Major League Ready

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.

I did say we only have one good SP. I aid we have one good SP signed past next year. In other words, if we have any inclination to look beyond next year through this "window of contention" we will need to trade additional assets or the trade for Realmuto means little if we don't have the pitching to contend. There is a lot of work to do in the bullpen as well. Basically, you are trading away very valuable assets on the bet ...... Sano will straighten out his pitch recognition issues, stay healthy and get in reasonable shape. Buxton will hit above average for the position and stay healthy. One of the SP prospects steps up to at least a 3 next year. We can acquire another front of the rotation SP next year. We can pretty much rebuild the bullpen from the start of 2019. We can replace Mauer and Dozier next year.. This would be an extremely rare feat.

Thanks for that dose of reality. Let's take it a step further. Realmuto alone does not even get us close to the top teams. We have money for free agents but it has been pointed out the SP market is weak. What do we need to trade to get a front of the rotation SP. Are we going to get another guy with two years of control and go all-in for 2019-20 and then punt the next several years beyond 2020? Can we fill the BP holes, 1B, & 2B with our only FA dollars or do we need to trade even more prospects?

I don't have a clue RIGHT NOW what Buxton and Sano will do in 2019 and neither does anyone else with any reasonable degree of certainty. This is part of the point. It's a lost season but we have almost a half of the season left to see if they can turn it around. Not advocating to sign Realmuto or any other player requiring us to give up our best prospects at this moment is very far removed from “punting 2019. Most everyone who is an advocate suggests we are in a window of contention based on control of Buxton and Sano. I am suggesting that it does not make sense to trade key prospects to build a team around two players who are performing so badly they are in the minors. At a minimum take the rest of this lost season, make a more informed decision at the end of the season and act accordingly in the off season. Part of the difference in opinion here is some of the posters have indicated the goal is to win a weak central division. If that’s the goal, I can see the point. I have said before that I believe the goal should be to construct a team that’s on par with the top teams in the AL. In other words, a team that has a 50/50 shot of winning a playoff series. If the goal is to build an actual contender, I have seen nothing written here that indicates any of the trade for Realmuto supporters have considered what it would take to build a contender and what is the best path to that goal. We are on pace to win 75 games. Even if Buxton and Sano come back to be 5 WAR players and we add Realmuto, we are still not close to competitive with the 4 teams on pace to win 100 games and those teams are all built to be good for several years. What do we do about SP? We have one proven SP signed beyond 2019 and the existing staff is not going to be adequate to contend next year. Mike has pointed out the FA market for SP is weak. What would we have to give up to get a front of the rotation SP with 3+ years of control? Ops, we still need a whole lot of help in the BP. Oh, we are forgetting replacing Mauer and Dozier. So, what I am hearing is let’s push are chips in the middle because our window with Buxton and Sano is closing. First, we extended Mauer so it’s certainly not a forgone conclusion we would lose them both. Secondly, they are failing so spectacularly that they have been sent to the minor. Neither can stay healthy. We should ignore the fact that our SP is not nearly at the level of contention and we have one good SP signed beyond 2019. Let’s ignore the bullpen needs almost a complete overhaul. Let’s ignore we have to fill 1B and 2B. Someone will have to show me how we fill all of these holes, especially by opening day 2019. While you are at it, explain to be how a team of a 75 win pace with all of these issues is in a window of contention.

Fair enough ... Do you honestly think the wise path is a path that largely depends on Sano and Buxton being elite players. It would be one thing if they were building toward elite status in at the MLB level but they have both been sent back to the minors and Sano's conditioning alone could be reason to not bet on him long-term. This is also overly simplistic. Should we not also consider the fact we have one good SP signed past 2019 and a poor bullpen when considering pushing our chips in? I also don't agree that either we go all-in or start over. Without looking, I think we have 4 years of control after this year. Why can't we wait until this winter? Why not see how Buxton/Sano/Romero/Gonsales/Busenitz/Gordon, and the entire ML system look like at the end of the season. Why does this need to be decided today?

