chpettit19

Now what could that team have done if they'd traded Luis Patino, Vidal Brujan, and Brendan McKay for a 1 year rental of someone like Kevin Gausman? Maybe they make it out of the division series. Constantly trading a bunch of prospects for 1 year guys is unsustainable for sure. But refusing to ever take a calculated risk on a rental is also part of why the teams you describe never win championships. There's absolutely risk in trading prospects. It's a numbers game. But the Twins are currently sitting on 4 guys in their rotation (Varland is in there as of today) who are signed or controlled for 4+ more seasons. Trading 1 or 2 of their pitching prospects shouldn't crush them. Yes, it's a risk that you trade a guy who becomes a stud and all the guys you keep flame out, but at some point if you want to take the next step you need to take a risk. If the Twins trading Polanco, Festa, and Prielipp tanks their future so be it. I find that basically impossible to believe, but maybe Festa and Prielipp are the next Johnson and Schilling and are going to carry a team to a title I guess. You can't trade a Festa and Prielipp for a rental every season, but doing it once isn't going to kill you.

Rojas isn't meaningfully younger. He's 29 to Jorge's 30. Actually they're nearly exactly a year different (July 5 birthday for Jorge and June 30 for Rojas). That 3.2 WAR season is the outlier, not his 2023. His career WAR numbers are -0.1, -0.3, 0.8, 3.2, 0.4 Betting on a bounce back by a guy who's had 2 negative WAR seasons to 3 positive WAR seasons, and only 1 season with a WAR over 1, as compared to Jorge Polanco who's had 1 negative WAR season (-0.1 in 2015) and multiple 4+ WAR seasons while being 1 year older would be a terrible bet. Josh Rojas is going into his age 30 season with a career bWAR total of 3.9. 82% of that WAR came in 1 season. Jorge is going into his age 31 season with a career bWAR total of 17.3. Seattle would likely bet on a bounce back by the clearly better player who's not significantly older. Maybe they'd bet on Urias to bounce back to his 2021/2022 numbers, but they have an opening at both 2B and 3B so it'd probably make sense to put Urias at 3B where he's played the most games of his major league career and Polanco at 2B where he's a significantly better option than anyone else you named. In fact, their current depth chart lists Urias at 3B and Rojas at 2B where I just laid out that Polanco is the clearly better option. Polanco would be a great fit in Seattle.

Jorge is 30. Moore is 30. Rojas is 29. Caballero is 27. Urias is 26. Urias and Caballero have a real age advantage. Jorge has a career 111 OPS+. Moore's is 98. Urias' is 97. Rojas' is 92. Caballero's is 90. None of the others have a career OPS+ of 100. Jorge's OPS+ in 2023 was 115 in 80 games. Moore's was 104 in 67 games. Caballero's was 90 in 104 games. Rojas' was 78 in 105 games. Urias' was 76 in 52 games. 2021-2023 OPS+ and games played totals: Jorge 120 in 336 games. Urias 106 in 321 games. Rojas 99 in 369 games. Moore 94 in 297 games. Caballero 90 in 104 games (yes, he was a 27 year old rookie with a 90 OPS+). I don't see how "Polanco would only muddy up the situation" when he's clearly the best player of that group.

It's by no means the worst trade proposal to ever grace the forums on Twins Daily. I think in a vacuum it's a reasonable trade in terms of value on each side. I just don't think Chicago is at a point where they'd be interested in vets over what I'd guess are pretty nice prospect packages they could get in return. Will be interesting to see where he ends up, though.

I don't have any idea what the WAR numbers are or anything, but my vote would go to the Johan trade. Trading a borderline HOF pitcher for nothing is worse than any of these trades.

I don't know if 44 year old Adam Dunn can really swing it like the Twins would need him to anymore. But I'd take him on my softball team. In all seriousness, though, I agree that standing pat is not going to be good enough.

