Major League Ready

My original point was that GMs of average or below average teams all have proven to value prospects much more than Chief and some others here so I won't totally disagree. However, we should take a practical look at how trading lower ranking prospects would impact this team at the moment. Which position players could be upgraded without trading a top prospect? Maybe 1st base but is that how you would suggest we use top prospects? Are we going to get impact pitching without trading a top prospect? Can you give me an example of how you would acquire impact players without trading one of our top 5? The only way I see that happening is to take on a big contract and I am not sure who that would be. I would love to see another Odorizzi type deal. The Mike Minor idea that was mentioned is good. I would think the cost would be outside the top 5 given he only has 1 year of control. I am on board with anyone who is advocating we find this type of trade.

So, are you saying its a reasonable expectation that they acquire impact players without trading top prospects or are you saying we should trade top prospects? It has to be one or the other.

I don't view those as even remotely similar trades. Yehlich was a good player who broke out big time. How are Verlander and Odorizzi in the same discussion? Palacios is a 40FV prospect. Was he even in the top 30 prospects? Using Yehlich over and over as trade proponents tend do exemplifies a biased view IMO. That deal was an extreme outlier. How many others like it can you point to in the last decade. Now compare that to trades like the Archer trade or Torres or Gregorius before him. How did Cleveland build sustained sucess? Pretty sure they traded for Kluber / Bauer & Clevinger as prospects? Should they have traded them? How about Bieber? Should he have been traded to bolster the team back then? BTW ... the most recent highly lopsided trade was the Glasnow/Meadows/Baz trade for Chris Archer which had the effect of immediately and dramtically improving the team trading for less established players and a prospect. That's the deal I want to make.

No argument here but and I am pretty confident there is not a person on this board that would object to any trade similar to the Yelich or Odorizzi trade. However, do those examples really support the type of trade practices being promoted here? Are the trade prospects advocates promoting trading for another Odorizzi? It sure seems to me that that the demand of these posters is to trade for top of the rotation SPs and/or elite BP arms. Those are not acquired without a very steep prospect price. Many posters have written that they would trade any prospect including Lewis / Kirilloff Graterol and Balazovic for player X? Using not trading Gonsalves to support what they really want is misguided. Trading Gonsalves or Stewart after his 1st couple years in the minors was not bringing an established impact player. Are you really going to suggest another Odorizzi trade is the basis of this argument? That’s not what’s been argued here so it makes no sense to use this as an example. The Yelich example would be great if you could substantiate that it is not an anomaly. The twins and every poster here would never argue such a trade but to use that as the basis of supporting trading prospects at every opportunity is not exactly an objective argument. You are basically suggesting our strategy should be to engage in the practice of extremely lopsided trades. We would all love to make another AJ Perzinski which BTW demonstrates Lopsided trades also favor the team trading away the established player just as often as the reverse. Just ask Pittsburg how they feel out trading for Chris Archer. Let’s debate the same question.

I don't think anyone here cares if our team trades prospects outside the top 5 or 6. The rub here is that the desire of those always stressing trading prospects is that they are looking to acquire proven impact players. You don't generally get that done without giving up top prospects.

I think you need to take another look at my post and perhaps I should have been more descriptive. Atba minimum I should have centered the discussion on top prospects. I think you interpreted this as I said they "never trade" when what I said was that lower revenue teams definitely do not agree with Chief's assertion that prospects should be traded for MLB talent whenever possible. Obviously it happen but their practices have obviously been to highly value prospects. Would you agree that even larger revenue teams have placed more value on prospects over the last decade, even last 5 years? I think it is also accurate to say that GMs from lower revenue teams have NEVER agreed with Chief's preference to trade prospects for MLB talent. A few weeks ago I asked for examples of top 25 prospects that were traded by teams of equal or lower level. Not one response. It is extremely rare.

Lower revenue teams have never agreed with your position and over the past decade all teams are clearly putting more value on prospects. What do you know that the GMs don’t?

