chpettit19

They 100% do. The arbitration decision is a binding agreement. Once the arbitrators pick the number, (team or player) that is the contract that has to be signed by both parties and the player is guaranteed that salary. There's no backing out once you offer arbitration. Once it's offered, you either agree to a number before your hearing, or you're bound by the result of the hearing.

23-year-old with options and a 40-man with about 15 MLB players on it? Gonzalez's future with the Twins is to go to AAA to start 2027, perform to the best of his abilities, and hope for a chance with the big club to show he's a major leaguer. He doesn't have extraordinarily high odds of being anything special, but it's a pretty straight forward situation that really isn't complicated at all. Absolutely no reason to make any decision on him yet. Beyond any trade involvement. Pretty straight forward prospect stuff.

With more control available at the deadline, his value was shown to be a rental reliever having a down year. And that deal got killed because the owner thought it was too much to pay. There is absolutely no reason to believe he'd be a "very valued trade chip from another club's point of view." None at all. Platoon DHs with a 109 OPS+ on their good side are not valuable. It's why Josh Bell is never traded for anything good at deadlines and why truly competing teams never sign him in the offseason. And he's not a platoon DH. He's just a 106 OPS+ one. And that isn't valuable. No team cares about what fangraphs kicks out for a player's "value." No team would pay Trevor Larnach 17+ million. None. Zero. He isn't actually worth that. He's maybe barely worth 6. If he was on the open market he'd be looking at a $5-6 million deal as a platoon DH on a non-competitive team. None of that means Trevor didn't have a solid year or he's terrible or anything like that. But that's the truth of his value to other MLB teams. Eddie Rosario could actually field and hit roughly the same as Trevor did in his last season in MN before being non-tendered with 1 year of arbitration left. He got a 1 year, $8 million deal from Cleveland. Larnach wouldn't get that because he can't field. Trevor Larnach is not some hot commodity to MLB teams. He just isn't. He's a platoon DH who isn't good enough to hit in the heart of a playoff lineup. He's good for the Twins. Which is the problem. The Twins aren't good enough. It's the same problem they had with Kepler. He was valued around here because he always hit at the top of the Twins lineup somewhere. The problem is, the lineup wasn't good, and other teams didn't want him because the Twins valued him as a top of the order guy when that's not what he was on a good team.

If the player wins, they are obligated to sign him. They aren't obligated to keep him. But they still have to pay them. Losing arbitration and then just releasing the player is awful roster management. You're suggesting dropping 12+ million for absolutely nothing.

I see a ton of realistic moves for Ryan, they just aren't the ones people are going to be happy about because his value has tanked and Twins fans are going to over value him because they see his shiny 1st half numbers and think he's an ace. He isn't. And the league knows it now. At this point in time its hard for me to have any strong feelings on whether or not I'd like to see them keep or move someone like Ryan. It depends what they're actually willing to invest and what other moves they're actually able to get done. Holding him and running back nearly the same team is of no interest to me. Moving real prospects is of no interest to me. So improving this MLB team is going to be heavily reliant on FA signings. And I have no faith they can make the kinds of splashes needed there to get this team solidly above .500. And, if thats the case, I don't want Ryan here just to watch 2026 play out all over again. As I see it, their task is to make real improvements by bringing in outside talent without sacrificing future assets or to figure out when Joe Ryan and Pablo Lopez will have their highest values and moving them for all they can. There's a lot of teams that will be calling on Joe Ryan during the month of November. I don't think many will be offering deals people around here find satisfying. Tom picked his direction and it went about as poorly as possible. Ryan's arb number isn't the problem. Its his second half ERA over the course of his entire year combined with having only 1 year of control left.

Why would Seattle be interested? With Joe's unquestionable 2nd half struggles, he wouldn't even be in their playoff rotation next year (or any future year) if they're anywhere near healthy. They just traded away Castillo in an attempt to get more offense because he had no place in their rotation anymore. Gilbert, Woo, Kirby would be their 3 playoff starters even with Ryan in the rotation. Kade Anderson has a very real chance to be better than Joe next year. Bryce Miller and Emerson Hancock are about where Joe is on a full season basis. And Ryan Sloan could very well kick the door down at any sign of an opening in the rotation. Seattle is more likely to be looking to move starting pitching than be bringing it in. I actually think the west coast is pretty limited in teams that would be looking to give up real value for 1 year of Joe Ryan. San Fran started their own rebuild and was looking to cut even more salary at the deadline. Anaheim has no need for any 1-year vets as they're one of the worst teams in baseball and need young talent. LA has a rotation full of guys better than Joe Ryan. Seattle has far more starting pitching than the Twins. San Diego may be the only west coast option as they continue to try to get over the hump to the WS.

Totally get this argument, but don't think it fits with the Twins right now. I don't know how long you've spent watching the Twins, but they haven't been "building for next year" for 6 or 7 years. They've been "building for now" since 2019, at least. And they've failed. Pretty miserably. Joe Ryan is here for 1 more year that has very little possibility of being anything more than the last 3 years have been, between 70 and 80 wins. You can build a winning team by selling off your best players. It's actually how most teams not in the top 5-10 in payroll consistently build their teams. The White Sox are 1 game away from the ALCS with a team built by "selling off (their) best players." Tampa sells their best players constantly. Cleveland has traded Cy Young winners and MVP candidates. "Building for next year" can absolutely go poorly. There's no guarantee that you turn into the Astros and make a run at nearly a decade straight of ALCS appearances. But "the bird in the hand philosophy" leads you to 1 playoff appearance in 6 years just as often as "building for next year." Just look at the Twins. They should've finished their rebuild and traded Ryan, Jeffers, and Lopez before this season. They didn't. And they'll be lucky to get 3 comp picks out of them while likely missing the post season this year and next. Being able to accurately assess your own team's skill level is vital. Knowing when to "build for next year" or hold your "birds in the hand" is what team building is all about. Tom Pohlad picked the birds in the hand. And it was wrong. And detrimental to the Minnesota Twins baseball team.

