KirbyDome89

Good Call. I'm sticking with my stance though; lots of young talent acquired via drafting/trades and affordable FA contracts. The real question is whether or not the players the Twins acquire/already have are lovable....

Using baseball reference, following your 1 or greater WAR criteria, I'm seeing about 12 WAR from FA signings and about 22 WAR from draft/trade players. Fangraphs is basically the same at 13 vs. 23. Fowler and Zobrist, the two highest contributors each have contracts the Twins absolutely can afford and they account for 8 of the 12 FA WAR. The Cubs don't have a bunch of FAs contributing heavily to the WAR total, its 2 guys. I'm not pushing for the Twins to focus most of their attention towards the FA market to acquire talent, I realize the importance of drafting, development, and trades. My point is that when you break down who is contributing to the Cubs run of success, how each was acquired, and how much they're being paid, apart from one contract it is definitely repeatable for the Twins.

I realize ALL winning teams do those things well, that was my point, they aren't unique to Chicago and therefore the Twins can follow that path. Significant FA signings the past few years: John Lackey - 2 years $32 million Ben Zobrist - 4 years $54 million, Dexter Fowler - 2 years $17 million Chris Coghlan - 1 year $5 million Jason Hammel - 2 years $20 million Jon Lester - 6 years $155 million Miguel Montero - 6 years $66 million David Ross - 1 year $2 million Jason Heyward - 8 years $184 million Significant players drafted or acquired via trades: Jake Arrieta - $11 million this year, arb eligible next year Kris Bryant - arb eligible 2019 Javier Baez - arb eligible 2019 Willson Contreras - arb eligible 2019 Kyle Hendricks - arb eligible 2018 Anthony Rizzo - 7 years $41 million....seriously that is his actual contract Addison Russell - arb eligible 2019 Kyle Schwarber - arb eligible 2019 Jorge Soler - 4 years $15 million left Aroldis Chapman - 1 year $11 million If you look at those two lists with even a small amount of objectivity I don't understand how you can think they purchased their ticket to the WS or they would only be there because their payroll is so deep. Seriously, the draft/trade list is almost their entire lineup. Zobrist, Ross, and Fowler are the only FA position players seeing regular action this postseason, and Fowler hasn't exactly been lighting it up. Heyward has been awful and is now on the bench! Coghlan and Montero have played sparingly. Hammel isn't even on the postseason roster. Lester and Lackey have been solid no doubt. Honestly though, the idea that this team is in the position they are because of their payroll just isn't true. There are 3 contracts on that team that exceed all contracts currently on the Twins books (not counting Mauer here, didn't think that was really fair) and of those three, two of them; Heyward and Montero, have done nothing in the postseason and really haven't been good all year. If the Twins can drop $50 and $55 million on Ervin and Ricky I see no reason the Lacky, Hammel, and Zobrist types are off limits. So when you boil it down, the Cubs have been so successful this season because of a young core of studs on rookie contracts, mid level FA signings that have been solid, trades that have worked out well, and one big FA acquisition. I'm not buying the idea that because the Cubs signed Lester, their philosophy of constructing a winning team is somehow beyond the Twins. My hope is that when Mauer's contract comes off the books that money is allocated towards upper tier pitching, because this team DESPERATELY needs it. Even if that isn't the case, looking at the breakdown of who is contributing and what they're making I see no reason the Twins can't do the same.

Nobody is advocating the Twins payroll reach 200+ million. Likewise nobody is stating that the Cubs don't have a monetary advantage. However, that club didn't just shop for FAs for a few years and buy their way into the WS. They made good trades, drafted well, developed young talent, found the right manager, ect...Those are all things that the Twins are absolutely capable of doing, so yes it makes perfect sense to compare the two clubs in that regard.

