Trov

Yes, they went on a 11 game win streak to jump to top team in the league, and we even went on a 12 game win streak early in the year. However, they are at 75 wins, 5 above the next best teams. When I think of the Brewers there are not too many names that come to mind. When you look they do not have a single player in top 10 in bWAR. Even when broken down by position players or pitchers they still do not. They are not a crazy good defensive team. I looked and they have one starting pitcher that is pitching well, but his FIP is still a 3.73. Their bullpen is doing well overall so that must be a big reason. Isaac Collins, by OPS+ has been their best hitter this year, you know that 27 year old rookie former 9th round pick that no one heard of outside the Brewers organization. Yelich is next on the list and leading the team in HR. Overall the players are just slightly above average hitters most around 110 to 120 OPS+. Andrew Vaughn since coming to Brewers has gone off in 27 games, but before he got there he was terrible for the Sox. So it begs the question how are they doing it? What really seems to jump out to me is that many of their players are having above average seasons for them. They have a balanced line up and no huge holes. They are getting production they were not expecting.

For those who do not know, the 5 tools are Hit, Power, Run, Arm, Field. They are the areas that scouts will give players grades to determine how well they expect a player to eventually become. However, not all 5 tools are, or really should, be weighted equally in my opinion. I would rank Arm the lowest. If a guy is great at many other things but has a poor arm you can put him in areas to do well, like LF, 2nd, or 1st. 4th I would go Run, it can be helpful on both sides and for many positions, but just because you are fast will not mean you can get on base or actually field a ball. There is a reason track stars do not convert to baseball. 3rd I would put Power, I know some may disagree, but when I am thinking of important tools I do not care if you have light tower power if you ability to make contact is almost 0 and you cannot play a position well on defense. The 1 and 2 I would say may depend more on which position you are grading, but for overall I put Field in 2nd. Having good defense is important, as if you cannot get off the field to hit you will never win. Of course there are more important fielding positions but having good defenders all around is a good thing. Hit to me is the number 1 tool. It is said hitting a baseball is one of the hardest things to do in sports, even the best only get hits 3 out 10 times generally. This means if you can find guys that can do it well that is very important. Hits can be strung together, it may not be the preferred method of scoring, and I am not saying throwing a team of no HR high single hitting players is the correct way to form a team, but power can be learned much more than making solid contact can. I am not saying that any of the tools should be ignored, and if the hit tool cannot overcome low other tools that is an issue as well.

I see no reason Larnach is on this team next year. He should be traded for international signing money or DFA. We have too many guys that can do what he does, younger and slightly cheaper.

It will be interesting to see out of the 4 OF taken in that draft, all touted as 1-1 in their own drafts will pan out with Jenkins. We got the left overs, but possible we got the best of the best. Crews the first OF taken has been the worst so far. Making majors but playing below replacement. Clark, the first HS taken has done fine, but compared to Jenkins, Clark is not as productive. Langford, the pick right before Jenkins is having best MLB careers so far, bWAR 7.1 in his 1.5 season so far. He could grow more power, 16 HR last season and 16 so far this season, but Jenkins sure looks like he could leap them all. That would be amazing for us.

I expect the FO of have both start in AAA but both be a quick call up, unless they want to push for that extra pick, but my guess they would rather have the extra year of control. Both will hopefully help the MLB team next year though.

No if only he can start swinging like he did in years past.

I personally find the narrative that he is a reason the young guys were doing poorly. He may have had a different leadership style, but that is on the team for not stepping in to help the younger guys and asking CC to do it. CC was not a bad signing at first, but he really fell off lately and was a risk long term. He should not be a villain though.

Larnach is getting non-tendered/DFA this offseason. His time is up in this line up. He is a replacement level player at best. Waller offers better power, and most players offer better defense and most likely offense. Roden does not need to worry about out playing Larnach, he needs to worry about Jenkins, E-Rod, and Gonzalez leaping him. I could really see by this time next year, assuming Buck is healthy some combo of Buck, Jenkins, E-Rod, Gonzalez, or Wallner in the OF. This assumes health of them.

