Major League Ready

If you look back, I was responding to a post from RpR. To paraphrase, he was basically saving good we signed garlick because we should avoid rookies. So, we are in agreement in general in terms of transitioning our good prospects. I don't know why you would think signing Garlick for 750K would be any impediment at all.

Heard an interview with Chris Antonetti a couple days ago. Cleveland debuted 17 rookies this year. Mid and small market teams absolutely must develop and insert young talent. This is blatantly obvious if you look at how any of the successful below average revenue teams were built. Oakland / Tampa / Milwaukee are other recent examples. Even Houston with above average revenue was built primarily on developing prospects. Your constant harping against young players suggests a complete lack of awareness to the rest of the league and how successful small and mid-market teams are built. I would bet you can't show me a successful below average revenue team where 80% of their WAR did not come from players that were drafted or traded for with less than 500 ABs or less than 150 IP. Are you open minded enough to check the facts. Just go to Fan Graphs and pull up any successful team from the last couple decades and look at how the players were acquired.

This is something that quickly illustrates the relative level of experience assessing business issues / strategies. People who regularly assess business issues do not offer an opinion until they have a significant portion of the information. Even, then, you will not get the kind of matter of fact conclusions we see from sports fans with limited information on a constant basis.

There are a couple others that could be taken off. Contreras, perhaps even Garlick for position players. Would anyone take Enlow in rule 5 at this point. They could cut Pagan loose as well. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Do you really think the manager is concerned about a RPs save total? It has nothing to do with being or not being a save situation. They want to retain availability.

Those buyouts are paid in 2022 right. If so, the IRS says they should be recognized as part of 2022 from a legal perspective. How the Twins recognize these costs in terms of setting the 2023 budget IDK. Hopefully what's done is done but previous year financial performance generally has some influence on the following year budget in other companies / industries. What lies ahead has influence as well. They have Gray / Mahle / Urshela & Maeda coming off for sure. I could also see Kepler and/or Polanco being traded. They are in a good position to invest.

Odd logic. The manager puts their best RPs in the 9th. Yet, the owners are stupid? Were the owners making that decision or was the manager? Of course, more recently the FO and analytics department are influencing the decision. You are describing different ways to use the same guy and somehow the owners are stupid for paying that guy.

I WAR in free agency cost $8M. They can probably hire 80 people filling these various roles for that same amount. I would sure hope the effort of these 80 people spread across the entire team and farm system would net more than 1 win per season.

This is basically the parallel to the development of analytics departments / personnel. Teams have added a ton of personnel. I heard an interview with someone from the St Louis organization last year and he said they have added 100 people. Not adding these positions like other teams would be the equivalent to not developing analytics.

I am thinking we trade him if we land Rodon because I don't know what we can count on the year after TJ. I don't think it makes sense in this scenario to put Ryan or Ober in the BP. We also have Varland / SWR and Paddack for depth. Sands could start too if we were hit hard by injuries.

After all the discussion, I took another shot. Add Carlos Rodon / Danby Swanson / Navarez and $8.5M budget for a BP arm. $6M over budget. If JP has a problem with the overage, I would pitch looking to trade one or both Kepler / Polanco mid-season which gets us closer to budget. Either one could also be traded during the winter but the safer route would be to not rely on the rookies right out of spring training. We also have $30M coming off next year. We can borrow so to speak from 2024 with Varland / SWR / Martin and Julien all on the brink. *** Sano's buyout is not included in the budget and probably should be. C: Ryan Jeffers ($0.70M) 1B: Luis Arraez ($4.50M) 2B: Jorge Polanco ($7.50M) 3B: Gio Urshela ($9.00M) SS: Danby Swnason ($21.00M) LF: Alex Kirilloff ($0.70M) CF: Byron Buxton ($15.00M) RF: Max Kepler ($8.50M) DH: Jose Miranda ($0.70M) 4th OF: Larnach or Wallner ($0.70M) Utility: Nick Gordon ($0.70M) Utility: Gilberto Celestino ($0.70M) Backup C: Navarez ($7.00M) SP1: Sonny Gray ($12.00M) SP2: Tyler Mahle ($8.00M) SP3: Carlos Rodon ($26.00M) SP4: Joe Ryan ($0.70M) SP5: Bailey Ober ($0.70M) RP: Jhoan Duran ($0.70M) RP: Jorge Lopez ($3.00M) RP: Griffin Jax ($0.70M) RP: Jorge Alcala ($1.00M) RP: Caleb Thielbar ($2.00M) RP: Josh Winder ($0.70M) RP: Moran ($0.70M) RP: Budget ($8.5M) Payroll is 0.99% over budget