Lewis should be non-tendered. It's time to move on. If they can swap him for Casas, I'd be happy. That's an intriguing trade of change of scenery guys. I love Diaz but am not sure what his D looks like at first anymore. Aranda is no gold glover over there, so it's probably not great if they're choosing to play Aranda over Diaz in the field. But that bat would be great in the Twins lineup. I'd much rather have a full-time DH like him than Bell. Burleson is too expensive for what you're likely to get from him. Very much like the idea of bringing Arraez back. Think Keaschall should be a LF/1B moving forward and there's no reason he can't be successful at both of those positions. So, if you want to have Clemens be the most of the time 1B against righties with Keaschall playing there against lefties, I wouldn't be upset. Or, if you bring in an Arozarena or Suzuki for the OF, Keaschall can be the 1B everyday until injuries move him to LF to fill the OF.

Isn't Royce Lewis a RH 1B of similar quality to Roden? Roden played 1B in college. It's not like he's Larnach or Wallner that people wanted to move there who'd never played. I fully agree that Clemens is best served as a utility man. They do have an excess of random OF pieces, also agree on that. My disagreement is that there's any use in bringing in a Roden level 1B. Or a "slightly better" 1B. No matter what batter box they stand in. They have an excess of part-time/platoon/Quad-A 1B, too. Sabato, Roden, Lewis, Caratini, Clemens, even Mendez and Gonzalez have played some there. I don't see the point in swapping Roden for Roden with a different name that plays only 1B. I'd much rather they upgrade 2B with Arraez, and 1B with Keaschall because they put Arozarena or Suzuki in the outfield. I don't expect that to happen, but I'm far less concerned with their ability to trade a Quad-A OF who can play 1B for a Quad-A 1B. I'm more concerned with removing Quad-A players from the 40-man and replacing them with real MLB players. Lots of ways to do that. But trading a Quad-A 40-man guy isn't likely to be a key way to do it.

It certainly doesn't have to be a 1:1 trade, my point is the same I make every time somebody talks about "excess." There's no such thing. Your suggestion was trading "excess outfielders for a 1B." Just curious what you thought that looked like. Because they don't have "excess" GOOD outfielders. They have an aging Buxton, a mostly established Keaschall, and 2 top 50 prospects. There's no other OFer to trade that brings back anything useful. I'm totally on board with the idea of trading for a 1B in general. I just don't see a path where you bring in a meaningful upgrade at 1B by trading any "excess outfielder" not named Keaschall, Rodriguez, or Jenkins. And that's a bold move to make, even for such a go big or go home org. Throwing Roden or Martin in as a sweetener is not the same thing, in my book. Because the real piece in that trade would be a non-outfielder. So, was just curious what you thought trading OF for 1B looked like.

Which one? If they're trading Jenkins, Keaschall, or Emma, they better get it right. If they're trading Roden or Martin, they likely aren't getting a 1B back that's very useful.

Ideally, the Twins bring in an external 1B who can hit in the 2-4 slots in the order for years to come. But, in the far more likely situation where they don't acquire that player, Roden and Keaschall should both bring a 1B glove to spring training. Along with Clemens. The best bats available on the FA market (trade market is harder to lock in at this point) are OFers or Arraez. Yandy Diaz may be a trade target, but he didn't play any 1B this year. If he can field it at an acceptable level, I'd love him at the top of this lineup. But if Tommy Boy is really willing to invest, then the more likely targets are Arraez, Seiya Suzuki, or Randy Arozarena. Arraez prefers to play 2B, and the other 2 are OFers. If they can add one of the OFers, they should be open to Keaschall getting 1B time. He's played it before. His focus should still be on learning LF, but he can take a ton of fly balls and a ton of grounders at 1B during the offseason and come in ready to play LF and 1B. Jeffers returning as a C/1B for 3 or 4 years would also be an intriguing move. It all depends on the payroll level, though. If they can go big on AAV for a 3 or 4 year deal, there are some intriguing bats to add. But most are in the OF and that'd need some adjusting for current players.

Joe Pohlad once talked the Twins spending 200 million. The Pohlads say all kinds of nonsense. Many fans want to believe them. I get it. But Tom didn't say anything special yesterday. Not being willing to put a number on things, or even a range, means he isn't really promising anything. Conviction about improving the roster and they'll provide the financial resources? Nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense. Because having conviction in spending huge on the best players in the game is incredibly easy to have. But they're not going to sign them. Because there's a number. There's a ceiling. It's all just more corporate speak. Just coming from a much better public speaker than the last Pohlad who tried to sell the same line of nonsense. And the entire line of Pohlads before him.

It's been the same line for decades. Falvey said the same thing for the vast majority of his tenure. Until the last couple years when it switched to "I have no idea what my budget is because ownership hasn't told me."

It's also how the Dodgers succeed and why the Mets don't. Development is the #1 driver of every successful team. The extra money to spend is the difference between being able to fill holes externally with a premium player or a mediocre one, and being able to retain your developed players or having to rely on the next developed player with little safety net. The Dodgers have been spending for a while. They've only been successful since they went and got the best FO exec in the sport who turned them into a development machine. Development is the key to everything.