Major League Ready

It will be unfortunate if either one of them is playing a corner OF spot at the end of 2026. If Jenkins does not take one of the spots, it will be extremely disappointing. We really need one of Roden, Rodriguez, Gonzalez, Rosario or Fedko to take the other. Austin Martin is also looking like he is in the mix. We are also going to be smack dab in the middle of a rebuild or major retooling. A couple of the above-mentioned prospects need to step up if we are to become a contender. Larnach and Wallner are just not good enough complete players, so the answer is neither. The more nuanced answer is Wallner has 4 years left and Larnach 2. There is no point in holding onto Larnach. Trade him for a RP. Walner could be held onto as a DH / 5th OFer.

Good question. You could make a case either way. I would tend to go internally produced because it was clear Alonzo really wanted to stay. My interpretation was the Mets were not willing to pay "market" early in the process and Alonzo gave them a discount to stay in NY. BTW ... I only did teams in the bottom half of revenue. My interest was specific to teams that could not buy a team through free agency, like the Twins.

I didn't collect every team because that would have been an enormous task and I was only interested in how winning teams were built when revenue was similar or less than the Twins. I was also interested in how they acquired their productive players as opposed to all players. Therefore, I collected the data for teams in the bottom half of revenue win 90 plus wins and I only included position players that produced 1.5 WAR and RPs with 1.2 WAR. So, my focus was pretty specific. The 80% is an average but there has been a few teams that produced 20-30% from free agency, including the Twins. The 2019 Twins stand out with 30% coming from free agents. If you look into that detail for all of these teams, about a third of them are medium priced free agents that performed exceptionally well and most of them are modest priced free agents that put up 1.5-3 WAR.

Culpepper is way ahead of Houston and will start the year at AAA and be up as soon as he can string 4-6 good weeks together at AAA. Obviously, this is purely opinion, but it sure seems to be setting up this way. The OF situation will be similar. I guess Jenkins could be there to start the season but my guess is that Culpepper and Jenkins are in the same boat.

I am not implying anything. I am supplying factual data that took me about 30 hours to put together as to how teams acquired the players that are producing on winning teams. They can draft them, trade for established players, trade for prospects or get them in free agency. I took the time to get the data because of instances just like this one. If you don't like the facts, ignore them if it makes you feel better.

Yes, really. You are looking quite literally at how much is produced by rookies which has very little value in a discussion about how contending teams were built. I am looking at how players were acquired to determine which acquisition methods most impact the success of contending teams. For example, players on the current Tigers team that will produce 1.5 WAR or more this year are listed below. 86% of their WAR is from players that were drafted or acquired as prospects. This demonstrates the dependence of average revenue or below average teams have on drafted players or prospects acquired in trade like Joe Ryan. Yes, they are prospects and many fail but the premise we should not rely on them defies logic given success is dependent upon developing them. That's the point. History is very clear that free agency and acquiring established players plays a much smaller role in success. 2025 Tigers Acquired WAR Riley Greene Drafted 3.0 Zach McKinstry AaP 3.2 Gleyber Torres FA 2.4 Dillon Dingler Drafted 3.7 Spencer Torkelson Drafted 2.1 Wenceel Perez Intl 1.9 Colt Keith Drafted 1.4 Kerry Carpenter Drafted 1.5 Tarik Skubal Drafted 6.5 Jack Flaherty FA 2.2 Casey Mize Drafted 1.9 Reese Olson AaP 1.4 Will Vest Drafted 1.4 Acquired by: Drafted 8 66.0% International Draft 1 5.8% Acquired as Prospect 2 14.1% Trade for Proven 0 0.0% Free Agent 2 14.1%

