KirbyDome89

C - Actual depth here. Hopefully Jeffers develops more offensively but this looks like a solid group. 1B - Rooker doesn't have a ML bat or glove, Sano is gone after this year, Garver and Donaldson are both FAs after the following season and I'd guess neither are too keen on switching positions. That leaves Kirilloff (coming off a wrist injury) and Larnach (who has never played 1B professionally or in collegiately.) 2B - Polanco is solid. Gordon hasn't shown he's even capable of handing a utility role. Miranda hasn't played a single inning for the Twins. If you're trading Arraez you don't also get to count him as depth. SS - Nobody. They literally don't have a SS for this season, plus there's a good chance Lewis and Martin don't fill in there either. LF - Touched on Rooker already. Cave has been abysmal for 2 seasons now. Larnach was a poor defender at the position in addition to his hitting struggles last season. Celestino wasn't ready. He's going to need to develop some sort of power if you're handing him a starting corner OF spot. CF - Buxton. They need a 4th OFer capable of playing CF. RF - Kepler is solid, the rest have been covered. DH - Can be used as overflow and/or a rotating door so I'm not going to worry about locking in a specific player. Maybe we need to define depth here. A body to plug in doesn't constitute a fail-safe in my view. There needs to be some level of skill floor involved before counting on players as actual depth.

He's replaceable/redundant for the Twins, but still so valuable that he'll net a top 100 prospect? If MN can actually get a good starting SS or a front of the rotation prospect for Arraez, it'd be hard to say no, but I just don't see a team that'd be willing to pay such a steep price. Martin and Lewis should be everyday players unless something goes drastically wrong. Miranda could be a better utility replacement, but there will be vacancies at 1B, 3B, and possibly LF depending on what happens with Larnach & Kepler. Trading Arraez this offseason to clear a hypothetical logjam seems premature.

The line of reasoning revolves around his value to the team vs. the value of a potential return. We agree, the Twins almost certainly aren't adding prospects, at least any of high pedigree, to a deal, and he's not likely to fetch a sizeable return on his own. I don't see any teams giving up a quality SS or a high tier pitching prospect for that type of package. The Twins can still pay for the type of proven big league pitching they're likely to get in an Arraez trade, and his value as a utility player is worth more to the team over the next 3+ seasons than a mid tier lotto ticket.

Arraez's offensive skillset is unique to all of baseball yet he's redundant on the Twins' roster? He isn't bringing back a front end starter by himself, which means the Twins are either adding other proven big league talent to the deal (if they're lucky) or more likely, they're throwing in a prospect or two. Teams willing to give up a 1-2 type starter with years of control left are almost certainly going to want prospects back. The Twins are sitting on $50M and we're talking about the major league team and/or the vaunted pipeline taking a hit. That's a problem. If he's part of a deal that brings in a true front end starter I can see the merit in moving on. If he's part of deal that only nets a mid rotation piece or another short term solution then what the f*** are the Twins doing? This FO wouldn't commit to adding talent when the price was only monetary, are we supposed to be confident they're willing to part with prospects to boot?

He was never asked to rely solely on FAs. He decided that "flexibility," was more important than stability, and the current mess is one entirely of his own making. We can't be at a point where year 6 is a throw away, with the positional talent, and it's excused because we're still waiting on something better than Randy Dobnak (or Ober if you want to count him at this point.) I don't think they're done with the pitching, honestly I'm not sure how they could be, but I'm not confident it'll be anything more than an Odo type addition with a veteran signing and another reclamation project or two sprinkled in. I guess they can still spend that $40M or whatever it is they're sitting on, but their best chance at adding impact talent with that $$ is gone.

All of whom were left handed, acquired on a leap year, and shared the same astrological sign right? How narrow does the scope need to be before all relevance is lost? I'd argue we're already there.

The fringes aren't really worth mentioning or arguing against. I view both '21 as well as the pitching issues as a culmination rather than a snapshot. Is it doomed because player X wasn't signed? No. Do I think it's highly unlikely they're able to field a staff capable of competing for a playoff spot at this point? Yes. The Twins weren't mathematically eliminated from playoff contention until mid September, but we knew the season was over by the end of May. I'd certainly take an Odo type, but barring a huge trade, it's a band aid on a broken arm. In fairness Detroit went all in during that run, and Dombrowski sold every asset he could to keep the window open. Maybe (hopefully) they don't reach those levels of spending again, we'll probably find out shortly. The Sox could be, and I said as much. I think the scope was narrowed to downplay the opportunity missed.

