Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,750 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
News
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
I was sure hoping to see him but between injury and pretty modest performance, I don't think we see him this year.
-
I am pretty much right there with ya on these moves. I was all for moving Bell just to make room. Now, I would be more inclined to keep him and let Larnach go. I don't think Bell brings back a player of any significance where Larnach could yield a pretty decent prospect. Play Keaschall and Roden with Buck and have an OF of all good defenders. Clemmons can play out there some as well. Part of this is that I have been watching Roden in AAA and he has been looking good. It's really a shame Rodriguez got injured, especially doing something as dumb as sliding headfirst into 1st base.
-
Great. Trade him if you can get a premium and sign him to a new contract this off-season because Boras is letting him sign now unless it's a ridiculous deal. Boras is exactly where he hoped to be with Jeffers having a great year in his walk season.
-
Taj looked really good!
-
I would consider it a win if he became a reliable 7th inning guy. Anything more than that is a very happy surprise!
-
This is a pretty pragmatic view. However, I generally believe SPs should not be converted to RPs until they fail as a SP. However, I am somewhat on the fence as to let him continue to develop as a SP in AAA or put him in the Twins BP. My 1st impulse is that developing the consistency he lacks would be best done in AAA. Then again, I think this is a very nuanced decision, so I don't have a strong opinion.
-
They can get good at it or they can spend a lot of money. Option 2 does not exist. While you are not actually saying this, what you are saying is they should follow practices that have not been as successful because they have not executed the practices most likely to be successful. I think the odds of getting better at good practices are a lot better than getting good through bad practices.
-
Happy to see Marco Raya getting it together. Not so happy Soto and Ellwanger are out and Hill has been a bit of a disappoint. He still has a high ceiling, but the lack of command is concerning. I have only seen Reitz pitch once but he has promise. We do have to keep in mind that Prielipp and Morris are transitioning quite well. Rojas still needs a little refinement, but he looks like he could be very good. Paredes has surprised me a little. He might stick too. It's actually been a pretty good year for developing ML pitchers. Hopefully some of the injured guys can bounce back in the 2nd half.
- 9 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- marco raya
- grant hartwig
- (and 2 more)
-
I never understand what point people think they are making when they take this stance. Literally ever form of player acquisition is dependent upon properly evaluating talent. Should they avoid every form of acquisition?
-
I have felt for several years the did not give enough weight to athleticism, base running, and defense. However, I think that will likely get quite a bit better in the not too distant future. Jenkins, Cunninghan, and Rodriquez will elevate that part of our team. None of them are 70 grade runners but they are all good athletes that can defend.
-
I don’t think you can make such a conclusive statement without recognizing what other winning teams have done before suggesting well-run teams don’t trade away their top players. Would you say. Milwaukee would never do that and they are 53-32. Last year they had the best record in the league. They traded Corbin Burnes two years ago and Freddy Peralta this last off-season. OK, but Cleveland would never do that, right. Well, they traded for Kluber when he was a prospect and then traded him away and received Clause in return. They traded Lindor. Carlos Carrasco who was also acquired as a prospect was in the same trade with Lindor. Cleveland also traded away Josh Naylor. They acquired Carlos Santana, Yan Gomes, and even our own Grady Sizemore as prospects. Tampa is known for trading established players. I won’t go through the list. This last off-season St. Louis traded away Sonny Gray and Brandon Donovan while paying $20M for Gray to play for Boston. Granted, some of these moves were made in the off-season but one could argue that’s what the Twins should have been doing this off-season. You can't look at the success of these teams and conclude trading productive players is automatically bad.
-
I am equally concerned with his play this year. He has not been great. Fedko's OPS is 175 points higher. He ranks 15th for the Saints. He needs to come back and step it up for a period of time. IDK if he even gets a chance this year. I would think Emma and Roden are ahead of him right now. I think we could see Roden fairly soon.