Players acquired as prospects. We need to define what is unproven. When I compiled this date, I defined a prospect as a player that have never produced 1.5 WAR is a season and an established player as a player that had produced 1.5 WAR in a season. That might not be what people ask for the organization to go out an get but I wanted to be consistent. The table below is for all of the top 7 Guardians teams in the past couple decades. Add together Drafted / Intl & AaP (acquired as Prospect) In Cleveland's case, in aggregate, 90% came from players acquired as prospects. 7 Cleveland Guardians WINS Drafted Intl AaP Trade FA 100% Cleveland 2017 102 24.3% 19.3% 44.3% 4.3% 7.8% 100% Cleveland 2007 96 30.5% 38.2% 31.3% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2016 94 33.1% 22.7% 44.2% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2019 93 34.0% 17.8% 44.1% 4.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2005 93 7.5% 21.8% 51.4% 2.5% 16.8% 100% Cleveland 2022 92 34.2% 19.7% 46.2% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2013 92 14.9% 0.0% 50.1% 10.2% 24.8% Guardians Total 94.57 25.5% 19.9% 44.5% 3.0% 7.1%

I have compiled the data from literally every 90+ win team since the turn of the century. With all of the very adamant positions about these things posted on this site, I was curious to know what has actually produced results.

I think he gets a roster spot to start the season. However, we need some combination of Jenkins / Rodriguez / Gonzalez / Rosario / Roden, and Fedko to push him off the roster. Unless, of course, Martin really picks it up a notch.

The whole prospects are just prospects ignores that 80% of WAR comes from prospects in all of the most successful organizations with average or below average revenue. I just don't understand how hoping for the only viable avenue to success is misguided.

Was the previous team a "good team". We had a good BP and two good SPs. 1B was covered by mediocre free agents. 3B and SS were under performing players (Lewis/Correa) The OF was a couple mediocre corners OFers and Buxton. Keaschall is part of the next generation. Getting rid of Correa helps a little for budget but we are not going to fix our position player problems unless the next wave is the answer. If we are talking about their odds in 28, given Lopez and Ryan would be free agents, are our odds better with the haul we will get from those two players, plus all of the players we picked up at the deadline than if we had stayed the course with the team we had and tried to augment it. If that augmentation was anything other than a spending the $23m from Correa, that would take significant assets away from 28 and beyond. The difference in post 27 teams can only be projected but that projection is far better than if we stayed on the previous course. So, we can stink it up for a year or two now or several years post 2027.

What are the chances the bottom revenue teams spend more if the top revenue teams did not share their revenue?

I deleted my post when I found TwinsDr2021 posted pretty much exactly what I wrote. I would add that the point of a trading these players is to get their replacement for 6-7 years for far less. That's the only way teams with half the revenue of the big revenue teams can compete.

Rosario was sensational after April. I hope they have him taking ground balls and learning the foot work for 1B all winter long and spring training. They have a good shot at coming up with a 1B/OF between Rosario, Menedez, Fedko, and Sabato.

I think Jenkins is an absolute stud. I just don't believe in using a sample size of 29 ABs. I like the odds that they build a much better core of position players this time around. Keaschall / Jenkins / Culpepper / and Gonzalez are easy to get excited about. I didn't mention Rodriguez in that group because I have more reservation about him. At the same time, if he can cut the K rate a bit, he is a great defender and he hits both handed pitching. Rosario might be right there with these guys as well and Tait looks like a guy that could debut very young.

He has a .624 OPS in AAA so he has not been even close to the same hitter. However, he also only has 29 ABs in AAA so it means very little at this point.

They are not winning back fans until they start winning. Let’s define winning. An 85-win team does not inspire fans to come out. A team that inspires belief they have a real shot brings people out. An athletic team that makes great defensive plays and runs the bases provides an extra degree of excitement. The above is not happening in 2026 unless they trade away Most of their top 10 prospects. They would keep Keaschall and Zebby because they need a 3rd playoff starter so the plan demands Zebby grows up quickly. They will also need to spend their absolute limit. I would give that plan a 30-35% chance of winning a playoff series or two but the odds would still be against getting to the WS. The post 2027 implications are probably that it take 4-5 years to build back to a good team. Now imagine a meeting between the FO and ownership where they layout option 1 which by the way requires them to make a minimal profit or break-even. Option 2 is spend 2026 building the kind of exciting team people will come out and watch. They transition from current OFers to some combination of Buxton / Jenkins and a couple of Rodriguez / Roden / GG / Rosario / Fedko. Of course, this group is far more exciting with more upside. They transition Culpepper to SS. 2026 is also used to transition multiple prospects who are now starting to the BP. BTW ownership, under this plan you make a solid profit and exit 2027 (if there is a season) with a great young team with a shot at true contention for 5+ years. Ownership then asks how many successful teams with our level of revenue have been built following strategy #1. Falvey answers “none in the past 20 years. How about option #2. Falvey answers “this blueprint or some form has been used in 90% of all successful teams”. My guess is that this meeting took place in some form. Which path do you take if you are ownership.

