Major League Ready

Not factually wrong. Just fails to consider the odds of a player drafted as a SS remaining a short stop. If two guys have a 15% chance each, the odds of one of them making it is 30%. You can make the very simplistic conclusion that Falvey has had zero success but that requires you ignore the fact that most players drafted at SS end up playing different positions. You have to ignore the fact that these players are drafted because SS are generally the best fielders/athletes and it is expected many of them will play a different position if they ever make it to MLB. When I look at Lewis and Lee, I certainly don't come to the conclusion Falvey can't pick guys that can play SS because I doubt that was a major consideration when drafting them. Lee was considered to have slipped to #8 and was considered here and elsewhere to be a good value at 8. Frankly, I have never liked him and have said so before he ever got to the majors but nobody here was complaining about that pick. Should they have picked someone else if they were unsure Lewis could stick at SS. I don't think so. I am pretty sure they always had doubts Lewis would stick but his athleticism would allow him to play another position well and everyone believe his bat would play. If the Falvey sucks conclusion makes you feel good, knock yourself out but it's a very simplistic view.

I don't think they ever believed Lee would was a SS. However, if the odds of one of them being a SS is 10%, why would you be surprised that 2 attempts did not produce a SS. Seems the problem is your math.

What percentage of players that make it to the big league that were drafted as a SS become stick at SS? Anyone know? My guess would be 15% and that might be high.

Caraballo received a $150K signing bonus last year from the Giants so I would guess the Twins have no problem paying $100K to sign him.

You might be right in terms of superstars but let's be realistic. How many players have the twins had in the past decade that put up 6 WAR like Cain did in 2015. If we take a more encompassing look at roster building, the modest revenue, trading for prospects is extremely important. Take the 2025 Brewers for example. If we look at the top 50% of the 2025 Brewers roster (top 13) by WAR, 3 were drafted, 1 (Yehlich) was acquired as a proven player, 2 were international draftees, and 7 were players acquired as prospects. Look at the 99 win 2023 Rays. two-thirds or their WAR was from prospects acquired in trade. The 2016 Guardians team that went to the WS produced 44% of their WAR from players acquired as prospects. This percentage from prospects acquired in trade is about average for the Guardians over the past 20 years. Same is true for the Rays. We hold them up as an example but don't want to follow their lead.

I don't understand. How did they make money on this pick?

Only one team in the bottom half of revenue has won the WS in the past 20 years. That would be KC in 2025. Their best player as well as their starting SS were acquired by trading Greinke. If we want to look at a larger sample, we can look at a more realistic measure like making the playoffs. If that's the measure, you will find that trading for prospects has produced almost as much as drafting. Cleveland and Tampa would have 1/3 of the number of playoff appearances without having traded for prospects. Last year's Milwaukee team also had several prospects acquired in trade. I do agree the chances of a trade meaning a WS win are very small but the chances trades contribute to getting in the playoffs with a team that has a real shot are very significant.

I wish I could bet on an over/under of 82 wins as constructed but they won't be "as constructed".

We all have our opinions as to how many games they would win "as constructed". We also have an actual performance record for one-third of a season "as constructed". They performed at a 57 win pace so how do you come to the opinion that they are an 80-win team? That's a very large gap. The only way to come to that conclusion is to assume, several mediocre performers become markedly better, the acquisitions you suggest work-out extremely well, Ryan, Lopez stay healthy and a couple other guys step-up because Ober did not look like he is part of the solution, and everyone stays healthy. Hey, it can happen which is the cool thing about baseball for fans. However, a front office managing to these assumptions is incompetent unless of course you get extremely lucky.

Unless they are willing to spend at record levels, investing good prospect capital in this team would indicate they are either incompetent or perfectly satisfied to put a mediocre product on the field year after year. I am not saying they won't trade good prospects and not spend but it would be to appease fans because it certainly is not the best strategy if they want to actually contend. I have wondered if people were right about their lack of desire to build a serious contender. This off-season will make it clear if they are satisfied to be a perennial fringe playoff team.

Good point on visibility through sales tax records. That would be $41.50 per person so that's a pretty viable indication of the average ticket price. It's the other half of this equation (concessions) that's a not so clear. In this discussion, concession revenue has been approached as if the Twins get 100% of the revenue. Delaware North is their concessions partner. What percentage do they get and of course there are product costs although gross profit margins have to be 80 plus percent, I would assume the staff are employees of Delaware North. My guess is the Twins take a percentage. That would make it transparent between teams for calculating the revenue split.

If we use $35 for the average ticket price, I doubt the average fan spends $100 on concessions. This article on concession revenue estimates $56 on concessions. That would be $91 so the $100 estimate seems pretty reasonable.

I can't find any source that suggests the average spend per fan is $140. I have seen a low of $52 and a high of $84. This article on the average cost for all MLB teams lists the costs for the Twins at $171 for a family of 4 which is only $35/person. Even if we use an estimate of $100 Fan which is almost triple the cost according to this article ... 300,000 Fans X $100 = $30M X .52 = $15.6M

I Googled how much does the average fan spend at a MLB game and got a lot of different answers but your estimated average spend is double the highest estimates I found.

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.