He was really good the 1st half of 2018. From memory, I think he put up 3.5 WAR in the first half. He was literally the worst hitter among the starters the 2nd half and was below replacement value. The first half of 2019 he put up a very respectable 1.4 WAR and was 3rd overall in OPS / wRC+ fpr the 1st half. He was 9th in OPS / wRC+ for the 2nd half and had 0 WAR. For the last season and a half he has put up 1.2 WAR. So, to answer your question, you trade him to make room for Kirilloff or Larnach whenever that malkes sense. If you happen to get a good return this offseason ... roll with Cave or a platoon with Cave/Gonzalez until one of the prospects is ready. Then, use the incremental $20M/yr over the next couple of years on assets that will contribute more than 1.2 WAR. Hopefully, high end pitching but it would not hurt to invest in another catcher and a 1B.

I agree completely with the point that fans here will likely be disappointed with the return for Rosario. No way does he return an established SP, especially anyone who could even remotely be considered an impact pitcher. I also agree with Chief that opposing GMs put absolutely no weight on what is written here and probably are not even aware of what is written here. GMs are going to ask their scouting dept and analytics people for input. They will tell the GM Eddie is dangerous if you give him anything to hit. However, you don't have to give him anything to hit. He simply can not or will not apply any plate discipline. I could see the GM for a contender trading for a prospect and hoping they can convince him his future is dependent upon taking better ABs.

Rosario was 54th in OPS and 65th in wRC+. He is not all that hard to replace. Cave had an 805 OPS this year and 795 career OPS. I will take Cave and invest the $8M/yr difference in pitching.

I could see trading him for prospects if we are fortunate enough to land enough FA pitching that it would become necessary to save on other expenditures. If not, keep him until Kirilloff or Larnach is ready to step in.

Rosario was one of the best players in the league the first half of 2018. Pitchers adjusted. Actually, they just don't throw anything over the plate and he has HORRIBLE plate discipline. Since the first half of 2018 he has been around replacement level. Fangraph Stats since 7/1/2018 --- Off / Def / WAR 1 Max Kepler 16.8 / 13.2 / 6.0 2 Jorge Polanco 23.4 / -4.4 / 5.4 3 Mitch Garver 28.4 / -1.2 / 4.5 4 Nelson Cruz 37.7 / -12.3 / 4.3 5 Miguel Sano 17.0 / -7.9 / 2.8 6 Byron Buxton 7.5 / 9.8 / 2.7 7 Jake Cave 9.3 / -3.9 / 2.3 8 Luis Arraez 13.4 / -4.8 / 2.1 9 Jason Castro 0.2 / 6.7 / 1.6 10 M. Gonzalez -3.8 / 2.2 / 1.4 11 J. Schoop -0.6 / -2.5 / 1.3 12 E. Rosario -3.1 / -13.3 / 1.3 13 E. Adrianza -6.7 / -1.7 / 1.2

I have looked at the history of FA starters quite closely. It’s true the success rate is low but we can’t rely completely on our farm system. What are the options? I have not examined trades for well-established SPs as closely but I don’t think the success rate there is any higher. Plus, those trades cost a king’s ransom in prospects. It’s just a different form of risk and there are lots of examples where the team getting prospects comes out waaaay ahead in the long-run. The Twins young core has positioned them to be able to afford FA pitching even given our modest revenue compared to top markets. The next wave of prospects should allow the team to get even better within a payroll structure the team can afford. Cole is a real longshot. I think Wheeler is the key. They need to land him. There are enough options for another starter that would be our #3 that we should be able to have at least 3 very good SPs. Young and FA pitcher rarely go together. Who would that be this year? .

Rosario had 1.2 fWAR in 137 games and ranked 33rd among LFers. I would say that's not all that hard to replace. Jake Cave had .9 in 72 games. Assuming the the same performance over 137 games, he would have produced 1.7 fWAR. I don't think he is the answer either but I would play Cave until Larnach or Kirilloff is ready. The team would be better off taking whatever they get in trade and then spending the incremental $8M on pitching or a back-up catcher.

Sorry. I could not make up my mind if he was a Sp or RP and left him in both places. I started to write that I would let Rosario go and get a catcher. Maybe even try to bring back Castro. * Is is possible to upload an image?

