Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,638 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
News
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
He will have already debuted. The chances of them applying new rules retroactively are 1/10 of one percent.
-
I am not sure of your point. I didn't offer an opinion on Skenes. The question before us is if it's worth a year of control for Jenkin's in his prime to gain a few weeks in 2026 when the team has virtually no chance of being a contender. You have often stated your priority is building a true contender. What will the team gain by getting an extra month of Jenkins in 2026?
-
You are entitled to your opinion. What is gained by those three weeks? The odds of it having an impact on making the playoffs in 2026 is 1% (give or take). What is gained? An entire year in his prime. Giving up a year in his prime seems like an extremely poor value proposition.
-
Trading him away would not negate the lost year. He still becomes a free agent a year earlier so they would have to trade him a year earlier. The value proposition here is gain the first 3 weeks with the major league club in what is very likely a lost year vs a full year in his prime when there would at least be a chance they were contenders. What we all for at this point is that he is a key part of a new core that eventually contends. Should we give up a year of Jenkins then for 3 weeks to start 2026?
-
I see it the same way. The competition for those spots will be one of the more interesting parts of 2026 and there is enough talent there that the end result (2027 outfield) should look quite good. Even the 4th OF should be good and I would bet a dollar that Wallner is primarily a DH at the end of the year. Wallner could even become trade capital if these guys come up and perform early in the season. E. Rodriguez seems like a high ceiling / high risk prospect but how great would it be to have an outfield of Buxton / Rodriguez and Jenkins after what we have watch in the corner OF spots for the last several years.
-
I don't think the goal should be a 500 team. Even with that modest goal you are relying on Lewis, Lee, and Roden. Lewis and Lee have been bad for two years. Roden was good in the minors but has shown zero thus far in the majors. You need to replace Larnach with a prospect. We have a few good candidates but none of them are going to be ready to start 2026. You need to come up with a 1B and back-up catcher, nobody on that bench can hit, and you need to replace 5 good BP arms. Basically, As Kenny Rogers once said, you got to know when to hold em and know when to fold em.
-
Did anyone think they had a new core ready to replace the old core on August 1st? I think the OP positioned this properly by asking the question will the team move on from players like Larnach, for example. I would bet the answer is yes but that won't be a wholesale exchange. It will be players like Roden and Gonzalez getting a shot and Jenkins probably follows close behind. 2B has already happened. SS - Culpepper will probably be here the 1st half of 2026. If he hits as well or better than Lee, he is our SS and Lee moves to a bench role. IDK what we do about 1B. It would be great if they could teach Wallner to play 1B but I don't think he has the hand or the footwork. Hopefully they get a 1B in one of the trades this winter. My dark horse is Kyler Fedko plays 1B which he has done some in the minors. If they don't solve 1B or Catcher, they are going to have plenty of payroll space to sign a FA. My guess is they get a 1B in one of the trades this winter. Could they extend Jeffers for 2 years?
-
I think our principal difference here is probably that I think they had no chance in 2026 even if they had only traded expiring contracts and I think 2027 will be very short or last all together. They have no 1B and a very mediocre 3B with upside. LF (Larnach) is mediocre at best. RF (Wallner) is a good not great hitter and a poor defender. They have no back-up catcher and no back-up CF and basically no bench. They have a good pitching SP staff but not elite and they had a good BP but not elite. The other difference might be that I think their chances of putting together a real contender is to rebuild around the next wave of Keaschall / Jenkins / Culpepper / Tait / Gonzalez and hopefully Lewis. Plus, whatever they pick-up from trading Ryan/Ober/Lopez which should be significant including a couple impact type prospects. Plus, a high draft pick for the next 2 years. I should add Lee still has a chance to be a pretty good player or trade piece. That's a lot to work with. Yes, they are prospects but look at how the winning teams with similar revenue have been built. It's just not possible if their prospects don't succeed. The previous group have not, and I don't see that changing. Plus, the window was officially closed when they traded away the BP and we can't unring that bell.
-
Some have said that the goal of trading Ryan would be to get another Ryan. Let's say that's how it plays out and we get a guy exactly like Ryan. Would you rather have Ryan for 26-27 or the 2nd half of 27, 28, 28, 30, 31, 32, and 2033? Which player would be more likely to contribute to a playoff run?
-
When I saw the title I guessed it would be Julien at the top of the list. Gasper if he is even a consideration. If Gasper is not even in the conversation, two of Clemens, Martin, and Larnach given all the OFers getting close to ready. Roden has 150 ABs. He is not even close. Lewis will get all or at least most of next year and I don't know how SWR is even in the conversation.
- 49 replies
-
- 5
-
-
- simeon woods richardson
- alan roden
- (and 1 more)
-
They have assets with 2 years of control (Ryan/Lopez/Ober/Larnach) They can get value for those players for the next 2 years or they can trade them for assets that can contribute for 6-7 years but they can't do both. If the goal is to build playoff teams, the question becomes will those assets contribute more if kept for the next two years or will they contribute more if they are used to gain assets that will contribute to a new core. Given I think they have no chance in 2026 and 2027 might not even happen, I think the answer is clear.
