Major League Ready

Incorrect. The return is the player(s) they spend the money Berrios would have received plus whatever they get in prospects if they trade him this year. Yes, it's possible the propsects don't pan out. Let's also keep in mind that Tattis Jr. was the return for James Shields. Cane and Escobar came back in the Grienke trade. Moncada and Giolitto in the Chris Sale trade and on and on. Frankly, if you are going to pay him whatever it takes, why not take the prospects now and sign him later or just wait until he becomes a free agent given we know pitchers are prone to injury or the "Mike Hampton" disease old nurse pointed out. We could call it the Jordan Zimmerman or Chris Davis disease or even Albert Pujlos disease or any host of other free agents who were never that great after signing a big deal. I think Mike's question "what if he wants" 6/150 is the underlying reason he has not been signed. How many times do we hear in the off-season, especially high profile players are looking for X and X ends up being 150% of what they were looking for? As I recall JD Martinez started at $200M and got $125. It's quite common. Players see this process as the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and rightfully so. The author's blank check premise is the answer to what is the last thing Tampa Bay would do or most teams for that matter. St. Louis let the great Albert Pujlos walk. Boston with a couple hundred million in incremental revenue as compared to the Twins did not give Betts whatever he wanted and on and on.

I think we can reasonably approximate the advantage of height if we can determine how much closer his release point is to plate. That's the difference, right? His height in effect brings the mound closer to the plate. If the average players stride and length provide a release point 57 feet from the plate and he releases 56 feet from the plate the travel time is 98.2% which takes a 92 mph pitch to approximately 94 mph. So, you are very close. Is there also a form of deception or difficulty picking up the pitch given his length? The advantage might be even greater. Your 95-96 seems very reasonable.

Anyone consider the possibility Baldelli was doing the opposite of spreadsheet management. Perhaps having been a player he understands the role confidence plays in developing players. Ober performed really well and pulling him when he did was a good way of assuring he gain some confidence from this outing. Was he managing by spreadsheet. I don't know but I know what happens when I assume.

Ober just might be the bright spot in a dark year. Sure hope he continues to be part of the solution. Also hoping for another bright spot or two.

I was wrong. Would you like to go back on all the times you were not just wrong but dead wrong. I have a long memory starting with your insistence that we must sign Jacoby Ellsbury. Sometimes you need to take a step back when things don't go as planned and things have not gone as planned. Having said this my position has not a 180 it's a regroup for 1 year not a complete rebuild entailing being bad for multiple years. I am simply open to trading Berrios and/or Buxton because in all likelihood doing so significantly improves our odds of contention for the next several. I do strategic planning for a living. and you have a very short-term focus. We are never going to agree. BTW ... I guy that has consistently proposed stuff that would have hurt the team significantly for several years should not throw stones.

I have put up their roster and how the players were acquired a couple different times. They have been great at trading established players for players with minimal MLB experience that have assimilated quite well to the MLB level after being with Tampa. They have also done a great job of what is often referred to as "dumpster diving" here. They have also drafted pretty well. BTW ... I did this for all of the small/mid market teams that made the playoffs. I just assumed people who don't want to accept it simply ignore this type of information because the facts are clear. It's also not that hard to go back and check how teams constructed rosters in successful years.

As you know from some of the analysis I put up on things like elite FA starting pitchers, I use the entire data set or as complete as reasonably feasible when it is of value. In this case, it goes without saying that not every team that trades away established players goes on to contend. The intent is to illustrate that it can or often works. I know you think you are pointing out bias. I just don’t agree that it is necessary to prove it doesn’t always work. Obviously, there are many variables. Also, keep in mind I was responding to people who basically suggested it was incompetent to trade proven players. Most of us listen to nation baseball programs where the need to trade players that teams can’t likely retain is a common discussion. I am happy to concede that this tactic or any other does not universally succeed. Perhaps I should have prefaced my position with something like “while it’s not a guarantee of Success”. I just don’t think it is necessary to provide this disclaimer. It’s obvious and is it really necessary to say this does not work every time. I will agree to a degree that my assertion for “2023 relies very heavily on 2-3 of the guys in the minors right now turning out to be good to very good starting pitchers.” It is not dependent on 2-3 guys being really good. We need 1 guy to be really good and 1 or 2 to be good. As I have stated in the past, 2 or 3 prearb guys in the rotation provides the payroll flexibility to add a very good FA starting pitcher. I was merely pointing out that with the depth and quality of prospects we could build a mostly homegrown rotation. My advocation of trading Berrios and/or Buxton has always stipulated we get impact players back. You are not acknowledging the very premise of getting impact players back when you limit the 2023+ team to players currently in the system. The entire premise of trading Berrios/Buxton is the acquisition of impact players. None of these things are a given. Of course, things have to work out. Do we really need to discuss it’s necessary for any roster plan to pan out if we are to build a contender. The debate should be the best way to build a contender. In 2022, that would be keeping Berrios/Buxton. Beyond 2022 the best way is most likely trading them. I have been a critic of the team’s track record in developing pitching. That does not mean we should pursue less viable strategies because the team has failed to develop SPs in the past? Sorry, but not following the best strategies because we have failed with those strategies in the past is nonsensical to me. Should we pursue inferior practices or get better at best practices. That’s not the plan I would put in place but you are welcome to your opinion.

