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 just don't find this reasonable logic. Lewis is not lost for the year. He is out for a month. Solano is far from a HR hitter and Larnach was a modestly productive player. Whoever takes his ABs is likely to be more productive. That's why he is in AAA and he is not lost. He can be brought up if his performance dictates. MAT was a below average offensive player and does anyone want Gallo back. This is just silly to paint these players as major losses.
- 95 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- carlos santana
- manuel margot
- (and 5 more)
-
MAT / Gallo, and Polanco had 56 HRs. Who accounted for the other 28? We also lost 360 SOs between those three. Are you complaining about losing Gallo?
- 95 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- carlos santana
- manuel margot
- (and 5 more)
-
I have no problem with the concept you suggest. However, there is the problem in executing that strategy. The vast majority of the time the market revolves around those high-end free being signed first. Then, the trade market heats up. Executing this strategy would require signing the free agent and then hoping you can trade both Kepler and Polanco. That’s not exactly good management practice. There is also the assumption that this free agent acquisition will be more productive than Kepler / Topa / Margot / and Santana combined. That is not only unlikely. It’s very risky given how often pitchers are injured. IMO, the best approach is to add the players they did and see if they have an actual contender. If so, they can acquire a SP at the deadline while also having Kepler / Topa / Margot, and Santana.
-
I heard/read 8-10 assessments of the trades from various reporters and former GMs. Not one of them indicated this jeopardized the present and the generally consensus was the either this was a very good trade for the twins. There were also at least 4 or 5 articles on the most likely player to be traded by each team. All of those articles listed Polanco because of the Twins INF depth. Are every single one of these people incompetent? Show us a link where someone who gets paid to render an opinion that agrees with you. I expect another uninformed quip that sounds smart instead of backing up your statement. Trading for prospects is by far the most effective way to build a winner. A couple years ago after seeing many similar statements to yours, I was curious as to which acquisition methods have been the most effective. So instead of assuming I knew without the facts, I gathered that information from roughly 20 different 90 win teams that were in the bottom half of revenue. I have posted those results here. Of course, they were largely ignored just as the industry assessments of this trade were ignored. The facts are that most of those 90 win teams produced twice as much war from players that were acquired before every having a 1.5 WAR season than they did from free agency and trading for players that had produced a 1.5 WAR season. The facts would strongly suggest your angst is a product of not knowing that history.
-
This is true only if the twins were willing to devote a roster to a player who is primarily a DH. Most teams don't want to devote a spot to a DH and if the twins were to do so Martinez made more sense. Who does he replace in the field? Julien is the superior and cheaper player at 2B against RHP. Farmer is the superior player a 2B against LHP. Lewis the much better player at 3B. Kirilloff is the equivalent player at 1B against RHP and much cheaper. Santana is the superior player at 1B against LHP. So, when is he the preferred starter? There is also the issue of having room on the roster for Brooks Lee.
-
If you think trading away proven pitchers and our best young player is the same as trading away a player who most certainly would have been a bench player, I don't know what to tell you. Did you even hear/see a single baseball reporter that thought moving Polanco was a bad idea?
-
Your disagreement with the FO stems from your complete disregard for the future. The primary responsibility of any leader responsible for the success of an organization is sustained success. The fact that you don't care about the future is the central problem.
-
That's some creative math. The $10.5M they paid Polanco is absolutely irrelevant given they traded him. Somehow you missed the part in your calculation where they traded him and his salary went away. Topa is worth at least the $1.25M. One could argue he is worth more but let's assume it's a wash. Therefore, they spent $4M for a SP with a 50/50 chance of playing and they got two prospects for free. Had they drafted those prospects, they probably would have cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $4M in signing bonuses so one could reasonably say taking on the risk associated with DeSclafani cost them nothing.
-
You make this sound like a travesty but you fail to mention that the starter was a LHP and Polanco's career wRC+ against LHP is 96 and Margot's is 109. No doubt Polanco would be the far superior choice if a RHP was on the mound but that was not the case.
