chpettit19

You're confusing "young" and "inexperienced." The Twins have very few actually young guys on their current roster but have many inexperienced ones. They aren't the same thing. Austin Martin is not young, he'll be 27 next season. Allen Roden is not young, he'll be 26 next year. Keaschall is young, and you can argue Brooks Lee is borderline. They are the only "young" position players on the roster. This is why some of us have been complaining. Because the guys you're trying to call young are actually just inexperienced because they weren’t called up until their mid-20s. The pitching staff is too far from being set to know what that situation will be. But people call Ryan and Ober young when they're essentially the same age as Lopez. The difference is that they were called up so much later they're still in arbitration while Lopez is making over 20 mil a year.

Winter League stats are much like Spring Training stats in that they shouldn't be used as evidence of much. I don't expect Emma to be on the opening day roster because I think Falvey is trying to compete in 2026 instead of rebuilding. But I think he should be on the opening day roster. This is his last option year. The Twins need to see what he can do. 2026 is a lost season unless numerous kids step up and do very unlikely things. So put the kids in there and see if they can do those unlikely things. Emma is very much a boom or bust prospect because of his swing and miss. If somebody values him as a top 100 or top 50 prospect and you can spin him into a similarly ranked young catcher, I'd be good with that outcome, too. But he has a ton of potential, for sure. The injuries are a massive concern just like the swing and miss. He'll be interesting to follow in the bigs, but he needs to be there now. If he's still on the Twins come opening day (I fully expect him to be) then he needs to be with the Twins and not the Saints on opening day. You can't let all 3 option years go by without getting a real feel for him and being able to send him back down if he struggles in his initial go.

Oh, I'm certainly not suggesting this is some doomsday trade. Eeles isn't likely a real piece to a winning team, but he has a real shot to make the majors. When you're in the position the Twins are in that's more valuable than any random catcher you need simply to fill out the roster for a year or 2. When you lack as much talent as the Twins do, I much prefer to keep any possible MLB piece with control. Prospects are a numbers game. More fail than succeed so you need as many as you can to give yourself the best shot at building a winning team. I believe the Twins should be in a full rebuild. That means trading Jeffers, not trading for a guy to back him up. That means trading Ryan this offseason and Pablo and Ober at the deadline or next offseason. I don't think the Twins have any plans to do that, and I think this is another sign of that. If all you're doing is filling a backup catcher role on a team you aren't trying to win with, you don't trade for them, you claim or sign them. You claim Ben Rortvedt if you have no intention of winning because you don't care if he's slightly worse than Alex Jackson because all you want is a glove that can legitimately catch at the MLB level. You're not trying to squeeze out a little more value for 2026 because 2026 doesn't matter. You trade for specific guys when you care about the marginal gains you think they provide. I said in my first post that this is a fine trade value wise. But the Twins traded Dobnak last year in order to not have to pay his buyout this year. 1.8 mil matters to them right now. My concern is that Falvey is trying to win in 2026 with a roster that has no real shot at it and it's going to put the Twins in a worse situation down the road by not bringing in as many high upside prospects as humanly possible. Trying to play both sides of the fence is how you end up with eternal rebuilds. It's an awful strategy that is going to hurt the Twins now and later.

If he is their preferred "backup" that speaks to bigger plans. The Twins haven't done "backup" catchers since 2018 when they first paired Jason Castro and Mitch Garver, I don't get why people keep calling him a backup. Unless they think it's revealing that the Twins plan to change their catching philosophy in a pretty big way. Every move is revealing. Or the front office is completely and utterly incompetent and just making random moves with no larger plan whatsoever in place to have the moves fit together in a meaningful way. There's plenty of people that would make that argument about Falvey. But trading away guys who have legit chances of making the majors and still have 6 years of control is absolutely telling. The only discussion is about what it's telling us.

Sure, super possible result. And I could make a more than reasonable argument along these lines that Alex Jackson has 0 years of control because he should be cut to make room for someone else.

I didn't say it was a smart belief for him to have...

Same way he thought the last 2 teams were going to be good enough to compete without making real additions during the offseason. He's bad at self-scouting.