I think this offseason has the potential to be a turning point type of moment. I liked the Mahle trade at the time. I still think it was a solid process and made sense, but it's turned out terribly. If they make a substantial move to bring in another arm to pair with Lopez at the top of the rotation it's going to be a move that doesn't come cheaply. They're going to have to pick the right guys they're willing to let go, and get the right guy back in return. If it ends up like the Mahle trade it could have a significant impact on where this team is over the next handful of years. I think the minor league system gets overrated on these threads a lot. Jenkins looks like a star, but he's miles away. We'll know much more about him after 2024. The rest of the guys in the system, and young recent grads, have serious flaws and there aren't a lot of guys who's likely outcome is an all star level major leaguer. ERod has a ton of tools, but his K rate is a real problem. Lee looks more like an MLB regular than a star. Wallner has a hole in his swing that covers basically the entire inner 3rd of the plate, if he can't erase a large chunk of that hole he's got no shot at maintaining his early success. Can Lewis and Kirilloff stay healthy while producing for a full year? Can Austin Martin be Whit Merrifield or is he Nick Madrigal? Can Julien learn to hit lefties and keep the Ks in check? Can Jeffers maintain his new production over a full season with a larger workload? Can Severino hit at the major league level with his K rates? Can Castro maintain or build upon a career year that was him being a league average hitter? Who's the real Nick Gordon? Who's the real Miranda? Can Larnach ever learn to hit off-speed stuff? Are Schobel and Keaschall anything more than utility infielders? I know that's a lot of doubt, and I'm not trying to suggest these guys are all doomed and there's no stars in there. I've been driving the Royce Lewis fan bus for years. He's a star. But I think there's some real improvements that need to be made with all of them. Or just proving they can stay healthy. The window could be slammed open or closed this offseason depending on who's moved and if they hold onto guys who they're able to help overcome their obstacles. I know a lot of fans are excited to see the young guys, and have super high hopes for them after the Lewis, Julien, and Wallner trio took the team by storm last year. But that was an historic rookie class performance for the Twins, and even those 3 have concerns. The Twins have the chance to build a contender for the rest of the 2020s if they get this offseason right. But if they get it wrong we could be looking at a much different result. I have cautious optimism that they'll come out of this with the arrow pointing up and be setup for a really nice future. But there's work to be done, and the right players need to be kept and developed further.

That's an interesting idea. 3 team trades are really hard to pull off, and I don't know what the pieces going to Chicago would look like, but that's an interesting situation.

Castillo is "only" due 22.75 per year with a vesting option that is very unlikely to hit unless he's really good in 2027, FYI.

I like the option to have him as an extra catching option since I don't expect at all that Jeffers and Vazquez make it through the year healthy. I don't expect him to either, but that little extra flexibility is nice I think. I'd take any of those 3, though. Yeah, adding a legit, proven bat is very high on my wish list. Don't really care at all about the nostalgia even though I've always liked Garver. I do care about that OPS, though.

Glasnow getting 30 a year while only making 20+ starts once in his career (21 last year) makes me think the Castillo deal is a steal.

If Seattle would take that deal I think the Twins should absolutely do that. I don't know that Seattle would be super happy with Larnach's K rate (they seem to be trying to cut their Ks next year), but it's not an outlandish idea and I think the Twins should be willing to do something like that.

He hit in the 3-5 holes for the World Series champs. I think that's someone the Twins could really use. I don't expect the Twins to sign him, but a righty power bat that can play 1B/C/DH would be a really nice fit for this lineup. His lack of playing time and cost are why it won't happen. But Garver or Hoskins would be guys I'd very much like to see the Twins sign to give the offense a needed boost.

If they can get 2 years of Cease for Polanco and Kepler I'd be very happy with that. I'd guess Chicago is looking for younger players with more control, though.

Agree with this idea, but Castillo has 4 years and 91 mil left on his deal. If he hits his vesting option in 2028 it'll likely mean he was worth every penny of that deal as he needs to get to 180 IP in 2027 for it to vest.

I don't know if we can draw that direct of a line between Gray and Castillo. Gray got more AAV in his age 34 and on contract than Castillo has in his contract that ends in his age 34 season. Paying Castillo for his age 31-34 seasons is quite a bit different than paying Gray for his age 34-36 seasons.

It's a drastic difference in the playoffs because the pitching is better in the playoffs. It's a lot harder to string together multiple walks and hits in an inning against big time pitchers than it is to hit one over the fence here and there. What is the average difference in scores in the regular season and playoffs? I honestly don't know so I don't know if playoff games are usually tighter scoring or not. Wouldn't be shocked by that, but there are also plenty of blowouts every year. And, yes, it is like basketball and 3 pointers. It's the mathematically most efficient way to score and thus give yourself the best chance to win. I don't think these things are good for baseball or basketball in an entertainment sense. I've hated 3 true outcome approaches since they started popping up. But I want the Twins to win. In the playoffs. And the best way to win in the playoffs is to bash. If you can provide me another stat that has a higher winning % than out homering your opponent I'll jump on that bandwagon instead. But the numbers have been this way for years and years. Hitting HRs wins in the playoffs. And I want the Twins to win in the playoffs. Hitting HRs is actually one of the "stickier" stats from the regular season to the postseason as well. As in there's not a large drop off in the number of HRs hit per game in the regular season and the postseason. It's the best strategy I've seen yet. Even if all the Ks are horribly frustrating to watch.

I wouldn't bet on them trading for Castillo, but if it's a Polanco and Kepler for Castillo deal I wouldn't be shocked. He gets 1.25 mil more per year than they're about to start paying Lopez so it's not like there's no precedent for the team spending 20+ a year on a pitcher. And the salaries balance out for this year in that trade scenario so they're not adding significant payroll. I don't expect it, but if it's the type of thing that happens I won't be shocked. Chances are the player(s) they bring in will be people who haven't been discussed on these threads yet, much like the Lopez deal last year (I don't remember his name being a popular one in December last year). And I'm actually expecting the player(s) leaving to be someone large chunks of the fanbase are not happy to see go, much like the Arraez deal last year. In general, I don't think there's any names, coming or going, that can be taken off the trade board right now.