Rare that the top top prospects play in the AFL unless they missed a ton of time. That would be only reason they would send him there, but my guess they will not. I could see him if he is healthy I could see him be an early call up next year. I could also see either E-Rod or Gonzalez getting an early call too. I bet Larnach gets non-tendered/DFA this offseason.

I find it interesting that the writer blames the failed hitting on a single player, and not on the coaching staff or whole organizational set up. I get that a leader in the clubhouse can have an impact on other players, positive or negative. However, the organization and coaches should have a much larger impact. If they do not, then you really need to reevaluate your coaching staff. I am one that in baseball, if a swing is not broke do not fix it. I think the Twins and many other teams feel that they can predict a swing is broke before the results tell you it is. Also, they want power more than anything. Gone are the days of stringing singles, steals and hit an runs. There may be some of that coming back these days, but Twins clearly have wanted to change swings of players to get more power, and signing players with those traits. Therefore, what is the message to the players by the organization? Overall, I agree with the statement of the article that the team in the long run may be in better shape, and that is getting off the CC contract. I know fans were happy the Twins finally spent on a free agent. However, it proved again, spending big on FA for mid to smaller markets can hamstring you for years if the player is not earning that contract. His first contract with Twins he did earn his money, not being MVP level but earning 5.3 bWAR showed he was worth longer term contract. However, after signing the second long term contract he had total 5.6 bWAR across 2.5 seasons. He has been fighting injuries, and was not just earning his contract when healthy. Last year he was on a nice pace to earn it, but then injuries derailed it. He is now on the wrong side of 30, and you can expect his production to decrease each year. He was never a super offense guy, but was elite defender with above average hitter. Now, his defense has dropped a ton, and his hitting has not increased. There is talks about moving him off SS now anyways. We have possible viable replacements at near same production for much cheaper over the rest of the CC contract. Yes, we are paying 33 mil over that time, but the team will now have more open money to spread out on different players. Now I expect fans to say yeah they will not spend it, but if it means they can keep a few other players that add more value, it is worth it. If the owners said dump payroll and you either need to dump 3 lower payroll guys or CC dumping CC was the right move.

There was no rumors of Duran to San Diego that I recall. So to say we could have got a similar return is flawed right there. The phillies said no way on Painter off the bat. So if he was a no from the start hard to say we could have got more. Now, if we held strong and Miller went to Phillies and painter was included then we can compare. Yes, league says Padres gave up a top 5 talent, but possible Padres do not value him as highly as the league did. Also, Miller have 4 years of control is huge, because if he maintains his value, Padres could even look to flip him on a deadline deal or off season in a couple of years and recoup some prospect value. Duran that will be unlikely. I also feel viable catchers are very hard to fill so if Tait can do it, then he may hold higher value then the SS.

Personally, I think the FO feels Culpepper can bring what CC was bringing overall. CC bat was not doing much, and his defense was falling to average to below average. So CC was becoming very over paid. If Culpepper can be above average at both defense and offense he will be a nice fill in.

"this is not the type of return that plays into the ‘sustainable winner’ mantra so frequently expressed by this front office. Instead, it’s the type of return that leaves you asking: ‘who’s next?" The trade included an MLB ready starting pitcher that is a top prospect as well. Yes, the 19 year old may be several years away, but to say the deal itself is not the type of return that plays into the mantra I would say you are wrong. You traded away a pen guy, that yes is very good, but will get even more expensive next year and the year after, if they kept him, which if the new owners, assuming we get one, put a similar financial restriction on the team means less money for other areas. Really having a sustainable winner means loading your farm system with guys through out it and not just always trying to have MLB ready guys. We traded on MLB guy for one MLB guy and threw in a young top prospect. I think that helps sustaining winning.

I think this is reading too much into the situation. CC has full no trade, so only way he moves is if he says yes. There is a big difference between the Twins shopping CC and asking him to waive deal for anyone, than having a team reach out and say hey could we get him, and they go to CC and say Houston wants you back, is that something you want? One could argue it is putting the player first. It is different than if he signed long term deal and team says yeah you out without the player having any say in it.