They think they have the pieces to compete. Falvey hasn't been lying. He really is looking to build around the pieces they have because he thinks they can win. They aren't punting next year (on purpose), they're trying to compete next year. With Alex Jackson, Ed Julien, Kody Clemens, and Trevor Larnach.

I agree it's low wattage in the sense that he's not a good player and doesn't move the needle in any meaningful way, but I disagree that it doesn't mean anything. The Dobnak trade didn't necessarily mean they're cutting the payroll to nothing but guys making 4 mil or less, but it absolutely was a sign that they're drastically cutting payroll, and the financial side of things became the most important part of their team building in the near term. You don't include him if the payroll isn't a serious concern or the priority. This being a "treading water" trade doesn't make me feel any better about it. It's bad roster management to give up a controllable piece for a guy with no options if you're just trying to tread water. You can sign an Alex Jackson type at any point of the offseason. Or claim them. They passed on claiming a glove only guy. What would lead them to believe that about Jackson? I don't disagree that catcher is a unique position in this way, but it's not like he's a Martin Maldonado/Christian Vazquez type vet with a track record of being good with pitching staffs. Rortvedt has more run as a glove only, specialist in MLB with the Yankees, Rays, and Dodgers all trusting him with their pitching staffs while they try to compete. I'm not saying that that isn't part of the equation or it's not possible that it's what they're thinking, but I'd love to hear the explanation for why they'd think so highly of Jackson to lead their pitching staff even if they move Jeffers. Again, I'm not saying this is some seismic move or dooming the team, but I do think it says something about their plans. There is simply no reason whatsoever to trade for a guy with no discernable advantage in leading a young pitching staff nor future upside at this point of the offseason if you're leaning true rebuild. Falvey has earned every bit of the fan distrust he gets, but I think dismissing his claims of wanting to compete and build around the current roster is a mistake. I think those are his true intentions and it's what he'll push for unless the Pohlads demand he trades the starters or Jeffers or Buxton demands out. And it's what not trading anything but expiring deals and pen pieces suggest. It's what bringing back Roden, Outman, Bradley, and Abel suggest. If you're doing a true rebuild you bring back the highest upside guys you can, not guys that are MLB ready with lower upsides or bounce back candidates that have already reached and struggled in the majors. I've said from the beginning that people are misreading the deadline and mislabeling that as the start of a rebuild. And nothing they've done since has changed my view. This may not be a flashing billboard sized sign of what they're doing, but I don't think it's nothing either. Dobnak's inclusion meant something and so does this trade. The payroll is absolutely a concern to where every couple mil matters and they brought Jackson in because they plan to have him backup Jeffers as they try to compete in 2026. I just don't think you trade for a guy with as little track record as him if you're considering having him be a vital role in a rebuild. If you want a guy who can lead a young staff through the ups and downs of a rebuild I just don't believe you're looking at Alex Jackson and saying "this is our guy."

Rortvedt wasn't available at the minimum, he's just cheaper than Jackson and didn't require a trade. I don't think Eeles is some super likely MLB piece, but why trade any possible MLB player with 6 years of control when you can sign or claim a Jackson level catcher at any point for 1 to 2 mil? Or, as others are suggesting, if it's true that this is a full rebuild and they're looking at dumping not only Jeffers' salary but also the salaries of a starting pitcher or 2 they shouldn't be worried about spending 4 mil on whatever glove only FA catchers they want. Making the trades people are suggesting means they're dropping the payroll down to the 70 mil range. I can't imagine even the Pohlads would be so cheap as to say "you need to trade for Alex Jackson because we need to make sure we don't touch 80 mil with the payroll after trading the rest of the controllable vets." This isn't the end of the world, and value wise it's a fine trade. But I think it very much suggests they aren't truly rebuilding and really aren't looking to move anymore MLB pieces for prospects. I believe Falvey is telling the truth when he says he wants to build around the pieces they have. And it makes sense since there's only so many bad seasons he can survive, even with the Pohlads in charge. He has to be nervous about job security for a true rebuild. I think the Twins are trying to win this year and I think that's why they traded for Alex Jackson instead of claiming Rortvedt or signing any random glove only catcher. And they aren't going to try to compete without Jeffers. It's why I think this trade is a sign Jeffers is staying.

