Major League Ready

I can't say I have looked over the data well enough to have a strong opinion. What I have reviewed gave me the impression the spent consistent with revenue. I have also looked at Forbes revenue and profit rankings whenever they were available. I don't know how precise they are in these estimates but the Twins have generally been ranked quite low in profit. I think fans tend to be swayed by bias. For example, you wrote that 12 times out of 24 they were below their revenue rank. I take they were also above their revenue rank 12 times. Sounds like they are above their ranks as much as they are below so that would indicate to me they spend pretty consistent with their revenue rank. It does not make sense to me to expect they would ever spend as much as teams with a $70-300M revenue advantage. I also don't get all that wound up about this because best case scenario a more aggressive spending strategy is a $10-12M swing which equate to 1-2 wins via free agent spending. Things like trading away Gil and Ynoa or drafting Cavaco instead of Corbin Carroll or Bryson Stott is what makes a difference. Being able to develop ML players matters. A $10M difference in payroll is just not all that impactful.

The Twins revenue is roughly 10-15% less then the league average. Therefore, my expectation is they would spend roughly 10-15% less then the average team. In other words, be around 18th on average. You are comparing spending without regard to revenue. It's no wonder you think the problem is they are cheap. Why would you ever gauge their willingness to spend by comparing them to teams with up to double their revenue. I would guess you know someone that makes twice as much as you. Do you spend as much on housing / vehicles as them. Is this because you are cheap or do they simply have more disposable income?

I think this is low on our list of problems. For starters, the only significant change I see in position players coming here from free agency or trade is a SS. That players is likely going to play only SS unless it's Chris Taylor and playing him in the OF on the occasion Gordon or maybe even Palacios gets a start is definitely not a problem. Our first problem with utility players is that Arraez is below average everywhere with perhaps the exception of 2B. Then, we have an issue with covering CF whenever Buxton is out. They should send Gordon to play CF in winter ball or at least give him a lot of reps in spring training. Also, Celestino will probably fill that role at some point in 2022. Astudillo probably will not be on the team. Take the hit on Donaldson and bring up Miranda. 3B, SS, and 2B have everyday players. Trade Arraez for pitching or a SS that is being blocked elsewhere. I don't see any problem with using Sano and Kirilloff at 1B. Start with Kirilloff and Kepler in the corners. We have plenty of options of a RH 4th OFer. Move Kirillorr to 1B if Sano were to be traded either this off-season or at the deadline.

Good question. They are probably going to get outbid for the top guys which leaves us with Galvis or Iglesis which are not great alternatives. BTW ... I think Taylor is going to get paid. Teams value flexibility and he is a better version of Marwin Gonzales. Without looking to deep I think there are some SS prospects who are blocked. This is where I would look to deal Arraez or even Rogers. It's a bit of a long shot but that could be a good solution if it lined up.

This is difficult to assess. It appears to me it's a conscious plan with Tampa. Do these other teams have low IPs from their starters because they are simply bad? Has Tampa found a market inefficiency in SPs that don't excel when expected to go 6 plus but are good the 1st couple times through the order. Have they adapted strategies and pitching sequences to succeed with this type of pitcher? Jax appears to be this type of SP to me. I think he would do better in the BP or in a stacking concept.

I liked the Simmons signing. He has been a phenomenal defender throughout his career. He is still good and fun to watch defensively. So, what I was trying to say is get someone good on both sides of the ball. I don't care to watch 400+ ABS from Simmons next year. What I would like to see them do is sign Chris Taylor. He is very capable of playing other positions if Lewis proves worthy of taking that spot.

The Rays have been among the lowest IP from SPs and they have 100 wins in the AL East. They have been using this model very successfully for a while now. I prefer SPs that can give you 7 but there is more than one way to succeed.