Mike, we just have very different ideas of management decision making principles. For starters, there is no such thing as perfect information but this team has absolutely crucial personnel that could not be more uncertain at this point. I would add that better developed information is the foundation to solid decision making. Therefore, I rigidly disagree with your position we will be less likely to succeed if we wait to get a better information. The "moving the goal posts" is a phrase used by many people, certainly not just you. The "movement" is a date, the principles driving the decision making process should remain the same. What I hear people saying is I am sick of waiting. While I can sympathize, the fact fans want it sooner than later is very poor decision criteria. The status of the team should dictate when to give up future assets to elevate the teams ability to win. You and many others, including local and national sportscasters have pointed toward Buxton and Sano being crucial. Well, they could not be further from carrying this team. Therefore, betting the future on them today is incredibly bad management. At a minimum, the FO should wait for Buxton and Sano to demonstrate they can be effective at the major league level and that's still a long way from demonstrating they play at the level needed to make us contenders. We Have one reliable starter signed past next year and our bullpen is not close to that of a contender. Our young core has not developed but many fans want us to proceed as if they have. There is not a credible argument (IMO) this team is at a point it should be making this type of move. At a minimum, it would make sense to evaluate Buxton, Sano, and several prospects the remainder of the year. Then, while presumably in a much better informed state, reconstruct the 2019 roster.

There is also the small issue of about $100M additional revenue for the cubs and $150M for Boston. Houston or Cleveland are far better models to examine unless you don't believe revenue matters. Boston could spend the Twins budget and have enough left over to sign 6 Lester equivelents. Houston had a core far deeper and far more proven. Cleveland's moves were trading for guys while they were still prospects and extending a couple key guys.

I understand your focus and many others is next year. My focus is building a sustainable winner. The two are generally not the same which at least in part probably highlights our difference in opinion. I have had a front row seat in observing dozens of organization being derailed or marginalized by short-term focus. I often don't reply in the kindest of manners to this focus because 20 years of watching it fail (sometimes spectacularly) tends to form a firm opinion of such practices. You are correct that Mauer is not the solution. I thought I was clear that was a fall back position. Are you against signing one of the 3B free agents and moving Sano to 1B? Obviously, this scenario changes if Sano works his butt off to get in shape and turns things around offensively by the end of the year.

You have a point if the assumption is that we have to spend all of the available payroll immediately. The nature of strategic planning is long-term and specifically where assets are concerned the assessment should match the life of the assets. I assumed the dollars would get spent over the next couple of years unless the FO is willing and successful in pursuing Machado. We have many unanswered questions which include a number of pitching prospects that really should be auditioned next year. It would not be wise to commit all of the available dollars yet. There are a number of 3B prospects and it might make sense to move Sano to 1B. I would prefer a 245lbs version of Sano shows up for spring training and his approach / pitch recognition improves significantly but the depth of FA 3B might make that option a good one. If Sano flops, we have other options at 1B. It also would not be horrible to bring Mauer back on a 1 year deal if he is willing. We could also spend on the BP. We all know spending on the BP in free agency is risky but one legit late inning guy would be a nice add.

This makes faaaaar more sense to me, especially given we have 60M+ in payroll coming off the books. 1B is another chance in FA to upgrade our offense. The rest of the available payroll budget could get spent on SP and BP.

If you define a window as a possibility of winning the Central, yes, I would say there is a possibility in the next couple of years. If a window means being an actual contender, no, we are not in a window until the many things that need to get addressed are improved. We would be 20 games back in the east or west. Competing with the real contenders would require considerably better starting pitching, an overhaul of the bullpen, replacing Dozier at 2B, replacing Mauer at 1B, not to mention any hope of contending would require Buxton and Sano to both sustain a level of play they have shown at times but they have not shown a glimpse of that play this year. Oh and catcher too. Trading long-term assets in order to have Realmuto for 2019-20 is a horrendously poor plan. If the team does not sort all of these problems you have given away the guys most likely to help the team when this does get sorted out. If it does somehow all go our way .... FANTASTIC, there will always be players that can be added by trading away great prospects. At least at that point we will know with much greater precision what we need to add. The cubs traded away Samardzija when they were on the brink. Why, because 6 years of Russel is waaaay better when you have not quite arrived but are expecting to contend soon. I bet Arizona wish they had not traded away Swanson before they were ready. Short-term focus is a good way to really suck long-term.

