chpettit19

As of today I'd be quite surprised to see them pulling off any major trades. Don't really expect them to even pull off minor trades. They already have their veteran platoon bats, and they don't have many openings in the pen. The openings they may have in the pen for the playoffs would likely be filled by Varland and whichever starter doesn't make the 4 man postseason rotation. Injuries could obviously change all this, but as of right now I don't see them being buyers or sellers. I think they stick with what they have and take their chances.

The Diamondbacks and Padres didn't launch their own channels, they're being produced by MLB. The Twins had that as an option. Both the Twins and MLB even said as much. MLB took over broadcasts in the middle of the season last year. The idea that they couldn't have done that for the Twins is nonsense. You're making stuff up to defend things that the team themselves have already apologized for and claimed the opposite of. Good for you for defending the honor of the Twins while they apologize to their fans for the very things you say they shouldn't apologize for, I guess. And they've already announced the long-term plan is to have MLB produce their streaming games moving forward starting in 2025. The only thing they haven't openly stated is exactly why they chose to wait a year. But the team has apologized for not meeting their promise of no more blackouts. They've admitted they failed at their number 1 goal of expanding their fan base. They've admitted all of this stuff was bad and wasn't their plan, but you still defend it. Are you going to bitch that the Twins are poorly run next year when they drop Bally's like their stated plan was to do and go with the MLB streaming package? Or will those paying fans not matter? I'd guess they won't matter because the Twins will have told them where they can access their product and the fans will have the choice on whether or not to go with those options. Instead of telling their fans 2 separate things that within months were wrong. But maybe I'm just a bitchy fan who doesn't understand that making your customers jump through hoops is actually a genius plan.

I think there's a lot of room between dud and borderline MVP. I think he falls in there. Streaky power hitter who gets sliced up by teams that can attack his weaknesses (mostly inside mixed with soft away like Houston shredded him with in the postseason), but punishes teams that can't consistently beat him in. If he turns into a 145 OPS+ hitter I'll be surprised and thrilled. Not saying it's impossible, but don't think it's likely. I'd be happy with a 120 OPS+ for him with a spike season here and there where he gets to 135+.

Dang, I hope you're right. That would be very nice.

So the Diamondbacks and Padres are the poorly run businesses? And, reportedly, the Twins will be the poorly run business next year when they join 13 or 14 other teams in doing exactly what you're saying is the bad idea? Your belief is that Corey Provus just went out making stuff up about black outs and the team never once corrected him? Yeah, that's very believable. Rogue employee making promises for the team that they never refuted even though it was wrong. That's definitely what happened. Weird that someone in the Twins informed him, but not any of their fans. That's definitely a great business decision. Even weirder that he said it on more than 1 occasion with multiple days between them. So either the team was slow in telling him to stop or he just ignored them and kept saying it. Which do you think it is? Edited to add: Dave St Peter came out after they signed with Bally's again and apologized for failing to meet their promise about ending black outs. And I'm pretty sure he is a Minnesota Twins executive with standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.

It was pretty well known before they signed their deal that Bally's and Comcast weren't seeing eye to eye. The idea that the Twins shouldn't/couldn't/whatever-you-want-to-say have known there was a problem with Bally's and Comcast before they signed a deal worth 10s of millions of dollars and dictated what options fans had to view their product isn't a good argument for the Twins doing things correctly. Either they knew and signed anyways or they didn't take their time to do even the slightest diligence in finding out what Bally's contract situations were with all their cable providers. Either way it's a failure on the Twins part. Because it was widely reported all offseason during the bankruptcy hearing what Bally's contract situations were. The Twins simply had to Google it to know it was far from a sure thing that Bally's and Comcast would work things out. Many of us knew it because we read a handful of articles on the bankruptcy stuff. And Comcast is most certainly not the first provider to drop Bally's so it's not like it's some unprecedented thing where Bally's is just so important YouTube, Sling, and others hadn't already cut them out and never looked back. The idea that the Twins signed a multi-million dollar deal without knowing is worse for them when it comes to the quality of their business decision making. The Twins told their customers at the start of the offseason blackouts were going away. They flipped at the end of the offseason and told customers they were going back to Bally's and blackouts would still be a problem. Customers were then able to make their informed decision about which services they could use to gain access to the games, even though it was late in the offseason. In less than 2 months a large chunk of those customers had the rug pulled out from under them. And your argument is that those fans shouldn't be upset and should just continue jumping through hoops to find different ways to watch this team. What other businesses tell their customers they need to continually find a new way to access their product? And would you claim their customers should stop complaining and they should just deal with it if that were the case? Is it good business to tell your customers 1 thing, then tell them that was completely incorrect and do this other thing instead, then have half the people who did that thing be told to just go do a 3rd thing? I'm no business genius, but that sounds like poor business strategy that would likely lead to frustrated customers, some of which who would stop trying to access that product and find other things to spend their time and money on.