I should have known you did not mean to trade both Polanco and Garver. I still don’t see trading either of them as a get better fast strategy. Teams interested in Polanco or Garver are contenders or teams looking for a missing piece to get them in contention. Trading away assets that would help us get in contention is one step forward and one step back. Anything is possible but I don’t see this happening. They would have to find a team that was contending but so weak at 2B that they would trade away pitching. That’s just not likely. The teams who would want Polanco are going to trade future capital. The Cubs got one ML player (Davies) in the Darvish deal but he was a replacement level player. The best prospects they got in that trade were 18 years old. The Rays, in typical Ray’s fashion, got some immediate value for Snell in Francisco Mejia. Nice role player but not an impact player. They got Patino who already made his debut this season but he certainly was not a path to getting better immediately. Trading Garver or Polanco are strategies to rebuild and the players they would get back probably won’t impact the team for 2-3 years. There are always exceptions. We could find other Joe Ryan type deals (assuming he continues to perform) but the premise of trading to get better immediately assumes established MLB players so that’s not what we are talking about here. I don’t see any scenario where getting back into contention nest year that does not require absolutely everything to go nearly perfectly. In other words, any such scenario is low probability so I would not leverage the future in any strategy for 2022. I would also prioritize some transitions in 2022. Donaldson to Miranda. Larnach and Martin transitioned in if they show they are ready and maybe even Lewis. Most importantly, get ML experience for our SP prospects that show they are ready in 2022. There are a few strategies that provide a high probability of getting better quickly. Contending? Probably not. A good product and entertaining baseball, yes. 1) There is a lot of free agent pitching available this year. Get some. 2) Replacing Simmons with someone who can hit and play D. 3) Decline Colome’s option and get a couple reliable free agent RPs 4) Don’t give Cave any ABs

Their first draft was 2017 so they have had 4 drafts. We also lost an entire season. It's ironic you suggest someone is incompetent with a review that contains an inaccurate account of the terms nor do you account for an extremely unusual circumstance of a missed season. I guess if you just want to complain a reasonable account of the facts is not necessary.

Cruz had a wRC+ of 96 the 2nd half of the season. One year guys can help keep it interesting but we need to be looking for players that can contribute to sustained success. The long-term success of this team is tied to pitching prospects. Eliminating ABs for Simmons and Cave will sure help the entertainment value of this club for me. Watching those ABs was painful. Sign Michael Taylor. He could play SS or OF.

Trading two of your best position players is not a good formula for getting better fast if "fast" means next year. Trading Polanco and Garver would be moves to rebuild for 2-4 years from now. They would need to trade top prospects to get better next year. Trading Lewis / Miranda / Martin or top pitching prospects is the most likely trade formula for getting better next year. I seriously doubt they trade any of those position players. We are very lean in up the middle position players. Lewis and Martin are the only two up the middle position player prospects with a high ceiling on the horizon. It could be argued that Miranda is our best position player prospect. He is a very logical transition from Donaldson and he has some position flexibility. I just don't see them moving any of these players. Of course, we could trade pitching prospects. We finally have enough prospective pitching to believe they can build a rotation from within. Do they want to give that up now? It would be one thing if we were a player or two away from seriously contending but that is not the case. Any team can get better fast if they are willing to trade future wins for immediate wins. However, there is often a premium associated with getting better immediately. I don't see them paying that premium now. They can put a good product on the field next year without leveraging the future. Get Kirilloff and Rogers back, add a good SS and even one "Stroman / Rodon" type SP and the team that was a game above 500 after the deadline is a pretty darn good team.

Trading Arraez or Polanco is at the top of my list. I Have always believed in Polanco and would hate to see him go. I would trade him if it's a really big haul. If that kind of trade is not available, I would trade Arraez. Really hate the idea of trading Garver. So, same thought as Polanco. It has to be a haul. Will the Universal DH give Sano reasonable trade value? He does impact games. I have never been a much a Sano supporter but I don't think they should move him for the sake of moving him. He could bring value at the deadline. Kepler is a sell low candidate too so why trade him now. I would have Donaldson on this list. We will likely be a better team with him in 2022. However, I think we are better in 2023 with Miranda in his 2nd year and the salary savings invest elsewhere. Donaldson will be 37 yrs / 4 months at the start of the 2023 season. Rodgers and/or Duffy should be available if the return is right but that opportunity will exist at the dead line too.