- 53 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- david festa
- simeon woods richardson
- (and 2 more)
-
Had they known Montgomery or Snell could be signed on the deal he got, they might have gone that route but you can't blame them for not anticipating what happened. Same holds true for Martinez. He was looking for much more. They could have done nothing and hoped but we would have crucified them had things played out as expected. You also can't just look at this year for Gray. His salary is $35M in 2026 right when all of our young talent should be entering their prime. They have a lot of pitching prospects and if none of them pan out we have bigger issues than not signing Gray. Champman makes less than zero sense.
- 53 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- david festa
- simeon woods richardson
- (and 2 more)
-
I agree with you on Polanco and I was of that frame of mind since the end of last season. However, I don't think it makes sense to include Vazquez in this discussion. He was needed at the time and the signing what pretty much universally supported here. So, we are really talking about a total of $19M for depth. That's not exactly big money. Those players are not just depth, they are all good as short side platoon players. I am not sure what to think about DeSclafani. It's just nearly so clear as people like to make it, We don't know how he was progressing. They mighty of thought he was a long-short or he might have been looking fully recovered. Either way, I think we had to take him in that deal and they obviously did not have better offers for Polanco. That said, I would have been OK rolling with the guys you listed and signed Lorenzen or similar. My guess is the twins might have done that had thought they could get these guys on a 1 year deal. I bet they were holding out for multi-year deals. I would not wanted them use up budget for next year and clog up the rotation with back-end guys. They can always pivot at the deadline if the many other question marks of this team or answered in as positive light.
-
The signing bonus for a fourth pick is around $500K. $3.5M is a late teens first round pick so the two picks would cost somewhere around $4M if the picks were their own. Would it be worth a little more to get a couple extra picks? $4M for these prospects is far from ridiculous. This type of strategy is one of the things a team can do to overcome the fact that there are teams that can spend twice as much on players. Players acquired as prospects have produced considerably more WAR than drafted players for most of the 90 win teams in the bottom half of revenue. Lots of people taking a very strong stance without having the information on how successful teams were constructed by teams with similar or less revenue. Trading for established players has played the smallest role over the past couple of decades.
-
They are not paying for any of Polanco's contract so how did they pay $9M for 2 prospects?
-
Defensive is pretty darn close between Farmer and Castro. However, Castro was far better against RHP last year and Farmer was much better against LHP. I suspect their playing time will be decided accordingly. This also probably influences who they call up. Martin makes sense because he can be the 4/5th OFer and platoon with Julien at 2B.
- 41 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- willi castro
- kyle farmer
- (and 1 more)
-
I am with you Doc. They are not bringing someone up to start. Castro starting at 3B makes sense. We can use Martin or Prato as a utility player until Lewis is back. Farmer could at 3B against LHP with Martin/Prato starting at 2B.
-
I didn't think his arm was that much of a problem. He just didn't have the footwork and I thought he looked quite shaky on the quick reaction type plays common with either corner infield spot.
-
All three were great last year. All three have looked great this spring and Jax has looked dominant. He looks like he has found another gear. I don't think they are being overlooked by anyone paying attention.
- 19 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- griffin jax
- edouard julien
- (and 1 more)
-
You forget to mention it's $35M in 2026 when our young core will be getting expensive, and Sonny Gray will be very unlikely to be performing at a high level at age 36. I would not call it reprehensible. I would call it competence. Can you give me an example of a team with under $300M in revenue that has ever made a deep playoff run with 4 players earning $100M. Take a look. No such team exists.
-
The Twins put a lot of eggs ($$$) in one basket in the form of Carlos Correa. They have roughly $70M invested between Correa, Lopez, and Buxton. There is not a whole lot of help coming from free agency, at least not from high dollar free agents. The payroll space has pretty much already been spent for the next few years. The first thing they need to keep this window open is for those three guys to deliver. I think the next most crucial or even perhaps the most crucial element will be internal development of starting pitching. As we observed with the Cease trade, trading for starting pitching costs multiple prospects that are the type of players that are needed to keep a window open. LA, Houston and Atlanta are very good examples of young players coming along a helping sustain success. The INF looks like it’s going to be fine. The OF is a different story. If Wallner fades and Kepler goes away we don’t look so good. I am going to be watching Rodriquez, Gonzalez, and Rosario closely. We really need those guys to not only make it but become impact players.
