Major League Ready

Arraez hit 6 home runs in roughly 1400 Milb PAs so they are far from the same and Gonzalez looks capable of a higher OPS. It's also not at all a stretch to believe he will develop more power given his age. It does not seem like a big stretch to believe he could become an 18-20HR guy? If he can hit for a high average, produce a high on base percentage, and hit 18-20 HRs that would be a very good offensive player. I will take that guy hitting 4th or 5th.

Your comment was not directed at "average fans". It suggested that people here who supported selling were "fair weather fans". Most of TDs, at least those who are advocating selling are not casual fans. They are people that follow the game closely enough to know that we would not even have Duran or Ryan if not for selling. They are fans that understand that not selling in a lost year (like the Angels last year) is gross mismanagement that can hurt the team for several years. Many of those average fans you speak of will go to games regardless of those trades while others will go more or less frequently based on the quality of the product. Those advocating selling understand selling provides an opportunity to put a better product on the field for several years.

Fans that don't want to see mediocrity year after year. Fans that don't think it's a good idea to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result. Fans that recognize that we took advantage of a lost year to acquire Ryan and Duran. Fans that recognize that Cleveland and KC improved their teams for several years when they recognized a lost year and traded for Clause and Reagans.

Because the market is not even fully formed. There are still teams on the bubble and until that's decided there will be very few transactions.

Good point. I wondered about that. It still works out fine if the goal is to give Clemens and Keaschall playing time because Keaschall also has some 1B experience. They can play Clemmens and Keaschall at 1B with Clemmens getting time in the OF and 2B and some 1B if Keaschall DHs

Looking at the entire league makes no sense. The MN Twins or any other team in the bottom half of revenue needs to utilize different strategies than high revenue teams. If you look at Average or below average revenue teams, WS wins have become quite rare. The White Sox won in 2005, in the 19 seasons since then, one below average revenue team has won the WS. That would be the Royals in 2015. Greinke was traded after the 2010 season and the won the WS the 5th year after that trade. The Royals got their best player (Cane) and their starting SS (Escober) in that trade. The question to ask would be if they would have won the WS without selling. If a below average revenue team wins the WS this year, it would likely be Detroit. They sold off any veterans they could and started over. Yes, it took a few years. The question we should be asking is what below average team has won the WS in the past 20 years without a sell-off and rebuild. The answer is none. You can find the answer you seek by only asking questions that yield the answer you want but that does not mean you have come to a meaningful conclusion.

They seem to be on board with your thinking. Now they just need to let France go. We have several guys that could play 2B or OF. IB is the perfect opportunity to see what we have in Clemmens. Keaschall can also play 1B so they have a back-up in case of injury or substitutions. They really need to trade Castro as well. That playing time should go to Keaschall (INF & OF). I think Clemmens is part of the future. The question is if he is an everyday player of a bench player.

A lot because those trades are highly unlikely to happen until the last day or two before the deadline.

The point many here are making is the Twins are generally reluctant to act on selling opportunities, so you are asking then wrong question. The question is has selling assets .5 - 1.5 years in advance of contract expirations contributed significantly to building more competitive teams for those teams that pursue this strategy. The answer to that question is a resounding yes.

The optimist in me sees Jenkins finishing the year really strong in AA and starting 26 in AAA. He tears up AAA for a couple months and gets promoted. Your scenario might have a higher probability but humor me. I would replace France with either Julien or Sabato. We need a 1B for next year more than an OFer. It also balances the roster better. Of course, I am assuming Keaschall replaces Kiersey. Then, I trade Castro or Bader if the offer is significant and bring up Martin. I would not trade either one of those guys just to open a roster spot.

It's not crazy but I think there is a more ideal sequence of events that could take place. GG is only 21 so rather than rush him, promote either Martin who has been great or Rodriguez if he is healthy and promote GG to AAA. That gives them a good opportunity to evaluate GG at AAA in terms of his ability to take a roster spot in 2026. The result would be the same, except Larnach gets traded this winter (if they are confident in having a replacement) and GG or Some combination of GG, Rodriguez, and Jenkins are patrolling the OF at target field in 2026. At some point between no and the 2026 deadline, Larnach and maybe Wallner are getting traded. At least I sure hope that some combination of Jenkins / GG / E. Rod / Martin and Rosario displace them. The picture I have in my head is that Jenkins and either E. Rod or GG will be corner OFer and Martin is a utility player or traded.

Yes, they execute their plan. No, it's not the same as other team's plans. If you execute a less effective plan, you are still less effective. You only want to acknowledge the part that fits your narrative.

