The Great Hambino

Not a bad overall list relative to each other. In my mind, they should get a demerit on every trade that wasn't an expiring contract because, at least from the outside looking in, they didn't need to make those trades. Your trade partners in those trades are doing so because they have an immediate need. In these circumstances, you should be shooting to receive a premium above what the on-paper value would suggest - you should have the leverage. In practice, that's not going to happen with every trade. But Gleeman made a good point that there wasn't one single trade that you can look at and say "Wow, the Twins got great value there" relative to on-paper value. If you're making nine trades, you should be able to say that about at least one of them, right? And the Outman trade should be an F minus. If he needs to be "working on things" at AAA at the age of 28, then he should probably be playing overseas or in independent ball. I honestly would've preferred a complex league flier in return for Stewart

They've spent their entire existence in a barely-accessible warehouse. That has to have played a part in tamping down attendance. And then there's Florida itself. For whatever reason, it seems like baseball is wildly popular in that state at every level ... except for the local teams at the highest level. That's always struck me as odd.

Define VERY strong correlation 4 of the last 8 World Series participants had losing records against >.500 teams in the regular season, including 2 champs

Luke Keaschall, you're my hero

There are currently only 6 teams with winning records against >.500 teams, and two of them are only a game above .500. No one in the NL West is, not even the Dodgers. It's a really tough threshold to reach

Respect the CF for giving it the ol' college try even though it hit the batters eye like 12 feet up

Good piece of hitting from Jeffers

Bomba Squad 2: Electric Boogaloo

Hey, a 6th inning platoon PH that worked!

Upon further review, what looked like an awkward turn by Keaschall at first was more due to a low flip from Lee. I rescind by criticism

Not exactly the smoothest 6-4-3 you'll ever see, but got the job done

Dang, I thought that was gonna drop for Lee

I'm shocked that LaTroy is shocked that was an error. If that's not an error, then there really isn't any reason to make the distinction

He really wasn't on this one. He was set up for a throw, just not a great transition by my eyes

Ironically, cuz we didn't think the Coast Guard would find us there (We were killing time before a college buddy's wedding that afternoon, and someone in our group has a boat club membership)

Sometimes the other team bunts for you

Earlier this summer, I was on a boat in Duluth that got boarded by the Coast Guard. Turned out that it was a routine inspection and they had half a dozen young trainees along for the ride. Pierson Ohl looks like every single one of the trainees

In keeping with recent game threads... Is this another Ron Jeremy thing?

I appreciate the convo as well. I like to think my pessimism is realism, but that might be a defense mechanism - expect the worst, hope for the best. (Except for Outman. That I'm full-blown pessimist. Meaningful pieces of a contender don't need time at AAA to work on things at age 28) Ultimately my entire viewpoint hinges on their willingness to reinvest in payroll, which will or won't happen regardless of my opinion

I would hope for a return like you described for Ryan. If they're not looking at 2026 as a competitive year, it would open up the possibilities of getting someone a little further away but more highly regarded. But that's in the ballpark of what I'd hope to get for him. I think that they do have the elements of a quality bullpen, I just don't think they'll have them identified and developed by any time next year. I think - in fact, I hope - it takes them longer than April 2026 to sift through their pile of young fringe starters and figure out the future rotation. And I think that has to happen before they can really develop they guys that don't make the cut as back-end bullpen stalwarts. And I don't see that happening over the course of 2/3rds of a season. If they have a quality bullpen by the end of 2027, they will have done an impressive job. I don't think extending Jeffers is an option because I don't know why he or Boras would agree to one without it being very lucrative, and I just don't see current ownership doing that. Just because they have the funds to spend on an O'Hearn doesn't mean they will. In fact, I'd be shocked if current ownership did. Same with any meaningful bullpen reinforcements. I think they're shopping in the Jay Jackson clearance rack. The outfield you've described is not a contending outfield, at least not right away. I'm very excited for Jenkins, but I think it's wishful thinking to think that he'll be the kind of player they need him to be to contend right away, certainly not in 2026. Gonzalez is even less likely to be that kind of contributor in that timeframe. Roden to me is a less powerful Larnach with the bat. Outman and Martin? Come on, man... Ultimately, the timing of their window depends on their willingness to reinvest their salary savings in the roster. Under this ownership, I just don't see that happening. They just don't seem like the type to put money into an asset they don't want. But all bets are off if there's new ownership in place anytime soon. I will say this, though: I think they've positioned themselves well to be able to pivot in either direction. If they do choose to go for a quick turnaround, they have the opportunity to make real upgrades through free agency, especially if the only starter traded is Lopez (more immediate cash available). But they're also in a position to complete a full teardown this offseason if that reinvestment isn't happening. They haven't picked a lane, but they are in a position to decisively pick one this offseason

I haven't seen definitive reports either, but I have seen reports that their debt load is almost triple what other similar franchises like Cleveland hold. The Twins have run their payroll a little higher, but not that much higher. It would be bizarre for that debt to be purely baseball debt.

Speaking for myself, I'm working off the assumption that a sale is not imminent. I do not envision them reinvesting the savings if this is true. I look at what they have, and I just don't see a lineup that can seriously compete in the next two years without some real free agent investment. There are some promising elements that could be key parts of a competitive lineup, but I'm not seeing that middle-of-the-order high level production that a competitive lineup needs. Jenkins or ERod could eventually be that, but not in the next two years without some incredibly wishful thinking. I think the ship has sailed on Wallner and Royce (especially Wallner) being that - too inconsistent. And who catches in 2027? They're not extending Jeffers in this scenario. Nothing they've received in this round of trades will meaningfully help in this window on the position player front (Roden ain't that guy). There's just too many holes to rebuild in-house in that short of a timeframe. And the bullpen ... you're basically starting from scratch. The quality bullpen they just shipped off wasn't built overnight. They may have the elements of one on hand, but they have to work out what the future rotation is first. The guys that don't make that cut might be quality bullpen pieces, but do we really think they can get that all sorted out in less than two years? You're banking on winning a lot of coin flips for that to be true. So, if a return to contention isn't realistic by 2027 without free agent investment, and that investment isn't going to meaningfully happen, then 2026/2027 isn't really a contention window. In that case, there's no reason to keep any of Lopez/Ryan/Ober into next year unless they have health issues dragging their value down to the point they're better off waiting until next trade deadline to see if they can rebuild that value This is all rooted in the assumption that they're not reinvesting the salary savings (both Correa and the arb raises they now don't have to give out) they got this trade deadline. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I'll believe it when I see it. Reasonable minds can differ about the returns they got in trade, but the fact is every single move they made was something you'd do if you were planning on cutting payroll to the bone for the next few years (maybe not Varland so much, but that move certainly didn't cost them more money). It's not the only reason for the trades, but it's certainly a reason.

My first reaction to that was ewww, but now that I think about it, it kinda makes sense. You put butter on corn, and butter and milk are, like, cousins or something. I did not grow up on a farm

I thought he was playing in LIV golf

I've been trying to think about how this could relate to a sale, because I agree that it doesn't really make much sense to me. Could it be a hedge? Maybe clearing the books while they can in case whatever they have in the works falls through? Maybe they thought they had Ishbia in the bag and don't want to get burned again. So clear yourself of future commitments in case you're left holding the bag. I dunno I've never been a billionaire, but if I were, I would be thinking about a franchise purchase as a decades-long investment. I'm not sure prospective buyers are as concerned with the current state of the roster as fans might think. In my mind, they're playing the long game