chpettit19

Entirely possible. I'm not going off just the Twins, but teams in their position in general. And not just teams in baseball. Teams across all sports are more often than not at least slightly conservative when they start performing a year or 2 ahead of schedule. Not every team, but most. Those teams are actually in pretty tough spots as they have to be really good at judging what's real and what's not with their young, over-performing players. The Sox also don't have a great farm system. They don't have the firepower there to really make too big of splash moves. Your point about their financial power is really their biggest weapon right now. Can they send lower end prospects to get back underwater contracts? I assume Roch, Smith, and Bonemer are off limits. Not a lot of other guys teams are clamoring for there. Their sales pitch is really just "we'll save you some money."

Last time the CBA expired, teams went pretty aggressive in signing guys. It was actually a very large complaint around these parts as the Twins didn't do anything and seemed to have been caught flat footed. I really hope the Twins don't go into this offseason with the same mindset. Guessing at what the new CBA will bring is a really risky to do business.

Fair enough. Don't think that's unreasonable. My differing opinion would come down to them relying a lot on young guys and, as we know from the Lewis, Wallner, Julien season, those guys can fluctuate after initial success so selling your other young guys too early can derail a rebuild back to contention really quickly. I don't have a strong feeling on which way they'll go, was just curious what was making you think they will go big(ish). I wouldn't be surprised either way.

Prielipp is at 91 innings pitched this year. I'd be absolutely floored if they let him go more than about 120ish to chase a playoff birth with a below .500 team. I don't know what the right answer is on inning jumps season to season, but teams tend to be pretty conservative with it. If their data says you can just let him rip for the whole season, do it. But if they have good reason to believe him throwing more than 120 (or whatever the number is) innings this year seriously increases the odds he gets injured late this year or next year, I really, really, really hope they don't push him for a team that can't even get above .500 by late July. And to add that to my earlier comment about Ryan, I REALLY don't want them to risk Prielipp's arm in a season where your playoff rotation would be Bradley, a cooked Ryan, and Ober throwing 88 MPH backed up by an over extended Prielipp and unpredictable Rojas and Matthews. I get people want playoff baseball, but I'm not a fan of adding so much risk to future years for this team. If Ryan doesn't look, and perform, like his typical first half self tomorrow, I don't want them doing anything beyond trading a DeBarge type for a reliever. Unless they find a way to bring in Hancock. If they can get him, it'd change my view on other moves.

Interesting. What leads you to believe that?

I'd wait until I see Joe Ryan throw tomorrow before I made any decisions. He already struggles pretty significantly in the second half of seasons so if he's looking like he's struggling right now it'd change my view on any percentage any system kicks out not accounting for that.

Cusp of greatness? That is quite the statement.

I think this is correct. But I think the Rays and Yankees especially, and the Mariners to a degree, are getting relatively desperate for some playoff success. And they all need a catcher in the worst way. Not suggesting the Twins can get a top 50 prospect for him or anything, but somebody in the 90-150 range? I think it's doable. Shoot, there's talk of the Rays having checked in on Skubal. And their POBO (Erik Neander) has been out there talking about their willingness to go bigger than usual this deadline. Could certainly be smoke and mirrors there, but I think you can drum up a relatively nice bidding war for Ryan Jeffers and snag a legit, albeit it flawed, prospect for him.

Now we're getting into the weeds! Love it. I'd think he can probably bring a little extra knowledge to one of those teams in a matchup against the Twins, but I don't think it'd be anything significant beyond what the teams already know. I mean, these boards can put together pretty darn impressive scouting reports on the Twins with just publicly available data. It's pretty hard to hide any weaknesses from teams in this day and age of Major League Baseball.

Question for folks: Does Joe Ryan having his start pushed back nearly a full time through the rotation after giving up his annual billion homer game make you more inclined to move Jeffers? Less inclined? No change? If Ryan goes out Wednesday and doesn't look like himself, knowing he's faded in every 2nd half in his career, does it change your perception on the Twins chances at making the playoffs and thus whether or not we should trade Jeffers?

Hancock is not a prospect. You may be thinking of Kade Anderson. And, no, he's not available for any realistic package. Hancock wouldn't be available for the Larnach centered package either, but he's not a prospect. The Mariners want right-handed bats. Jeffers is the piece you're trying to sell there. It'd take more than that, but Jeffers is the best piece they have in a possible Hancock deal.

No interest in Warren. The others are intriguing, though. Jeffers is likely to be highly desirable at the deadline as there's multiple teams that really need a catcher. Lagrange is who I'd prefer. Hess is intriguing as well. But those are probably the types of guys they can hope on with a bidding war. Borderline top 100 guys.

I think you mean Winokur is almost 2 full years older than Tait.

