Trov

I am wondering if Kiriloff can field better in OF and Larnach can get converted to 1b. If not, we need a ton of help defending the OF in the future. Alex cannot seem to catch a popup though, which is odd since he played OF, but they get fly balls not popups.

To me what makes things even murkier that is not being talked about is the expected work stoppage. I have overall been saying they can be traded in off-season, but depending on how long the work stoppage will be, unless that trade also has a contract extension with it, teams will be less likely to trade a player when there may not even be a season or not knowing how things will be happening after. The work stoppage has not been talked about much lately, but I 100% expect it to happen, it just how long it will be and how much it will affect a season. I know you normally do not look at future based on things like that, but it should be taken into consideration when deciding a deal at deadline or off-season. Yes, they could hold onto them and trade mid-season, assuming there is a mid-season, but their talent is too high to just let them walk for nothing, and if we have a bounce back season next year, they most likely would be helping do that if they started with team, and then we would be less likely to deal them away, not like Cleveland has not done that though.

My favorite line is the 259 delirious fans, as sadly a winning baseball team in Tampa Bay only draws about that many fans.

I wonder if they will give Balazovic a call up to MLB in second half to get some experience. I see no need to just move him to AAA as long as he is locating. Also would be interesting to see if Varland is a diamond in the rough guy. His numbers look great so far in his minor league career, but he will have to fight his whole way as a non-top prospect guy.

I agree with Gordon that I am not sold on him, but the team needs to play him the rest of the season to see if he has a role or not. For Dobnak I feel they need to give him a planned role, whatever it is. He has been bounced in and out of rotation up and down as well. Figure out what you want him to do so he can plan around that. I hardly give much stock in end or season numbers for young guys so I would take little stock for Ober in that, but if he shows he can make adjustments as season goes and into next year, that is what I want to see. Rooker will get DH time after Cruz is dealt, but I have no faith for him in OF. If he can be full time DH next year cool, if he fails second half, do we go out to sign someone, I doubt that as we have plenty of guys that can fill in or rotate around. Middle infield is a major question that I doubt this second half will not answer. Clearly they do not think Gordon can play ss, so will they plan to shift Polonco back, slot Lewis in, resign Simmons, or push heavy for one the FA, or trade for someone. Not sure second half will answer that question. Bullpen pitchers are very volatile from year to year and hard to ever expect much from them, unless they are the best of the best.

As interested as I would be for the young guys to come up, I never put much stock into short stints late in years.

The only way Berrios should be traded at deadline is if you get blown away with a top prospect or two. Right now the possible trade partners get limited, he still will be around next year and if you cannot extend him, you can trade him in offseason where more possible teams will be involved.

The article says Cruz will not bring in a game changing prospect. What it should say is he will not bring in a top rated prospect. Only the future will decide if someone is game changing. I bet when Twins traded away Dave Hollins many years ago the player that was to be named later, who we eventually let walk for nothing, would turn into Boston legend. A player to be named later is almost never a top prospect, and almost never turns out to be a major player, but it happens. Point is, just because the player is not a top 100 prospect does not mean they cannot produce at a high level. I know there are other examples, but that one always sticks out to me. There are many examples of top rated prospects that get traded only to mainly not produce at MLB level. Prospect ratings are speculation based on a lot of things, but many flop and many top guys get overlooked.

The day 2 pitchers are slotted as end of rotation or long relief guys, except for the 2nd round guy projects to be better. I would have to say, duh! I mean how many top end expected starters will fall to rounds 3 plus? That does not mean they are not going to develop into top guys, but if they are projected to be top guys they will not fall back that far.

Very few teams are willing to give up MLB ready players for rental players. Would you give up a MLB ready player for 3 months of a reliever? Remember when we got Matt Capps, that was a terrible deal, giving up MLB ready catcher for rental, that we resigned but he was still just a rental. Years of team control on a MLB ready prospect for 3 month rental is perfect way to get fan base upset. Specifically for pitching, how are you going to expected an MLB ready pitcher in any trade? Every team can always use more, so why would they trade someone that could pitch at MLB level for someone who does now? Even if they are projected starters and you have 5 good ones, you will still be able to use them out of the pen for the year and go back to starting later on. The only way you can trade for MLB ready talent is you need to give up guys with years of control. The old way of doing business like it was in 10 plus years ago has gone away. Teams love to keep low cost controlled players.