- 19 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- jose berrios
- toronto blue jays
- (and 5 more)
-
What's wrong with posting information for the sole purpose of others using it to form their own opinion?
-
Absolutely agree DeSclafani was risky based on health and share your disagreement with all pitchers are injury risks. Obviously, some are more risky than others. I am basically with you on Topa too. His age before impacting a ML roster makes him suspect but every media guy that spoke about him this off-season sure did seem to think he was real. I hope they are right. You and I have been pretty much aligned on Santana too. I know he plays good D but he would not have been my first choice. I am not as sure as you are about Polanco at 1B. I think it's a totally different skill set, He looked pretty bad a 3B which is a lot more like 1B than SS. All this aside. I would trade him for value without hesitation given the roster construction. Tampa and Cleveland are good at getting guys that are on the cusp of the ML level. Those guys are less risky. Gonzalez has a high ceiling but he is no lock to be a ML player.
- 118 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- anthony desclafani
- tyler mahle
- (and 5 more)
-
I am not forgetting about the DH spot and I would agree with you that I would prefer to have Polanco vs Sanatana as a pure DH. However, many teams prefer not to roster someone as a primary DH and I think the twins are one of them. Santana is here because we had no (good) depth at all for 1B. Who do we play there if Kirilloff goes down? Rocco actually said during the broadcast yesterday it's not as simple as putting the best 26 guys on the roster. They have to fit together. Kirilloff/Santana offer flexibility and depth that does not exist with Polanco on the roster instead of Santana. Kirilloff could go to the OF if needed at times. He can pitch hit for Margot and replace him in the OF when Margot starts at a corner spot against LHP. Let's not forget that it's not as simple as Polanco vs his replacements. We got Topa and DeSclafani. Most people think Topa is a pretty darn good RP. DeSclafani is a decent depth piece. Obviously, he needs to be able to give them some innings but if he is available there is value in that depth.
-
Where he hit last year or will hit for a different team matters little. What would be his role on this team. Who is he replacing in the starting line-up on this team. Julien took his spot. You just have a real hard time with this fact. Farmer is at least as good as a platoon partner, has better defensive flexibility and can back-up Correa. Did the Rays hand on to Adames when Franco became established? No. Holding onto a player is shortsighted. Obviously, it's a bust if Gonzalez busts but there is a massive upside to this typer of trade. This type of trade is how a team with less revenue builds a quality roster of inexpensive players which facilitates the ability to extend players or sign free agents like Correa. Replacing Polanco with a combination of Julien and Farmer has little downside as long as they stay reasonably healthy. Every baseball reporter that commented on the trade said something along these lines. I did not see/hear one single reporter align with what you are saying.
- 118 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- anthony desclafani
- tyler mahle
- (and 5 more)
-
While we would all like sustained success, many TDers place overwhelmingly more importance on the current year and very much favor asset management focused on the present. That emphasis will assure less sustained success and that's why we see a disconnect with many fans when someone like Polanco is traded. He was no longer a starter. The most successful mid/small market teams have done a great job trading that type of player for prospects. Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and Oakland produce more WAR by trading for prospects or unproven ML talent than they do drafting. We talk about Cleveland producing pitching but don't stop to realize that Corey Kluber, Mike Clevinger, Carlos Carrasco, Trevor Bauer, Bryan Shaw, Justin Masterson, and Emmanuel Clase were acquired as prospects.
- 118 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- anthony desclafani
- tyler mahle
- (and 5 more)
-
How much do you think this kind of expense is going to impact NOI? Any significant added expense is going to be a depreciable asset. I doubt they can impact NOI much by recognizing certain expenses.
