KirbyDome89

Agree 100% on the first paragraph. Yeah, we should probably wait to see who they take with the supplemental picks and hear some rationale for the moves made.

Why wouldn't he? If the Twins were offering less than he stood to make signing in the 2-7 range it's a smart decision on his part.

I need to see what they do with that extra $$$ before passing too much judgement on the pick....relieved it wasn't McKay though

This draft has nothing to do with football or fantasy.

For me it is in the context of strategy. I would rather they sign the best player at 1-1 regardless of how much of their allotment it uses up.

Thanks for ruining my day....

Greene...then Gore if he'll sign under slot. The association of Wright with "safe," scares me and I'm not terribly high on McKay as anything other than a mid to back end rotation piece. If they go with one of the college pitchers and save some $$$ for picks later in the round I can understand it but short of that it'll be disappointing for me if they take one of those two guys.

We'll disagree on the first sentence and agree on the last paragraph.

Both are theoretical scenarios. A return for Santana exists, the question is whether the Twins can make a deal happen. The same goes for all the above pitching scenarios and whether they work out in the Twins favor.

Who are they signing in FA to solidify this staff? How long does Ervin pitch like a Cy Young candidate? Are we counting on him to pitch like this at 36 years of age in 2019? Which direction does Mejia go? Hughes and Gibson may potentially have to contribute as starters? Romero and Gonsalves haven't spent a full season at AA yet but one may be starting the season with the Twins? The questions and uncertainty that are causing a break down are abundant on both sides.

When did I claim to know something that everybody else doesn't? Can you quote that one for me too while you're searching for the quote about bringing back front end prospects? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you realize just how drastically Santana is outperforming his career numbers. I shouldn't have to explain why that makes him a prime candidate for regression. That in no way is a downfall for the argument to trade him. In fact, it's a strong reason to seek out a trade. The major league staff has seriously issues. It isn't an assumption to say that this organization has refused to spend big money in FA and the pitching pipeline in the minor league system is underwhelming. Those two FACTS don't leave many other options for acquiring the pitching the Twins need.

Personally I think amateurism is when you falsify other posts to form an argument. Still waiting on that quote where I said they'd get 2 frontline starters btw.... I just told you it was sarcasm. I know you're not high on Santiago, which is why I found it amusing that a big part of the rotation righting itself and making the playoffs involves him turning his season around. So just throw in the towel on trading anybody and just chug along with a dumper fire of a staff? That's the solution? They can ignore obvious issues because hey, maybe they'll "get lucky," every year and make a playoff push. I mean once you're in "ya never know," right? He was a utility player his entire time in NY and the same in 2015 for the Twins. The number of seasons he spent as a bench player greatly outnumber the 1.5 seasons he has started. "Then trying to trade the remaining prospects (out of 4 SS and 4 MLB Top 100-potential arms) with them for "established, solid and cost-controlled pitchers" to bolster the current pitching depth." That sounds like attempting to dump the farm to me.... All the front end starters you would trade for fit the description of a rental. Yes I know, all prospects are created the same, they're all huge risks and lottery tickets. Also, all veteran players are safe investments, they can be counted on to perform at an expected level, and they're all immune to regression.

I literally just responded to another post that advocated trading the farm for a rental. You don't let the fact that a team is overachieving blind you to the improvements that need to be made. I'm saying the same thing I did in the OP. Getting a couple pitchers who have a legitimate chance to post a career ERA+ of 103 isn't inconceivable. Nowhere did I say they both had to be MLB ready, they would have front of the rotation potential, or they would be "alright." So teams don't overpay at the deadline now? Look, I would be thrilled if they did start actually utilizing FA, and I get that everybody is excited because it's a new FO and "you never know," but it's still the same ownership cutting the checks. We've never seen this team willing to spend big in FA, and so far the moves this FO has made don't suggest a drastic change is in the cards. Admittedly it's their first season and spending in FA can (and hopefully will) change, but I'm not holding my breath on the Twins going after elite talent in that market.

Isn't ignoring weaknesses because "they're winning and their luck hasn't run out yet," a big part of the disaster that was last season? This team would be much better off if they addressed problems early instead of waiting until the need to do so became painfully obvious. You refuted it? Why the consternation over trading him? If you think he'll continue to pitch like he is I can at least understand the desire to keep him, but if you're agreeing that he is prime for regression then why the uproar at the prospect of a trade? If he regresses, as you believe, what little chance this team does have to be competitive in the postseason, let along make it there, is gone. So why hold onto him?

Berrios isn't a front of the rotation starter right now, and Santana, apart from this stretch, certainly isn't either. I'm not saying they're getting two potential aces, and I was clear about that in my OP. This isn't a team with a couple imperfections that can be addressed at the deadline. This bullpen and part of the starting staff is atrocious right now. The organization has shown no willingness to be active in upper level FAs, and the minor league system isn't brimming with pitching talent. I'm not saying it's an easy decision or sell, but they desperately need pitching help and trading veterans who are over performing is one of the best ways to provide that.

