Major League Ready

I thought the same thing but not exactly a class move telling his team he is coming back if it's a negotiating tactic.

That would great if they can get it but I doubt it. I would hope they would take a reasonable trade and free up the dollars. Kirilloff looks good at 1B and we could play Garver some at 1B. Invest the money in pitching. They know this so if we are so fortunate as to have buyers for him this off-season, let's hope they move him. The only thing that could change this a little is if Kepler is moved. I could see a trade of Kepler to NY happening. They have a bunch of pitching prospects and we have OF depth.

How is this a strawman? . I am not being coy. I am wondering what's you point. Throwing strawman out there is a good way of saying nothing when you don't like the message. Are you saying the fact these teams did not win is irrelevant. Did KC or Baltimore have an ace I am not aware of? Is it or is it not true SanDiego has averaged under $80M for the past 15 years? Are you saying small market teams can be successful building a rotation via signing elite free agents. What are you saying? I would love to see hard evidence (examples) instead of "strawman". That's a copout.

It looks like Berrios is set on going through the free agency process. He wants the absolute max he can get as do the majority of people in or outside of baseball. We surely can't criticize his desire to maximize his earnings. It would appear the only way the twins could extend him would be a offer so wild that Berrios and his agent thought no other team would match. If this seems like a reasonable take ... Why not take the prospects now and make the top offer in 2023? If it's to contend in 2022. Let's be realistic. Those odds are very low. Even with Berrios we would need 3 starters in 2022 and one needs to be better than Berrios. Our BP needs a total overhaul. Our best hitter (Cruz) is not only 41 years old, he is a free agent. Our other established star (Donaldson) is going to be 36 and he is frequently hurt and declining. Our potential biggest star (Buxton) has never stayed healthy. Sano is lost and there is no way his contract can be moved. We have a couple guys (Kirilloff/Larnach) who show some promise but Larnach is getting schooled right now and Kirilloff is not exactly lighting it up. They probably will both be good but I would not bet on them carrying the load in 2022. Other than that, we are in great shape for 2022!

The trade(s) of Pineda and hopefully Happ will make plenty of room for Winder to be promoted and Balazovic can take his place in AAA.

You have picked a couple rather extreme anomalies. You have established a team could payout these amounts. You can also personally spend more than you make in a given year. It does not make it a sustainable way to succeed. You also omitted a crucial piece of information. How did Baltimore and Kansas City do those years with record payrolls? KC was 80-82 and Baltimore was 75-87 good for last place. You also failed to mention that the Padres averaged under $72M a year for the last 15 years and spent over $100M twice. $110M in 2015 and $104M in 2019. I think they banked enough cash to go wild for a year. Also, the Padres team is what it is as a result of great drafting and development, including the trades they were able to make as a result of an extremely deep prospect pool. So, the Padres are much more of an example of what you arguing against than for. I guess we could add that KC did not have a true Ace when they won the WS. We could add that Baltimore did not have a true ace either during their run. They had a rotation of 2s and 3s. We could also look at how much other small market teams that DO RATE amongst the lowest team ERA and see how they are doing it. Tampa Bays top paid SP is $6.5M. They traded away a Cy Young pitcher and let their top SP in terms of WAR walk in free agency. Oakland's top paid SP is paid $6M. They do have a RP they are paying $11M but he has not completed an inning this year. Their top two SPs (WAR) they got by trading away an established player for a prospect. Their 3rd SP in terms of WAR they got for "cash considerations". Even the Dodgers with all their revenue ... How did they acquire their 3 top SPs, They drafted and developed them. I guess the point is your evidence of the need to spend big to get an ace (or win) is full of holes. You went looking for examples of spending instead of looking for examples of winning.

They were coming off a 100+ win season in 2019 and a good season in 2020. I would assume they thought we would contend so why would they trade Berrios? Contending in 2022 would require a long list of things to go really well. So, they are definitely not losing their ability to contend in 2021. That shipped has sailed. They also have long odds against for contending in 2022. Therefore, it makes no sense to suggest they should not have waited until now to trade him. The question is really what is the best strategy for getting back into contention. Many fans would answer this in the context of 2022. GMs and some other fans are going to look at this in the context of contending for more than one year. If Berrios is dead set on going through the free agency process. Why not take the prospects and take our best shot at getting him back in 2023 if our odds are not great in 2022? Another possibility would be to go after his replacement in free agency next year which will be the deepest group of free agent SPs in recent memory, especially if Bauer opts out and he is not exactly popular in LA right now.