Here is their payroll assuming a $50M budget for FA pitching and arbitration estimates from MLB Trade Rumors. I am sure this is not the exact 26 man roster that will roll out next spring but this exercise helps in determining the financial feasibility of any moves. They could also keep Rosario and Cron but I would rather they trade Rosario this off-season if possible. They have plenty of options for LF. Starters 1 Jose Berrios 5,400,000 2 FA / SP #1 3 FA / SP #2 4 FA / SP #3 FA SP TOTAL 50,000,000 5 Lewis Thorpe 555,000 6 Randy Dubnnak 555,000 Devin Smeltzer 555,000 Brusdar Graterol 555,000 Jordan Balazovic Bailey Ober Johan Duran Relief Pitchers 6 Taylor Rogers 3,900,000 7 LH / FA 6,000,000 8 Tyler Duffey 1,100,000 9 Trevor May 2,100,000 10 Zack Littell 555,000 11 Sam Dyson 12 Ryne Harper 555,000 13 Randy Dobnak 555,000 13 Cody Stashak 13 Fernando Romero 13 Trevor Hildenberger 13 Sean Poppen Catchers 14 Willians Astudillo 560,000 15 Mitch Garver 575,000 Ryan Jeffers Infielders 16 Ehire Adrianza 1,900,000 17 Luis Arraez 555,000 18 C.J. Cron 7,700,000 19 Marwin Gonzalez 9,000,000 20 Jorge Polanco 3,883,333 21 Miguel Sano 5,900,000 Nick Gordon N/A Outfielders 22 Byron Buxton 2,900,000 23 Jake Cave 572,500 24 Max Kepler 6,250,000 25 Eddie Rosario 8,900,000 Alex Kirilloff Trevor Larnach Brent Rooker 26 DH - Cruz 12,000,000 TOTAL PAYROLL 133,080,833

Cobb got 4 years. If not for the strong swing toward shorter contracts, you would think those guys are 4 years for sure. I still think Wheeler and Bumgarner get 4 years but I am not taking any bets. The key is can they sign these guys to 4 years and keep a team around them. I believe they can. Cruz (12M) comes off next year. We will feel his loss but that money can be allocated to Arb increases. Gonzales comes off after the 2021 season. Rosario probably has to be traded but we have a couple good replacement candidates close. It would also help to get a pre-arb replacement for Cron either this year or next.

No. I said that I don't believe as some here do that "impact" SPs can be acquired for our surplus 45-50 FV prospects. However, I would be all-in if we could get a SP with at least 2 years control for that type of prospect. No worries though ... It's hard to keep straight all the ideas thrown around here.

For starters, I am not putting words in your mouth. I used your exact quote. Perhaps you were making more of a conceptual statement but it definitely did not read that way. I have said I would start by trying to get Cole. If that happened I would sign Wheeler / Bumgarner / or Odorizzi in that order. If I could get that done I would figure out the rest between our prospects, come back candidates or maybe even Perez or Pineada if financially feasible. This might not be much better during the regular season but better in the playoffs. If I could not get Cole, I would target two of Wheeler / Bumgarner / or Odorizzi and the 4th spot to Pineada. Anderson if I could not get two of those three. The fifth spot would go to Dubnak / Smeltzer or Graterol.

How did you conclude I am a proponent of a Samardzija type trade? In general, I don't like trading multiple players with multiple years of control for a guy who had one year of control. You also ignored all of the other facts I posted which is by far the more relevant information. In other words, you completely avoid the hard evidence with refutes the validity of the strategies you support. I welcome you to list all of those $150M+ contracts signed by teams of a similar profile and top prospects traded by them.

Actually, I did not say the couldn't do it. I sadd it was uncommon and our expectations should reflect that rarity. You said this is what is required. History is exceptionally clear that not only is this not a requisite action, other models / approaches have been more successful. BTW ... I have stated in a few different posts what I would do. The rub here is really no different than it has always been. That being fans thinking that a team with a $50M-$250M revenue disadvantage with several teams can just go outbid the other teams. The second thing being we can trade a few 45-50 FV prospects for impact SPs. Hey, if they can trade Javier / Rooker / Duran etc for a top SP with 2 or more years of control ... I am all in.