And just getting on base doesn't help unless you come around to score. In the playoffs (this thread is about the final inning in the playoffs) it's a lot harder to come all the way around to score without hitting for power because the pitching is better. There's 1 way to guarantee yourself a run while hitting: hitting a homerun. I've said numerous times that the Twins struck out too much last year. They need to lower that number. But it's not as bad as people are making it out to be (unless you're strictly speaking about enjoyment watching. I think it's terribly boring watching 3 true outcome offenses). There's a balance that needs to be struck, but striking out is acceptable as long as you can balance it with enough power.

The stat is showing that teams who score via routes other than HRs win less. Teams who hit fewer HRs than their opponents have to score more non-HR runs to win the game. So the stat is showing that teams that are forced to score more non-HR runs win 14.5% of the time. That's why I'm not focusing on that as a strategy.

If they think he's better than Montgomery or Snell that'd be a reason to trade for Castillo. If Montgomery or Snell are going to get bigger and/or longer deals that'd be a reason to trade for Castillo. If Montgomery or Snell don't want to come to MN but Castillo would accept a trade here that'd be a reason to trade for Castillo. I think it's unlikely they trade for Castillo, but I think it's an option.

You added a whole bunch to this comment while/after I replied. They didn't change their approach against Gausman. Chasing splitters out of the strike zone was never part of their strategy. Getting good pitches to drive (like fastballs in the zone) is their strategy. If they don't get those good pitches then they don't swing. That's the strategy. You realize that the opposite side of out homering your opponent is to be the team that had to score in other ways, right? I hit 3 home runs and you hit 1. The only way for you to win that game is for you to either have hit a grand slam to my 3 solo home runs, or to have scored more runs doing things a different way. And, in the playoffs, the teams that have to score runs without hitting as many home runs win the game 14.5% of the time. If you want it to be the reason the Twins got bounced, cool. It was the reason the Rangers won the World Series so you can take that however you want. Yes, getting on base is another important part. Nobody has said it isn't. What you guys have complained about is the strike outs vs the home runs. The home runs are more important as is easily proven by looking at the stats. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be concerned about their extreme K rates last year. It doesn't mean that taking walks or getting singles or anything else simply doesn't matter. It means that home runs are more important than any of those other stats. All the best offenses have the same strategy as the Twins. Know what pitches you handle well and look for them. If you get them look to do maximum damage. The question comes down to who's able to execute on those maximum damage attempts the most. Which comes down to talent. If I can only do damage on fastballs middle middle, but you can do damage on multiple types of pitches in multiple locations because you're more talented than me it's likely you're going to do much better than me at being able to do maximum damage. Doesn't seem like too crazy of an idea.

I don't understand the argument here. The obvious idea behind that stat is that hitting for power is the best way to score runs. The teams that didn't hit as many home runs (the teams that win 14.5% of the time) were scoring their runs (or failing to score any runs) in a different manner. You first sentence is literally agreeing with the idea that hitting for power should be their strategy since you're equating hitting more home runs to scoring more runs. Really confused by what you're trying to spin this into.

They aren't "solely chasing home runs." They're chasing hard contact by being selective on what pitches they swing at so they can maximize damage on their swings while raising pitch counts for opposing pitchers. Home runs are not the strategy for every hitter that steps to the plate for the Twins. Certainly wasn't for Arraez while he was here. MAT wasn't going to be a successful hitter by choking up and just trying to slap the ball around either. That's a big part of this. People want to equate cutting down swings to obvious improvement in success. That's not how it works. You still have to be able to square the ball up with authority to be successful. The league wide batting line with 2 strikes in 2023 was .172/.249/.273/.523. Hoping for some sort of dramatic increase in run scoring by choking up and not striking out with 2 strikes is ignoring the reality of major league hitter's success rates with 2 strikes. Thinking MLB hitters can simply flip a switch with 2 strikes and suddenly hit like Luis Arraez simply isn't realistic. If they can't build that roster they're doomed to a below average offense. You can produce sluggers through your system. They don't all have to be high priced players. Royce Lewis provided some power and he wasn't making $10M last year. MAT produced power and wasn't making $10M. Julien. Wallner. The Twins can't build any kind of team through having to pay market rates for a bunch of guys on their roster.

Well they won 87 games. But part of why they lost was because they struck out too much, yes. As I said in the last comment. But that was a symptom of bad talent, not bad strategy. Even with all the Ks they were still top 10 in runs. Washington and Cleveland had the lowest K% in the league. They won 71 and 76 games. If striking out is such a key why only 71 and 76 wins? They were 21st and 27th in runs scored. 29th and 30th in home runs. So the worst K team in history was 3rd in HRs, 10th in runs, and won 87 games. The 2 best teams in K rates were the 29th and 30th in HRs, 21st and 27th I'm runs, and won 71 and 76 games. What works better, not striking out or hitting for power?