Great catch on the sarcasm. Show me where I said he would fetch two front of the rotation starters. Please, quote that line for me. Pro tip; you won't find it. A utility IFer brought back the guy starting games in the 4 spot right now but apparently it's crazy to think Santana would bring back a near MLB ready mid rotation starter and another prospect who has a chance to be an average MLB pitcher. But sure, that's pie in the sky. So you want to dump what is left of the farm to rent a SP in the hopes that a band aid fixes the disaster that is the pitching staff. They'll assume a starting contract via trade, bring in another via FA, and then what about the bullpen? Will they just go on a spending spree there as well? So basically they'll do something they never do and become legitimate players in FA? But it's pie in the sky to think they can get two prospects for Santana. Riiiiight.....

1) His curveball isn't at the level of the college pitchers they're considering but he's also three years younger than them and by all accounts an elite athlete. I don't know how we can be certain he won't be able to develop secondary pitches that rate as a plus. It would be interesting to see how the secondary pitches for Wright and McKay were rated when they were coming out of high school as a comparison. 2) All pitching carries risk of injury. What about the fact that McKay and Wright have three extra years of "wear and tear," on their arms compared to Greene. I don't see that as a reason to knock their prospect status just as I don't see a reason to knock Greene because he throws too hard. I'm fine with whoever they draft as long as they take who they think has the chance to be the BEST player. I understand the desire for pitching as the current staff is a mess and if the player with the fastest track is also the most talented then I'm be ecstatic, but I don't want to see the Twins value a higher floor and faster track over a higher ceiling. A mid rotation starter in a couple years is nice but a true rotation ace in 4 is better. They can trade for and sign mid rotation pitchers, they aren't signing aces and if they're trading for one the cost will be severe.

I agree, getting to the playoffs does require more than a 1-2 punch, which is exactly what they should be looking to improve upon in return for Santana. I said the same thing above; you're banking on Santana continuing to pitch at this level, Berrios and Mejia can't have any hiccups as young pitchers, Santiago has to completely turn it around, they'll need serious contributions for Hughes/Gibson/name your 5th starter, and that dumpster fire that is the bullpen has to suddenly become competent. That seems like a lot that has to break the Twin's way.

All hypothetical proposals are made in a vacuum. An example was requested and I offered a realistic return. Nobody is claiming it will be easy, but finding a trade partner can be done. I'm sure the Twins would like to obtain a near ready pitcher but it shouldn't be a deal breaker. If they're able to acquire talent they believe will bolster their rotation in the future they should pull the trigger. The point of the trade is to get the best talent possible as to bolster the rotation.

Yes, any pitcher acquired will the current version of Santiago or worse, and trading Ervin will clearly result in another 3 years of terrible baseball.... You think this pitching staff as it stands has any chance to make a deep playoff run? How about next couple years? Where are you finding pitching if you're not trading for it? Barring a massive change in spending philosophy the Twins aren't signing significant FAs and the pitching they do have in the minor league system is still likely a year out at least. You're banking on Ervin sustaining a level of pitching that is ridiculously above his career average. Santiago, whom you seem to love, is going to have to turn it around, Berrios can't pitch like a 23 year old, and the same goes for Mejia avoiding succumbing to the ups and downs of a young pitcher. Oh, and how about that fifth spot in the rotation? Is Huges miraculously cured after his DL stint? Does he return to that 2014 form that some seem to believe is just within his grasp? Maybe Gibson just "figures it out," in his sixth season. Yeah, clearly myself and others who wouldn't oppose the trade are satisfied with the past six seasons. Great analysis. Part of building for the future requires a complete team, not just a core of young position players. A pitching staff this is capable of winning playoff series is a necessity. They don't have that, even with Santana. Do you honestly think the FO thought they had a three year window of contention when they signed Castro? I don't, and the subsequent moves, or lack thereof made by the FO suggest they didn't either. I've seen 87' thrown around a lot in these threads. If you want to ignore the infinitesimally small chances an event may occur and instead focus on the fact the possibility of occurrence still exists that's fine, but hopefully the FO isn't operating on that same premise.

Eduardo Nunez brought back Mejia. Ervin bringing in a couple of prospects who have a legitimate chance to post a career ERA+ of 103 isn't inconceivable.

For me it comes down to 2 questions. Do I see Ervin continuing to pitch like this at age 35 and 36? No Do I think the Twins can put together an above average rotation via FA and in house prospects? Not particularly. If they had even average pitching my feelings might be different but I think it would be a mistake not to trade Ervin if they're able to pick up a couple cost controlled arms that have the chance to be at least what Santana has been career wise. I get that everybody is excited they're not 15+ games under .500 right now but I would gladly sacrifice what was already pegged as another rebuilding year if it means the difference between acquiring the pieces necessary to field a truly competitive rotation vs hoping to avoid implosion and rolling the dice on a one game wild card.

How else are they going to put together a rotation? Flipping a vet at peak value for a prospect(s) that can contribute for 5+ years is how teams sustain windows of contention.

Agreed. I can live with any pick, good or bad, as long as they're taking who they perceive to be the best player. If they honestly think Wright is the better player then I'm on board, but if they're going the college route to take the safer pick and avert "risk," despite thinking Greene is potentially the better prospect then mediocrity might be the best we can hope for...

We agree that they need pitching help, but if they're unwilling to let go of veteran players to bring that help in how exactly are they going to rebuild the staff in time to coincide with the competitive years of the young core of position players?