I am arguing their strategies should be developed on likelihood of success as opposed to the need to be in place on opening day next year. I significant percentage of the absolute clusters I have seen in client's organizations was a product of them insisting on something be in a specific timeframe. What they ended up doing was making the situation worse. Many fans have a very difficult time accepting any approach that is not focused on contending immediately. I would not be too quick to make any big moves until they figure out if they are going to get Buxton signed. Then, can they get a top FA pitcher to come here. I would not be trading any major pieces until these two things had some clarity. The other point I was making is that a "Padres approach" can have significant cost for several years. I do not agree the Padre's approach was all that great. Snell is just not that good. Musgrove played well but two years of control is a short window and anytime you trade for a pitcher as old as Darvish you are taking considerable risk. They bet 10 prospects on this approach. Right now that wisdom is very questionable.

Compete or contend? They were quite competitive the last couple months of the season. The next question does contending mean being close enough to have a shot at the AL central or wild card or does it mean being a team like the Astros or Rays that have a very good shot at going deep in the playoffs. They have a decent shot at keeping it interesting. Rebuilding to the point of dominance this off-season not so much. Any decent team with good prospects can leverage the future to get better now. Last year everyone praised the Padres for being aggressive. They had an extremely deep farm system and they spent a great deal of future capital to get better quickly. They traded away 10 prospects and spent $38M. Where are they now? They have one more year of Musgrove. Snell just is not that good and Tampa knew it. Darvish will turn 36 toward the end of next season and he was quite bad the last couple months of 2021. Should we really want them to push in their chips at this moment? Can they put a good product on the field without leveraging the future?

Kansas City won the WS in 2015 without an Ace. Their top SP in terms of WAR was Yordano Ventura who had the 44th highest WAR. Their 2nd highest by WAR was Edinson Volquez who also had 2.7 WAR. He was signed on a 2 year deal as a free agent and had averaged .6 WAR over the previous 6 seasons. Their next 3 SPs combined for a total of 3.4 WAR

Yes, this could really change the outlook for next season. If Alcala can be an effective starter and we add one really good free agent to go along with Ober / Ryan / Alcala, all of the sudden the pitching situation looks quite different. This is a really intriguing idea.

By your logic, if we were having this same discussion about the trade of James Shields for Fernando Tatis Jr, your position would be that acquiring Tatis is meaningless until he actually proves his worth at the ML level. In other words, we can’t put any value in the return if the player has yet to be proven. If this were true, Tatis Jr would have had no trade value at that time. Sorry, value is projected for prospects and established player. It would not make sense to project Josh Donaldson to play the way he did in his prime. If we are to evaluate this trade today, we should use all of what we know to project future performance for Alacala and Pressly. Do we know that players often struggle at first? Do we project based on a pitchers velocity / command and movement? Alcala does not project as a below average RP. The only logical conclusion of your position is that we should not even attempt to evaluate a trade until the period of control has expired for all the players involved. There is a whole lot of baseball media that seriously disagrees with you.

I am not so sure we have much of a 40 man problem. There are a number of guys that can come off. Simmons replacement will be after the Rule 5 draft. I hope they decline Colome’s option. They can do better for the same money. If Pineda is resigned, they can time that after the Rule 5. Charlie Barnes and Beau Burrows do not look like MLB pitchers to me. Danny Coulombe / Luke Farrell & Ralph Garza Jr. are fringe guys. Devin Smeltzer and Lewis Thorpe need to go. Rob Refsnyder or Kyle Garlick can go. Maybe both in favor of a more formidable RH bat in free agency or bring up Miranda and let him fill that role as part of a utility role. It might be time to let Astudillo go too. How does the 60 day IL work in the off-season? I am assuming Maeda won’t be counted on the 40 man roster.

I don't think anyone is saying their futures are certain and therefore it's a good trade. We can only judge in this moment and at this moment the players we got are likely more valuable than 1/2 year of Pressly in a lost year and Pressly for the 2019 season. We also should not consider what Pressly did after his contract expired. We have no idea if he would have stayed here. We also used that money elsewhere, including Nelson Cruz. Would do the trade today know what we know about Alcala and Celestino in present terms. Absolutely. Pressly would have been nice in 2019 but we did win 100 games without him and he would not have changed the results in the 2019 playoffs. The net effect of having him would have been marginal. Plus, Alcala and Celestino have a chance to impact us for years compared to 2019 having Pressly. I am very happy they made this trade.

