Major League Ready

I agree if he can be signed to a team friendly deal. However, I don't see that coming together before the arbitration deadline. If it comes down to Rooker / Kirilloff or Larnach + $10M allocated to a free agent vs resigning Rosario, the team is better of with one of the prospects or even Cave and $10M allocated to a free agent, IMO. It's also possible the FO will gamble that Covid vaccines will be widely distributed by spring and we will have a normal season. It seems unlikely they would make that assumption but the equation would change in that case.

I like Seth’s plan. It has by far the greatest probability of being executed. Profar is a great fit. His plan also facilitates bringing on Kirilloff and/or Larnach which has great value IMO. I might be inclined to invest the Brad Hand money elsewhere. I think he is a very good RP but it’s hard to ignore the failure rate among high-end free agent RPs. Between 2017-2018 there were 21 free Agent RPs signed to contracts with an AAV of over $7.5M. Their combined WAR for the past 3 years is 7.5. The two highest in terms of Fwar were Andrew Cashner (2.5) and Zach Britton (2.4) All of the others combined produced an average of .14 Fwar. It’s really hard to look at that recent history and not believe those funds would likely be used more productively elsewhere. Nick’s plan would be great if you could pull it off. However, it is extremely hard to imagine a World Series team trading a top of the rotation starter with 3 years of team control. They would require an absolute haul. Probably a Chris Sale type haul. Moncada was a better prospect than Kirilloff and the White Sox got Michael Kopech in that deal. Our equivalent would be Balazovic or Duran and they are not even close in terms of prospect rating. Of course, the Sox got a couple other prospect in this deal as well. Luis Alexander has a FV of 40, same as Rooker. I don’t think Snell is equivalent to Sale but I would not be surprised if the Rays asking price was similar. John’s plan centered around getting Bauer places too much importance on one guy for my liking and I agree with Nick and Seth that he has been good more often than great. Also, any plan based on signing the only high-end starter on the market should include a plan B even if you are the Yankees or Dodgers. In the past 20 years, these pitchers have gone to teams in the top 7-8 in revenue almost exclusively. The only exception has been the Nationals and the Nationals could pay for Bauer twice with the revenue advantage they have over the Twins.

He is worth a lot more in trade with 2 years of control vs 1 so it makes perfect sense they would test his willingness to extend before the last year of his contract. In addition, some players are going to be less inclined the closer they get to free agency. Having said this ... trading him for an established player(s) is not easy. Anyone interested in trading for him would do so because they are in win now mode. What team is giving up front line pitching when they are in that mode? I don't see us trading for position players. We have a plethora of outfield talent. Replacing any of the infielders would not be enough of an upgrade to make it a net gain losing Buxton in CF.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of fastball / breaking ball percentages thrown. It seemed to me opposing pitchers threw more breaking balls, especially when ahead in the count. IMO, the league adjusted to the Twins aggression. There were 203 players with 150 or more ABs in 2020. We had six players with 150+ ABs. Here is how they ranked for swinging at pitches outside the zone. 60-Kepler 66-Polanco 103-Gonzalez 111-Sano 142-Cruz 195-Rosario

I was thinking pretty much the same thing as Doc. It starts with Odorizzi. I don't see them reaching an agreement with Odorizzi quickly. I am betting the current asking price is more than the Twins are willing to pay. They are going to allow him to go out and determine his market and then make a determination if they want to match. That process could drag on long enough that another deal may present itself. Morton on a 1yr deal for example.

IDK ... It's already pretty abnormal with Strohman and Gausman accepting Qualifying Offers. Hand's option being declined is unusual as well.

I was thinking the same thing in terms of a 3 year deal but not just where Odorizzi is concerned. There should be some great deals to be made. Landing a couple guys worthy of a 3 year deal almost certainly means a substantial loss this year. However, there is a reasonable pitch to be made to ownership. The FO would have to show a 3 year financial plan that demonstrates flexibility in years 2-3. Option years would help validate this plan. It's possible 3 year deals could be made this year that represent enough savings in years 2-3 to make it worthwhile to take the hit this year. Tijuan Walker is another guy that might make sense on a 2 year deal with a 3rd year option. I know this year was a SSS but it seemed like he finally was healthy and got it together. Anyone else think he might make sense?