Thanks. It's hard to figure out if he has legit stuff or is he overwhelming younger / less experienced hitters. I would guess there will be a domino effect with promotions once another SP is promoted to either AAA or the MLB level. It will be interesting to see what happens when he moves up. It would be great to see a local guy make the big club and it's a bonus he was a 15th rounder.

I agree with Dman. There are some players that want to stay with their team even if they don’t get every penny that the free agency process generally yields. A much greater percentage of players can’t wait for free agency and there is no way they are foregoing that process. The whole pay them whatever it takes mantra is patently naïve. Just as assuming we can win a bidding war with teams that have 40, 50 or 100 percent greater revenue. Mid/small market team have to get return for players they can’t resign. We can hate ownership and the front office if it makes us feel better but denying the reality that we simply have considerably less financial resource is not a thoughtful or even logical response. We should look around the league. The Angel and Phillies who have significantly greater financial resource signed huge names and failed. They traded away assets for “known quantities”. How have they done? The Dodgers went through a period where they spent huge and traded for vets. Thar was not a complete bust but they were not serious contenders. The Whitesox traded away key (core) players and rebuilt a winner. Tampa and Oakland trade away established players for players that have not made their mark yet and they have consistently been top teams despite their limitations in free agency. Cleveland has also been inclined to trade away established players. Even Boston traded Betts while they could still get something. Verdugo is now an important part of their team. The even better recent example is Chicago. Moncada has the highest war among position players for the Whitesox. Cease and Jiminez were acquired by trade as was Giolito. The successes associated with restocking with controllable talent are everywhere. The most likely way for this team to get into serious contention is developing SPs that are low cost and will be here for several years. That's not going to happen by the start of 22. We can go "all-in" for 22 by trading for more talent and ride it out with Buxton and Berrios. The odds of success are quite low IMO and that strategy leaves you in significantly worse shape after 2022. If we can get a substantial return that impacts 2023 and several years after we are likely to be significantly better for several years. Basically investing one year for a significantly better team over the next several years is a preferable strategy for me.

What does Varland have in his arsenal.

Every night I check the box scores to see how Javier and Miranda have done. Its a little more exciting because they seemed destined to be AAAA players. It's a bonus we did not expect. I guess the same is true of Gordon. What a boost for the organization if a couple of these guys ended up living up to the potential.

What did Chicago do? Tampa traded Snell and lost Morton to free agency and yet they have the best record in baseball. They have always been willing to part with players approaching free agency while they still have value. You are welcome to your opinion but IMO you don't trade these players if your only focus is next year. You trade them if you get the kind of return that makes you better for several years.

Agree completely. Who should they trade that would yield high quality prospects? The only players I see netting that kind of return are Berrios / Buxton / Polanco / Arraez. Maybe Kepler if he plays better the rest of the year.

I was on the fence with Darvish so I understand the attraction. The really top free agent pitchers have had a pretty good track record. The guys a notch below (IE Jordan Zimmer) have failed at a high rate. With Darvish his age and length of contract made me nervous. So many fail but then you have guys like Grienke and Verlander who have been fantastic. You need a crystal ball with pitchers.

I am praying for Sano to catch fire between now and the break. He has always been a guy that goes cold for significant periods and I stated at the time he should not be extended. Have to agree it is not ideal to have AK in the OF with Larnach. The fact he can play out there when needed is good but most days at 1B would be ideal. Worst case scenario Sano can be the DH next year and we pray he is good enough to move next year or we decline the option in 2023.

If they decide 2022 is a rebuilding year they could play Polanco at SS until one of the prospects earns a shot. That would give them great flexibility. I agree one of them should be traded but not Miranda as he could be Donaldson's replacement. It comes down to Arraez or Polanco for me with Gordon being kept as a utility player. Of course, this assumes we could we get a really good CF / SS or SP prospect for Arraez or Polanco? Also, does Gordon continues to hit and can he go to AAA and prove he can play CF. That would make him a valuable utility player. If not he is the easiest to cut. I would love to see the scenario where Gordon continues to hit, proves he can play CF and we get a great prospect for Arraez or Polanco.