How were the decisions to option these three players about money? Who do they have at AAA that has even a 30 day track record that suggests they are ready for MLB? Rodriguez was on a Milb rehab assignment. Maybe Fedko but he had 22 games at AAA when the call-ups were made.

Sal Perez caught 422 over 3 years at the same age as Rutschman.

I am rooting for Larnach to finish the year strong. His August was good with a 138 wRC+. It would sure help if he did the same or better in September. Maybe they could get a back-up catcher or for him or perhaps even a 1B prospect.

I think from the players standpoint, someone as young as Chourio or Jenkins can still get another big deal at the end of 8 years. This guarantees them generational wealth with the first contract regardless of health or performance. From an organizational viewpoint, there is considerable risk with such a young player. It's easier to make an $80M leap than a $150M or 200M leap.

Lewis: 10% chance. They don’t have a replacement. He is relatively cheap and has considerable upside. Jeffers: 25% chance. They are already very thin in catching and the return would not be an impact type prospect. A lot depends on how they view his work with young pitchers. Wallner: 25% chance. He still has four years of control. He is cheap and his career stats are pretty darn good. However, they are very deep in OFers and they would probably be inclined to deal if the return was really good. Larnach is much more likely to be traded. Only two years of control and he is more expensive. Pablo: 60% chance. It all comes down to the return. Will teams question his health. If so, the return will be marginal, and they could hold onto Pablo until the deadline. Ober could get dealt in his place. Pablo is also the better mentor for all of our young pitchers. Ryan 90% chance. Ryan will bring back two really good prospects and one of them should be an impact type player. This kind of trade needs to contribute to the next core.

A Chourio type deal with Jenkins is the type of risk the Twins need to take. It would not be devastating if he turns out to be an average player but locking him down for 8 years sounds good. However, it should be pointed out that if they bring him up after the 1st month of the season they still have for 6 more years so they only gain 1 year. Maybe they go for a nine-year deal

I think what happened at the trade deadline is a pretty clear indication of where Falvey is leading this team. Trading Duran / Jax / Varland and Correa is a clear signal they are going to retool / rebuild the roster in a manner that can't be done over an off-season. My guess is they will spend all of 2026 and part of 2027 transitioning in players for every part of the roster. The OF will transition to 3 of Jenkins / Roden / Rodriguez / Gonzalez / Fedko and Outman with Wallner becoming a primary DH and occasional OFer. Their many pitching prospects will be auditioned with some becoming part of the rotation and others moved to the BP. The INF has less moving parts in 2026 and is pretty dependent of Culpepper making the leap. Lewis will get the entire year to prove he belongs. 1B is hard to predict. Maybe they bring in a France equivalent.

It is all about the odds. 75 seems slightly optimistic but let’s go with that. How do we get a shot at 85-86 wins to have a shot at the playoffs. Spend $50M on Free agents. That would project to 80 wins. Now what? Are we going to trade away prospects in an attempt to get to 85 wins. We might be able to keep Jenkins but it would take some good prospects to bring back a couple of impact bats or RPs. Should we trade away Matthews / Festa / Culpepper / Emma / GG? What are the odds the free agents and trades produce enough to get us to 85 wins? Is making the playoffs with a fringe playoff team goal worthy and worthy of the cost of getting there. What is the cost? Several good prospects traded away and several good prospects not acquired for Ryan/Lopez/Ober. That is a dramatic shift in future resources. We would also most likely be taking on a couple long-term contracts and we know from history the back half of those contracts are generally not productive. Sunk payroll costs are also a likely detriment to post 2027. The net of it is that taking a shot 2026 and 2027 if we have a season significantly reduces our chances for several years post 2027. Even if the odds of success are the same with these two strategies which I doubt, one strategy has the potential for 2 years of success and the other 5-7 years or perhaps more with extensions and the ability to trade from excess.