I read so many people saying they are happy or not when it comes to drafted players. I am sure some of the commenters do a full deep dive and look into these things, but most of us have no clue anything about them other than what we read. In baseball, it takes years to know if a player will pan out or not. Some players people are super high on and they flop terrible, and others people scoff at as terrible picks only to find they work out just fine. Look at any draft and players drafted high never make majors, and players drafted later rounds become all-stars. We never know how they will turn out.

Seems like a bit of a gamble, but I think that is not bad for the pick number. He has the power arm, if he can develop that will be nice. He will be higher risk for injury, one that level of velo at his age normally leads to injury, but not always. Also, his lack of playing year round ball being from NJ leads to teams letting guys slide. Same town as Trout and similar draft area. Not saying he will be pitcher version of Trout, but point is you can get some good diamonds in the rough in the norther states sometimes. Here is to hoping he can become a top starter, or worst case a top pen arm.

Your position only holds for players that are not going to be FA this year. Players like Cruz, Pineda, Simmons, and Robles all could be moved. May we get not much in return, sure we might. However, there may be some decent returns. Yes, the odds are none of the players move the needle in the future, but would you rather trade them for a possible future player or just let them walk for nothing? Some big names have been moved in mid-season trades, like when we got David Ortiz, or more recently the White Sox gave up Tatis Jr. for James Shields. The way I see it, if they will walk for nothing, if a team is willing to trade any potential player that you can get a look at why not? For players like Berrios, Buxton, Kepler, Rodgers, and others forcing a trade right now would not be the best thing to do, but sometimes teams will give up more during this time of year thinking they are just that 1 move away. No need to force a deal with them, but if one comes along that team feels in a good one, no need to hold off.

I have issues with the evaluation of straight war comparisons to determine how a team did in trade. Yes, you can use it to say how the players performed, but to decide if a trade was good or bad needs much more than just WAR. Specifically, context should be looked at. If you are trading away a player on end of deal like Lynn on a losing team, who cares what the WAR was from them, because you were not winning with them. Also, unless you know of what may have been turned down it may have been the best trade available. Maybe at the time no trades would have been good and you could have kept them to just walk as a FA. I say at least try the trade. Also, as you mentioned if you are dealing from depth you need to compare the player dealt to the players kept. For example, we trade away a corner OF. We have several that rank above them and perform to all-star level, even if the one traded away performs at a high level if the players kept perform better, then even if the player brought back has lower WAR we still may have made a good deal.

Cruz will get dealt and so will Robles I think. Others possible too, but Robles has been decent enough and not being under contract many teams like to take fliers on guys like that. No top prospects will come back, but hope to find a potential future MLB guy in return. Cruz has no need to remain with Twins and he can help other teams. I like him but his time with Twins is coming to an end. Shop him to get best return. I doubt any huge names coming back as well, but again if you can get a diamond in the rough that would be great.

Miranda jump in power raises my eyebrow a little. It sucks that our top 3 pitching prospects are all dealing with injury issues. That being said if they can stay healthy the future of our pitching does look good, even outside of those top 3 there are others on the rise. That will be a nice change over the terrible vets we signed this year.

I fully agree that if you can get anything of value in return for him I would jump at it. We have replacements and he seems to be aging quickly. His legs are not holding up and I think the last 2 years of the deal will not look good. Dump him and move on. I like the signing when they did it, but the legs just did not hold up and I think he is going to fall off a cliff.

For me the biggest question mark is the next CBA and what it will look like. There will be a work stoppage, question will be how long. I think less of an issue will be gate money, depending on how long the stoppage is, but how will money look after it. Will there be as strong of tax, or possibly a salary cap, and how will current contracts be affected by those rules. I do not think the single trade deadline will hurt the Twins, I think it will help. I get the thought of keeping near MLB prospects for insurance purposes, but I also feel there will be much less sellers because that extra month to win games makes a big difference in teams decisions. So with less sellers and possibly more buyers, that creates a sellers market. Even if you cannot get MLB ready guy, you can swoop up lower level guys, and then if needed swap them during offseason for MLB guys. This particular season though with work stoppage expected it is not like you need MLB ready guy right away either for a quick reload.