I don’t know how screwed up a team has to be before we should accept they are not in a window but how anyone can conclude we are just a player away from contending with NY, Boston, Houston, and Cleveland. We have one proven SP that will be here after next year, the bullpen is a mess and the guys who were supposed to be our superstars are in the minors. Yes, lets trade away or top prospects for a catcher that will be here for 2 years and hope all of what ails this team will be fixed by opening day next year. Who cares if trading away those top prospects could result in continued futility for several years. Let’s go all-in on next year. We have control of the core players through 2021-2022. This team can also afford to keep Berrios and one of Buxton or Sano if we have cheap talent like Kirriloff, Lewis, Graterol, etc coming on board as the price of some of our core players goes up. Managing our assets to be all-in on a 2 year window is a very bad idea. I would prefer a plan that at least has a chance of sustained success. Luckily, Falvey and Levine have been very consistent in their message that sustainability is a primary objective so I trust we won't see them pushing all their chips in, especially when we have a bad hand. You can't bluff when there are several great teams that are set-up for long-term success.

They were having better ABs the last couple innings. I think taking him out was motivated by making sure his confidence remained in tact. It was a good outing to build on and that was more important than getting one more inning.

We are not as far apart as it may seem. My primary point is that the answer is getting better at acquisition and development of young talent. The secondary point is that short-term assets like Gibson can't possibly factor in to long-term success. They are gone after next season. If there is a 3rd point to be made here that would be the financial realities of being a mid market team. Fielding young talent is essential to the ability to retain talent and extend a winning window or to have the capacity to add free agents. You don't resign Escobar when you have Gordon ready to take his place. Assuming you pay market value, you fill that role with a league minimum player and add a player of equal value to Escobar that fills a need. Then, the next question is what do we get for Gibby. I think he has proven he is a different player starting the 2nd half of last year. Maybe the market won't see it that way. I am with you if that's the case. Why trade him for a guy who projects to be a back of the rotation SP. We have quite a few of those guys. If you can get a guy like Sheffield or better, that trade should contribute to winning for several years. It's not a good idea to pass on the chance to add that type of asset because we want so badly for next year 's team to be better. That's a good way to remain bad. We are also caught in a wait and see mode. We have a number of pieces that COULD come together but that's a lot of "ifs". So, it does not make sense to press reset but I suggest we take advantage of any opportunities to add assets while we wait to see what happens with Buxton, Sano, and even Romero. Will Rooker become part of the solution in the next year? Will Gordon prove to be part of the solution. Is Polanco the player we saw the last half of 2017 or was that aided by PEDs. That's alot to figure out so let's not forego opportunities to add more long-term help because if all the stars and moon aligh, we can be fringe contender next year.

I have not read the Fangraphs article but I think the $8M/WAR is the average cost of acquiring 1 WAR though free agency. This is used by many as a measure of value. Your post demonstrates that 1 WAR is not worth $8M. What this really tells us is that building through free agents has been a relatively poor strategy. Of course, there are some free agents (like Lester) that provide the final pieces to a contender. Let's hope the Twins spend the available money wisely and outperform the $8M/WAR productivity measure.

There is a very long list of things that need to be improved / sorted out before this team becomes a contender. The loss of Dozier and Mauer is just a start. Our two guys that were supposed to be the key guys are in the minor leagues, our bullpen is a mess, and most of the SPs are gone after next year. Why would we want to manage our assets based on the assumption ALL of these thjings are going to turn around next year? Managing this teams assets as if we are going to be a contender next year is the kind of blind faith driven by fanaticism. A guy that can produce for 6 years has waaaaay more value at this point than having Gibson for 1 more year. Go get a free agent SP next year. You have Berrios / Romero / Odorizzi / FA / and one of several others for the 5th spot. If you can get Sheffield from the Yankees or someone similar, in the next couple years your SP staff looks something like Berrios / Romero / Graterol / Sheffield and the FA if they are still here or one of Gonsalves / Thorpe / Stewart / etc.

That's why we have a lot of them. How is this relevant. Have you somehow come to the conclusion that all of the best teams are not built around prospects or do you think it was just luck? I am really curious to hear how you look at the construction of NY, Boston, Houston, and Cleveland and not conclude drafting and development or trades acquiring prospects without giving up key talent (Indians / NY) are the most important aspects of building a contender, especially for teams outside the top 10 in revenue.