I didn't mean to suggest they were exactly the same. I agree he won't hit for the same average but his OBP could be even higher and he should hit for quite a bit more power. So, could he equal or even greater offensive impact. IDK and I wouldn't bet on it but it's an intriguing possibility.

How about Lewis / Rodon and $10M on a BP arm vs Correa? Which option produces more WAR?

Close enough but what you have left out the most important difference in our positions. We have a boat load of evidence as to which strategies have been successful for other teams. I have studied all of the successful teams with relatively the same or less revenue and that examination leaves little doubt as to which strategies have been successful. I have offered those examples and described how anyone can check this out for themselves. Chief and others refuse to evaluate the evidence and insist we should follow a different strategy. Those strategies have far / far less history of success, but some here insist we should follow bad strategy because we have not effectively executed what have proven to be best practices. I am saying get better at practices that have been proven most effective instead of following strategy we know to be less effective. In the real world, the latter gets you removed from a leadership position in a hurry. Now, if anyone wants to actually offer tangible proof / examples where drafting and trading for unproven players / prospects were not the driving force of success, I am wide open to re-evaluating which strategies are most successful.

That would be great. Let's add Varland and SWR pitching effectively by that time as well. BTW ... Julien was OB 4 out of 5 ABs last night. He could be Arraez with more power and better base running. Obviously, the AFL is not MLB but we can dream, can't we?

Actually, I don't think there has been anyone more vocal about the benefits of building this type of flexibility. Last year when people were having a fit about moving Berrios I said future success was all about building a staff from within because of what it would allow in free agency. The difference is that I would use that money on the best pitching possible. Don't tell me they refuse to invest in pitching. That could and should change if as you say we are in unique position which is exactly what I have been saying for a year. I submitted my plan and it was $135M and the 25% assumes a $140M payroll. My posts at the time show I was OK with them signing Donaldson. I was even more in favor in the deal to move him when others had a fit that we got worse at 3B. What did we hear.

You quote me asking for examples and then come back with the same rhetoric. If you have point, there would be plenty of examples. The capacity to just ignore anything that seriously challenges a position goes with fanaticism. I get this but when the question is asked repeatedly you would think a few people would stop to ask why other teams in similar positions don't sign these elite players. What do you know that all of the GMs of similar teams don't know.

You ignored how all of the winners were built. This particular failure you are focused on is absolutely irrelevant unless you are trying to figure out how to not get to the WS for 30 years. I am sure you think there is great wisdom in your position but you are demonstrating why some fans (of all organizations) are dismayed by FO decisions. You think not getting to the WS for 30 years is relevant to strategic decisions.

Show me an example of a team that went to the world series while paying 25% to one player which is what Correa at $35M of a $140M budget. You also refuse to acknowledge that Harper / Betts / Freeman / Goldsmidt / Arenado and Springer all play for teams that could pay 2 players Correa's salary and have the Twins budget left over. You also apparently don't understand that the lower revenue necessitates higher productivity per dollar spent. This is not a theory. It's a mathematical certainty. In other words, it's not a quantity of quality thing. Forget about what I think. Do you know something all the other GMs of average revenue (or below) teams don't know because they don't sign these players. You are able to find plenty of meaningless comparisons like teams with significant incremental revenue. No kidding a team with an extra 75 or 150M can sign high AAV free agents that the twins don't sign. Yet, somehow the fact these players are not signed by below average revenue teams escapes you.