I like the swing change from Tait. Just foot down, load, and launch. Looks to be more on time than he was with his leg kick. He's clearly got talent, but his swing decisions need improving. Maybe the foot down will help keep his head steady and he'll be able to better recognize pitches and make better swing decisions. That's his biggest challenge in advancing. Swinging at the right pitches.

I don't disagree one bit with this stance. The team trading the veteran often "loses" the trade. But that isn't the whole equation. The players have free will. Their team control comes to an end, and they get to choose where they want to play. And that can leave you without your best player(s) and, at most, a comp pick in their place. That is not me saying the Twins should always trade a vet before they hit free agency. It isn't me saying they've given true effort to extend every player before they hit free agency. But I'd bet they've offered pretty close to all of their best players an extension at some point before they hit free agency. And when the team is below .500 for all but 1 day after they were 12-12 and it's the end of July, it's probably worth thinking about moving expiring contracts if you can get a nice return. When the team is doing well, you should ride it out, add some pieces at the deadline, and see what you can do. This season blurs the line more than usual because of the state of the American League. But the overall point stands. Ryan Jeffers is likely leaving whether the Twins trade him or not. Simply stating that the Twins are better with him doesn't cover the entire equation.

That is absolutely a fair point.

No problem whatsoever on that stance. I have no problem with people wanting to keep Ryan or Jeffers. I just disagree. And disagreeing and debating is what brings me back to TD.

I certainly don't have high hopes for Hancock, but the Mariners are half a game behind the Twins, closer to their division leader, and have been just as good over their last 10 as the Twins. If the Mariners aren't trying, it's hard to argue the Twins should. I know you're not one advocating the Twins "go for it" or anything, just pointing out the circumstances of the 2 teams.

I don't have huge disagreements with this. It's all matters of degree. 90 wins is as good a mark as any for a goal in being actually competitive. With those 2 things in mind, here's where I'm at on some things. Starting Pitching: Lopez. I don't trust going into a season with a guy coming off TJ and counting on them to just be themselves from the jump. I'd give Lopez about as good a chance as anyone based on the things we know about him from the outside, but he'll be 31 next year and the body does what it does. I love him, and would actually like to see them try to turn this TJ surgery into a cheapish extension for another couple years with him. Taj clearly has an incredible ceiling, but he was available last year for a reason. Consistency. I am happy to have him but not sold on his consistency yet. But do feel better about it now than at the start of the year. Ober is doing a heck of a job smoke and mirroring his way through things right now. Guys who rely on that tend to fall off cliffs in an instant. Prielipp, Rojas, Abel are all very exciting pieces. I watched Abel throw a pen in spring and I have no idea how he doesn't dominate every time out. Ball explodes out of his hand. I actually really like the rotation with or without Ryan. But expect there to be some ups and downs with the young guys. Bullpen: So unpredictable. Sands was a "trusted" late inning guy going into 2025 because of 2024, and couldn't hold that. Can Gomez, who has been around the block a time or 2, and Morris, who is very new to the role? I hope so, but I don't trust relievers until they've done it for 2 or 3 years. Just such a variable position. Will definitely feel better going into next year than this year, but I never trust a pen. Lineup: I don't trust rookies to come up and be consistently good right away. That is a large part of my view on things. If 2 or 3 of Jenkins, Culpepper, Emma, Mendez, Gabby, etc. come up and explode next year the team is going to likely be better than this year whether they have Ryan and Jeffers or not. I don't trust Larnach, Lee, Clemens, Kreidler, etc. types. Clemens has definitely made me eat crow this year, and it's probably me being more stubborn than I should be, but I just don't trust him to sustain. Hope he keeps making me look foolish. But the offense as a whole has produced significantly better with RISP than their normal stat lines. That isn't sustainable. And I think we've seen a lot of that since the break. Outside of 2 games, this team has really struggled to score. If the youth come up and pull a Wallner, Lewis, Julien from a few years ago, those other guys dipping won't matter. But I don't like predicting great, sustained, consistent success from rookies from the jump. It's why I wanted, and still want, them to all get a lot of experience this year to be able to be more consistent next year. To sum it all up, I think the keys to next year being successful are the young guys, and if they all do well, it doesn't matter if we have Ryan and Jeffers or not. If they all fail, it doesn't matter if we have Ryan and Jeffers or not. The level the new guys will have to perform at for them to be a 90+ win team are higher than I expect, so I'd prefer to use it as a transition year (which I wanted this year to be more of) and add more possible pieces to the puzzle for 2028 and beyond to help their chances of building a sustainable winner. All that is also why I don't mind if they get A+ type top prospects for Ryan and Jeffers. I want sustainable and the guys already in the org are already the key to opening the window in the first place. Adding to the next wave is important, too. I probably come across harsher than I mean about 2027. .500ish feels like a reasonable goal for next year. 90 wins is more optimistic than I can get to. And it feels like the difference between our thoughts are probably minor and mostly about the level of faith we each have in certain outcomes.

