Major League Ready

Totally agree which is why I said it's unlikely. It would not work for a player with multiple years remaining or a player with no value. Therefore, it would take a more complex transaction. For example, a player with 1 year $30M remaining where the Twins could flip the player and eat $20M-30M. There is probably some sort of scenario where this could work but a lot of things would need to line up.

Of course, I agree completely, especially about picking a lane and committing. What I was getting at is people don't really want a 72-win team, they want to believe that everything will go perfectly, and this 72-win team will somehow compete for a playoff spot. As ill-advised as it is to pursue that hopeful scenario if you are a baseball executive, it's still fun to believe.

I applaud the creativity. The only thing is we would not want the deadweight blocking players that could be part of the solution. If they were forced to spend to get above "grievance level", cut the player, eat the money and bank the prospect. I don't see it being at all likely, but it couldn't hurt to look for such an opportunity.

I could be wrong but I just don't see trading Jeffers as all that important because I would not anticipate him returning a prospect with high impact potential. Would we anticipate anything more than a 45FV prospect? I guess what I am saying is I need to see the specific return before I agree the Twins need to trade Jeffers.

The beauty of baseball is that we can dream of a scenario where Lewis is a 130 wRC+ guy, and Lee improves drastically, and they find a 1B, and Jenkins comes up and excels immediately, and the starting staff stays healthy and perform well, and they completely rebuild their BP, and they win the close games. In that scenario, as unlikely as it might be, the Twins could conceivably have a shot at a playoff position. This is what some fans want. If you ignore or don't recognize the future cost, why give up anything now no matter how low the odds are of it coming together?

I would find it much more interesting to watch a young team with real potential develop than watch another 70 or even 80 win team. Anyone hoping for them to patch the numerous holes and take another shot with this core can't complain that the twins are not interested in contending. The only merit in that strategy is appeasing fans of this mindset because the likely outcome is continued mediocrity.

I am not sure what place they would take but it sure seems unlikely to earn a playoff spot. This is why I have been among the biggest supporters of a rebuild. I just can’t see us contending next year and the 27 season is quite uncertain. Let’s talk about 2026. Our BP is non-existent. That would be fixable with the Dodgers budget but we have to convert a few starters. The good news is that we have several good candidates. The bad news is that will take the entirety of the 2026 season and will probably still be in progress in 2027. The OF also requires the transition of both corner OFers. The good news is that two of our top prospects are OFers and we have a couple other possibilities in Roden/Gonzalez. The bad news is that these top prospects still need a little Milb time. In other good news, we have Martin and Roden who deserve a shot and this gives us maximum opportunity to fill these starting positions with very good players. The bad news for 2026 is that this transition requires a focus on developing players and that process will take most of 2026. Where the INF We have no 1B which could be fixed. We have a 3B with significant potential but he is performing well below average. We have a SS whose defense would require offensive production well above average and he is well below average. The good news is we have a top prospect to transition. The bad news is he is not quite ready. The sum of these three parts tells me the best thing for this team is to focus on transitioning all of these players. How often can a team rebuild to this degree in 1 year? If it all came together, we would likely contend for a playoff spot in 2027 but we would lose Ryan, Lopez after 2027 and Buxton would be in his last year. The question becomes, should we forego acquiring several players, some of which have a good chance to be impact players through 2032-33 for a reasonable shot at making the playoffs in 2027. Keeping in mind, contention in 2027 assumes many things come together, do we want a one year shot or several years with the addition of what would be a considerable addition of talent from trading Ryan, Lopez, and perhaps Buxton.

You speak as if Falvey has to trade him. If Falvey can't get a good return, he can simply hold on to him. If Buxton wants out, he will have to be reasonably cooperative to facilitate his wishes. What they could do is offer to add a year or two to his deal and then pay part of it in the deal. That would probably look pretty good to a guy who's contract expires going into his age 35 season.

When you start with the absurd assumption of trading quality players for "low or mid-level prospects" the conclusion is most assuredly going to be equally absurd. If you honestly believe that's what would happen, the problem is that you believe the FO is dumber than every poster on this site because not one of us would even consider what you are suggesting. I understand your disappointment, but this is not an informed take.

Me too. I would also take Tong, Williams, and Kussow without hesitation which makes me wonder if the Mets would do it. As Similar deal for Ryan and I like our odds of putting a contender on the field in 28. Thanks for putting that up @Mike Sixel I am still unsure how teams will view Lopez in terms of being injury free.

I find the conceptual approach you are advocating to be more about strategy and direction while individuals players are the nuts and bolts of executing the strategy. Both important and both are interesting but as Kenny Rodgers once said, you got to know when to hold em and know when to fold em.

That sure could sway their plans. However, they could put Williams at 2B, Keaschall at 1B, Chowolsky at SS, and Culpepper at 3B. Jenkins / Rodriguez / Gonzalez / Martin / Roden in the OF and that's pretty promising. If nothing else, that's a whole different level of athleticism.

