Major League Ready

I agree and this framing of how to proceed is fair and honest. I also think nearly everyone is solely focused on a plan to compete next year while ignoring the near impossibility of getting a top 3 capable of contending in one off-season. At least it's nearly impossible without a combination of a lot more revenue and an extraordinary farm systems like the Padres tapped into last year.

Now you are just framing this up to suit your needs. For starters, your math is technically correct but we are not talking about calendar years. Of course, you know this because Cave was here for 4 seasons. 2018/2019/2020/2021 so either you are trying to mislead us or you are just ignoring basic logic for convenience. Also, the context of the conversation was clearly adding pitching next year. Everyone here knows we could trade away our established players and rebuild. Are you really telling us what you meant was they should take an approach targeting 4-5 seasons from now?

Go back to 2011 and look at the posts on this site. The majority of fans ALWAYS think the future is now. Year after year the cry was we are ready go for it now. Fans are simply much more willing to trade away the future compared to GMs. It's a lot easier to take that stance when you are not accountable. This team has far better odds of building a winner via developing internal pitching. Therefore, any strategies that don't facilitate that goal are inferior strategies. Prospects volatility is way overplayed for three reasons. The most important one being that a below average revenue team has no chance if their prospects don't work out. Second, free agents also fail at a significant rate. Third, trades for prospects or yet to be established players has a bigger impact on building a team than trading prospects for established players for below average revenue teams. Leveraging the future with so many unknowns is very poor management practice. Falvey and Lavine are very skilled regardless of what some people here like to believe. I will be shocked if they trade away any significant assets this year.

I actually agree that Kepler is not the type of prize Oakland would look for in a trade for Manaea. I was just being Captain Obvious pointing out the considerable added value of three years of control. Frankly, I think trading for any of the highly coveted pitchers mentioned here is going to cost considerably more than what has been discussed. Teams in the Twins position generally don't leverage the future for the present so I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

3 years vs 1 substantially influences trade value, especially when it's a cost controlled player in their prime. One year just does not bring back that much in trades anymore as we have seen with numerous examples unless you are talking a Mookie Betts level player. Trading players controlled for 3 or more years for 1 year of control is a good way to ensure long-term mediocrity.

Baseball Trades shows this trade favors Oakland but it's fairly close.

Losing Maeda was a big blow. If he was not hurt and they sign a "Stroman type" and Pineda and we have a good team. Probably not a contender but the only way this team gets to contention is if our pitching prospects develop as we hope. The other option is basically the approach San Diego took. However, we would need to aim higher than Darvish and Snell. The trade proposals mentioned here for Alcantara and Montas seem waaaaay short t me. We don't have any blue chip prospects with the possible exception of Kirilloff but even Kirilloff is not the type of player Miami would look for if they traded Alcantara or if Oakland traded Montas. Therefore, I would think we would have to offer a number of our top prospects. Look what we got for 1 year and 2 months of Berrios. My guess is that Alcantra would cost us Kirilloff + Jeffers + Balazovic + one of Winder / Enlow / Sands and I still don't know if that would do it.

Yep... Who would want a pitcher like Carlos Rodon. He was a bargain basement price at 1yr/ $3M or Anthony Desclafani on a 1/yr /$6M deal or Robbie Ray 1yr/$8M? Why would anyone want to sign these guys?

I highlighted the big question. Plans to retool, even for a year, will be in the minority here. IMO, that approach makes the most sense. My guess is that they will retool with an eye on 2023 while putting a better product on the field in 2022. The best way to do that IMO is to spend on the high quality (young) free agent they can get to come here and be part of the next window of contention. Fill one other slot with Pineda or equivalent and let Dobnak / Winder / Balazovic and others fight it out for the 5th spot. Add a SS and a couple RPs and we will have a plus 500 team that could even stay in the race if everything goes well. Youthful SPs played significant roles on playoff teams this year. I think over the course of 2022 they will look to work Miranda and Martin into the lineup. They will give 3-5 SP prospects a look over the course of 2022 looking to establish SPs to fill out the rotation with Ryan and Ober. Establishing those SPs would give them the budget to tweak the roster in 2023.

According to baseball trades the median value for Alcantara and Montas is 123.5 and I would guess they are not getting traded unless the receiving team pays dearly. How are you going to come up with the prospect capital to make this happen. I don't think we have a single elite prospect that it would take to get either Alcantara or Montas. Seems like we would have to trade a boat load of our top 10 prospects including Miranda, Ober, and Ryan. Curious to see what you would propose.

It's pretty simple really. He would have cost $10M+ for any team that traded for him. He produced .9 WAR this season. Therefore, he had negative value. Teams like Atlanta had options like David Duvall as a free agent for $5M and he produced 2.4 WAR. Why would a team pay twice as much and trade prospects for a significantly inferior player?