Like usual you are ignoring what I said and twisting it into a completely different argument. I responded to a poster who said “Will the Twins ever dive into the deep end? This is what it takes to be a WS contender.” He was referring to the current contenders who combined spent in excess of $120M AAV for their top two SPs. History is very clear that this is not what it takes. As a matter of fact, this is an anomaly that I would guess has NEVER happened before. Where point two is concerned … how about giving examples. I never siad the Twins should not make trades. I said that teams with the Twins revenue rarely trade top 15 prospects. If I am wrong show me. Give examples instead of twisting the argument. Where point two is concerned … Again, how about giving examples. I asked how many SPs have been signed to $150M deals by teams with revenue equal to or less than the Twins. I added the concession that the Dbacks signed Grienke but the fact they just signed a billion dollar TV contract. Just once it would be great if you actually addressed my position head on instead of changing the discussion. My points were exceptionally specific. Show me the top prospects traded for Ace SPs and the $150M contracts for SPs signed by teams with equal or less revenue than the Twins. If you come up with a significant number of examples I will gladly concede I am wrong. If not, there is always the possibility you have a much better understanding of how to succeed running a mid or small market team as compared to the GMs doing the job.

This medium tends to mix points. It's just the nature of the beast. My point is that part of the rub here is quite a few people here willing to trade Lewis or Kirilloff and even both. I was simply pointing out GMs of similar revenue teams are not. GMs are not that short-term focused because it is there responsibility to build sustainable success. We also differ in our opinion of difference makers being acquired for 6-20 type / 45 FV prospects. The one exception is a team dumping salary but there are not many opportunities of this type. I don't believe the FO has a problem (nor do I) trading the next tier with the exception of Graterol / Balazovic. They are by far the most likely source of an ace and one or both of them becoming an ace or close to it would be enormous for this franchise. The fact that Bumgarner and Wheeler did not get traded at the deadline would suggest it was not just the Twins. The asking price was very high. There were several teams needing SP help and these guys were not traded. The reports specific to the twins suggested the only prospects other teams were interested in were Lewis / Kirilloff / Graterol & Balazovic even for rentals. We have no way to know for sure but I don't believe the problem was an unwillingness by the Twins to Trade prospects outside their top 5.

You have a point in that it was not a complete bust. However, the context of this conversation is how to get SP that will take us to the next level. Rolling trades for still unproven players is at a minimum not a solution to the problem being discussed. Actually, it’s the opposite of what is being suggested by all of us. More to the point is that the result of that trade was nothing more than a side note. The discussion was the willingness of teams with equivalent or less revenue to trade top 15 prospects. I would be interested to hear your examples if my take on this is wrong. If I am correct that it is quite rare are the posters here who insist this should be done correct and all of these GMs incompetent? Even more interesting is that you bring up the example of Samardzija to the CWS. That is an example of why GMs are far more reluctant to make these trades than most fans. That trade hurt the CWS for the next 4 years and probably next year too. Samardzija posted a .2 WAR for the CWS. Simien produced 11.1 WAR over the next 4 years including 4 WAR last year and they still have another year of control. For 1 year of replacement level production, they gave up 5 years of a very good player. They have 3 more years of control with Bassitt.

There are a number of reasonable strategies. I am not suggesting we sit on our hands. However, there tends to be a lot of rather indignant comments where posters assert the ineptitude of the FO for not believing as they do that certain strategies are “no-brainers. History not only does not support these positions but would refute these assertions if the posters would take an unbiased look at the facts / history. World Series starting pitching is a good example. The same argument is made every year here that the Twins need to spend big in FA to compete. History suggests that this strategy is a very poor way to build a contender, especially for a mid-market team. Successful teams, not just WS winners, draft and develop, make savvy trades, and get production out of modestly priced FAs. High-end free agents have a modest overall impact compared to drafting / development / trades and even the signing of 2nd tier FAs that perform exceptionally well. I would not be inclined to take a hard stance on any strategy without the scouting reports and analytics available to the FO. Having said this … I think the team is in a position where they might have a chance at Strasburg or Cole. They also have the payroll for one other from the group of Wheeler / Odorizzi / Bumgarner. Then, take a shot at a couple projects and prospects to fill out the rotation. I don’t think that team wins more games than last year but they are better positioned for the playoffs. If you can’t get Cole or Strasberg, a good plan B would be to sign two of Wheeler / Odorizzi / Bumgarner plus Pineda. Kuechel or Anderson would be acceptable just not preferable in this scenario. We have the payroll room to make that happen. Obviously convincing two of the three most sought after FAs to come here is also a tall task. Making another trade as good as the Odorizzi trade would be an enormous boost. In that scenario, I would simply take the two best FAs we can get and we could afford that even if one of them was Cole or Strasburg.