Even the Ray's, A's, and Guardians are not following identical practices, but they definitely operate differently than other teams. Part of that is pure necessity. They literally have 1/3 the revenue of the top revenue teams. It goes without saying that they are effectively executing these strategies. The Guardians rarely spend in free agency. The Rays spend sparingly but get great value for the dollar. Charlie Morton for example. They managed to get a great free agent SP on a moderate AAV, two-year deal. They also cycle through more (as they are called here) dumpster bin cast-offs than any other team. Cleveland and Tampa have traded a lot of good players in their last year. This strategy has arguably been the biggest difference maker for these organizations. They have gotten 5-6 years of good production by trading players in their final year. Look at Kluber as an example. Texas got nothing out of Kluber and Cleveland got Emmanuel Clause. This also how the got Clevinger, Carasco, Bauer, Sanatana, Haffner, and many others

That is not an even remotely logical conclusion. Other teams are VERY aware of practices followed in Tampa, Cleveland, and Oakland. Many teams, even large market teams have adopted practices similar to those followed in Cleveland and especially Tampa over the last 10+ years. However, other teams have different personnel with different opinions that result in different strategies. Fans have different opinions on how to do things as well. Many hate Cleveland's practices despite their success.

Completely agree and I have voiced this position quite a few times here. I would like to see them follow most of their practices and use the incremental revenue they have over these teams. Ideally, they would have more of the type of players we want to extend which would result in them moving fewer established players. It would only be a few less but the players we kept would hopefully be impact players. Rameriz for example is a waaaay better deal than Correa. He produces more for 60% of Correa's salary.

Who said it's the best they can do. That's hyperbolic response to reality you don't want to acknowledge. I completely agree that there is room for improvement. However, with the exception of the Mets or a couple teams that had owners who knew their time on earth was very short, teams don't spend well beyond their revenue assuming revenue will take a giant shift upward. Expecting business owners to not care about the bottom line is incredibly naive.

Not exactly true. The Rays and Guardians operate differently. The way they accumulate talent is quite different. The Guardians rarely spend on free agents and both the Rays and Guardians have traded away significantly more established players for prospects. It MIGHT be fair to say they have a better success rate but the bigger difference is the number of opportunities they have created through trades. The Twins trades of established players that worked out were Cruz and Escobar for Ryan and Duran. The Berrios trade remains to be seen. It looks OK at this point. The Polanco trade remains to be seen. That trade also looks OK rat this point. I am blanking on other good established players they have traded in the past decade. They too often refuse to turn over players the way the Rays or Guardians have in the past.

IDK if you listened but they actually said in framing one of the questions that the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expect different results. They also pointed out Detroit has a strong young team and a very good farm system so if the twins are going to compete with them, they have to upgrade the talent. I am paraphrasing a more direct version. They were being polite.

I like the Cardinals organization a lot. However, "Market Size" does not necessarily dictate revenue. St Louis does not have an NFL team or an NBA team. It's a great baseball market and the Cardinals generate substantially more revenue than the Twins. You can't just ignore all every factor outside of population size and call them similar markets. Therefore, it is unrealistic for the Twins to operate the same way as the Cardinals.

Thanks for the link. It sure seemed like both Sherman and Heyman believed they should sell. They did not come out and say it but the way they framed the questions suggested they believed this team needs a makeover.

The only team in the bottom half of revenue that has won the WS in recent memory is the Royals. Do you want the Twins to model their practices. The Royals rank dead last in win percentage over the past 20 years and they have won 90 games in a season exactly once, the year they won the WS. They built most of that roster by sucking really bad for many years and getting high draft picks. The WS measure is a very poor anecdotal measure given how rare it has become for teams in the bottom half of revenue.

IDK what to believe of Clemens but I doubt he is a long-term solution at 1B. However, I do like his versatility. He is a decent defender at a number of positions which at minimum would make him a good bench player. Why not give him a chance and see if he can gain some consistency which is what they seem to be doing. Keaschall will be back very soon. He might end up getting some time at 1B. If that's their plan, they should DFA France and bring up either Julien / Sabato or Martin. That would give them plenty of depth at 1B and Keashall could get plenty of playing time by rotating between the INF and OF.

Like you, I really want to get a look at Sabato but I might be inclined let Sabato prove it for another month. I would still definitely DFA France because we have Clemens / Julien / Keaschall and Sabato as potential replacements. Julien has a .989 OPS the last month. Clemens does not need to be the everyday 1B to get a significant number of PAs the rest of the season. He could be a valuable bench player next year so I want to see him get a chance. We could also see one or two of Castro, Bader, and Larnach traded so hopefully there will be a few spots opening up. We need to start looking for long-term solutions now.