You might have me on the big FA signing. Maybe its wishful thinking on my part (definitely is), but I'm not ready to let that go until we have a better idea of what Falvey is working with. I agree, identifying and trading for pitchers like Arrieta and Hendricks isn't easy and it won't always work out but its within the means of a competent FO to make deals like that happen. You won't always get a Cy Young pitcher in return, but you can certainly upgrade your pitching in this way, and the Twins absolutely are capable of doing it. Lackey was a solid but unspectacular signing. I don't see the Twins having that much trouble signing a player of that caliber. You're right the Indians are a closer match. I was just pointing out that basic principals the Cubs followed (save maybe signing a big FA) are definitely repeatable by the Twins. I think people have this idea that because the Cubs payroll is higher the Twins can never emulate anything that they do. Obviously their money helps in signing FAs, covering up bad signings (Heyward!?), moving on from bad trades, ect... Such is life in a sport with no cap. The Twins have to be more careful about where they allocate their money, but following the Cubs blueprint isn't as improbable as some believe. It would be great if the Twins could develop all their pitching in house, but I just see no way that happens. The closest thing they have to a front line pitcher at this point is Gonsalves? I haven't given up on Berrios but he's looking more like a mid rotation guy right now. The Twins would need to hit on pitchers in the next couple drafts, as well as have pitchers like Gonsalves, Jay, Berrios, and Stewart all reach their ceiling just as an attempt to put together a competitive staff by the time the young core is moving into their prime years. I don't like those odds. The Twins are going to have to be involved in the FA market or make significant trades to bring back top tier pitching. I don't see how the rotation can improve to playoff quality without doing one or both.

I totally agree, kids often fixate on athletes at a young age, and as they grow older they hopefully are able to form more meaningful relationships with individuals in their lives who can be considered role models. I was speaking more about the adults who never moved on from the hero worship of their childhood. I think a lot of the extreme reaction in either direction has everything to do with that. I think the role model card is often played as a way to justify calls for extreme punishment or put social pressure on organizations. Personally I can't stand that. I don't believe athletes need to act in accordance with what society or social media would deem acceptable role model behavior. As long as an individual is available to the team a fan really can ask no more. If players fail to do so then criticism is fair. However, I think the critiques should be directed at the individuals actions and the detriment caused to the team rather than his/her inability to live up to standards that are forced upon him/her outside of the work place. You're right, athletes are going to continue to be looked at as role models. I agree that its a good thing most of them seem to be decent people.

"hero-worship among athletes, putting them on a pedestal." I think this has everything to do with it. Like you stated, domestic abuse is an unfortunate part of all walks of life, it isn't unique to athletes or one sex. I've never been comfortable with the hero label regarding athletes. Everybody is entitled to choose their own role model but personally I need mine to be a person I know beyond what I see on a field or a television screen. The pedestal is the reason for a lot of the extreme reaction after an abuse story comes out. Fans either don't want to believe their hero could do such a thing and therefore defend or deny the actions, or they're so hurt by the actions that they demand instant justice, often in the form of lifetime banishment.

I disagree. The Twins certainly can develop young talent, make good trades, find a manager who is can be patient with the young players, and make good mid level FA pitching signings. I wouldn't even rule out the possibility of an "ace," pitcher acquisition until Falvey takes over and we have a better idea of what the plan is for this team.

KC acquired both to bolster the starting staff. Davis didn't move to the bullpen until the end of that 2013 season and it was because he was tanking as a starter. KC got lucky, I doubt they knew they were getting an elite reliever when they traded for Davis so I wouldn't exactly call this a fair example of a top relief acquisition. It sounds like both of you (and almost everybody else) are advocating for the same thing: buy low, sell high candidates on short term contracts. Its a solid plan. Mike said it best, spending money isn't an issue, this team has to in order to improve. However, committing long term to a position as volatile as relief pitching should be avoided, at least at this stage in the rebuild.