I agree with those who say we are a little short on depth in position players. We could end up looking quite strong a year from now but we really need Miranda / Lewis and Martin to reach their projections. There are plenty of other guys who can average MLB players and you need those guys too. There is always the chance guys like Walner / Severino / Cabbage / Sabato could also continue to improve their stock. It sure would be nice to have another Miranda like breakout player next year. If you fill a rotation from within, it's easier to fill position players from free agency and we will be in a financial position to do so if we build a rotation from prospects. We can also afford to extend Buxton who is all the more important given our lack of depth at CF and position players in general.

He has 1.05 years service time. Does that give us 5 more years of control? 2018 was a lost year so was it worth it to give up having Pressly in 2019 for 5 years of Alcala? There certainly was a lot of complaining over that move but the Twins won 100 games in 2019 and has presence in the BP would not have changed what happened in the 2019 playoffs so YES it looks like a very good trade right now without Celestino. Whatever value Celestino brings is a bonus. If Alcala performs at the level we saw at the end of the season and Celestino is a league average player this deal could be end up being extremely good for the Twins. Let's hope that's how it goes.

The Royals have made the playoffs twice in the past 35 years!

You reload to make a playoff run, right? So, I don’t understand the logic of you would trade Arraez to make a playoff run, not to reload? It also does not make sense to hold on to him for 3B. Donaldson is better offensively and defensively. Our top position player prospect (Miranda) is also ready and he can play 3B. Arraez is the least preferable option of the three at 3B. We are a better team with Donaldson at 3B. We are probably better with Miranda at 3B plus whatever we get for Arraez plus whatever we save on Donaldson going into pitching. Maybe not in 2022 but by 2023 I would prefer to have Miranda at 3B (and 10+M saved on Donaldson applied to pitching or a Buxton extension) over a 37 y/o Donaldson.

Arraez is the only one of the three that would bring back a meaningful piece. He is also somewhat redundant. The only position he plays reasonably well is 2B and we have a great 2B and we have multiple prospects that can play 2B. I would like to see them sign Taylor at SS. He can move to 3B or 2B if Lewis or someone else proves to be better at SS. Lewis / Miranda / Taylor and Gordon would provide a really flexible group of IFers for the next several years. Trade Arraez for pitching. Trade Donaldson by the trade deadline next year. Use the money for pitching. Sign Buxton and add Martin next year. That's a good team for the next several years and it should be even further improved with the depth of pitching prospects that are close.

Do they deserve an A+? No. That was probably just Pohlad’s way of publically supporting the management team. However, a baseball fan / blogger is going to evaluate the situation differently than a business owner. A management consulting firm that evaluates management operations would also look at the situation through a considerably different lens. The baseball fan is going to focus on this season. A business owner is going to look at their entire tenue, where we were, and how we are positioned for the future. A owner or professional evaluation team would also focus on management infrastructure and the things they were brought in to change. The Twins were far behind the league in terms of analytics and player development programs. Are we considerably better positioned than when we were? Minor league operations were evaluated and change substantially. What kind of hiring decisions have they made? How much have these things improved? We have some insight to these questions. I would presume the Pohlad’s have been given formal reports. Sorry Tom, while I agree the A+ is public puffery, you are very focused on the premise they have had 5 years to bring in pitching. For starters, their 1st draft was 2017. That’s 4 years. We also lost an entire minor league season and you have to at least consider the role injury has played. They would have graduated a couple more pitchers given a normal rate of injury. The grade for me is an incomplete. We have never been this deep in legitimate pitching prospects. Are they different from prospects like Jay / Romero / Gonsalves who ultimately failed? IDK but that’s the point. We still don’t know if the Falvey / Lavine prospects are going to make it or not because their picks have yet to be tested at the ML level because of very unusual circumstances. Four years (not 5) would have been adequate under normal conditions but we did not have normal conditions. The decisions made this year were all reasonable. The moves that are going to hurt us for a while were made long ago in the form of trading away Gil / Ynoa and leaving Wells unprotected. There were other guys that were fringe players that should have been exposed before Wells. Gil and Ynoa were the type of trades many fans want to make. Trade a way A ball guys for help now. However, they were high upside SPs. Those guys should never be traded away like they were for a 4th OFer and a rental. I find these decisions much more objectionable that what happened this season.