What suggests they're going to do that? And, if that's the plan, why trade for Jackson? Again, they don't need to think highly of Rortvedt to understand that trading a controllable asset for Jackson is a worse plan than claiming Rortvedt if they have no intention of competing in 2026 and are going to trade Jeffers and 2 starting pitchers by the deadline. And I find it very hard to believe that they don't think highly of Rortvedt's glove. Which is all they should care about if they're truly rebuilding. They didn't get Jackson for his long-term upside with the bat. You seem convinced this is a rebuild. I've been saying since the deadline that it doesn't look like one to me. They traded expiring deals and bullpen pieces while keeping every position player and starter with control. That isn't how you rebuild. I will take the under on 3 of the combination of Jeffers, Ryan, Lopez, and Ober being traded by August 1st, 2026.

I didn't say it was a good plan. In fact, I've been saying for months that I hate the plan. But bullpens are incredibly volatile and is the part of the team most teams feel is easiest to rebuild while also carrying excess value at the deadline. If this was a true rebuild, they'd trade Jeffers this offseason, at least 1 of the starters this offseason, and at least 1 more by the deadline. I don't think they'll do any of that. Because I think Falvey means it when he says he's trying to build around the pieces here, including Lopez, Ryan, Jeffers, and Buxton. That is not a rebuild. That is trying to win now and in the future. And I think it's a terrible plan. That second sentence doesn't answer the real question. Why trade controllable assets to fill roles on a tanking/rebuilding team? Who cares about substance when you're not trying to win? I don't know why you guys continue to delete out the vast majority of my posts when you respond. I have mentioned Ben Rortvedt 4 times now. That is the move you make if you're rebuilding. You claim a cheaper, younger player without trading any asset, no matter how unlikely it is that the traded asset is a useful piece in the future. There is a whole free agent market full of catchers in the Alex Jackson/Ben Rortvedt tier of players. Go sign any of them without trading a controllable piece. The question wasn't "why add" it was "why trade." There's a massive difference. You can't have it both ways. You can't suggest it's clearly a rebuild and then suggest they should be trading for "substance" for 2026. That isn't how a rebuild works. A true rebuild doesn't care 1 gosh darn bit about the 2026 results. It gets rid of every valuable short-term piece while adding as many possible long-term pieces as possible. You don't trade the possible long-term pieces (no matter how likely they are to be real pieces) for the short-term piece because you don't care about the short term. You don't trade for guys, you sign dumpster dive players.

I legitimately don't understand what you're arguing anymore. I stated that I think this trade is a sign they have no intention of trading Jeffers. You said you didn't understand why it suggested that so I answered you. You added that trading Jeffers would mean they're trading Lopez, Ryan, and possibly Buxton so I expanded on the idea and said this trade makes even less sense if they're trading all those guys. This is now the 3rd time I've mentioned claiming Rortvedt if their plan was to just have 2 guys who can catch the ball and help the pitchers. Cardenas is one and Rortvedt is another. That's 2 by my count. If they were planning on trading Jeffers because they've actually gone with a full rebuild plan, that is by far the more likely route they'd have gone, and it's the smarter route for that situation. That is why my answer to your question of why this trade suggests they aren't trading Jeffers is because it doesn't make sense to trade for Alex freaking Jackson and then trade Jeffers. I think you're going to get your hope. It's been my belief the entire time that they plan to try to compete this year. I just don't think it's a good idea. I think all they're going to do is make the needed rebuild worse and slower.

