 1B: Alex Kirilloff ($0.70M) 2B: Jorge Polanco ($7.50M) 3B: Jose Miranda ($0.70M) SS: Correa ($32.00M) LF: Trevor Larnach ($0.70M) CF: Byron Buxton ($15.00M) RF: Matt Wallner ($0.70M) DH: Jose Abreu ($20.00M) 4th OF: Gilberto Celestino ($0.70M) Utility: Nick Gordon ($0.70M) Utility: Luis Arraez ($4.27M) Backup C: Danny Jansen ($4.27M) SP1: Sonny Gray ($12.00M) SP2: Tyler Mahle ($8.00M) SP3: Kenta Maeda ($9.00M) SP4: Joe Ryan ($0.70M) SP5: Louie Varland ($0.70M) RP: Jhoan Duran ($0.70M) RP: Jorge Lopez ($3.00M) RP: Griffin Jax ($0.70M) RP: Jorge Alcala ($1.00M) RP: Caleb Thielbar ($2.00M) RP: Josh Winder/Trevor Megill ($0.70M) RP: Reliever TBD ($5.00M) RP: Michael Fullmer ($3.00M) Payroll is 3.97% under budget