Polanco as SS could be dicey if Sano is playing 3B. I think some of the offensive that Polanco may lack at 3B can be found at 2B by Dozier, 1B if Vargas platoons, and an improving OF of Rosario, Buxton, and Kepler. It isn't an ideal fit but giving up a little offense at 3B won't devastate this team. I agree, a utility role isn't appealing, but if Molitor uses Polanco like Dantana (i.e. playing him nearly every day) then I can stomach the utility role. Obviously 2B is the preferred spot for Polanco. I can see scenarios where options 1-4 work out. If somebody is traded, I hope its Dozier. He'll absolutely return more than Polanco, and he has only 2 years left on a good contract before free agency. Given the outlook for 2017 I think it makes much more sense to trade Dozier.

I think "We burned option years and consequently have little idea of what type of MLB player they will be.....so we must put him on the team," is a little more accurate. Hopefully the new regime places more value in options and consistent playing time.

I've defended the Park signing since it occurred, and I still think he can mash MLB pitching, but at this point he is still almost a complete unknown. A platoon of Vargas and Mauer at 1B is a good option to start the season. If Park destroys AAA then this rotation needs to be reexamined.

I agree, using it as a stand alone argument doesn't work well which is why I said it does't hold much weight. I was just pointing out that because there is risk involved both ways, choosing one side over another isn't necessarily a bogus position.

I wouldn't say its a bogus argument because there is risk involved in both dealing and keeping players. However, because the team doesn't look to be competitive next year and they enter 2018 with a 35 yo Santana who others are banking on repeating this year I would say the argument holds little weight.

Obviously this all hinges on how somebody views the rotation for next few years. In the same way you aren't advocating an all-in approach to 2017, I don't think anybody hopes the Twins call it quits on next year either. It isn't improbable to think this rotation could be decent, but like you mentioned above they're below average. That is their ceiling if everything breaks right for this team. I'm frustrated by the idea of wasting years of good young players as well, but isn't sending out this rotation next year doing just that? I'm not advocating a FA signing, I realize the market isn't exactly saturated. The best options for the staff, barring a massive haul for Dozier or some team becoming desperate at the winter meetings and giving up a plus AAA prospect, lie within house. Objectively this team isn't going to anywhere near the playoffs next year with the current rotation. Is it not placing faulty hope in the present to hold onto Santana, thinking there is a chance 2017 is anything other than a last place divisional finish or that 2018 is anything but a toss up whether or not the team is competitive (new regime coming in so we can't know a direction yet)? I'm not saying the Twins have to trade Santana, but if they can get a piece back for him I don't see his loss as catastrophic to the rotation. Like I said, next year will be rough, and we don't know what 2018 will be like because we don't have a POBO right now, so selling Santana at peak value doesn't seem too crazy to me.

Duffey, Mejia, Hughes (wildcard). No Pat Dean and other AAAA pitchers aren't the only options.

No, I understand what you're driving at. I simply pointed out that many of your opinions are stated as fact. I do the same thing, as does everybody on the site. Like I said, most divides can be supported on either side so where an individual falls is often based on opinion. It just happens that sometimes one side is better supported or represented. I hope nobody does disagree with your opinion on the pitching staff. Its hot garbage right now.

Not every scenario is black and white and often statistical arguments can be made on either side so disagreements come down to opinion. I see no problem with this and I believe most posters understand it. However, you've gone off about posters stating opinion as fact, yet this thread is full of posts where your opinion is stated as fact. You're right, little is known about the TR situation. We do have information, in the form of statistics and video on May, Nolasco, Sano, Plouffe, Park, and Vargas. Reasonable arguments about performance can be made either way based on their play this season. To argue from a hypothetical scenario in which none of the moves you mentioned occurred isn't a viable defense, its a fallacy. If Buxton, Kepler, or Sano are traded this offseason this organization might do the unthinkable, and sink even lower. I'm fairly comfortable throwing Gordon in there too, barring a blockbuster deal in which he is packaged. I agree this season isn't a total disaster there are some positives moving forward. However, I haven't seen unfair questions or critiques in the article or this thread so I'm not sure where the piling on is coming from. What I have seen are some posters complaining about other posters who complain. That seems pretty hypocritical to me.