The writer makes assumptions without much to support it. Other teams may have had interest, but their interest may have been minimal. It is possible Twins talked to Rays and Yankees and the offers were worse than what they got. The assumption that they could have got a better return prospect wise is a big assumption. Also, you do not know how the Twins actually valued that prospect. Just because national list has certain things do not mean they are right over the Twins. You also have to think about what other trades they may intend down the road.

The kid from the Padres would get me thinking. The others they would have to throw a lot more in than just them. There are 3 questions for the Twins to answer before looking to move Ryan this year. First, can you resign him at a contract you are happy with, my guess is most likely no. He will be seeking a much longer contract than Twins like to give. I think he can age well because he does not rely on velo, but location and spin. If he loses his spin though he will regress real quickly. Two, how much of a push will the Twins make in offseason to try to win next year? You cannot trade your best or second best pitcher without a plan if you are going to try to win next year. Third, how much can you get in return for him next year at deadline if needed? Of course that depends a ton on his health and performance next year. However, assuming he does what you hope he does, how much different is his value this year versus next year? Now that depends a ton on who is competing next year and their needs, but everyone needs starting pitching. So if the Padres come a calling and offer their top guy, it may make some sense to listen. The rest do not seem elite enough to pry Ryan away this year.

I have long said that corner OF that are not elite at something are a dime a dozen. Larnach is average so he has almost no value. He is completely a replacement level player. If another team sees any value in him in a trade you jump at it. He should be a DFA/non-tender next year for us. He has never developed into the hitter we expected. The only value he offers, which is almost none, is that he hits slightly better against right handers than average. That is to be expected, but he is not elite at it. So even a platoon fit is not there. If a team is offering any level of an actual prospect made the trade in a heart beat.

I fully agree with this, they could sell some pieces and unless they do a full sell off, if Lewis, CC, Wallner, and other guys that have struggled on offense can pick it up. We have guys coming back from injuries and pitching coming back they could make a late run. The guys they are talking about trading we could fill their rolls from minors.

It is possible, but unlikely this would happen this year. None have enough value to a buying team to expect they would help this year. Further teams selling are not likely to sell anyone with much control and we should not be buying rentals.

I fully get the lack of defense and poor running as a reason to not be high on him. I can even get that he has not shown much power, yet. He is still only 21. Although not super common, there are players that develop power later into 20's and were not known for it when in minors, but where elite bat to ball guys. I am not saying he will become either of the two guys I am about to list, but both were shorter guys, both shorter than Gonzalez, had almost 0 power in early 20's but were great hitters and eventually developed power. A recent guy, Jose Altuve, had very few HR in minors and his early MLB career. He did not crack 20 HR until his age 26 season. Since then he has had several high teens to even 30HR seasons. He is not a huge power guy, and yes he was a 2nd baseman until this year, but he was always a solid hitter and developed some power. Kirby Puckett was another guy who had little power in his early 20's. He did not have double digit HR until he was 26, when he jumped to 31 from 4 the year before. He was a free swinger that hit to all fields. In his younger days he was a good runner, and was known to be a great defender, so not a complete comp prospect wise. However, my point is that power can be developed over time, but generally learning to get bat on ball is something that does not get more developed as time goes by. Will he be even close to either of these guys, doubtful, but to downgrade him because he does not have power at 21 could be a mistake.

I was not specifically looking for a bunch of debate, but more so wanted to address what I see as fans that get upset with certain trades in history where we "bought" and missed, or not traded for "MLB" ready prospects when we sell. There is more to deciding what prospect to bring in or send out beyond just where they rank in lists. How many other guys do we have at similar position, how much room on 40 man do we have, and many others. I also responded to one comment about essentially not caring about losing players when you DFA them just to see if some guy not on the 40 man can cut it at MLB level. When we all know just having some success as a rookie does not mean long term success, we have 2 guys in AAA that proved that recently.