It's OK if they narrowed it as long as they did not eliminate it!

Pretty reasonable synopsis. I have run the numbers. It's possible to put together the team you elude too above IF Sano and Donaldson's are moved at close to 100%. This is the part I don't think is realistic. It would take $185M with them on the payroll and that's not happening. I am using $13M in the BP and $22.5M to add the caliber SP we would probably need to contend as well as 22.5M for a SS. That won't come close to getting one of the very top guys but it did not want to get carried away with the amounts. I would like to see them trade Donaldson this year and eat most of this year's salary and 35-40% next year with the new team picking up full salary in 2023. That would make it feasible to move him. Would the Met's be more interested if trading for him did not put them over the LT threshold? Probably given the escalators and the likelihood they are over next year. Sano is a different story. The only way he could be moved at full salary is if he catches fire the rest of the season.

Looks like posturing to me. He is telling fans they want to compete and other teams it's going to take a lot to get one of our impact assets. I guess that's the way the game is played.

I would sure hope he understood this several weeks ago. Frankly, I would be more concerned if he is not properly motivated by pride and competition regardless of fear of being replaced. There have been question marks regarding make-up since he was in the minor leagues. Just not they guy that should be extended, IMO. However, I have to admit that I was impressed at how much his approach improved in 2019 and the results that came with it.

Could be that he is using this play to get the best possible offer from the Twins? We shall see.

Seems likely. I have been hoping Sano would break out of this slump for the last month so that there would at least be a chance he could get traded. I never understand extending him but here were are. What are the new waiver rules? Can a team claim him and use him on a playoff roster? At this point I am just hoping to see some pitching prospects can a chance. It would sure boost my confidence in turning this team around if some of our pitching prospects showed well the rest of the year.

Rooker and Ober have done quite well in Milb. Gordon's Milb performance was poor in the early years but he was decent in 2019 and looked much improved this year. He has also looked the part at the MLB level. They are all pretty much perfect examples of players who's role or lack tgereof need to be defined. Sounds to me like you just want to go on with the status quo instead of investing in the future. That's your prerogative. I am interested in finding solutions to building a better team. Apparently, so is Nick. My only quibble is that I share Mike's position that the most important question they answer is related to evaluating prospects that can contribute to starting pitching in 2022.

None of them had had a significant opportunity to do so. Thus, Nicks suggestion this would be good to test during this period that does not matter in the standings. Makes perfect sense to me. Just writing them off because they are not top prospects is really foolish. Have we not learned anything from TB or the multitude of players that have taken off when given an opportunity?

For what it's worth ... I was listening to MLB radio / Dan Duquette shortly after the story broke. Of course, he did not know the number of years either but he did say (paraphrasing) that Buxton was nuts if he did not accept an offer with a $70M guarantee, especially if the escalators were as significant as suggested. He was quite animated in citing Buxton's injury history and the fact that he does not have a long track record of performing anywhere near his numbers this year. Obviously, he has had multiple GM jobs so his opinion has some credibility. Will another team go "a minimum of 100 million over 4-5 years" as you suggest? IDK but I don't think any of us can speak intelligently to that point today. His health and performance over the next year and a half are going to have significant influence on what he gets if he rejects the Twins offer. Perhaps the takeaway here is that at least one industry exec / insider feels a $70M guarantee at this time is a quality offer.

I don't see the article as being a problem. I think we all want to know the Twins are trying to put together a deal with Buxton. The problem is people drawing conclusions based on nothing but completely unsupported assumption. We don't know if the offer was 3/7 or 7/70. We also don't know any details regarding the bonus parameters so why would anyone have an opinion on quality of the offer. For all we know, Buxton's agents and the Twins FO have been involved in a very cooperative collaboration trying to come up with terms both sides can live with. So, I just don't think this article poses any problem if approached with even a modest degree of reason. .

There is nothing worse than someone with NO ACTUAL knowledge disparaging respected people like Rosenthal. He is about as informed as it gets and you ASSUME to have all the answers. It's ironic you are calling others a slimeball while dealing out this kind of slimy insult based on assumption.