I don't have any ideas other posters have not already discussed. I have been saying for a while that I am hoping for up the middle infielders. Yes, the common wisdom is to take the best talent you can get but it would be very helpful if the best talent we can get is a middle infielder. If I thought Adian Miller could stick at short, he would probably be my first pick although if you told me Arias was the better prospect, I would not argue the point. Jett Williams would be a fun guy to watch but not quite the same level in my modestly informed opinion. A great 1B prospect would also be big just because our only hope is a conversion. Of course, 1B is also the position we envision having a guy with an elite bat. Basallo would be great but I think there is no chance the Orioles trade him. I have always liked Harry Ford. He is the guy I hoped they could swing in the Polanco deal.

I liked your post. Not because I prefer two 50 FV guys but because it's really hard to make a deal for 55+ prospects. I actually couldn't say which type of deal I preferred until I saw the actual options. It's a tough call. I just hope like hell they get it right. The players acquired from Ryan/Buxton/Lopez along with the other depth in our farm system certainly have the potential to produce a real contender. It also wouldn't hurt to win the draft lottery next summer. 😁

If they were to get a normal number of wins out of the extra expenditure that would equate to 5 wins. Do you think they are an 82-84 win team as constructed? I think you are at least 10 wins high.

It's quite reasonable that a very good veteran player does not want to be part of a rebuilding team so we can't blame Buxton for wanting out. I would assume that this would be a third reason teams clear out every decent veteran player when they rebuild. The second is cost and the most important reason is to acquire players that contribute to a contending team. I sure don't blame Buxton just and I also understand why he might get traded.

I would not even begin to think we have more than a general idea. Ask me in three years. I think we might finally know how to rate the Berrios trade at the end of this year. We might even have a reasonably good take on the Polanco trade by the end of this season as well but that one might be next year.

That makes absolutely no sense. Did you mean what is the over under on the number of times the Twins offense gets shutout? The record is 13 times so 30 is pure hyperbole.

One could argue that the July 1 roster will be a better indicator of the club's future. The assimilation of Jenkins and Culpepper is huge and a couple other guys like Able / Prielipp / Rodriguez / Gonzalez could also be key to ongoing success.

I sure hope they make significantly more change. We all know the definition of insanity.

I see this claim often but it's always a generalized statement that the revenue would offset the expenditure with no supporting math. The glaring problem with your math is that 48% of the increased revenue goes to the visiting team. Your assumed benefit is off my half to begin with. Then, you have the assumption of a 600K increase. When have the Twins every had a 600K increase in attendance? Never and it’s not close. They had a 500K increase after covid which is an extreme anomaly that is irrelevant. The increases in attendance for the 101 win team in 2019 was 344,000. Let's use a semi-reasonable assumption for attendance. If everything goes extremely well and attendance is increased by 400K (which is still extremely optimistic) at an average of $75 spend per fan. The revenue gain is 400,000 * 75 * .52 = $15.6M of gross revenue. Half of that revenue is concessions. I know what their arrangement is with vendors. If we assume a 50/50 split with the vendors absorbing all of the cost of product and personnel, the concession revenue on increased attendance is about $4M. Therefore, the total increase in revenue is about $12M. In estimating the ROI, you would multiply the $12M by the probability of success. If we think the odds of success are 2:1 in favor, the expected revenue is $8M. (12 X .666) If someone knows how the concession revenue works, please jump in.

With a little luck the entire outfield could be pleasantly surprising. Wouldn't it be nice to be pleasantly surprised for once? The optimist in me thinks Jenkins, Rodriguez, and Gonzalez all have the ability to make a Keaschall type impact. With a little luck things get very interesting in June/July.

You said since he left. Bader and MAT were since he left but somehow you discount them. Where letting him go is concerned, I don't care what Rosario did during his Twin's career. What matters in terms of the decision to let him go is what he produced after they let him go. I was glad to see him go so that I did not have to watch him take horribly undisciplined ABs and play poor defense.

You make it sound like they would have been better off keeping him. He was below replacement level in the years after they let him go. Just about anyone they put out there was better than him. What he did before he left is completely irrelevant. They also saved $24M from 22-24 that was invested elsewhere. We can debate how well that money was spent but it certainly was not a mistake to replace him and invest that money in guys like Bader and MAT.

I like the idea of Gonzalez at 1B but who knows if he can make that transition. I can't find any record of him ever playing the position in a game. You would think they would be giving him a shot there if they thought there was any possibility. Who knows, maybe they have him working on it over the winter. Martin does not have the bat to be a long-term answer at 1B and if his bat got that much better, he would be more valuable in LF or perhaps a trade for a 1B or a 3-team trading returning a 1B. I hear ya on Roden which is why I believe they would not wait until August to replace him with another prospect. However, it's way too early to give up on him. There has been many a great player that struggled in their 1st 150 ABs. I think he is a better possibility at 1B than Martin.