-
That's fine but we can't complain about not building playoff teams if we are unwilling to do what the most successful teams with similar revenue have done. We can choose to be the best team we can in 2026 or we can do what's necessary to build a winner but those two things are mutually exclusive.
-
The four most successful teams with modest revenue over the past 25 years are Oakland, Cleveland, Tampa, and Milwaukee. They have outperformed a significant number of team with considerably more revenue. Oakland has actually had the most success in the last couple of decades, but they have not been good lately. Milwaukee has not had as much success, but their success is in the present. Their success in acquisition has been very similar. Milwaukee differs in that they made a big trade for Yelich, Adames, and Contreras. Contreas was not as well established as the others but he did have a pretty good season the year before they acquired him. However, I just checked their current stats and the table below shows production by acquisition method. This table shows the WAR for players on pace to produce 1.5 or more WAR. As you can see players acquired as prospects represent the most players and highest percentage of WAR by a considerable margin. 2 Drafted 6.5 22.4% 2 International Draft 4 13.8% 7 Acquired as Prospect 13.2 45.5% 2 Trade for Proven 5.3 18.3% 0 Free Agent 0 0.0%
-
Cleveland has repeatedly proven this to be untrue. If we track their WAR for all of their 90 win teams you will find players acquired as prospects produced more 44.5% of their WAR vs 25.5% from players drafted in the regular draft. Their International draft is much higher than most teams primarily due to Jose Rameriz. I would suggest the upside is considerably higher (as is the downside) with a prospect because you have them for 6 years. Not only do you have 6-7 years of production vs 2, You have far more opportunities to be a playoff team. When quantifying value, is production for a team that does not make the playoffs as valuable as a team that does not make the playoffs? I would argue production from Ryan and Lopez is likely to have reduced value. Corey Kluber is a good example of upside. He was acquired as a prospect, produced 34 WAR and was then traded for Emmanuel Clause. Cliff Lee was acquired as a prospect. He was later traded for Clevenger and Sizemore. Our old friend Carlos Santana was also acquired as a prospect, BTW ... Jake Westbrook, the player Cleveland gave up for Kluber produced 2.7 WAS in 2 seasons with ST. Louis. Trading for prospects can be a bust, but it has enormous upside I don't think you are recognizing.
- 137 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
The 5 teams in the bottom half of revenue with the most 92 win seasons in the past 25 years are (8) Oakland (7) Cleveland (6) Tampa (5) Minnesota (4) Milwaukee. I compiled the acquisition method for every player that produced 1.5 WAR or greater for all 30 teams. The acquisition methods are Draft / International Draft / Acquired as a Prospect / Trade for Established / Free Agent.. The percentages are in the table below. Acquiring players as prospects has been far more effective than trading for established players or free agency. Drafted Intl AaP Trade FA 34.0% 8.0% 36.0% 11.0% 11.0% BTW ... I used a very conservative definition for established players. They were considered established if they had ever produced 1.5 WAR in a season. If we were to use a more stringent definition of established (for example having produced 2 WAR in a season or 2 years, the gap between trading for established and trading for prospects would be far greater.
-
I would prefer they ask themselves how they can build something much better than the mediocrity we have been watching the last 5 years. They could appease fans by keeping this mess together or they can do what's necessary to build a team with a legit shot.
-
You are absolutely right. I have when they become arbitration eligible and arbitration level in my spreadsheet and I had Wallner down for 2026. Somehow, I got the wrong info or entered info in the wrong cell.
-
He is the first call-up from AAA. Of course, this is debatable, but that's another conversation and it does not impact payroll. I don't see them rushing him because what would be the point. His presence is not going to thrust the twins into the playoff picture.
-
I am not trying to get to a number. Quite the opposite. The goal should be to make moves that facilitate building a contender and the lower payroll is simply a product of that process. You can keep Lopez and Ryan and win 75 games instead of 67-70 games but in the process you give up acquiring prospects that could eventually be critical in building a 90 win or a 95 win team.
- 137 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
The point was meant to be that payroll would be low even if they were willing to invest in a couple RPs. I could see them investing in the BP because they will most likely transition SPs to RPs and that takes times. Plus RPs are always good trade capital at the deadline. The $6M catcher again reflects a max spend. They will want someone good to handle a young staff. I am also thinking they move Jeffers at the deadline if they have a reasonable replacement. They might very well trade all three established SPs but I could see them holding out until the deadline with one of them. That gives them a little more time to ready the next up prospect for the big leagues. It will probably be determined by the return offered.