If the reported base amount ($70M) is remotely correct, it's probably a 5 year incentive heavy deal, it's definitely not a 1 year deal. Why would he sign a 1 year extension. He would be much better off to hope he can stay relatively healthy next season and get a nice offer elsewhere. It will be interesting to see if this comes to fruition. He is an elite player and our W/L with and without him can't be denied. We also have nothing in the pipeline that could come anywhere near replacing him unless Lewis were to end up in CF. Not exactly sure how next year gets pieced together but after 2022, I hope for an infield of Kirilloff/Polanco/Lewis/Miranda and an outfield of Kepler/Buxton Larnach for a few years.

I watched the game and his fastball looks to grade 55 maybe 60. He was 94-96 as you mentioned but it is quite straight. However, he was quite dominate with it so maybe it plays up more than I think from first impressions. A better change up would really make him tough. The secondary pitches looked like they need quite a bit of work, especially if there is any chance of him being a starter. However, this is the first game I watched him pitch. How has is off-speed stuff stuff been in other starts?

I am not sure how you could possibly believe this is true. Donaldson and Polanco are $26M. What about Berrios /Maeda/Rodgers/Duffy/Kepler/Buxton/Sano and Garver? I come up with $93M with arbitration estimates and an assumption of first and 2nd year players getting an increase to $600K. My guess it's probably closer to $700K. They could get a very good SP and a SS. The rest would have to be filled by prospects. However, it probably would not be financially feasible to retain any of Berrios/Buxton/Rodgers after 2022. So, it would be an all-in for 22 play.

Thanks for this article. I was unaware. He is the biggest difference maker we have for sure but will he ever stay healthy long enough to impose that ability? I sure as heck do NOT know. We also don't have anyone in the system that's a good replacement unless Lewis ends up in CF. I would not be disappointed if he was extended. The rumor mill should be heating up soon!

The reason for poor attendance is the horrid location of the stadium. It's a nightmare getting there. Is Houston's attendance down having let Cole and Springer go to free agency? How about Boston letting Betts go? How about when they let Lester go? Did attendance go down in St. louis when they Pujlos go. Are you telling us you would rather they hold on to players we know vs developing a consistent winner?

Houston lost Cole / Verlander and Springer. All three far more impactful than Berrios / Rodgers. Since the 2019 season, Tampa lost Morton / Snell and traded two of the top three position players in terms of WAR. Of course, the difference is those teams were great. Barring a small miracle, the Twins are not contending in 2022 with or without them.

Everything came together for them in 2019. They were good but they still were not a serious contender. There were a bunch of question marks in 2019. Several guys had career years. Garver / Polanco / Sano and Kepler had career years. Arraez burst on the seen. The BP was vastly improved. They signed a 39 y/o FA (Cruz). That’s risky and he was phenomenal. Odorizzi was at his best and we got him without giving up anything. 2022 would require everything come together like it did in 2019 but there are some differences. The biggest difference is the FO must choose between keeping assets like Rodgers / Berrios and Buxton or targeting 2023 and beyond. They did not need to risk the future to succeed in 2019. The prospects that would come back from those trades could have a huge impact for several years. Of course, they could all flame out. Odds are some good even very good players would come out of trading these high value assets. It comes down to a couple things. Do you believe we can retain Berrios / Buxton and Rodgers. Do you believe Sano will return to his 2019 form./ How about Kepler / Garver? Will they return to 2019 form? Can Nelson Cruz continue to perform at this level. Can we even sign him with universal DH likely? Can we replace his bat for $13M? Can we completely rebuild the BP in 2022? How will we fill the holes after Berrios / Maeda by opening day 2022? What are the odds we can contend and is it a good idea to go all-in for 2022. If we target 2023, are our odds much better? Retaining Berrios / Buxton / Rodgers is going to require we are top bidder. 2023 probably is not any different if you trade them now. They will be here if the Twins are top bidder. However, taking an approach of developing starting pitching and the BP over the remainder of this year and 2022 has a much better chance of succeeding than piecing together a rotation and a BP in 2022. Targeting 2022 also takes away rotation spots that could be used to develop SPs at this level. The difference is that we have whatever assets we would have traded away chasing contention in 2022 and we have some very good additional assets. Some of them might not be here by 2023 but it’s certainly realistic a couple of them would contribute in 2023. I do not accept the premise we either have to retool for 2022 or go into a full rebuild. If targeting 2023 is the best plan, let’s follow the best plan. I would prefer a “retool” take a year and a half than to pursue a strategy with a high probability of failure, especially when that failure significantly extends the duration of that failure.