Most people are looking to resolve all of our problems by opening day 2022. IMO, that's not very feasible and doing so mitigates our chances of getting there soon. I have seen many instances where companies created an even bigger mess because they were unwilling to take the time to implement a plan that was a better long-term solution because they insisted it be done in a given timeframe. This does not mean they can't spend some money and field a good team but putting together a team in one off-season that rivals the Astros, White Sox, and Rays or the Red Sox and Yankees and they spend a bunch this off-season is simply highly improbable. I will gladly take Chris Taylor and play him at SS until we find an ideal SS. Taylor would continue to be an asset to the team for several years. Sure, there are a number of other paths we could take but getting Taylor is not problematic.

What failure to develop? They developed quite a few very good BP arms. Most of them just pitch for other teams.

The measure is Wins Above Replacement. Given 1B has more offensive production on average than 2B the replacement player at 1B needs to produce more than someone at 2B to have the same impact on WAR. Once again, you think someone else is an "idiot" (your words) because you don't understand this analytical construct. I would bet the people who developed that stat have formal educations in quantitative measures and other credentials that actually got them that job. Yet, if you don't understand, you assume the problem is that the people who actually have the credentials to have this job are idiots.

That's for sure. Most pitchers are ineffective long before they turn 38.

I thought parts of your financial discussion were quite reasonable. However, the discussion about “why do baseball teams need to make a profit” is a horribly flawed concept because the assumption is our financial disadvantage would go away if teams just did not need to make a profit. The reality is the Twins would be at an even greater financial disadvantage because the team with more revenue also have more profit. Therefore, spending at break-even for example would widen the disparity in available payroll available to those teams to sign free agents. The appreciation in value logic is also flawed. Company valuations are a product of profitability. If profitability goes away, so does appreciation in value. If the norm became break-even, baseball teams would have very little value. Finally, if an owner is willing to basically donate normal earnings or go so far as to take money out of their pocket, I sure hope they would donate that money to a cause much more worthy than a couple extra wins. I think the money would be far better used to feed or shelter the homeless, shelter battered women or cure disease.

Grienke's ERA for the 2nd half of the season was 4.95. His K/9 was 6.15 and his WAR was negative. He will be 38 years old next year. Relying on guys in their late 30's is not the path to building a sustainable winner unless that guy is Nelson Cruz.

I am with you, Mike. Time to shake it up. We have relatively poor roster construction. Reshape it. We also need to invest time in developing pitching and many here are unwilling to make that investment. Many ardent fans just can't accept investing in development. Their answer is to buy a team through free agency and trade away prospects for the here and now. This is simply not an effective approach for a below average revenue team and this has been proven around the league. I am (using your word) gobsmacked by how often the tactics of successful and unsuccessful teams are ignored. The Mets, Phillies, and Padres made all kinds of trades and invested in free agents. They all failed. In the case of the Mets and Phillies, repeatedly. Boston and San Francisco tweaked rosters. Tampa Bay traded Snell and let Morton go. They got lambasted by everyone. The national media proclaimed they were punting 2022. Some inferred they were incompetent. We should all pay a little more attention to how winners are built. Sure the big trades can be impactful but how many under the radar trades for A ballers turns out huge. Sure, trading for Tatis Jr. is a little lucky but there have been plenty of great players acquired for next to nothing. Those are the trades that really tilt the scales. Gil and Ynoa are not all that proven yet but how much better would we look if we had those two now. Fans are hyper focused on the right now and the block buster trades and that's not how a mid market team builds a contender. Tampa's trade for Snell was brilliant. Mejia is not as valuable as Snell but he is a good inexpensive role player will 4 years of control. They also got a SP that might be better than Snell with the exception of Snell's one exceptional year. He is already playing at the MLB level. Plus, they got a 50 FV catcher and a 21 yo A ball pitcher that had a .857 WHIP last year. This is how a team without limited financial resource builds a contender.

It is virtually assured you and I will disagree. You absolutely ignored the questions I posed regarding the impact of these decisions in 2023 and beyond. So, try answering those questions before you conclude (without consideration) that taking a a year to invest in retooling the team will result in mediocrity. San Diego built a team with a bright future through the draft as a result of being bad from 2011-2019. They had five 90 loss seasons and four 90 loss seasons in in a row from 2016-2019. Don't stop to actually consider the facts (that San Diego gave up a lot) and are now positioned worse than they when these trades were made. Assume the impossible should be done. It is hard to ignore the result of the questions I posed would result in a better team in 2023. This type of fanatical "it has to be done right now" approach is just fine for fans. Ignoring the questions I posed gets you fired as a GM or anywhere else in the real world. So, just keep assuming the team never follows the strategy you think should be implemented because they are incompetent just like so many did when the Rays traded Snell.

