Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,751 -
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
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
I am not arguing for a cap. The luxury tax is a better vehicle because the money is partially distributed to players. My point is that a floor is not viable given the enormous disparity in income.
-
You are not following. MLB has a far greater revenue disparity. The floor would have to be under $150M because some of the teams can't spend that and remain profitable. Their franchise value of a business making nothing is nothing. A floor is viable for a league who started that standard a long time ago before revenue disparity got out of control. Are the players going to accept a $200M cap? That's what it would take in order to get to spending parity similar to the NFL/NHL.
-
No argument here but we are where we are. The top teams are not going to give away their advantage competitively or financially. Getting them even close to equal would be an enormous financial redistribution and that's never going to happen. Something more modest would still help but the players fought hard against that last time. You may recall they wanted to reduce revenue sharing.
-
Sure, in a fantasy world where the top teams were willing to just give away a third of their revenue so that fans in small markets are happy. That's just not remotely realistic.
-
We would all love revenue sharing that diminished the revenue disparity such that it was roughly equivalent to the NFL. Well, those of us in markets that produce less revenue. The problem with this is the top teams would lose a billion dollars in value and of course the bottom teams would gain a billion. There is no way in hell the top teams are accepting a massive loss in value. The revenue disparity has grown wildly and now is somewhat at the point of no return. They did try to manage it with the luxury tax but if you recall the players were very insistent on raising the luxury tax levels significantly.
-
If that were the case, teams in the bottom half of revenue would go from being very disadvantaged to having not a prayer in the world. Whatever level of parity we have today would be greatly diminished. Teams like Milwaukee and Tampa would be completely screwed. What if the Twins had not gone into rebuild and your concept was in place. The Twins next year would have had Ryan/Ober/Duran and Jax in Arb2 and Jeffers in Arb3 and other members of the BP would have been Arb2. There is absolutely no way the twins could afford those players so what you are lobbying for is good for players but it would destroy any chance the Twins or similar teams have of building a team and keeping it together. I heard the same type of stuff during the last CBA period. Some fans are a lot more concerned about players maximizing their income than they are about maintaining a reasonable level of parity. From your other posts you obviously understand the advantage the large revenue teams have so I don't understand why you would take this position. The big markets have dominated the last 20 years and accelerating salary levels earlier would be devastating to the smaller markets.
-
So, with the Twins rebuilding, would you want them to be required to sign veterans? Those veterans inevitably block prospects. There are only 26 spots available. How do you set a floor where the Marlins and Pirates can still make a profit and have that floor push the Rockies to spend what they could afford?
-
They just traded away Duran, Jax, Varland, Stewart, and Correa. In doing so, they punted 2026 and probably 2027. Of course, 2027 is also very likely a short season. Then, there is the fact they have a catcher that has been better for the last two years. I sure hope they won't be giving up significant prospect capital for Rushman or any other player who will be a free agent in 2028. Sign a decent free agent back-up for 2026 and push making decisions on this position until the end of next season when the future will be in better focus, including the likelihood of a 2027 season. Maybe it makes sense to extend Jeffers at that point and a back-up is generally available in free agency. Giving up significant future assets for a player under control for 2026-2027 is the last thing they should do. If they had not traded away the players mentioned above, and we were a player away, this is not a game changer given we have a catcher that has been better for the last two years. I guess we are going to have a number of articles about making 2026 better from the opening bell. 2026 should be about where we are at the end of the year, not the start.
-
Jenkins is going to play a max of 21 games at AAA, He would have to have video game numbers at AA and AAA to warrant calling holding him down manipulation. His number at AA were good but nowhere near what Bryant accomplished. Bryant had an OPS of 1160 at AA the year before he made the big-league club. in 2014. He was promoted to AAA and had an OPS of 1057 over 70 games. J It will not be a blatant manipulation even if he has an 1100 OPS. The new CBA will be agreed upon after Jenkins debuts unless things go terribly wrong. There is not going to be retroactive application of service time.
-
I too have pondered the INF arrangement. What swayed me is that if Lewis hits well enough to be an asset at 1B, he is even more valuable at 3B given how much his fielding has improved. Culpepper is also less valuable at 3B and I just don't see Lee being good enough to move these other pieces around in order to keep Lee at SS. I would love for Lee to take off but right now his most valuable future position looks to be utility INF.
- 117 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- walker jenkins
- emmanuel rodriguez
- (and 5 more)
-
My guess ... Lewis gets all of 2026 to sink or swim. Jenkins is in LF. Buxton is the far superior defender for now. The curveball would be if Rodriguez is on the team. I am not sure who plays RF in that scenario. If not Rodriguez, it's very hard to predict between Roden / GG / Fedko and let's be generous and say Outman has a chance of regaining his rookie form. We really need Culpepper to significantly surpass Lee's production. Lee looks like an average player at best to me. I hope I am wrong but he looks like a good utility INF to me. My guess is Culpepper is at SS and Lewis at 3B. My longshot guess ... Keaschall or Fedko end up at 1B.
- 117 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- walker jenkins
- emmanuel rodriguez
- (and 5 more)
-
They just don't have the players for this strategy at this point in time. They have three guys that are a legit base stealing threat. (Buxton/Keaschall/Outman) It could look quite different in 2026. There are quite a few guys (Jenkins/Rodriguez/Culpepper/Fedko/Roden) that could changes things considerably.
- 44 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- byron buxton
- luke keaschall
- (and 5 more)
-
I am going to take a run at this assuming the sell-off at the deadline was a clear sign. My guess is Ober or Lopez plus Matthews / Festa / SWR and Abel. Bradley is the wildcard. He could turn it around and be in the rotation or end up in the BP.
- 27 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- pablo lopez
- joe ryan
- (and 5 more)
-
Your "what if" is a valid consideration but what would you estimate the odds are Jenkins wins ROY? My guess is less than 20% so I am not making decisions based on that assumption.
-
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.
