Major League Ready

He hit even better in 2024. I think you both have a point. Hopefully, there is a team that believes the 2026 version of Larnach will be like the well above average 2024 Larnach. That should yield an A baller with a shot at someday contributing. Seems reasonable.

Actually, I did address Rayn / Lopez when I stated that there is a significant future cost of keeping Ryan / Lopez. Here is the difference in how we see this situation. You like to say the team does not get better when your best players play for other teams which IMO only looks at the part of the equation you want to see. Obviously, the team would not be better in 2026-27 by trading Ryan / Lopez. KC traded Greinke before the 2011 season and actually improve from 67 to 71 wins. The players they received (Escobar & Cane) made the team in 2011. Escobar contributed 1.9 WAR and Cane had just 23 PAs. In 2012 they contributed 4 WAR so it was probably a wash in terms of if they got better. Here is the part you are not considering, the Royals had their best teams in a very long time from 2012-2015 and Greinke would have been gone for free agency. The Royals were slightly worse for a couple years when their win totals would have been in the mid 70s and they would arguably have never got to the WS without the players they got from the Greinke trade. They definitely got better for 3 years by trading Greinke. Of course, there are no guarantees the Twins will have similar success but there is definitely an opportunity cost in NOT trading Ryan / Lopez. The Twins are in a very similar spot. Keep Ryan/Lopez with a likely outcome of mediocrity or invest in the future. Ask yourself this question, if the twins had a real good team and could add a key piece by trading a prospect, would you do it? The two scenarios follow the same Logic, just a reversal of when the benefit is realized.

Absolutely not. Making changes in any business should be a product of critically evaluating the current state and developing a well-reasoned projection for the future state. The current state of the Minnesota Twins is that they are below average in the corner OF positions, 1B/3B and SS. They also have an exceptionally poor BP. So the question is can that be fixed in free agency. The answer is that they could not come close to fixing their problems through free agents. How about trades. There has not been a team in the bottom half of revenue that has ever solved this scenario through trades or a combination of trades and free agency. The next question is how well positioned for a rebuild while understanding prospects don’t work out. Here is how I see the Twins position. They can keep Ober and they have Bradley / Matthews / SWR / Abel at the major league level with several prospects likely to be ready over the next two seasons. They have several OF prospects with a much higher ceiling than their current corner OFers. They need to transition the corner spots. It’s a matter of how aggressively they do it. We are very weak at SS and have a very good prospect near ready. The best way for the Twins to build a BP is from BP is from numerous starting pitching candidates being transitioned. That’s much easier to do in rebuild mode. They have a deep farm system and two very good trade assets that would add potential impact players. They also have the #4 pick in the 2026 draft. Building this way would leave payroll open for a significant FA addition. The Twins are in an ideal position for a rebuild. They already have several promising young players here and several more that are close. That’s generally not the case with a rebuilding team. Perhaps most importantly, the realistic evaluation of 2026 is that they are not contending, not even close. They might have a shot at being in the mix in 2027 if things go really well with young players in which case they will be pretty good even if they are in rebuild mode. There is also the question of the 2027 season being severally shortened. Then, there is a significant future cost of keeping Ryan / Lopez to consider. A half-hearted rebuild diminishes the impact of rebuilding as does giving up future assets for a poor shot in 2026-27. That would be short-sighted and most likely to result in continued mediocrity.

There has been a lot of angst over a rebuild because most people just assume it will take 5 years. The Twins rebuild will either sink or swim by 2028. I am not saying they will be WS contenders but the relative strength and potential of the team will be evident by the start of 2028. They have an unusual number of players either ready or close. Some of the SPs (Bradley/Matthews/SWR/Abel) are already here and there are others that are close. Their top position player prospects (Jenkins/Culpepper/Rodriguez and Gonzalez should be ready during 2026 or 2027 at the latest. Tait enters 2028. The whole thing could yield nothing or they could have a good team for several years but that will likely take shape in a couple years.

You're right. They have always opted to put a quasi-contender on the field that if everything breaks right has a shot at winning a series or even two but very little chance of making it to the WS. It's a model of sustained mediocrity and there most recent statements make me think they may follow the same path.

Could not agree more. Nothing would be more incompetent than pivoting 180 degrees in the middle of a rebuild. If that happens, I suspect it would be ownership driven. Rebuilds are part of the landscape for teams outside the top 10 in revenue or perhaps even the top 4-5. They are good for the team outside the obvious short-term implications and rebuilding teams cash in assets that can contribute to a rebuilt team. IE Grienke for Cane and Escobar. Cleveland and Tampa do it as a matter of standard practice. Do we want to be "better" maybe even get close to 500 or do we want to build a contender? There is a cost and it's the chances of contending in 28 and beyond. Those chances will be diminished by whatever productivity would have come from selling off assets now. It's possible that's a complete bust but it's equally probable we get a pitcher better than Ryan for Ryan and have that player for 6-7 years. Granted, Ryan's production is much more likely as are the chances we won't be good over the next two years. Do we want to manage to mediocrity?