In a vacuum I liked the Park signing and saw it as a sign the Twins were attempting to change the way they approach free agency. He was more than productive while he was healthy and at 3 million a year it looked like they finally had a savvy signing. Who knows exactly when he was injured but it likely was around the time his numbers plummeted. Vargas wasn't exactly a stud last year during his time up so I didn't have a problem with them bringing in Park, especially with his contract. The problem became their inability to move Plouffe in the offseason. Reportedly there wasn't much interest which forced Sano into RF and we all know how that disaster ended. With Plouffe still on the roster after the trade deadline I don't think its unfair to question how willing the team was to part ways. This is unfortunate given how poorly the Sano to RF experiment went. I realize all the decision to bring Park in can't be judged solely in a vacuum. I think initially it was a good signing, but subsequent moves (non moves really) negated much of the positive.

I've never been a fan of using postseason play as an indicator of HOF worthiness in any sport, especially not baseball. Mauer could only bat once every nine chances, and he certainly wasn't pitching during the playoff series. In a sport where the regular season is 162 games I can't understand how 9 career playoff games (good or bad) are somehow indicative of whether or not he is a HOF player. I also have to disagree with the notion that he didn't "carry the team," and therefore isn't worthy. Baseball isn't like the NBA where a star player can lead a mediocre team to low seeded playoff spot. You need good players at every positions in baseball to even have a chance at the playoffs. Mike Trout with the angels is a prime example. I'm not sure whether Mauer is a HOF player, but I am sure little stock should be put into the 2 criteria above.

If the Twins move Plouffe like they should, and Sano takes over 3B full time then the DH logjam is solved and Vargas doesn't have to go. Park can spend another year in the minors if necessary, or maybe he and Vargas duke it out who knows? Polanco is your IF utility. The infamous Dantana can finally be relieved of his duty (who am I kidding this guy is going to torture me forever,) which opens up another spot for either ABW or Palka. I feel Grossman's ability to get on base and work an AB is underrated. I'm also not sold at all on ABW ever being a productive MLB player, of the two prospects Palka is the more intriguing prospect to me. IMO there is no need to toss Grossman out when other moves can be made which would actually strengthen the roster.

I think part of the kickback regarding the move has to do with the way the Twins seem to yo-yo prospects. I wasn't too happy when they sent him down early in the season because it was a matter of weeks after being tabbed to start in CF. I also had concerns when he was called up quickly in the middle of this season. Add to the shuffle the fact that Molitor has to get his boy Danny ABs, often at the expense of superior OFers, and the struggle of Buxton becomes a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.

Can't say I share the same amount of disdain for the trade but I'm a little torn on losing Meyer, especially since he never had a real chance to pitch for the major league team. I will say though, this seems to be the strongest case you can make against the move. Most of the talk has been money. The team has a lot more flexibility with the non-tender option at seasons end. Financially the move makes sense (whether they allocate those funds to baseball related moves is another story,) and they received a better (if only slightly) starting pitcher. Really it all boils down to how much you hate to see Meyer go and how you view Busenitz.

Honestly I can't believe anybody would take Nolasco off their hands, even with the $4 million kicker. Not sure how I feel about Meyer leaving but man does it feel good to see Ricky hit the road.

I agree that the relievers should be sent packing for a flier, and I'm fine with Suzuki moving for the same type of return. Recently he has been good but he wasn't anything to cheer about last season and he was worse to start this season. No way do I want the team paying 6 million to trot him out there again next year. I think his hot streak leading into the break has inflated his value for some. He was a serviceable catcher while he was here but I can't imagine the Twins are trying to retain him at 6 million for next season, so IMO take what you can get for a guy you don't plan on keeping.