Nearly all of that WAR has vacated, hence the concern.

In the last decade Detroit was a fixture amongst the top payrolls while they were racking up division titles and making deep playoff runs; the Twins have never shown a willingness to do that. KC and Cleveland sat in or very near the bottom 5 and briefly rose to the median during WS runs; the Twins never should do that. I guess the Sox are a comp if they don't spend like they did in the late 2000s, and instead continue to mirror the payrolls of their rough 2010s run. Ray, Gausman, Stroman, and Berrios all signed deals well within the Twins budget. Spend like NY or LA is a strawman. It's understood there's inherent risk with FA pitchers. Alternatively, prospect development carries a similar, if not greater, amount of risk. "For a team like the Twins," isn't painting an accurate picture. If you're only willing to spend mid level dollars on short term deals, then sure, it'll be tough to get over the hump, but that's not really the point of this whole discussion.

No doubt, the goal of every team is to develop their own talent as a primary means to success. They'll always be judged based on team performance. The reason we're fixated on these prospects is because the FO has failed in other avenues. To say 'this was the plan all along," ignores those failures and what transpired to reach a point where so much is riding on this group, i.e. it shifts the goalposts from a team that should be competing, to one that now needs time for development. I honestly don't know why you're limiting the scope to the AL Central. Semantics maybe, but I would've considered significant to mean one of those top tier FAs that signed deals well within the Twins' budget. Rodon is still out there, and Pineda seems destined to return, but barring some massive trade (very unlikely) it's going to be another season of stop gaps, and considering what they could've had, I'd call that sitting out.

The same thing was said while the club was sporting bottom third payrolls in the early 2010s. Those savings weren't spent following those atrocious years, and whatever isn't spent this year won't rollover into some future expense account either.

Canterino threw 23 pitches last season, Duran threw 16, and each dealt with elbow issues. Assuming the Twins get lucky and there's no surgical intervention, those guys still aren't going to throw a significant number of innings, let alone get much experience at the major league level. Maybe Winder's shoulder issues were just fatigue, but even if his injury situation is also a best case scenario, breaking down after 70ish innings isn't encouraging; he's likely limited this year as well. SWR pitched so poorly the Twins decided to shut him down, but he's another guy with workload questions. That leaves Balazovic to round out the Twins' best shot at an "impact," arm, and none of these guys really profile as a front of the rotation arm. These guys aren't likely to start the year in MN. How much "learning," or evaluation is actually going to occur? From where I'm sitting the Twins still have a gaping hole at the top of the rotation, with Ryan as a long shot to fill in as a 3 rather than 4-5 type. If the belief is that the pipeline will debut and solidify the pitching need, why not get that front line starter(s) to supplement and actually try to win some games? If the prospects are still viewed as massive question marks, why not sign legitimate pitchers as insurance and again, maybe win some games. There really isn't an excuse for sitting on your hands and wasting a year, particularly with the position players in place. I sincerely hope that "the plan all along," wasn't to fail miserably in FA, be meh in trades, and pin all hope of success over the next 3-5 seasons on a good but not great group of prospect arms. Gunnarthor nailed it; the goalposts have shifted considerably if we're rationalizing sitting out an offseason and wasting a year as necessary to build a "sustainable winner," and make upcoming 40 man decisions easier.

I think arriving at a conclusion based on the worst years of these contracts, and then projecting that judgement onto future contracts is painting with a broad brush, and far from "hard fact." You said it yourself, it's a small sample, and I'd add that it's an inconsistent one as far as talent level is concerned. The certainty that these later years won't be productive and the timing/strategy of approaching them is the crux of the disagreement. It seems we've reached an impasse.

Attributes I'd consider to be more important: age, past performance, injury history, pitch repertoire/style, which franchise they're moving to, on and on. If you want to say that SPs are more likely to perform better earlier in their contracts, you'll get no argument from me. What I'm not on board with, is distilling these contracts down to their least desirable results, painting with a broad brush, and calling it hard fact. Blue Jays fans shouldn't be angsty over locking up Berrios long term because Jordan Zimmerman was a bust 6 years ago.

