Major League Ready

Dozier's history of coming on in the 2nd half might entice a team to take a chance but I don't like our odds of getting a decent prospect. Lynn would not be a shock because he too has performed in the past. Plus a couple of the contenders are still short on SP.

There is no doubt you and I have very different professional backgrounds. I would be more than happy to list my credentials if you really want to compare credentials.

It's only significant because they have horrible odds. It would only be a 4% reduction if they had a 50% chance of making the playoffs. Would it make more sense for them to trade Escobar and Pressly if they had a 50% chance?

Agreed. They obviously traded two players with more to contribute than the player's you listed. So, I don't think there is any reason to believe they won't trade all of the players given a remotely reasonable return. The bad news is none of them are going to return much. The good news is it will create opportunities for players who could possibly contribute to the solution.

I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star. If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series. This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

Trading a pending free agent and a RP with one more year of control is blowing it up?

I guess I don't understand how the "coin-flip" metafore ever had any relevance. Their odds of winning the division are so low that foregoing an opportunity to add to the farm system would be negligent on the part of the F/O. A significant part of that evaluation is that if one or more of the players make it, they will contribute for 6 years or more. You still have not acknowledged this and I think that is a significant part of the disconnect. The other is the extreme weight you put on the present. I support your desire to never give up. I can't and won't support your insistence that the F/O apply extremely poor management practices because you are unwilling to give any weight to benefits that take place in the future.

Sorry ... That was from ND-Fan and I was thinking it was from you.

I have a very hard time following your logic, not just here but in general. I thought you meant odds of getting into the playoffs. No kidding they are not that far off from a coin flip on a given game. A 90 loss team has a 44.4% chance of winning any given game. There are two other points where we simply differ in opinion. You view the goal as getting into the playoffs. I view the goal as building a great team. If Cleveland folds the rest of the way and we get in as a 500 team, so what. We are still a bad team. The odds makers would give us somewhere around a 30% chance of winning a playoff series which I include when assessing our odds of success and consequent buy/sell strategies. Again, what difference does it make if we get crushed in a playoff series? That's not success in my opinion. Therefore, I am looking at the probability of success as the odds of getting into the playoffs multiplied by the odds of winning a playoff series. I think the core of our disagreement is you and the millennial fans you reference are unwilling to ,make even the smallest sacrifice to get better better in the future. Cashing in our small odds would require a bunch of players to completely turn around their performance. The departure of Escobar and Pressly does not preclude this from happening (see 2017). To address your question about the odds of the players we received contributing to the ML club, once again we evaluate that situation very differently. For starters the contribution of Escobar is this season with an extremely low odds of contending a decent RP in the same time period as well as next year where our chances of contending have to be at least a little better. The players we received in trade would contribute for 6 years if they make it to the ML club. Your focus on the immediate seems to have precluded this consideration. So, do I think the odds are higher of the players we received contributing to an actual contender, absolutely.

A coin flip is 50/50. We are not remotely a coin flip. Plus, the only reason we have a chance to make the playoffs is that we play in an extremely weak division. Is the goal to make the playoffs in a weak division or is it to construct a great team? It seems many of you are want to waste an opportunity to get better for a small chance to get into a playoff series where we would be the considerably weaker team no matter which of the opponents we draw. That is an incredibly misguided unless your goal is to stay mediocre or in our case not even mediocre.

That would be an incredible boost. If that happens Berrios / Romero / Gonsalves / Graterol & Wells could give is a great home grown rotation similar to what Cleveland fans have enjoyed of late. We are overdue for a break or two!

This one is hard to understand. It makes you think that something is in the works to move a few pieces. If not, what does the guy have to do?

I have no problem at all with how you represented Escobar's numbers, it was the way you manipulated Hosmer's track record where I have a problem. It would have made far more sense to use the previous 3 years, 4 years or 5 years. Instead, you separated his best year (the most current year and then used a 3 year period where he had two bad years with very good years before and after that period. In other words, instead of portraying the numbers as accurately as possible you elected to manipulate the numbers to look as bad as possible. The question of if Hosmer is a reasonable example is easily verified by looking at where he was rated among top free agents last year. You could also evaluate the comparison based on the contract Hosmer got and the projected contract for Escobar. Six months from now we can compare the actual contracts. They are not remotely close to comparable free agents.

Because he is much more valuable at 3B if he can play even close to average defensive with that cannon for arm. 1B is far easier to fill and we have waaaay more prospects that profile for 1B. Plus, if the reports are accurate, he is taking getting into shape seriously. He is a tremendous athlete that happens to be out of shape. How good could he be if he sheds 40 lbs. His value at 3B is worthy of further evaluation if he does in fact get in shape.

I have to admit ... I did not think there were ANY reasonable examples. However, if you manipulate the numbers, you can make a case for Hosmer. However, you chose a 3 year period which included 2 years when he was at his worst and had near zero WAR. You elected to position the numbers in a manner not reflective of recent history. For example, he had 7.8 fWAR the 3 years immediately proceeding his FA year and that included a very bad year of .2 FWAR. You could have also used the last 5 years where he averaged 2.14 WAR. He was also rated the 3rd best FA on the market my MLB Trade Rumors so manipulating of war aside, comparing Hosmer and Escobar makes little sense and the fact he received a $144M contract would suggest the league does not see them as anywhere near comparable.

We could not move him for an elite prospect. I think the probability changes when you go down a rung. I guess it depends on how you define not much.

We all love Escobar BUT IF the Twins get a good offer it would be wildly incompetent to hold on to him based on the strategy of making a qualifying offer. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If they want to keep him, they will make an appropriate offer in FA. Can anyone name a player with a career WAR under 1.5/season that has received a qualifying offer? How about under 2 WAR for the previous 3 seasons? The QA for Escobar is a terrible idea that can go wrong in too many ways. Trade him and then go sign him back this winter.