The Saints have a good thing going so it's hard to say if $20M is a good business decision when we don't have all the facts. 1) What would be the salary savings? 2) What level of price increase can be made will maintaining attendance? 3) Can seating be expanded? 4) Are there other revenue sources associated with MLB affiliation? 5) Are the Twins willing to contribute? They have some cost savings. Would it build fan loyalty and increase attendance of MLB games after seeing players at AAA?

In 2019 the Twins had 9 guys with an OPS of 800 or better. In 2020, they had three above 800. Unfortunately, two of them (Buxton & Donaldson) only had 237 PAs between them. The first step toward having the best or one of the best rosters in MLB is for the players we have to play up to their capabilities and stay healthy. A new hitting coach that can get them to improve their approach would help. A good free agent utility guy should be doable and that would help too. That 10th guy is going to get a lot of ABs. Starting pitching should get priority in terms of free agent budget. Bauer is the only difference maker and we are not going to win that battle. Taijuan Walker might be risky but he seems like the best upside guy. MLB trade rumors predicts 2/16. He is young enough they could offer him a back loaded 3 year deal if they believe in him. Perhaps 2 years (6M/10M) and a 3rd year option at 14M with a $2M buyout) That would leave room for the BP help we need.

Why does Larnach get no love?

The Saints coexist with the Twins just fine so why would it all the sudden be a problem if they were a AAA team?

Using the scenario you provided of gate related revenue at 50%, revenue would be reduced by at least $60M even if they played 162 games. That's probably not realistic but even at that optimistic number maintaining the same level of payroll is "far fetched" when revenue is down $60M. If they could know for sure that the worst case scenario would be that gate related revenue would not go by more than 20%, it might be realistic to hope they would only reduce payroll by $25M and take their lumps in terms of profit. Unfortunately, there is a pretty good chance revenues could be down by more than 20% and none of the teams are going to construct a budget that has a good chance of loosing tens of millions dollars. This would change considerably if they players were willing to adjust salaries based on revenue reduction but that seems very unlikely.

I doubt anyone gets LeMahieu away from the Yankees. Every year there is a plea to sign the top FA starting pitcher and every year those players go to teams that are in the top 6 or 7 in revenue. This is not the year that changes.

I know! Why doesn't every team just spend as much as NY and LA? So what if they generate a couple hundred million more in revenue.

There could be a couple surprises in the form of non-tenders from other teams that the Twins pick-up. To come up with a roster on par with The Dodgers, Braves, Yankees, Padres, and Rays will require rebounds from Kepler / Garver, and Donaldson. Buxton will need to stay healthy. Then, we need the youngsters to fill out the roster and I seriously doubt that's going to happen on opening day. I am hoping Rooker starts in LF and they pick-up a couple good non-tenders to fill out the bench with quality players. Then, I am hoping Larnach and/or Kirilloff make it up before the 1/2 way point of the season and play well out of the gate. Obviously, we need another SP too.

It sounds like you (and others) are hoping the Twins will make a leap of faith the revenue will be normal or close to normal. This hope begins with players agreeing to take reduced compensation. This assumes a willingness on the player’s part to accept less than 100% of normal compensation. Not only did the players Association refuse to do this after agreeing it would be necessary, they went so far as to see they did not see the need. It is very difficult to believe the player’s would accept reductions that reflect revenue losses when they have already refused to do so and when they can’t understand the need in the wake of 40%+ revenue reduction. Free Agency has already begun. Is the entire league going to wait and see if a deal is struck? If such a deal were going to be negotiated, owners and the Player’s Association would have been working on an agreement before the season ever ended or worst case when the World Series concluded. Is it going on in secret? I seriously doubt it. Even if we have a full season and 50% of gate related revenues, the loss in revenue for the Twins would be roughly $60M. It's probably not going to be a full season. Even if we have a 130 game season, that would add losses approximately equal to 20% of fixed operating expense. For the Twins that's another roughly $15M. So, these projections with spending going down $10-15M have no basis in reason.