Personally, if you are 26 years old you are no longer in prospect area, at least not high on any list. Most players peak at 27, some later, but most peaks are 27 with primes being around 25ish to 31. Again this will very on player. That being said, 26 and not regular at MLB level to me means not much of a prospect. I know generally, prospect is left for players yet to lose rookie status, but I feel Rooker should be off this list.

I am glad we can finally say the season is a wash. I said that in May, but some fans still held hope saying if we can just get things together. We are not the only team playing worse than expected, but we are playing much worse than expected. Very few players are playing at level we were hoping coming into season. Time to shop around see what teams are willing to give up for players we are willing to part with. I do not feel we need a full tear down, but a big retool is needed. Here is to hoping some of our young pitchers can come up and be good.

I would never use past seasons to dictate how you move forward in a current season. Unless the team can one show they can beat winning teams by trade deadline it does not matter if you can make playoffs, you will just lose again. I am not saying to do a tear down, but if they are not a plan for next year or beyond, ask around to see what you can get.

Of the three players listed, I would say the only big miss was Anderson. The other two we do not really know yet how bad it may have been. Yes, Cave had terrible start on on 60-day, but you never make plans saying well this guy will get put on 60 day DL. If they knew that of course they cut him and keep Wade. Wade is doing pretty much as expected, it just turns out it was wrong call between the two, but not like at the time people were crying terrible decision. With Badoo I still say wait and see. Many rookies are flashes in the pan, not sayin he will be, but he was several spots down the depth chart on OF, and it was not expected a team would take him in rule 5 this year because his low numbers. Detroit said worth the risk and it may pay off for them. Again, he was not listed as a top prospect by any place, so if we missed on him on self-scouting so did every national scouting group for years, and every team that passed on him in draft. You could even spin it to say we did such a good job of scouting that we took him and we had too many good people to choose from. I am sure if it was a 45 man roster or maybe even a 42 Badoo would have made it.

I am real interested to see how high Miranda jumps on the mid-season prospect list. I read he is playing more third lately, is that accurate? His possible emergence of a top hitting prospect may change some plans moving forward with team. He is 2nd or 3rd base is my understanding. If he can hit, they will find a spot though.

Berrios is the one to give the contract to between them. I would say Buxton adds more value when he plays, but he will only play 50% of the games, if that. So I would offer Buxton shorter term contract to prove he can play a season or two healthy, or give him longer deal but for half the money you would give someone and explain you play 50% of the games so you are only worth 50% of what you could be.

I can understand wanting to examine the front office after a few seasons to see where we stand, but I would also caution over reacting during a down season. I did not review all the deals over the years, but feel they have made some good, and some bad. I challenge you to find one FO that has always made all the right moves in baseball. First, for trades you cannot look at them in a vacuum of players in and players out and how each has performed since. This is because there are many things that go into a trade decisions, like pending FA, possible replacements in minors or via trades, and I am sure many more. If you just say well this player did better than than players we brought in, that is not a good way to look at trades, in my opinion. I would rather trade a guy away that will walk anyways for nothing and get something in return, or if we have a player ready to fill in why have them blocked by an expendable player? Second, the FA we brought in have been a mix I feel. We hit on a few, missed on a few, just like every team. Yes, Donaldson has not played up to contract, but how many people were complaining when they made the signing? People discussed the risks but many teams were looking to bring him in, we were not bidding against ourselves. Also, I think Pineda was a good signing, Dobnak was found in independent ball and has played well above what was expected. They have missed on some starters and pen arms, but that happens to all teams. To me, unless you can point to moves that at the time people would have made instead, it is hard to use hindsight to say they should have made move 'x'. Should every GM that did not draft Mike Trout be fired? I think giving the FO a couple more years should be done. They came into an organization that did nothing with advanced metrics, or any thing like that. They had to change the whole organization, that is not done overnight. I will agree some changes could be done and some mistakes were made, but every FO has mistakes made.