Are there other businesses out there that make it hard for their customers to gain access to their product and then have people defending that practice as good business that shouldn't lead to customer complaints? I know there are the "high end" type businesses that look to sell things for higher prices because of scarcity, and that's why the Twins sign exclusivity deals, but are there companies that rely on high customer volume that make it hard for customers to access their product and then people turn around and say "well, obviously the customer should just try harder to get this product, it's not the company's fault their customers won't jump through hoop after hoop to get their product?" Because the Twins rely on high customer volume for both ticket sales and being able to sell broadcast rights at maximum revenue. And there are numerous people out here blaming fans for being unhappy having to guess which platform their games may be on from month to month. So I assume this brilliant business plan has many others who use it to great success and that's why people are suggesting fans are being ridiculous by complaining about this situation.

Why does it promote more cable cutting? These people "had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins." If they didn't have cable for the Twins why does Bally's not being on there matter? Did people not get or keep cable because of the Twins or are they going to cut the cable cord because of not having the Twins? Can't have it both ways. If people weren't signing up for or keeping Comcast because of the MN Twins then Comcast really doesn't need Bally's. Your first argument directly refutes your second.

This is the Twins strategy, but with mediocre to bad vets instead. Usually short-side platoon ones at that. Gallo, Andrelton Simmons, Margot, Farmer, Santana, etc. get never-ending chances to figure it out instead of letting some kids learn. I'm not as strong on the "let the kids play" stuff as others, but if my options are crossing my fingers on young guys figuring it out or crossing my fingers on old guys holding on I'll take the young guys. Especially if I'm loading up on 15+ mil worth of the old guys. Give me 1 much better old guy and then young guys trying to figure it out.

Far better? He's at a 128 OPS+ and 125 wRC+ currently (good for 36th and 43rd amongst qualified hitters), and has a career 136 OPS+ and 134 wRC+. What are you defining as far better? 140+ OPS+ or wRC+? There were 10 qualified hitters in all of baseball last year with a 140 or better wRC+. 29 with a 125 (Alonso's current number) or better. 10 and 32 hitters for OPS+ of 140 or 125. Pete Alonso was 33rd in baseball in 2023 in OPS+ and 41st for wRC+. And you think Wallner/Larnach will be far better than that? I hope you're right. It'd be great to have a borderline MVP candidate or 2 on the roster. Personally, I don't think either of those guys are top 30 hitters in baseball.

While I believe a big, everyday, middle-of-the-order bat is a better target than pitching at the deadline, I don't like targeting a guy you have no chance of re-signing. I'd take Alonso for Gonzalez straight up with the Mets eating the rest of his deal, but I don't think the Mets take that deal. The Twins need a bat like his, but not on a rental deal for what it'd cost to get him.

I'd say leaving all 3 of those guys unprotected in the Rule 5 and having none of them picked shows the Twins, and league, have made their decision and likely won't go out of their way to get them to the bigs. Not saying those guys don't deserve a shot, but 26, 28, and 27 year olds who go unselected in the Rule 5 don't often have teams going out of their way to give them that shot.

I'd start my trade pitch with Julien and go from there. If they aren't ready to start letting Raya go deeper into games soon he'd be the next guy on my offer. If they don't want Julien I'd flip to Lee and try to build a package around him. But SP isn't where I'd be focusing my player acquisition energies at this point. This team needs offense more than it needs pitching. If they're pulling off a big trade it should be for an everyday, heart-of-the-order bat, not a SP. It's not that I wouldn't like Luzardo, but I don't think that should be their focus if they're spending significant player capital in a trade.

Brooks Lee is not a "super utility guy." He's possibly a utility infielder, but he's not going to the outfield. And he hasn't played "all over the infield" in any meaningful way. He has 9 professional innings at 2B, and 67 at 3B compared to 1200 at SS. Brooks Lee does not replace Castro, he replaces Kyle Farmer. And hopefully does it this year. He's an interesting trade piece, though. If the Marlins see him as an MLB ready SS he'd have really nice value going to them, but if they see him as an injury risk just coming off a herniated disc his value is going to be much lower. If he lights up St Paul for the next 2 months he'd have really good value on the market, but would also be a really nice reason to DFA Farmer if he doesn't get his stuff together and start performing.

I'm really not sure when it's appropriate to play Farmer at this point. Castro is better against lefties than righties so the straight platoon at 2B they planned with Julien and Farmer isn't there anymore. Margot is the more straightforward platoon with Larnach or Kirilloff in left, and Santana and Miranda are the platoon guys at 1B with Kirilloff (if Miranda isn't already the DH). I don't know when you put Kyle Farmer on the field with this roster. (The answer is they'll sit Kepler against lefties to put Castro out there and play Farmer at 2B, but I don't like that answer)

Varland is going to keep getting chances to be a starter until multiple other guys pass him in the pecking order. The Twins aren't getting through the rest of the year with just 5 starters. Has Festa passed Varland? Maybe, but he's not on the 40-man so it's not a for sure thing he'd get the call when a starter is needed. Is anyone else even close to passing Varland? They won't move him to the pen until the end of the year or until he's 9th or 10th in the rotation depth chart. Right now he's 6th or 7th.