Nobody can say you have not thought this through! BTW ... I like the whole plan. The only thing I would do differently is remove Larnach. I would look to fill the OF spots between Jenkins / Rodriguez / Martin / Gonzalez / Rodon / Outman / Fedko and Rosario in roughly that order in terms of potential.

I agree we are deep in starting pitching. We have very little else. Zip in the BP. No 1B. Well below average at SS/3B. Great CF but the corners are very incomplete players with the exception of Martin who is still unproven and has a modest ceiling due to lack of power. This is not a team anywhere near serious contention and holding onto players that are not part of the solution diminishes the effectiveness of the rebuild. Invest 1 year into on boarding new corner OFers, a new SS, and rebuilding a decimated BP and auditioning young SPs. We can rebuild very quickly because of the SPing you highlight but if they are going to be legit, they will have to field better players than Larnach. I would like them to commit to a rebuild or not rebuild at all. We are about to see if the FO is committed or puts a just good enough product on the field to keep people in the seats.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, we just have different goals. Your approach maximizes the present. It makes perfect sense to make a young player "prove it" when a team is in contention. There is no doubt, they won't have 8 better hitters but the goal during a rebuild is not maximizing the present. I prefer an approach focused on building a contender and holding onto Larnach next year is counterproductive to that goal. Of course, that's an opinion not a fact but if we look at successful rebuilds, those teams gave priority to players who could be long-term solutions. Houston didn't keep anyone around because they didn't have 8 better hitters.

I can't speak for others but they are probably thinking the same thing I am. Larnach is an adequate hitter but there is a good chance we can get that level of hitting out of someone else that will provide better defense and base running. Wallner is in a slightly different boat and probably worth another look because he has at times been quite potent, and he has 4 years of control remaining. What's the point of keeping Larnach around if the team realistically is looking at 2028 to contend? We are more likely to get to a point of contention if his roster spot is utilized to develop a contributor.

Why would they use Gasper over Clemmons who is a better hitter and defender. If Gasper makes the team it's as a back-up catcher but I hope they find a better alternative.

Not a chance in hell they make even one phone call regarding any of these free agents.

I am much more concerned about them putting together a deep lineup. Larnach is simply not a solution. He needs to be traded so that his playing time can be given to someone with more upside as a complete player. Lewis and Lee were well below average and should be treated as suspect. If they get it together, great but the Twins need to find a number of other potential solutions. Keascall and Buxton are the only two players that deserve to be in the top of a MLB lineup. They need new blood. Jenkins, Culpepper, and Rodriquez are really key. Those three have the potential to put this team back on the map. Martin and Gonzalez could help too and they might hit enough to be near the top of the order.

Try answering the question that was posed instead of conclusions with no substantive support.

It's so hard to predict. The team that has what we want might not be the team that wants him the most. IMO, the most important thing is to get a high impact player back. Think of it this way. When we're looking for a piece to add to what we thought was a good core, we wanted the highest impact player we could get, not two pretty good guys. Moving Ryan needs to accomplish the same thing. The goal is to give up two years of Ryan when we are not contending for 6-7 years of an equivalent or better player when we have a shot at being a contender. Obviously, we don't know that we will be a contender 3 or 4 years from now, but we can be quite certain we won't be one next year.

Why would teams looking to improve their chances for contention by trading for Ryan,. trade away really good players that can contribute immediately. It's a marginal net gain for them so the return is diminished. Would you rather get a guy that will contribute 2.5 WAR per season immediately or 4 WAR per season starting in 2027? I will take the later knowing that we are not going to be a contender immediately. Take the premium talent over immediate gratification. Now, if you can get a prospect similar to Walker Jenkins that is very close to ready, great but prioritizing immediacy over production is not a winning strategy.

People that have amassed $400M don't think short-term when it comes to investments.

Alternatively, the key word is rebuilding. Teams in the bottom half of revenue do it all the time. Can you name a team in the bottom half of revenue that has not gone through some form of rebuild in the past decade? Fans don't like it but it's inevitable. You can stomp your feet and insist it's an unwillingness to spend but that insistence requires we ignore that it's simply part of the game for any team not among the highest revenue teams. It also requires we ignore this team is not remotely close to contention and the likely result of filling a few holes is mediocrity. There is an alternative possibility they want to build an actual contender. That's not likely to happen by propping up what is now a very weak team.