No doubt they have the capacity. The question is the relative effectiveness of spending such a high percentage on one player? I am sure you have seen/heard or read this discussion in various form of media. The common wisdom is that it is not. Do you think Houston is poorly run? They could pay Correa twice with their incremental revenue and they let him go?

I knew you would not actually address the issue. If the Twins were the only below average revenue team in MLB you would have a point. Obviously, the point is how teams have been successful NOT how they have failed. The facts are very clear that successful average revenue teams have been a product of drafting players and trading for prospects. The reality is obvious if one is in the least bit willing to educate themselves on past winners. Your refusal to address my position with facts would be understandable if they were not so easy to validate. You damn well know you are ignoring the facts and if you could disprove my point you would have done so. Instead your response is a smart ass answer. We can all ignore facts when they absolutely obliviate our positions if we are willing to remain uniformed.

You are ignoring history which very clearly illustrates the stars aligning in our farm system is by far the most important element to any average or below average revenue team building a dominant team. I am including trading established players for prospects or players that have minimal major league experience in "the starts aligning" in our farm system as trading for prospects has been far more impactful than free agents or trading for established players among these teams. This is how average and below average revenue teams have been successful. Believe what you want to believe but you are ignoring the facts. We had Correa and we were under 500. Texas signed Seager and Semien and they were under 500. LA has Ohtani and Traut and they are under 500. They won 68 and 73 games respectively. What matters and what we should be concerned about are decisions like drafting Cavaco instead of Corbin or Stott. Don't agree. Great but show examples of winning teams in these markets that back-up your opinion.

Yes, their roster situations were better but that's not the primary difference between the teams that signed these players. With the exception of Machado, these teams all have significantly more revenue. The fact that these teams could all sign at least two of these contracts and still have the Twins budget left over is a far more significant difference. Let's also recognize that SanDiego has one 90 win season since the turn of the century and that was exactly 90 in 2010. Not exactly a franchise that has such great success that we should follow their practices.

That makes a lot of sense. They need to come up with two SPs to replace Mahle / Gray between Varland / SWR / Winder / Paddack and perhaps Sands or Dobnak could surprise us. If they have that depth, they can easily afford to go out and get a true front of the rotation guy in free agency that is at least as good as Gray and Younger.

I think you make a very good point here in terms of needing to shake things up a bit. What makes that really tough is we have so many unknowns with great upside that it may require some patience. One the position players side ... Will Lewis make it back mid-year. Will Kirilloff's wrist be OK? Can Miranda play an adequate 3B. Larnach looked great at times. Will he adapt to this level? Is Wallner the answer? Are Julien and Martin the next Miranda type breakout? That's a lot of unresolved questions. However, those guys getting a chance and working out is a far more effective way to build a winner. On the pitching side, we are going to lose two top of the rotation guys next year. I saw a big difference with Ober's new slider and Ryan had a good year but we don't want to be back to 2020/21 using retreads. Winder is a question mark. Will Paddack be back sometime next year. What are we going to get the all-start Lopez was with Baltimore or the mediocre guy we got after the trade deadline. Are Varland and SWR the answer. They need to get in to the mix this year. Hopefully, that could be part of shaking things up that could be done on the fly. The biggest question ... Should we put Duran in the rotation. Now is the time if they are going to give it a shot. Figure out if he takes one of those pitching vacancies next year. If it does not pan out they could put him back in the pen and work on transitioning Varland and SWR later this year. My shake-up would be to try Duran in the rotation, and I would trade one of Arraez or Polanco if a good return could be had. I say this knowing major established leaguers don't often get traded for other established major leaguers. Tampa has done great trading those types of players for MLB ready or near ready talent. One of Polanco / Arraez is your 2B and Gordon / Martin or Julien are the back-ups. I also trade Kepler and bring in Hannigar and another back of the BP arm.