The RP that has not been mentioned is Brock Stewart. He has been good this year and in the past with a high K rate when healthy. He is not a free agent until 2028 but he is 33 years old. It just takes one team that sees him as dominant for this year with the possibility of another year or two. Maybe I am being a homer but I don't think Stewart gets enough credit.

The assumption that trading for established players would be far more effective than relying on prospects has been made here many times, Cody. Have you ever looked at examples of successful teams and how they acquired those players? It’s really quite easy to look up any successful team you like on Fangraphs and sort by WAR. The acquisition method is listed. If it’s a trade, you can look at WAR in all the years preceding the trade and determine if the player was acquired before or after they were proven players. Baseball reference has more details on acquisition. I will spare you looking them up but feel free to check the data. I used a very liberal definition of proven. If a player had produced 1.5 WAR in any season before being acquired they are considered proven. Listed below are the below average revenue teams with the most wins since 2000. The average WAR produced by proven players acquired in trade is 11.3% Pablo would get us to about that number if he performs as expected. There are 3 of 30 teams that are anomalies producing around 30%. The 202 Diamondbacks are by far the biggest outlier. No other teams even come close to their profile with 30% coming in trade and 44% from free agents. They acquired Randy Johnson in free agency and he produced 8 WAR. They acquired Curt Schilling in trade and he produced 9 WAR. He produced 3 WAR the year before they traded for him. They also had got more than expected out of some other free agents. The 2011 Tigers got 6.6 WAR from Miguel Cabrera and the 2018 Brewers got 7.7 WAR from Yelich (career year) and 3.7 from Travis Shaw. Shaw produced 1.5 WAR in his 1st season, .4 WAR in his second season and was traded to Milwaukee. As I said, I used a liberal definition but I doubt a player like Shaw is what you are advocating. Does this help answer your question? 30 Teams WINS Drafted Intl TaP Trade FA WAR 2001 Athletics 102 65.9% 14.3% 11.4% 8.3% 0.0% 2001 Mariners 116 0.0% 11.0% 18.7% 12.9% 57.4% 2002 Athletics 103 36.0% 12% 43.0% 0% 9.0% 35.4 2002 Dbacks 98 9.1% 8.9% 6.8% 30.7% 44.6% 43.6 2002 Twins 94 59.8% 0.0% 35.0% 5.2% 0.0% 39.9 2005 White Sox 99 33.2% 0.0% 31.0% 17.7% 18.2% 39.0 2006 Tigers 95 39.0% 0.0% 28.5% 17.4% 15.0% 32.8 2006 Twins 96 39.7% 3.3% 44.3% 12.7% 0.0% 2007 Guardians 96 31.3% 36.5% 32.2% 0.0% 0.0% 38.3 2008 Rays 97 45.7% 0.0% 33.2% 4.5% 16.6% 2010 Rays 96 64.7% 0.0% 22.1% 9.1% 4.1% 2010 Twins 94 50.4% 0.0% 20.8% 8.0% 20.8% 53.9 2011 Brewers 96 31.0% 4.1% 30.0% 12.8% 22.1% 2011 Dbacks 94 26.1% 22.2% 44.1% 3.9% 3.7% 33.6 2011 Tigers 95 39.9% 0.0% 10.9% 29.0% 20.2% 33.6 2012 Athletics 94 10.7% 0.0% 37.4% 5.3% 46.6% 40.7 2012 Reds 97 38.1% 19.6% 18.3% 17.2% 6.8% 46.4 2013 Pirates 94 46.7% 12.8% 0.0% 11.9% 28.6% 41.6 2015 Pirates 98 36.9% 13.5% 3.2% 22.9% 23.6% 36.5 2015 Royals 95 38.0% 9.0% 32.3% 11.7% 9.0% 40.4 2016 Guardians 94 33.1% 22.7% 44.2% 0.0% 0.0% 47 2017 Guardians 102 22.9% 20% 43.9% 8% 5.0% 38.3 2018 Athletics 97 51.8% 0.0% 29.1% 19.0% 0.0% 30.0 2018 Brewers 96 5.2% 0.0% 30.8% 34.8% 29.3% 33.3 2019 Athletics 97 25.0% 0% 54.0% 10% 12.0% 38.6 2019 Rays 96 18.6% 0% 45.8% 9% 26.0% 2019 Twins 101 36.3% 24.7% 0.0% 9.1% 30.0% 2021 Rays 100 25.0% 6% 45.8% 7% 16.0% 42.7 2023 Orioles 101 51.2% 8.3% 32.7% 0.0% 7.7% 47.4 2023 Rays 99 13.8% 9.8% 66.2% 0.0% 10.2% 41.3 97.73 34.2% 8.6% 29.9% 11.3% 16.1% * TaP - Traded as Prospect. (acquired before ever producing 1.5 WAR in a season)