For starters, keep in mind the point I was countering was that "prospects are fools gold". The focal point of my post was that NY, Boston, Houston and Cleveland are built primarily around prospects. It would appear you assumed I meant the prospects primarily came from trades which was not remotely close to the intended message. You apparently assumed when I said "I would add" there was a sell off component to rebuilding that meant it was the primary catalyst. I used KC as a specific example and the players netted in the Greinke trade. I am not sure how that indicates all the draft picks and international free agents were not the most important aspect of their rebuild. When you have our budget, draft or trading for prospects and developing them is crucial to being able to afford to retain them when we are in a window. It also provides the payroll room like we have next year to add free agents. People complained when we let Cuddyer go too. That compensation pick resulted in Berrios. It's easy to figure how to put the best possible team on the field next year which is often the focus of fans. Unfortunately, building a contender requires a long-term approach and the short-term focus of most fans is often detrimental to sustained success.

There are 4 incredibly elite teams right now in the AL. They were all built primarily around prospects. Obviously, the Yankees and Redsox used their considerable revenue advantage to add even more established talent. I would add that if you look at the rebuild of mid or small market teams there is generally a component of selling off top talent for prospects. KC traded Greinke for Cain and Escobar. Houston traded every player they had with any tenure. Their entire payroll got down to around $30M. Oakland amassed the best record over the past 25 years of any team outside the top 10 in revenue and better than some top 10 teams by trading very good players for prospects. Same is true in Basketball even though they have a salary cap. Front offices are evolving. They are hiring staff with the education and experience to use hard data and build operating models. The new FO is not going to follow sentiment. In the case of mid and small market teams they understand the financial realities that many fans simply will not accept. The FA market last year was witness to their understanding of building through prospects and the handful of incredibly good teams dominating MLB is glaring proof of the need to build around prospects. If the Twins or any other mid market team do a great job acquiring and developing prospects, they will have enough payroll to add (not keep) proven talent. They can't afford a JCS or to build an entire SP staff like Boston but they can add significant talent. You keep the talent once you are in a window of contention. To continue to look at this team as a contender is "fool's gold".

Mike, any professional has job demands that require preparation. When a non-athlete professional does not bother to prepare when ample time has been provided, the people accountable for the the organization are going to conclude that their level of commitment is not adequate. In this case, the demand is to eat healthy and exercise. Compared to what many of us need to do in preparation this is a absolute walk in the park and he had 5 months to do it. If there are medical reasons Sano that make it difficult to drop the weight that's a different issue but it's seems a very reasonable assumption the media would have reported it. So, what reasons other than he did not care enough to get in shape are reasonable alternatives?

Every team has let players go. There are many examples of considerably better players than those you have mentioned. We got Johan as a rule 5 players. Corey Kluber and the list is very long. To suggest this is a Twins thing is very uninformed.

Most fans of teams that play in a league with a cap come to understand the correlation to spending wisely and winning. Some baseball fans somehow can’t grasp that there is a practical limitation to what the team can spend. The “I don’t care because it’s not my money” position is a simplistic line of thought. Given the revenue advantage of the top teams, we should all be hoping for very wise spending on the part of the FO. This entire discussion is premature. This team might be in contention for the central division but we are far from contenders. NY, Boston and Houston are on a completely different level. Upgrading at Catcher won't change that much. The only way it makes sense for this team to be buyers is If the entire team improves dramatically by the deadline. If not, why spend a premium for mid-season additions? We have a lot of payroll dollars freeing up this off-season. Address the problem with those dollars instead of prospects, especially the kind of prospects it would take to get an elite Catcher.

I was basically saying the same thing as you have here. If you include 3 rounds for 15 years it's the equivalent of 45 years. I would take rounds 74-78 for 20 years and make it 100 years. Divide by the number of ML players produced. You could even project the probable war of a player picked. I don't like giving up the pick but none of us have any regard for the financial component. This is a business and that's the basis of this decision. Baseball fans understand and accept players treating it as a business but they often can't accept the teams making business decisions.

When you expand the comparison beyond #74 you are multiply the odds of getting a viable player by the number of rounds you are adding. So, no you can't look at successive rounds or anyone taken past #74 when evaluating the odds of getting a viable player at #74. It would only makes sense to compare all picks between 74-xxx if they were trading away a comparable number of picks. I would prefer they kept the pick but I also recognize they are running a business.