The Great Hambino

Sheesh, I sure picked a bad time to tune in

Isn't that a line from one of those old Cleveland tourism videos?

Good point - not just Spanish, but Catalan as well. They're both from metropolitan Barcelona

Jose is an all-time runs-faster-than-it-looks-like-he-should guy

Way to kill the rally Brooks

Agreed that you're not eliminating the PR hit by keeping Ryan, you're just delaying it until he walks in free agency. Makes sense in that regard to take the hit when you're already down, not when you're hopefully making meaningful gains in building fan confidence back up. On top of that, fan confidence across the sport is probably going to be pretty down coming out of what's sure to be a frustrating CBA negotiation process. They're likely going to be swimming against the tide no matter what. Simply retaining Joe Ryan into next season isn't going to make a dent in that, just like simply retaining Ryan/Buxton/Lopez/Jeffers coming into this year didn't meaningfully restore fan confidence coming out of last year's deadline. Keeping Ryan will only meaningfully drive fan confidence and attendance figures if they extend him. So I really hope they don't pass on trading him hoping his presence over the rest of this season and whatever becomes of next season does anything for fan morale.

But weren't Zebby and Abel and Prielipp getting further run in games when they were down there? I think part of the problem is that pretty much everyone they'd been planning on really developing as a starter is either hurt or called up. Having said that, I wouldn't hate it if they were maybe more aggressive with letting true starting prospects go further into games as they get to the upper levels of the minors

That is true. I was thinking of the picks - the one received by the former team and the one given up by the new team - as tied together. Dropping the penalty but keeping the reward would certainly maintain the QO's relevance.

Without the draft pick provision, then the QO process has no meaning. At that point it's just like any other free agent offer. The draft pick compensation is the QO system. What purpose does it serve without it?

I don't think anyone looking to trade for a rental catcher would be interested in giving up pieces that help you win now, whether that's in the bullpen or elsewhere. But the Twins don't necessarily have to get their pen help directly through one trade. If they traded Jeffers for prospects (it's not impossible that someone out there is willing to give up pen pieces for him, but I gotta believe your market will be bigger and your return more valuable if you accept prospects) and also traded prospects for relief help (doesn't have to be the same prospects you received for Jeffers), they've effectively landed where you'd be if you'd have swapped Jeffers for relief help, only you've had more flexibility to find the right relievers. They could accomplish this in a three-team trade, I suppose, if the third team was supplying the relievers. I guess my point is I hope they don't shop Jeffers with too narrow a scope regarding the return, since how they net out after all their trades is what really matters

I have to agree here. At the end of the day, Lackey will probably be two levels below Jenkins when he debuts even though Jenkins only a few months older. Hard to justify leapfrogging him without proving it to some degree. In fact, I could probably be convinced that he's currently closer to Culpepper than Jenkins, at least until he confirms some of the hype

It would be great for multiple reasons if they had Buxton insurance they trusted enough in CF to keep Kreidler and Clemens in the infield (you coulda won a lot of money off me if you'd bet me before the season that I'd be saying this sentence unironically). If Martin/Roden/Keaschall/et. al. don't provide that insurance at this time in their eyes, does that open up the door for perhaps a utility IF upgrade over Arcia/Gray as a trade target? Or maybe a true CF (less desirable IMO - I'd hope a viable internal option emerges)? This iteration of the Twins is at its best if Kreidler/Kody can either stay on the dirt or have a better fill-in available if they have to move to CF for a stretch.

One thing I've thought about regarding the QO and the potential of offering it to Jeffers: Are we absolutely sure the draft pick compensation it comes with will still exist in the new CBA? The players hate it, and the owners actually offered scrapping it in their latest offer. If both sides are fine with it disappearing, should we really be counting on it? Maybe it does end up staying in some form, or maybe the changes don't take effect until the following year, or maybe existing offers get grandfathered in. But it's already a stretch to offer any catcher $23MM even for just one season. Does it make it less worth it to make the offer if there's potentially no draft pick compensation anymore? Or is it moot because the price tag of QO'ing a catcher is just too high anyway? I dunno, just spitballing here

I generally agree with the overall point that the best time to trade away relievers is at the deadline while the best time to trade away starters can be in the offseason under the right circumstances due to supply and demand factors that I'll save for another day and another rant. But this is not a typical offseason. No one is giving up anything of real value for someone with one year of control when they aren't sure what they're actually getting for that control while the season is still up in the air. If you're thinking you can just move Ryan in the offseason, you're making a massive gamble that they'll be avoiding a lockout (they will not be avoiding a lockout). If that doesn't happen, what are teams giving up when what they're getting is a mystery box? Too many unknowns to think you can maximize Ryan's value in the offseason. So trade him this deadline or actually commit to competing while you still have him. I suppose one angle they could be taking is there could be a post-CBA environment where they'll be in a position to be able to offer him more than any other team in free agency if something similar to the NBA's Larry Bird rights materializes (plus some combo of revenue sharing and a floor that makes increased spending both more realistic and necessary), and they can more realistically view him as part of the core of the next few years. But assuming that is coming is also a huge gamble.