I understand someone needs to sit behind the plate, it's why I said they'd have claimed Rortvedt if that was the plan. You don't give up control years when you're rebuilding. I didn't write Gasper in my post for a reason. They have legitimate catchers on the roster already. People want them to trade for a young, MLB-ready one if they trade all those guys. Alex Jackson doesn't fit into that strategy. You don't trade for 30-year-old, 3 years of control Alex Jackson if you're truly rebuilding. You just don't. You claim the similar, younger, cheaper player off waivers and pair him with young guys like Cardenas after maybe starting the year with Pereda. But you don't give up guys, no matter how low they are on the prospect ranking, with 6 years of control for a guy with 3 years of control if you're planning to trade your 3 best players and your starting catcher. You asked why I thought it suggested they weren't moving Jeffers. This is why. If all they care about is putting 2 guys behind the plate who can help pitchers, Alex Jackson isn't the move. Alex Jackson is the move if you're keeping Jeffers and just need a backup you think is better than in house guys which matters because you're trying to win MLB games in 2026.

Sure, but I don't think that's the plan in the least. I have said since the trade deadline that I don't think this is a rebuild. I think they legitimately plan to try to compete this year. And this trade does nothing to suggest anything else to me. And if they're trading all those guys and truly doing a rebuild then why trade for anyone? Eeles is very unlikely to be a useful big leaguer, but if you're going all in on a rebuild you keep all your prospects. You don't risk losing anyone with 6 years of control for a guy with 3 because the 6 is more important than the backup catcher in a tanked season. If all they're trying to do is fill 2 roles with guys who can catch, they'd have claimed Rortvedt for cheaper and run with Cardenas, Pereda, or whoever else. You don't trade away controlled assets to fill any need whatsoever if you're trading Jeffers, Ryan, Lopez, and possibly Buxton.

Backup catcher or tandem catcher? I agree with labeling Jackson a "backup catcher." But the Twins don't do "backup catcher" if they think the catchers are at all comparable. They do "tandem catchers." Jackson has never caught even 60 games in the bigs in a single season. That's a backup catcher role. If they view him as his entire big league career suggests they should, they see him as a backup. And if that's the case, I don't expect Jeffers is going anywhere before the season. Unless anyone here thinks they're bringing in somebody of Jeffers' quality to replace him. I find that hard to believe. And if they do as many want and bring in a young catcher, I find it even harder to believe they'd use Jackson as a true backup and put Ford, or whoever, as a true "starting catcher." That's why I think it suggests they aren't looking to trade Jeffers. They brought in a guy who has no business being a tandem catcher on opening day. And I'd think you only do that if you're planning on having Ryan Jeffers here to be the main catcher.

Judging the trade from just a pure value perspective, it makes sense. Eeles isn't likely a major league player, even if he does get a stint or 2 eventually. He's not some major piece being moved. But if this is all you're looking for in a backup catcher, why not just claim Rortvedt and be done with it? Younger (slightly) and cheaper (slightly) and didn't have to give up any other asset. Is the MLB team better today than yesterday? Maybe. By an ever so slight margin. What's the point of that? That's my question. What is the goal with this deal? It's not for long-term improvement. It suggests heavily, in my opinion, that they plan to keep Jeffers and either try to deal him at the deadline or just let him walk for absolutely nothing after the season. What's the goal with that? The Twins trying to live in both worlds feels like such a massive mistake. Trying to win now instead of diving headfirst into a rebuild has been my fear since the deadline. Pick a route and go all in on it. Continuing this "if this is the year player x and y and z and 1 and 2 and 3 and * and ^ and ! all finally figure it out, we're going to be great!" feels like such an awful plan. It's what they've been running with for years and it's why they continue to struggle. Go get as many high upside prospects with years and years of control as you can and hope a handful hit. There isn't enough talent on this team. I don't get the point of this trade.

I'll be pretty surprised if Larnach isn't non-tendered today. I'd guess they've been trying to trade him up until now but there are no takers. Much like Eddie Rosario a few years back. Teams don't give up players to bring in guys who aren't worth their arb salary. They try to sign them after they're non-tendered and sign someone else if they don't get that guy because they're a dime a dozen. This entire discussion is a microcosm of the Twins organization right now. If the Twins were talking about bringing in a guy with no defense, no base running, and only a little above average against righties as a strict platoon DH type people here wouldn't be excited, and they certainly wouldn't be calling for the team to be trading for that guy. The Twins have just been so bad offensively that people have convinced themselves that Larnach is worth something because he was so important to this awful offense. Platoon DHs that should be hitting in the 6-9 holes against only righties are not vital pieces nor worth 4-5 mil. The Twins absolutely need better base running and defense, but this conversation just shows exactly why offense is still, by far, the number 1 need of the Minnesota Twins. Trevor Larnach getting nearly all of his PAs in the top 4 spots in the lineup is such a great example of how bad this lineup is. Same with Kepler before him. These guys are vital to Twins lineups while being guys who wouldn't hit in the top 5 or 6 of playoff lineups. The Twins need bats. Legit bats. So many bats.

