nicksaviking

I'm happy to have the consistency, but he had a lot of moments last year where he struggled. I wouldn't be surprised if the contract was built so the Vikings could get out of it even as soon as next off season.

Yeah, looking at the Bucs roster, they need a new GM to go with the coach next year. You don't want to give Mayfield a 50M deal, but that's the price these days and much worse QBs are getting paid that much or more. So they don't have a ton of good players, so why are they 27th in cap space? Answer, Tristan Wirfs has a 36M cap hit. He's definitely a good LT but but it looks like the cap hit was front loaded and it would actually save them money to cut him in the next couple of years. Is that what you want? His contract makes it look like they'll have to give good consideration to cutting him starting next year. Chris Godwin has a !33M! cap hit. I know he's well liked and a good player when healthy, but no team would have let that happen. Antoine Winfield is good, but he already peaked and he's got a 27M cap hit. Then this offseason, 10M to good-not-great A'Shawn Robinson and 7M to running back Kenneth Gainwell? Do they realize what year it is and how much you're supposed to pay running backs? Sorry, I don't actually care about Tampa one bit but went down a rabbit hole wondering what the hell is going on here.

There is so much group-think with these prospect rankings, and Law seems very aware of that and often bucks trends, which is commendable. I usually roll my eyes at contrarians, but since no big name pundits in any sports dare stray too far from consensus with these things, this is the spot a contrarian is actually beneficial. Because of this, I'm sure at times it gets to the point where he has pet prospects, but I'm pretty sure he's acknowledged that happens, which is also commendable. And while I like Jenkins, I'm surprised people aren't putting Lackey above him. If he doesn't start putting the ball over the fence, he's going to be getting Alex Kirilloff comps as soon as he's called to the majors.

They only got one fringy top 100 prospect in last years sell off. And history clearly shows the team getting the star player wins about 75% of the trades involving prospects. I keep both Ryan and Jeffers if possible. I know it looks pretty blasé right now, but if kept, I think this club is going to be really good next year if two things happen. 1) either Jenkins, Culpepper, E-Rod or another homegrown talent can be a legit #2-5 hitter in the lineup. 2) Instead of blowing their budget on five players, they mostly use it on ONE free agent/trade for a front line starter. Obviously neither of those are remotely close to sure things, but I think the odds of those things happening and the Twins making 2027 a year of legit contention is higher than trading Ryan and Jeffers and being a legit contender later in some undefined window.

Maybe if he's just one component of a surprisingly big deal for a long term controllable player. But definitely not just to move him. Not now anyway. Only bad teams sell their players at their absolute nadir. Why trade him for a player of no consequence now instead of waiting to see if his value rebounds? Even if it doesn't, the odds that whomever he brings back in return is any good are just as low or lower. Unless they're willing to call up Gabriel Gonzalez to play 1B, I don't see the rush.

Maybe. I guess I'd need to start hearing the trade scenarios rumors. I'm still fairly turned off by the fact that the Twins were only able to snag one fringy top 100 prospect during last year's massive sell off. I think the system is pretty heavily rigged for the buyers these days, which not coincidentally is mostly made up of the big pocket teams.

Out of curiosity, what free agent(s) are you interested in? I guess that question isn't just for Mike but anyone who'd rather put the Jeffers QO money towards free agency.

I don't think this season is going anywhere no matter what they do, but if the Twins are willing to take on salary to avoid giving up anything of note, they can go ahead and trade for a starter as far as I'm concerned. It would send a good message at the very least. No bats though. And controversial take here, no relievers either. Because I think this team actually CAN be good in 2027, but they need to get the top young bats up ASAP and continue to transition the internal starters into relievers for that to happen. They can't sit on the young hitters and wait to transition the young pitchers to one inning relievers and expect it to come together all at once next year. Get these young guys up to speed now, and if you chase .500 while doing so, great.

I'm seriously not being flippant. The 16-23M free agents next year are going to be guys like Luis Arraez and Jazz Chisolm and I'd much rather run with the younger Keaschall and Lee. The pitchers will be Kevin Gausman, Robbie Ray, Brandon Woodroof and Sandy Alcantara. All have some combination of age, injury and severely declining strikeout issues. And if the bottom dozen teams are all going to spend more, than these guys all might blow past the 16-23M figure. If there ends up being a salary floor, this years 22-23M QO is going to be way undervalued comparatively; if the system remains similar (which it never does) it's going to have to jump significantly after the CBA.

I don't want them to spend 16-23M on somebody else. I want them to either spend 40M on a good player, or I want them to play the young guys.

I wish the front office would stop sweating the rotation/bullpen decisions so long. These types of starters have a tendency to turn into the team's best relievers. And the teams best relievers tend to be more valuable than the team's #4-5 starters. Moving to the bullpen should not be the soul crushing stigma people have historically viewed it as. Just move him now, and see if it pays dividends in 2027. I don't get the harm, this team isn't going to be winning many games with the way he's pitching in the rotation. I know the team is short starters, but what's the difference if it's Matthews or one of the stop-gap AAA guys? Or somebody from the waiver wire?

Where does precision fall into this equation?

Maybe. But who knows. The MLB isn't known for learning any kind of lessons. I'm not committed to either keeping or trading Ryan or Jeffers, but I do have strong opinions on how I DON'T want the team to look next year. And I do think removing those two makes for a higher chance that next year's club is another poorly constructed, unmemorable roster full of other teams' castoffs.

Even if free agents ARE willing to sign here, the Twins are going to have to compete against a dozen other similar clubs who are being forced to spend, including the entire AL Central. Not to mention actual attractive winning teams like Milwaukee and Tampa, and reliable organizations like St. Louis. So, maybe a small market team does get Skubal or Burnes. But then the others (Twins) are going to be forced to give 20M to Zac Gallen and 10M to Rhys Hoskins just to spend money. As to the second sentence, I've been saying for years that Joe Ryan's years of control and age matched up at a perfect time to cut ties. But yeah, I think I'm changing my mind, but only because of this atypical CBA position. I'd rather pay a good player now AND past his prime than I would risk the team being force to sign four to six gross free agents next year. Next year's free agents are awful. If they can't get the cream of the crop, then I want the free agents they sign to be the type of low level contracts that the team doesn't mind cutting bait on come May.

It’s really frustrating, because there are absolutely right or wrong answers here. But until we know the rules of the new CBA, we don’t have a clue which is which. Every point since the end of the collusion era says they need to sell the big name players. But if by chance the new CBA mandates the Twins spend another 50-70M next year, they will not be capable of signing better free agents that Ryan and Jeffers.