I agree with all of this except I see great potential the long-term outlook IF the pitching prospects pan out reasonably well. We will be positioned extremely well If 2 or 3 SP prospects do well. We have been spending plenty of free agents pitchers but its been multiple pitchers. Prospects panning out means they can sign 1 very good $25M guy instead of 2 or 3 decent guys. Yes, prospects fail. I am optimistic because they have a much better group of SP prospects than they have in a longtime IMO. Ober looks like a good bet to be a solid SP. Is he an Ace? No but he could be as good as Pineda for $10M less than can be invested elsewhere. Balazovic / Duran / Winder look like guys that could be top of the rotation SPs. I am less optimistic about Canterino but he looks like a back of the BP guy worst case scenario. They have a few other guys that also look like they could be MLB SPs. I don't think it's at all a stretch we get 3 MLB pitchers out of the group over the next 2 years. A couple of the other guys probably become BP arnms. Add to this some combination of Polanco / Arraez / Kepler / Kirilloff / Larnach / Garver / Jeffers and that's a nice group of young players at a modest cost. They could afford to add a very good position player and SP in free agency, especially when Donaldson is gone. I would envision something like this .... Balazovic / Duran / Winder / Ober / Maeda or perhaps a FA in the mix 1B? / 2B Polanco / SS Lewis or FA / 3B Miranda / OF Kepler / Kirilloff / Larnach + CF to be determined (perhaps Lewis) and Kirilloff at 1B) Gordon and Refsnyder as bench players BTW ... as long as we are wishing, I hope Javier stuns us all and continues to break out in a big way. Send Lewis to CF. And, if we do trade Buxton or Berrios, let's get a AA guy that is contributing in a significant way by 2022

1) That's completely irrelevant to the discussion of decisions made this year. 2) They still would not be contending 3) We would have been without some key additions in 2019 when Darish was out all year. They could not have afforded him and all the other additions including Cruz. Therefore, that decision would have hurt the team in the best year they have had in quite sometime in order to be a little bit better in a year we are very bad.

Who is suggesting they blow it up? I would view blowing it up as what Chicago did trading top players with multiple years of control. I am suggesting they are very unlikely to contend next year. Could they go out and make one last push next year in the last year of Berrios and Buxton. Sure, how is that going to be different than the last few years? IMO, becoming a true contender is going to require the crop of SPs that are nearing MLB ready become established. That does not happen over night. Again, my opinion is that process is going to take the rest of 21 through 22. They do not have the payroll capacity to go out and buy enough pitching. What would Tampa do MIke? Sure as hell not trade away top prospects or sign expensive free agents. Target 2023. They can put an exciting young team on the field in 2022 that will be entertaining and competitive. They will still have the core guys + Kirilloff and Larnach. If the young guys adapt to the ML level right away they might even be quite good. The only thing I am suggesting is they sacrifice Berrios and Buxton in 2022 if a trade nets an impact player(s) that will be part of the next 6-20 years of twins baseball. That's how Tampa stays good despite a huge revenue disadvantage. Everyone said they are just giving up when they traded Snell and lost Morton. Well, here we are and they have the best record in the league. Perhaps we should take note.

The fact you felt it was directed at you does not make it so.

Hindsight makes for pure genius. Colome and Happ were very reasonable additions. We can find countless examples of free agents that failed in every year for every team for a lot more money that were perfectly good choices. Easily over half of "high-end" free agent RPs fail. The majority of people on this board have called for the signing of a long-list of RPs that have failed, including a call to keep Wisler and Clippard. Most posters here called for Odorizzi. Turns out he has been bad but he was not a horrible choice. Let's not forget they could have signed Bauer and we would still be quite bad. People just feel better if they bitch about it especially if they can insinuate the problem is the stupidity of management.

Sure with 20/20 hindsight Hill was the better choice but Happ was widely considered the better option during the off-season which is why he got paid more than 2X Hill. I thought Walker was a better choice but most people were not that high on him. We also can't reallly suggest they should have know to use Ober out of the gate when he had not competed since 2019. This is pure hindsight given Shoemaker failed. Regardless, we might be talking about a couple more wins. We can hardly look back and say these choices would have made much of a difference. BTW ... most people were feeling pretty good about Dobnak after he had a very good spring training.

I agree which is why I capitalized "could". Pitching is always in demand at the deadline and Buxton has been having a Traut like season. Is it not possible to believe a team takes a chance this is Yelich type situation and trades for him in season? I don't think it's probable but I could happen.

So what would you have done within the budget they have to work with in 2021? Most here advocated for Odorizzi. That would not be much better. Some said trade a bunch of prospects for Snell. That would be a little better but for all practical purposes insignificant. It's easy to complain. What would have been accepted here at the start of the year as a reasonable solution, within the budget, that would have made this team a contender?

There COULD be some decisions to make to that end in the next 1.5 months.