Leody Taveras came up as a guy who could go get it in CF. I don't know what he's like these days (I don't watch a lot of Leody highlights) so I'm not sure what his CF prospects are now, but I'd guess his bat is the far bigger concern. I don't really understand this trade. It's very interesting. Feels like Baltimore is starting to really regret their refusal to move prospects for MLB pieces the last few years and now they're trying to be more aggressive. Possibly because Elias is feeling some heat.

I'm not defending any of this. I'm not saying it's good. They're an incredibly poorly run team and business. All I've been saying is that the Pohlads should bare some blame and it isn't 100% Falvey. He deserves blame too. They all do. I also said they should be able to do things no matter what the budget is. But they also don't have many, if any, big moves to make at this point when they don't have the big guns on the market. They can want to trade Ryan or Lopez or whoever today, but they need somebody willing to pay the needed price. I don't know what action people expect to see at this point. Unless anyone legitimately thought they were signing Naylor. Nothing else is happening.

Certainly a possibility. I wouldn't rule that out at all. My guess is that the limited partners swing the payroll relatively significantly. But I wouldn't rule out any nonsense from this org.

Because this has been a super poorly run company for a long time. And, apparently, they won't make any decisions until the minority partners are approved.

I think he should be looking at trading Ryan and Pablo no matter where the payroll possibilities are, unless one of the options is 130+ and he's calling Bo Bichette and Pete Alonso every day. And I don't know if he's actively calling on either of those guys. My guess would be that he's not in the best position to get max value out of them at this point of the offseason, though. All the other teams have multiple options for filling their rotation holes. I'm not blowing my prospect gun powder on Lopez or Ryan if Skubal is still a possibility. Sonny Gray, Mackenzie Gore, Sandy Alcantara, Edward Cabrera, Kodai Senga, Freddy Peralta, and probably more are rumored to be available. Framber Valdez, Ranger Suarez, Dylan Cease, Zac Gallen, Michael King, and Tatsuya Imai all available for just money. I'm not at all suggesting Falvey shouldn't or couldn't be doing things. He absolutely should be actively working to improve this roster. But where the budget falls changes his options significantly and other teams need to be willing to actually make deals for Twins players now. And I don't think many are at this point.

I don't think anyone is saying Falvey has no blame. There are hundreds (thousands?) of calls for his firing on this site every single day. But Owner is higher than President in every company I know of. I think some of us are just saying that there is a reasonable possibility that he truly doesn't know where the budget will come in and that that is on the Pohlads which takes Falvey from 100% responsible to something lower. Not 0, but not 100. Falvey should absolutely have plans in place for a 70 mil payroll, 100ish, and $130 million payroll. He should have parts of those plans that overlap that he should be moving on. But the difference in what he can do between those levels of payroll are massive. And this current era Pohlads have done nothing if not confirm time and time again that they have no idea what they're doing when it comes to running an MLB team and it is very possible that they have a gap in payroll possibilities that are 10s of millions of dollars. That absolutely effects how Falvey can do his job on the baseball side.

Because Falvey keeps saying he doesn't know. Repeatedly. Every time it comes up. Which isn't something he's ever denied to this degree before. I certainly wouldn't advocate blindly believing Falvey. But it's a change in how he's spoken about the budget for his entire tenure. He's never denied knowing what it is to this extent. They have limited partners that MLB still hasn't approved despite it being beyond the normal time it takes. There is a very real chance that he doesn't know what the budget is because the Pohlads don't know what the budget is because they don't know if they'll get bailed out of their debt or not. Is it 100% certain he doesn't know? Of course not. But it isn't 0% either.