This is the exact kind of comment I was addressing in my post. You cannot just shuffle guys on and off the 40 man without having them move onto other teams. Generally, if a player is at AAA and not on the 40 man it is because they are not MLB qualify players, or they do not have to be on the 40 man because they still have time to be forced on it. The FO needs to decide is it worth cutting ties completely with a player that may not be great, but is a MLB level player, or do they force the 40 man move, start option years when a guys is too young. If they were exposed to the rule 5 draft or was DFA from either our 40 man or another 40 man roster, then there is a reason they are sitting at AAA and not on a MLB roster. They were exposed to every other team and could have been on a 40 man roster, but each team chose, for whatever reason, to pass on them. Calling for the FO to call up every hitter or pitcher from AAA that is putting up decent numbers, but not on 40 man will lead to removing of other guys on the 40 and most likely losing them to either another team or as a FA. Then if the guy you call up fails, then who do you replace them with? You cannot just bring the guy you let go back. Do you drop them off the 40 man and force more moves?

As we near the trade deadline, most fans seem to be in the, well we hardly have a chance so sell what you can now boat. I am in that general thought as well. However, there is one thing many fans do not think of when it comes to this, what are the timelines of the players you are brining back in and how does that work with roster construction. I know most on here know the rules, but many seem to not, or really do not care what the rules are even if they do know them. However, the rule is you can only have 40 people on your 40 man roster, unless they are on 60 day IL. After the season all players are removed from the IL and the team must get to the 40 members. If a player is not on the 40 man they cannot get called up to majors. After being the system so long, they need to be placed on 40 man or be exposed to the rule 5 draft. If they are on the 40 man and removed they are exposed to waivers where any team can take them and just pay them and occupy a 40 man spot. Why is this all important when thinking about trading players, either buying or selling? Well each year the team needs to decide who to protect on the 40 man and not lose to rule 5 draft. Some years it is an easy call for team, but others they really need to balance it risking losing players either on waivers or the rule 5. This has to be thought about when trading players away, or brining them in. Of course for every player traded off the 40 man frees up a spot, but every player they bring in on a 40 man, must be put on the 40 man. Also, if the player needs to be put on the 40 man after the year. If you bring in 5 guys that need to be added, you better be planning on doing that, or you may not keep them. The team currently has 43 guys on the 40 man, Keaschall, Lopez, and Tonkin are all on 60 day IL. Even if we make no moves that is 3 guys that need to be taken off. The Twins have several players set to be FA and be off the list. Vasquez, Paddack, Castro, Coulombe, France, Tonkin,(Bader has mutual option). That leaves plenty of room to add players, as there are plenty of guys that could get DFA and we would not miss them. However, just because you have space does not mean you can start taking on a ton of guys on other 40 man rosters, or ready to be added. This also gets to my second point, sometimes you trade away a prospect now in a buying move, simply because you do not expect to add them to 40 man later on. So you trade them before you risk losing for nothing. I think this was part of what led to the Spencer Steer and CES trade years ago. Both were guys that were going to need to take up space on 40 man or just risk losing for nothing after that year. Neither were high on the depth chart for the team. So even though the trade did not bring in big value, the team was not likely to put both on 40 man that year either. I am not saying you should just be willing to trade guys not on 40 man before they need to, or be afraid from brining in guys that will need to be on it, but it is something the fans should think about when the team trades for, or trades away certain players. The FO will not do a deep dive as to that kind of thinking, but you know they are looking at that as well.

I think this year the Twins could look to sell and buy for the future. They should not make any "rental" trades in my opinion, but they can look to sell off MLB talent to bring in guys that are MLB ready or at that level with years of control. They can use some of their system depth to shuffle guys around. We again have a ton of in field depth, with Martin is doing well in AAA to put name back in could be a 2nd base guy or OF. Keashall sure looks like a long time lock. Lewis and Lee both still have potential. Julien is getting his stroke back in AAA. Then we have Culpepper knocking on the door. We can look to pick and choose who to trade with plenty of depth left. OF also has guys knocking on the door with E-rod(if he can ever stay healthy), Jenkins, Gonzales are all guys that could push for time next year. Wallner still around too. I could see if there are teams selling players with more than 1 year of control be willing to trade to Twins, and we could flip some of current MLB guys for more depth.

Yeah we really missed out on the guys we traded away, who was that again? Oh that is right they have done nothing. Just because a trade did not work out did not mean we made a bad trade, both teams ended up with crap in that trade. Just as the writer pointed out the Mahle trade we did not get much of anything in return, but really did not lose much of anything either, other than maybe flipping them to a different team.