I've seen the "what will they do with Miranda when Lewis returns?" articles/threads/whatever on here, and all over the internet recently. I've always been confused by any answer other than "figure out where they both play to keep them both in the lineup everyday." But the more and more I see people talk about it and think about it I've come to accept that there's a real chance they send him down. They should be fired immediately if they do, but they wouldn't be. Outside of their big money guys and Jeffers he's the last guy they should be considering moving. He's arguably the best hitter on the team right now. I know it's a long season, and you need to account for that, but sending down your best hitter in order to maintain "depth" is a joke of a move. They absolutely can't be giving it serious consideration. But I know they are. Their "positional flexibility" plan has completely failed if they have to move their current best hitter to AAA to add their young superstar back to the roster.

Emmanuel Rodriguez what not part of that trade so I'm not sure what his success has to do with that trade.

Jenkins injury doesn't concern me at all and he's still #1 by a significant margin on my list. He looks like a natural and I expect him to reach AA this year and be ready to debut at some point next year. A herniated disk is no joke, and not a typical injury for a pro athlete. That does give me some worry about Lee. I've never seen him as a star, so the injury doesn't change his ceiling for me. I'd agree he has the higher floor than Emma, but a lower ceiling. He'd probably be #3 on my list now because I prefer ceiling to floor. You don't win championships with floor, you need ceiling. Emma's floor is still AAAA player who doesn't make enough contact to be an MLB player. His extreme patience (at least bordering on passivity) at the plate makes it really hard to predict what he'll be because he likely won't be tested the way he needs to be until he gets to the majors. I don't tend to rank prospects with lots of swing and miss super highly. The guys in the majors are really, really good at finding holes and exploiting them so if you're swinging and missing a ton in AA it's not likely you're going to suddenly become a great contact guy in the bigs. And he's not going to walk at a 25% clip in the majors if he's swinging and missing so much. He'd probably be my #2 prospect right now because if he does make contact well in the majors he's going to be a star. But there's a massive gap between Jenkins and him, for me. 1. Jenkins 2. Emma 3. Lee

That's fair. Don't disagree with that stance at all. Well other than I think his bat will be/is solidly above average and not slightly above average.

Starting pitching prospects or current major leaguers? I'd argue this team needs Miranda's offense this year more than it needs another current major league rotation arm. In my opinion, the offense on this team is a far bigger problem than their rotation. I don't trust this rotation in the playoffs, but I don't trust this offense to even get to the playoffs. Taking a 113 OPS+ bat out of a lineup with 7 guys with 100 or better OPS+ sounds like a bad decision for a team trying to make the playoffs.

As for just whether or not they should be eligible, I'd say they shouldn't be eligible for the draft pick compensation, but I'm good with them being eligible for winning the rookie of the year award itself. The Japanese leagues are very good, but they aren't the majors. They're still rookies to the major leagues and I think they should be recognized as rookie of the year (like Ichiro was) even if they shouldn't bring an extra draft pick to their team.

I don't believe either is on the requisite top prospect lists to be eligible for the draft pick compensation.

I disagree that "not spending" is the same as "trying to get by without talent." If the sample size isn't going to change then it is volatility. Their job is always going to be to throw 60 IP. Some years they're going to be good in those 60 innings, some they aren't. That's the nature of relief pitching. It's volatile because it's a small sample, but that doesn't make it not volatile. Their performance can shift dramatically year to year (because it's a small sample) without being easily predicted. The definition of volatility is "a tendency to change quickly and unpredictably." Relief pitchers are volatile. Edwin Diaz is a timely example of both of these things. The Mets spent ($102 million) but he's been terrible so he's no longer trusted to close games. They had traded for him in 2019 (gave up a ton for him and old man Cano) and he was terrible and lost his closer role. The nature of relief pitching is small sample, and it causes their performances to be volatile.

I'd be shocked to see Varland in the MLB pen anytime soon. They have no rotation depth and you can't take him out of that role in May. My guess is he ends up in the pen in September if the rotation is mostly healthy, but he's not going there in May. Also not sure why they're treating Alcala this way. I don't think he's going to be great, but he's certainly got more upside than the never ending line of mid-30s, 1-hit-wonder arms they keep trying to make work. Not sure why he isn't getting a shot at being a 1 inning 6th/7th inning guy. I will say the practice of not spending on the lowest guys in your pen isn't a crazy strategy. Finding guys with a pitch that can be dominant (slider or any other) who you can get for cheap is pretty standard for teams these days. Relievers are just too volatile to invest big in and the best practice is to find individual dominant pitches and rotate through guys through the first half of the year to find which guys are going to stick that year.