That is an interesting question. He feels like a "Hall of Very Good" guy, but it'll be interesting to see the full case that can be made for him when he retires.

He caught IN 88, 86, 82, and 84 games those years. He didn't catch 88,86, 82, or 84 games. You can feel free to count games where he caught an inning or 2, but I don't. And you could make an argument that they mismanaged him during those time share seasons if you'd like, but you'll find a bunch of people on here who will point out that he faded down the stretch in every one of them despite the time share. As I said in a subsequent post, I'd certainly bet on him over Caratini when it comes to their chances of being an everyday catcher, but the other poster pointed to Caratini's lack of more than 87 games caught as proof he wasn't a good bet. Age 30 Jeffers isn't a great bet either is all I'm saying. Being "on target" for 120 games doesn't impress me. We have no idea what he would look like over the stretch of the entire season at that pace. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me based on his previous track record of not doing it. Oh, it is definitely rare. But that's because most of the time you're trading someone it's because you already know you won't pay the player what they're asking. It's a naturally biased data set. I'd much rather have Jeffers for the next 3 or 4 years than piece things together beyond Caratini and Jackson. But, I believe, if Jeffers and the Twins were on the same page for a contract he'd already be signed.

I don't disagree. I think @bean5302 is onto something with the comment above. The Twins drafted guys who weren't true catchers as catchers and hoped they could make them MLB catchers. Austin Wells has never been considered an overly good defensive catcher. I'll be honest, I don't really know who Ali Sanchez is, so I can't speak to his defensive acumen. But my overall point there is that if Swanson really was some key piece to developing catchers, the Yankees should be overflowing with catching since he's been there for going on 7 years now (joined them late 2019). I think developing catching is just really, really hard. And Tanner Swanson probably isn't some superstar catcher developer if the team he's been with for 6 and a half seasons doesn't have anyone to turn to and hasn't really developed anyone outside of a bat first Austin Wells since he's been there.

It isn't a huge leap. I'm sorry if I've come across stronger than you'd like or I meant. You made a statement about how you "think" people think and feel. I informed you that you were wrong and assuming how other people feel just because they don't do things the way you do, or have the same opinions as you, is a bad road to take. Not thinned skinned, but, yes, I'll openly debate on the forums with others and state my thoughts and opinions. The "Pohlads love you" comment isn't an insult, or wasn't meant to be one, it was a joke. I apologize if it came across as mean spirited. I'm not trying to throw gasoline on any fire, but I will continue to respond to comments (or entire articles) about how people "fan" by telling the people who write them that they should watch their own bobber and not assume what other people feeling.

And this is the crux of it. You haven't framed things in a way that suggests you're only talking about people who outwardly hope the Twins lose so they can trade Jeffers. You've framed it as anybody who wants to trade Jeffers hopes the Twins lose. But there is a difference between wanting them to flip Jeffers (I have no problem admitting I want them to flip Jeffers and Ryan no matter how things go between now and the deadline) and hoping the team loses so they do flip Jeffers. You haven't made that distinction so it comes across as you telling everyone who wants to see Jeffers flipped from a team that has been at (not above, at) .500 for 1 day since they were 12-12 that they're bad fans and they don't understand their own enjoyment levels. If you're only talking about people actively cheering for Twins losses, you've written an article for what 1-5% of Twins fans? Feels like a waste of time, but you do you.

I'm not arguing Rocco shouldn't have been fired at any point in time. I'm simply stating that nothing that's been presented suggests the manager makes all that much of a difference. Who are the multiple? Jeffers having a career year. Buxton is the same. Keaschall is worse, but mostly uneven as his sample grows early in his career. Martin is the same/worse as the sample size got bigger. Clemens was new. Bell is new. Roden is the same in small samples with both. Caratini and Jackson are new. Lee is slightly better. Pitching staff is either new or the same. Larnach is slightly better. Kreidler is new. Yes, all managers get fired. Which is kind of a point in my direction. Good managers know how to adjust in relationships and keep them from getting stale and a new voice being needed. Almost every time it is just players underperforming and people above the managers saving their own butts. This isn't a manager thread so we shouldn't get too off topic here, but I still see no evidence in either the Twins or the Red Sox that makes me think managers are any more important than I used to. Or the Reds for that matter. Tito hasn't saved them. It's about talent on the field performing. It's always been about talent on the field performing. And it always will be about talent performing on the field. No manager saves a bad team or ruins a good one.