Like Snell and Darvish? By any objective view, reconstructing the Twins roster in one off-season to the point of realistic contention is highly unlikely. As DC Twin noted, absolutely everything would have to go right. While that is always possible, we should consider the cost / downside of following a San Diego type strategy. Would the team be better off in 2023 and going forward if they focused on developing pitching internally which means playing those prospects at the major league level? Would we be better off in 2023 if we trade Donaldson now and bring up Miranda? Could there be benefit in doing a Peralta with Alcala and trying him in the pen? Would we be better off trying Jax and others in the BP? What is the cost? The Padres sent the Rays a SP with a higher FV than any pitching prospect we have in our system and he is already graduated to the major league level. They also got another pitcher roughly equivalent to Enlow or Winder plus a catcher with a 50FV value. They also got Franciso Mejia who had 4 years of team control. The guys they sent to Darvish were most 19 year olds but they got a very good corner OF prospect and a CFer that had good years last year and a SS with potential too. The Padres gave up a ton. Darvish was really bad the 2nd half and he is going into his age 35 season. They have $37M on the books for him the next 2 years. My bet is they could have done better in free agency for the next 2 years and gave up nothing. Snell produced 2.1 fWAR and 1.4 bWAR. His salary is reasonable $29.7M for the next two years but again, they probably could have gotten Snell’s production in free agency and gave up nothing. Why do we insist our FO pay this type of premium for a longshot in 2022? They are not going to push their chips in betting on 2022 and we should not be disappointed if they take a year to retool. The cost could very well be mediocrity or worse for several years. Can anyone cite an example of a team that added 3 highly productive outside SPs in one off-season, especially a team with below average revenue, where that team went on to contend?

Probably. However, I don't think this is the right question. Is trading him the best way to build a contender and how long will that take. That's the right question. Polanco is really important to this lineup. Yes, we could go with Arraez at 2B which is his best defensive position. One of them should be traded, IMO. If it's Polanco, it needs to be a big haul. Otherwise, trade Arraez a part of a trade to get a SS or pitching. Trading Polanco extends the time it takes us tom get back in contention. We have a very good chance of ending 2022 with a pitching staff that is homegrown. Extend Buxton and establish this homegrown staff and we have a great shot at contention for several years.

What number did you come up with for payroll to form this opinion? A true top of the rotation guy is $30M and if you are looking to contend this year you need a 2nd good SP so let's say $15M. What are we budgeting for Buxton? 20M/yr? The top SS guys are going to be 25-30M/yr. That comes to $170M/yr without spending any money on the BP, correct? I would bet a lot of money they don't spend $170 or $160 for that matter. I would be pleasantly surprised if they spent $150M. My guess is they spend $135-140M.

What does Laweryson have for pitches / velocity and command. Does he have the raw stuff to suggest he could be on the rise?

I highlighted your comment about developing SPs because so many of the plans / comments here require landing top free agent SPs which is a real longshot. Of course, we could trade for pitching now like the Padres did last year. These deals often fail to produce the desired result and the team can suffer for years as a result. How much better would we look now if we had Ynoa and Gil and those players were traded for mediocre players. We all know trading for impact SPs cost big. The point here is that Twins should construct a plan focused on developing a pitching staff from within. This does not preclude getting a very good SP in free agency this year but any plan should be focused on developing pitching. You hit another nail on the head in regard to our lacking a major league SS in our system. I was really hoping they would get a great SS prospect when they traded Berrios. I am still hoping they can trade Arraez for a SS prospect that is blocked. Of course, any other package they could put together for a top notch SS could work too.

I think there is one question that will determine how the Twins approach the off-season… How good does the FO view their odds of contending next year and what would it take to make those odds realistic. Also, does contend mean be in it with the Whitesox or does it mean they are equal grounds with Houston / Boston / NY / Tampa. They would need to acquire two top of the rotation SPs, one of the top SSs, and a back of the bullpen arm. That would cost around $90M in free agency. Of course, they could trade prospects for one of those top arms and get it down to $60M. It would mean trading away the prospects they would hope to get them to contention in 2023-24. Anything less would not get them the type of SP they need. So, the question is really will they trade away the future for a shot at 2022-23. They are not spending $90M and I sure hope they would not trade away the future for a shot at 2022 that would still have relatively low odds. They still would not have a line-up that compares to Houston / Boston / NY / Chicago. Houston has $32M from Grienke coming off this year so look for them to add a top SP. There are a lot of available impact free agents this year. Boston and NY are going to spend and they have resources we can’t compete with. 2022 will not be a 100 loss season if they don’t fill every hole like some here like to suggest. They played 500 ball the last couple months. One good SP and a good SS along with getting Kirilloff back and this is a pretty good team. I would like to see them get Chris Taylor to play SS and he can take another position if Lewis proves himself. That’s a good team without mortgaging the future. This path eventually has Larnach, Miranda and probably Martin joining the team for a good part of 2022. Of course, we have several pitchers that could (should) be ready at some point during the year. I Would bet they take the path that gives them a good product in 2022 given that path probably gets better (contention) in 2023/24.