- 137 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
I understand their track record with position players is pretty bad but what's the alternative. They need to replace 5 of the 8 position players. The only players that wouldn't need to be replaced are Buxton, Jeffers, and Keaschall and you need 4-5 RPs. You can't come remotely close to putting a dent in those needs through free agency. The alternative is to trade away pretty much every good prospect they have and bet on making a run in 2026 and hoping there is a meaningful 2027. Post 2027 you would be assuring a very long rebuild where they would be horrible. They have the 2B of the future in Keaschall. With the preface that no prospect is a lock, There is a pretty good chance Culpepper and Jenkins are here by July 1, 2026. Wallner is decent so he stays until one of Rodriguez/GG/Rosario or Fedko push him to the bench or out all together. We should not give up on Lewis just yet. At least Lewis has become a good defender. Add to this list whatever they get for Ryan/Ober/Lopez and what should be a top 5 pick next year. By 2027 they should field a respectable team and the potential to sustain a run of several years in the playoffs by 2028. Granted, that's an optimistic view but it does not change the odds that staying the course on this rebuild provides the best probability of success.
- 137 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
We just see the situation differently. I don't subscribe to the theory that we should hold onto players during a rebuild because we already have a highly ranked farm system. Improving the system improves the likelihood of success in the post rebuild years and Ryan is the type of player that brings back premium prospects. That's always key to building a new core. I don't agree we give up nothing to keep him until the trade deadline. The return is generally better in the off-season and we avoid the risk of injury or underperformance which is substantial. The most attractive players to trade during a rebuild are the star players. Garrett Crochet for example. The Royals most likely don't win the WS had they held on to Greinke. Holding on to that type of player has the highest future cost which is a bad idea when there is little present benefit in terms of playoff aspirations, and you have decided to play for the future.
- 137 replies
-
- 5
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
Wallner starts the season in the OF and is forced into a primary DH role by an OF prospect that plays better defense. Of course, it's possible he gets traded at some point in 2026. The 2.2 assumes allows for the possibility he steps up and remains with the team or remains with the team in a diminished role. It won't make much difference ($1.4m) either way so in terms of payroll it's not much of an issue.
-
Why must we trade Pablo's salary? With him they are still under $100M. Ryan will be the first to be traded because he would bring back two top 100 prospects and one of them would be a 1-3 ranked prospect for most teams. Those are key components in getting to the next level. Then, trade whichever player brings back the best package between Pablo and Ober. Keep one of them around for veteran presence. Pablo impresses me as the better veteran presence. Waiting until the deadline to trade Ryan is a huge mistake unless for some reason a great return is not presented this winter. The return should be better this winter and they avoid injury risk. My guess is that Ryan is by far the most likely of the three to be traded. Keeping him would be a failure to commit to a rebuild which is the would be truly unfortunate. This would leave us with Ober/Matthews/Festa/SWR/Bradley/Able/Morris who are ready and a couple of Rojas / Raya / Prelipp / Culpepper and should be ready at some point in 2026. Of course, it's possible perhaps even likely they get a SP for Ryan or Ober that will be ready for 2026 or at some point in 2026.
- 137 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
Here is a projected payroll for next year. Of course, we have to make some assumptions. I come up with around $77M if they trade Pable and Ryan which I suspect they will. Larnach is traded as well. This also includes adding two RPs at a salary of $5M each. Correa's $10M is included. There are a couple other assumptions here that don't mean much in terms of payroll. Culpepper eventually takes over for Lee at SS moving Lee to a utility IF role. The year starts with Fitzgerald in that utility role but it could be Eeles or they could sign a Wili Castro equivalent for a bench role. Of course, the return for Ryan/Lopez has a good chance of containing pieces that fit in at some point in 2026. 1 Bailey Ober 7,000,000 2 Zebby Matthews 820,000 3 Taj Bradley 820,000 4 David Festa 820,000 5 SWR 820,000 Relief Pitchers 6 Cole Sands 820,000 7 LH Free Agent 5,000,000 8 RH Free Agent 5,000,000 9 Michael Tonkin 1,750,000 10 Justin Topa 1,750,000 11 Travis Adams 820,000 12 Andrew Morris 820,000 13 Funderburk 820,000 Catchers 14 Ryan Jeffers 6,500,000 15 Cardenas / Trade / FA 6,000,000 Infielders 1B Fedko / Julien / Sabato 820,000 2B Luke Keaschall 820,000 3B Royce Lewis 3,000,000 SS Brooks Lee >>> Kaelen Culpepper 820,000 Utility Players 20 Kody Clemens 820,000 21 Fitzgerald >>> Brooks Lee 820,000 22 Kyler Fedko 820,000 23 Wallner >>> Gonzalez / Rosario 2,200,000 Outfielders 24 Wallner >>> Jenkins 820,000 25 Byron Buxton CF 15,142,857 26 Roden >>> Gonzalez or Erod 820,000 Carlos Correa 10,000,000 TOTAL PAYROLL 76,462,857
- 137 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