- 33 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- royce lewis
- tom pohlad
- (and 3 more)
-
I think you have interpreted the way I approached this to mean the only thing that counts is when an established player is traded for a guy that has no major league experience. I view Kriedler or Willi Castro the same way at least in the context of this discussion. When we talk about roster building here, we generally look at through a lens of 4 categories. 1. Drafted by the Organization, Free Agents, Trading prospects for established players or Trading established players for unproven players. There is another category of players like a Kriedler or Wiilli Castro. I guess I could have created a couple more categories but there just are not enough of those guys to make a couple more categories meaningful. Conceptually, the way we discuss acquiring players here, they are unproven just like all other prospects so that's where I put them. If you want to quibble about another category especially for them, OK. Would that change the percentage of players acquired as free agents or the percentage of production from established players acquired for prospects.? Of course, the answer is that those categories would not change at all. The difference is you would have another category of players that were unproven when acquired. Add all those categories of unproven players up and you have the exact same result.
-
I think this would be pretty darn close to the over/under if Vegas had odds on it. I would have to wait and see what he does the rest of the season to decide on the over or under.
-
2023 was Jenkins draft year so it would be expected that he would not have played many games so we are really talking about 2 1/2 years. You still have a point but Jenkins history is not that long.
-
You will have to elaborate. What statistical bias would be present by using a data set comprised of the highest WAR players or in this case generally the 10-12 highest producing players. I was looking to identify how the highest producing players were acquired. How could that result in statistical bias. Where is the issue with how the study was structured? If you want to conclude it's all about development, OK but the fact remains the majority of production does not come from free agency or trading for established players for the most successful modest revenue teams.
-
The Yankees actually match up pretty well. They have 3 or 4 prospects that would be a good return.
-
Do you have any data to support this assertion? Having heard this often, I collected the acquisition method of every player over 1.5 WAR for every single 90-win team with below average revenue for the past 25 years. It's not universally true that those teams had a major influence from prospects acquired in trade. However, on average prospects acquired in trade contributed as much as prospects that were drafted and those two categories combined accounted for 80-90% of WAR for the most successful organizations. It's an assumption of many that trading current MLB players for prospects diminishes the chances of building a playoff team. History suggests the opposite. Trading for established players has by far the smallest role in building a winning team among organizations with below average revenue.
- 96 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- josh bell
- kody clemens
- (and 6 more)
-
I knew I was missing someone. Walner is somehow out of sight out of mind right now even though I watch a lot of Saints games. Anyway .... I agree. Good catch.
-
For me, assuming a good return, the list of guys I want most to trade, the order goes something like this ..... Joe Ryan Ryan Jeffers Trevor Larnach Bailey Ober Anthony Banda Kody Clemmons Byron Buxton if it's an enormous haul. Of course, he has to waive his NTC.
- 96 replies
-
- 8
-
-
-
- josh bell
- kody clemens
- (and 6 more)
-
You are right. In my opinion, Cleveland would trade Larnach in a heartbeat. I would point out however that the difference between your opinion in mine is based on what they have actually done. That's factual.
-
I made a statement about success over the past 20 years and your response is anecdotal evidence from one game. Cleveland has had eight 90 win seasons in the past 20 years. Tampa has nine. The Twins have 3. I am not sure if you are unaware of the roster management / trading practices of these teams or simply ignore how they operate because you don't like the implications. Either way, I just don't think we should ignore how successful teams operate. I especially don't believe we should follow practices that are basically the opposite of what has made these teams successful.
-
Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee would not hesitate for 10 seconds to trade Larnach. Those organizations don't manage their assets to produce perennial mediocrity.
-
IDK. Bell has an OPS 0f .853 for the last 6 eeks. I agree that they should be more concerned about building a sustainable roster but it would be a bad look if the jettison him when he is hitting quite well. Find a trade partner, even if the return is very modest.
- 58 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- matt wallner
- alan roden
- (and 1 more)
-
Just my observation. His approach was not great six weeks ago. I think he would have been exposed pretty quickly at the ML level. He had a .683 OPS in April. .947 in May and .971 since May 1. He has been really good for long enough that it's about time. However, it is possible they are putting the final polish on the work they have been doing. They also might have been contemplating swapping roster spots with Keaschall. IDK but I sure hope Culpepper is here soon. He is my favorite prospect.