That's what many posters said in 2018 when the top 10 free agent RPs signed for an averaged 9.6M annually. The produced a cumulative fWAR 1.6. Only one of them broke 1 WAR. High-end RPs are the worst investment of any type of player. Not where I would spend in a year when they have to replace several players and don't have much in terms of available budget. BTW ... All of those top RPs managed to produce 1 win for every $60M spent in 2018.

It would not be a big deal if Kirilloff never played at AAA had he tore up AA but that’s not the case. He had a 756 OPS at AA. That’s not exactly screaming the player has proven he is ready to jump AAA to the MLB level. The guy who has earned a spot on the big league club is Rooker. He takes Rosario’s spot and we have a good 4th OFer in Cave with Wade as depth. We don’t have a burning need so to burn a year of service time when Kirilloff is in his prime just to have him for the 1st 6 weeks of horrible asset management. Let Kirilloff and/or Larnach prove they are ready to play on the ML club.

They lost 10-4 / 8-2 & 5-1 so I thinks it's safe to say the opportunity cost of not having Escobar for the 2019 playoffs was zero.

You will have to elaborate. I don't understand the point given he was a free agent at the end of the 2018 season. Would would we have better with him even if they had resigned him? Sano was signifcantly better offensively than Escobar in 2019 and Escobar was terrible in 2020. I loved Escobar but I don't see how we were hurt by trading him and if Duran pans out it was a significant net gain.

The Twins simply were not very good that year. They were not going to be even remotely serious contenders with or without him. The way I I see, they can't loose for having made a trade in a year they were not going to contend. The question is did the acquire anyone who will contribute. If they get an average ML starter ... it's a win. If they get a mid rotation SP it's a win. If Duran is a solid #2SP ... It's a huge win. If we get two average ML starters ... it's a huge win. If you look back throughout the past decade, they are 4X more players on playoff rosters that are acquired in similar transactions as compared to trading for impact players. Getting something out of players about to be FAs is a huge boost to building a contender in a mid-market. We could have been a little better and enjoyed Eduardo for another couple months. If it turns out we get someone who makes us significantly better for 6 or more years, I will take that path every time.

It would be great if this was viable but there is absolutely no chance the "local government" is going to commit to allowing fans. We are talking about public health and safety in the midst of a pandemic. Baseball is a very long way from an essential service. The only hope we have of a semi-normal off-season would be if the players agreed to a salary structure that accounted for attendance. I don't think that is going to happen given the stance they took last year.

I think we might see the Mets sign a couple deals similar to what you have described above. That's what happened when the Dodgers were bought. That strategy failed for them and they radically changed their approach but the Mets may still try to buy a team. The Yankees are badly in need of starting pitching. We could see them spend aggressively and then try to reset their luxury tax next year. I don't see any chance of a mid-market or small market team following this strategy.

I agree baseball is a free market and therefore your statement is a contradiction. Owners can't fleece players if a free market exists. You may also want to look back at the actions of both sides last year and re-evaluate which side acted with integrity. Owners paid Milb players in spite of them not playing. They also kept the vast majority of their staff despite a 50% (roughly) revenue loss. How many companies were even remotely as generous. Players on the other hand agreed to renegotiate if fans were not present. Then, they ignored this fact and basically said we want every dime regardless of what happens with revenue.

They could not have lost over $3B (100M+ per team) if revenue was only down by $3.1B. There are variable costs that we not realized because of the 60 game season as well as some other cost cutting measures that would assure a difference between revenue decrease and net loss. I have not seen anything that detailed losses but the estimates for lost revenue are closer to $5B. The estimated losses(EBITA) I have seen lately are between 2.7B & 3.1B