I think the odds are against it but I would try to position the team in a manner that provides flexibility, does not punt 2019, and does not leverage our future. Maybe Buck and Sano come back in August and tear it up. Not likely but it would certainly think that would impact how the FO approached next year in terms of FA signing and trades. At present Gibson is the toughest for me because he has been quite good since the middle of last year and losing him would likely be detrimental to next year. The offer needs to be good. Odorizzi is replaceable. The others being discussed are all free agents and holding on to them because it MIGHT give us a slightly better chance of signing them is a naive approach assuming any of the others net a decent prospect. If Sano / Buxton improve enough to warrant an aggressive approach, great. Perhaps others breakout. It sure seems like Kepler could and perhaps should. Garver has been good offensively of late. Cave has been a very nice surprise. Polanco looked fantastic for a considerable stretch last year and I am not going to assume it was PED induced. There are a number of SP and BP candidates to step up too. Point being there is plenty of upside but the plan should remain fluid until we figure out which players are part of the solution.

That's the crux of the problem. The singular focus on next year. That's what leads to the sentiment that it won't hurt you. Supervisory or even middle management is tasked with execution. Leadership, in this case the Chief Baseball Officer and GM are responsible for the long-term health of this organization. There is not a GM in this league that would give any serious consideration to trade for Realmuto at the expected price if they were in the Twins situation. Cmon, this team is a mess without the necessity of Buxton and Sano becoming elite and you are suggesting a "final piece" type move. To be fair it's a mess with potential. The SP and BP aside, what are the odds at this point Buxton and Sano become 5+ WAR players or whatever measure you want to use that would equate to them playing at the level necessary for the Twins to contend. We should trade away our best prospect for 2 years depending on both Buxton and Sano reaching their potential. That kind of decision making gets you fired when in a leadership position.

Is your answer really pursuing less effective practices for building a contender which trading for top talent happens to be, especially given the economic necessity for mid to small revenue teams to build from their farm systems. The answer is to get better a drafting, international signings, and trading from prospects. Basically, the way Cleveland has been built. To say it has not worked, therefore let's pursue a path everyone else has realized is far less effective is an outstandingly bad idea. Any plan to get a great player sounds exciting when your window to the world does not extend beyond next year. This team has a long list of needs in 2019 and it gets longer in 2020. The solution is not a player that is only under contract for two years, especially when that player will cost the elite prospects that could finally end the term of our mediocrity. This is a play with a low probability of success at the cost of likely extending us watching bad baseball for several years. Try asking if the Twins should trade (assuming a premium) for Realmuto (RIGHT NOW) on one of the Q&As you follow. Let's see what their take is on this move. You ask these questions frequently, let's get an outside perspective.

This is fantastic. It's great for getting an idea of how players are trending.

You make several good points. My position trading away prospects is based on many of the things you point out. I just think we should ride it out until at least this point next year before we do anything drastic.

When depends a lot on what happens with Buxton / Sano. I really want to be optimistic but realistically what is the probability they turn into the elite players we need them to contend. BTW contend (to me) does not mean for the central. Contend means a 50/50 shot at winning a playoff series. What percentage you and other TD followers put on them reaching this status. 50% seems generous. If we say 50%, the probability of both of them contributing at that level is 25%. I also have no interest in any approach that is focused on a 1-2 year window and requires we part with assets that are likely to extend the window for several years. I would be fine with keeping Gibson if we extend him or if we don't get an enticing offer. With Dozier, I am just not confident he with him going forward but I also have no idea what the minor league staff. Of course, he is a FA so I guess what we do short-term simply depends on the offer. Next question is what can we pull off in FA. We can't just sign whomever we want unless the overpay is just nuts which is always a bad idea. Players want to go to certain teams and the FA market is a mechanism for them to get the best offer they can on one of a handful of teams they want to play on. I disagree with the sentiment that we should just trade everyone if we don't believe Sano / Buxton will lead us to the promise land next year. Why do that today? Whats to be gained?

I hope they find a way to get better.

That's for sure. I have asked a few times to those of you who have said we MIGHT waste 2019 ... what's the rest of the plan. Are you really suggesting a move this costly be done without determining the viability of the other moves required. 2019 will be a waste with or without Realmuto without at least one more top of the rotation starter. I would assume the supporters know this. I assume they also know we have a sum total of one BP guy. It's also understood we need to replace Dozier who was arguably most valuable player on the team the past couple of years. As you have pointed out, we have a hole to fill at 1B and the FA mark is very weak. Would that not require a trade to fill as well? Escobar will be gone as well. Maybe it's just me but I have not seen anyone else address what we need to do to insure the cost associated with acquiring Realmuto is not a complete waste. I have also seen anyone address why now is better than the off-season other than this particular asset might not be available. So, we are not just talking about a considerable package for Realmuto. We would need to pony up big time for a SP given there are none available this winter in FA. We could get a 3B and move Sano to first so that is possible through FA. At a minimum, saving 2019 would require two monster packages which would take several of our top prospects. All of this to build a contender around two guys that have regressed to the point of being sent back to the minors. The only cost of waiting the rest of the year and being in a considerably better position to make such a decision is this particular asset probably won't be available. The cost, if all of these things don't come together is likely several more years of sucking. The benefit is elevating our chances of contention for the 19-20 seasons. The only way this makes any sense at all is if Buxton and Sano are playing at an elite level out of the gate in 2019. That's a long-shot as is putting together all of the rest of the pieces by the start of 2019 Given the cost of this plan (trading key prospects) and the relative lack of cost to take the rest of the year to evaluate Buxton / Sano as well as SP and BP prospects it would be flat out incompetent to trade for Realmuto or any similar asset today.