The Great Hambino

To clarify, I didn't mean to suggest DFA'ing now or before the end of the season. He's needed now, even if he's only up right now over Zebby due to lack of options instead of current form. In fact, DFA probably wasn't the right term to use - nontender this offseason would be more accurate. Which if he doesn't turn things around, is absolutely on the table at $7ishMM* if he can't crack a rotation that next year could look like Ryan-Lopez-Bradley-Ober-Priellip-Abel-Matthews-Rojas, and that's not counting any other additions through trade or free agency or someone like Gallagher or CJ Culpepper stepping up. If he shows something the rest of the year? Sure, he can stabilize the back end of the rotation. But if not, I'd rather put that $7MM savings towards more of a ceiling-raiser if they're willing (or forced by a floor) to commit to more payroll in 2027 *Figure pulled out of thin air based on $5.25MM this year

Fun fact: decreasing the denominator can help improve a ratio as much as or more than raising the numerator

It's fair to question whether or not a formal cap is needed if the amount of revenue sharing needed to level the playing field acts as a de facto cap. The Dodgers certainly wouldn't be able to keep up their current level of spending if enough of their revenue is re-routed elsewhere. What's not in question is that a floor-type mechanism is needed, since the Nuttings and Fishers of the world have already shown their willingness to pocket as much revenue sharing as they can get away with. If I'm a player, I'm not cool with taking money from teams willing to spend and giving it to teams not willing to spend unless they're required to spend it. Otherwise it's just another form of salary suppression The question is what can the players offer the owners as a concession to get their floor if not a cap. This is still subject to negotiation, and the owners aren't going to grant this without some quid pro quo

This is a good thing to point out. Even though this wasn't the course I would've taken, it was far from irresponsible or reckless. Short of Hill or Jhomnardo (hell of a name BTW) going super saiyan, nothing they did will kill them in the future. I'm just not ready to throw them a parade for doing scarcely more than the bare minimum of investment. It's a small start, but they must follow through in the offseasons and trade windows to come if they actually want to restore the goodwill they're hoping to regain from fans. The mission is not accomplished

The more I think about this, the more I'm not loving the course they're taking here. They bought a little, but no more than the teams they're chasing in the division They bought, but without doing anything to improve an offense that's pretty clearly regressing to the mean after an unsustainable run of production with RISP (I think I saw they're something like 21st since the deadline in runs scored, which is more in line with their overall metrics) They bought with a little bit of an eye toward the future in getting two players controlled beyond this season, but one of them (Kremer) will be a strong DFA candidate if he doesn't turn his season around (it would be bad roster management for a team on a limited budget to pay arb-3 prices for a swingman/AAAA depth type of starter, which is what Kremer could be next year if his current form holds) They bought and took on salary, but only to an extent (how far down the prospect rankings does the return for Hoffman slide from Hill if they were willing to take on his full salary next year?) They bought while retaining Jeffers (a month ago I would've included Ryan here, but his current shaky form paired with his overall second half history probably suppressed his value enough to make it a moot point for now), but at what opportunity cost given the wild market for catchers and the Yankees' obvious need for one? Given what an injured Rutschman went for, I gotta believe it was worth much more than a comp pick plus two months. They bought and supposedly garnered some goodwill for themselves with fans in the process (I seriously doubt this being any sort of meaningful amount of goodwill from most fans, but I'll play along), but are they just kicking the proverbial can down the road until the guys they're so proud of retaining end up walking in free agency anyway? In other words, is this just a goodwill sugar rush? Put those all together, and they sound neither like going big nor like going home. They sound like half measures

Fangraphs: Hill #12 prospect in the Twins org, Klein #35, Pena #49 Pipeline (pre-draft additions): Hill #7, Klein #17, Pena outside top 30 Blue Jays eating some salary helps

Now would be a good time to start making some unreasonable offers to the Yankees in exchange for Jeffers after watching the Red Sox and Rays get Rutschman and Hicks

I used to think this was a walk the bases loaded 10 times out of 10 situation Somewhere along the line, I became convinced that I might've been overlooking the fact that doing so completely removes the margin for error for the pitcher and might change the way he pitches, especially if he falls behind in the count. I think it's reasonable to look at Saturday's situation and pitch to the 2026 version of Raleigh. Sunday? The case for walking them full is stronger. Ultimately in both cases, they lost because the players didn't execute. People sometimes fall for the logical fallacy that Option A didn't work, therefore Option B would've worked. That's not how it works.

Greene has high risk for sure. But the reward for a pitcher with that much proven talent and three additional years of control is also incredibly high. And those three years are at locked-in prices not subject to arbitration inflation, plus an out for the third year (club option with just a $2MM buyout) if things do go south. There's a real chance at elite starting pitching for multiple years at prices that could we well below market value - that's just about the most valuable resource in baseball. Like the pitching version of Buxton at his best I'm high on Culpepper and wouldn't want to move him unless it's for multiple years of a true game changer. Greene could be one of those guys But I'd also do what I could to assemble a package without touching Jenkins, Lackey, or Kaelen first. Maybe throw CJ Culpepper in the offer and see if they don't notice (kidding, sort of)

DFA is very much in play after the season. I'm looking at him as a quasi-rental Even if they do make the playoffs, does he make the postseason rotation? Does he even make the postseason roster? Long relief at best? I'm not sure he beats out Zebby, and I'm not sure Zebby even makes a postseason rotation I like this trade considerably less than the Minter trade

On its own? No Could it be the first in a series of moves between now and Dec 1 that prove he's walking the walk? Certainly possible

Did Arozarena catch that ball, or did that ball catch Arozarena?

Yep, Fundy is goin down tomorrow

I'd hope they'd be aiming a little higher. What's the upside here? Is he even an improvement over Zebby? If this allows them to convert Rojas to a true reliever for the rest of the season, I guess that's a plus

Hopefully they're giving them one of their lesser buckets of balls ... dude's been rough lately

The idea that the Varland trade got them Lackey is absurd First of all, their tank didn't guarantee them anything. It got them marginally improved odds in what is a fairly flat draft lottery. Note that the Twins still picked behind the Rays, a team that did not give up on their season and severely hamper the following season by trading away over a third of the roster. Second of all, even if you do buy that tanking improved their draft odds ... the tank was already complete before the Varland trade. All the other trades had already been executed - their "tank" had been secured. The Varland trade was either a) a fairly substantial bet on the promise of Rojas, b) Falvey getting high on his own supply in the midst of a flurry of trade activity, or c) all of the above. Any draft-odds benefit of the Varland trade alone was barely a rounding error

All else equal, I'd prefer targeting guys with future control. But other than that, I like this a lot. Especially the part where they minimized the prospect cost by taking back all the money. We now have something tangible that puts Tom's words about investing in the roster into action. They still have a long way to go to start winning fans back, but that was never going to happen in a single transaction. To quote the poets of Rage Against the Machine: It has to start somewhere It has to start sometime What better place than here What better time than now [incoherent yelling]

Kody just really wanted the ice dump

I forgot it was a day game. Looks like the Twins lineup did too

Rough stretch for Lane Thomas - take one in the pills on the on deck circle, then have your RBI robbed from you by your own teammate

Perhaps while listening to Rush and discussing the merits of universal health care

Way too sunny a disposition to be Pat

In center, there are two fielders that can back him up instead of one

Why do the Progressive insurance people always wear aprons?