Makes perfect sense but I am hoping for a more optimistic end game to play out over 2026-27. I am hoping Jenkins and Culpepper step up in the same fashion Keaschall did last year. Those two have the highest probability and should be here the soonest. Then, we have the less certain guys who hopefully show up a little later in the year. It would be big if Rodriguez would realize his potential. He has a very complete game including hitting LHP. Martin is the 4th OFer in that scenario and he can play a little 2B. In this scenario, Lewis just needs to step up to league average offensively now that his defense is above average and he would be a nice complementary player. This leaves catcher and 1B. Best case scenario for Tait is 2027 and it's going to take them a couple years to rebuild the BP. However, we have a pretty good shot at having a fun team to watch in 2027. In my optimistic view, this could be a very good core by 2028 with a lot of cheap talent and payroll room to add a significant free agent. We also have a top pick next year. Getting a stud prospect in trade for Ryan and a very good prospect for Lopez could be the icing on the cake in building a team with a real shot.

I think it's going to be that kind of year Doc. Unless they drastically change course, it will be a year where they audition solutions. It would be nice to have someone as athletic as Fedko or Roden at 1B. I would love to know which players among the group you mentioned they have working on 1B drills over the winter. Is it possible they have GG or Rosario working on some 1B? It's a potential career boost for any of the guys we are talking about so I would hope the plan has already been put in place.

This is one of the first posts I have seen that actually considers how the transition between acquired players and prospects. My guess is they are confident Jenkins is up this year. Years of control don't change if he is in AAA for 5 weeks or 5 months so they are bringing him up relatively early baring an unforeseen struggle at AAA. They are not spending money when they expect Jenkins and Martin has earned the other corner spot. Not to mention they will give Roden an opportunity. Same basic story with Culpepper. Plus, they probably have not given up on Lee. SS cost a lot and often fade at least somewhat relatively young. They are not going there with Lee and Culpepper ready. I also have a suspicion they acquire a prospect SS in trade. 2B is Keaschall and Lewis is getting another half-season at least before they would cut bait with him. Catcher could definitely be a 1 year deal but with little of the horizon I could see a 2 year deal for Caratini. 1 year for Lois Arraez to build his value after a relatively bad year could make sense for both parties. If I were betting on any free agent going to the Twins it would be Arraez. BP has a lot of needs. I would like to see them sign quality RPs to multi-year deals. We need a lot of help and they have the potential of a good return at the deadline. Do you see a position other than 1B or catcher where they would sign a 1-year free agent or any FA?

I was coming at it from what would be the point of signing those players. Why would anyone advocate abandoning the rebuild they have already started to acquire average players. While I agree that's what they have done in the past, they were patching holes on teams that had a chance. It makes zero sense at this point and they are not blocking spots and spending money on that type of player in a rebuild other than 1B and RPs.

I agree but why use a mediocre veteran as the bar? Signing that type of player would insure they remain bad or mediocre at best. Why would any of us advocate or care if they sign a mediocre veteran. They would be better off staying with the prearb guys they have and hoping for improvement. The type of free agent that would matter and that any of us care about is simply not a guy you sign and then replace. Everyone advocating for free agents is speaking conceptually and assuming they can play the acquired and free agents. They are bad at several positions. Therefore, they would need to sign at least 2 if not 3 meaningful free agent position players to have a reasonable shot at contending.. Then, you still have no BP. That would cost a minimum of $30M to fix. It's absolute folly to think they are going to buy a team and if they were to buy a team, it's even more absurd to think they would replace those players with prospects. The only way those prospects get a chance is through injury. Of course, you already know this. Rebuilding teams don't sign expensive veterans, especially when they have guys expected to be ready soon. The Yankees held of on SS when Volpe was in the wings. The Twins are not signing a SS, 2B, 3B or OFer. Arraez, I could see it if the price tag is modest.

You are framing it to please yourself. I said no teams outside the top revenue teams have had sustained success as that poster had used as a measure. I simply stated that it probably makes sense to look at a metric that had enough data points to draw a conclusion. Therefore, perhaps it made sense to look at teams that had made the playoffs. If you think we should view it through a lens of a metric that is not achieved by any team in the bottom half of revenue, knock yourself out.

How does that work. Let's say they go sign or trade for a really good SS. They are not replacing that player with Culpepper. They would need to replace Lewis or Keaschall with Culpepper. They would be in a similar position if they replaced Wallner except 3 of their top 10 prospects are OFers. IDK how they get around blocking prospects if they replace these positions with a high-quality veteran. Either the veteran starts or the prospect starts but they can't both be everyday players. They were below average in the corner OF spots, 1B/3B and SS so one free agent is not making a dent. They would need to replace at least 2-3 position players. In other words, they can either rebuild or they can switch coarse in the middle of this rebuild and giving prospects would need to wait for injuries to get a shot.