Removing prime production years and using a SSS don't really jive with "hard facts." Teams spend money on FAs that make them more competitive every offseason. I'm not going down the rabbit hole of debating the merit of signings on an individual basis.

The history of FA, or a selective history? You want to sign them because you have a hole that isn't able to be adequately filled by internal options. If you aren't filling those holes, and getting better over time, I don't know how you expect to reach the talent and/or win threshold where you yourself would consider signing a top dollar pitcher. If your answer is draft & development, it's clear that doesn't occur linearly. We'll just disagree on the generalization that FA SPs turn into pumpkins after 1-2 years. I understand there's risk/volatility involved, but the same goes for drafting and developing players. It makes zero sense not to utilize each avenue concurrently if the goal is to win a WS.

You're missing the point; waiting for the stars to align, or assuming that they will, isn't a viable strategy. Teams need to take advantage of an opportunity to get better when available, not hold out until 95% of the roster is set and/or bank of that same opportunity existing down the line.

What you're advocating for isn't a realistic goal. High end starters aren't signing 1-2 year deals and waiting for all the pieces to fall into place, i.e. pulling the trigger when you're "a piece or two away," is a good way to ensure you're constantly short that piece or two.

If the Twins won't play in FA then nobody should be off limits as far as trades to bring back pitching are concerned. I'd rather that not be the case, but this team can't forgo the option to buy front end pitching, designate top prospects as untouchable, and then expect to develop a staff when there isn't a single prospect that profiles even on the level of Berrios.

Having a career year isn't development. I'm going to pass on splitting hairs over which bottom dwelling teams are worse. In the last 20 years + the Twins haven't been good at identifying, developing, or "polishing," pitchers. That's objectively true. Again, we can pick out maybe one pitcher per decade that other teams coveted long term. This FO has repeatedly stated their goal is to build a sustainable winner. We agree that to this point they've failed mightily in FA. Trades haven't yielded any long term stability or success. We're into year 6, the clock is running out on the prospect patience as well. You can cherry pick his worst years at either stop and you very well might win that bet. That's an awfully low bar to clear though. More realistically, I think the odds of Bundy returning to his '16 form, i.e. an averg-ish pitcher, are less than 50%.

Your post was a caution against committing long term. I pointed out the downside to frequent reshuffling. Cruz isn't a pitcher. I wouldn't put Bundy in the same category as either Ray or Gausman, as each of those two had much more success prior to signing "prove it," deals. With Bundy, the ceiling is him returning to league averag-ish form from 5 years ago. If he has a career year, great, but I'm not holding my breath hoping he turns into something he's never shown any indication he's capable of being.

I posted something similar in a thread earlier in the year, but I don't think the prospect reinforcements are as strong as some believe, at least for this season. Duran and Canterino barely pitched last year and each battled elbow injuries. Surgery isn't guaranteed, but those types of injuries usually lead to intervention. Winder's shoulder issues to end the year could fall under the same category, or maybe it just was fatigue (still not great considering he only threw 72 innings.) They had to shut SWR down, not for injury, but because he was pitching so poorly. That leaves Balazovic. Add to this the fact that both Ryan and Ober threw just over 100 innings last year. Neither of them, even if healthy, is going to be able to pitch a full season, unless they're making 4 inning starts. Good luck constructing a bullpen capable of absorbing that on top of the occasional short starts from whoever else is added into the starting mix. If they're putting a bulk of their eggs in the prospect basket they're 100% throwing away the season. Hell, I'd argue that eschewing affordable arms in FA, and barring some big trade(s) for a front line arm this winter they're tossing away more than just this year. Maybe the prospect "luck," completely turns around, but it seems like an unnecessary amount of risk to take on.

We only have to venture back 1 year to see the volatile production of single year signings, and we don't need to time travel at all to see the results of the continued use of that strategy.

Odorizzi and Maeda weren't developed by the Twins. Berrios for sure was a success, but who did he snatch that title from? Liriano maybe? That was 10 years ago. Santana was 20 years ago. We're not that far removed from the Twins teams in the mid 2010s that could barely field two ML caliber pitchers, and right now the outlook isn't exactly roses either. They've had some success with FA starters (very little with the current FO) but even those were very short lived.

Unfortunately the Twins should also be included in that group.