Pareto's optimality, barriers to entry/exit, and the Dodger monster

Pareto says an efficient market yields trades where "buyer" and "seller" are neither better or worse off after a trade. Thus, in the case where a seller is barred from exit, the buyer will be better off afterwards. Vice versa, when seller is barred from entry, he has the advantage. As such, it is not advisable to "shop" players, but rather field offers and decline discount or equivalent offers freely. Likewise, the best players to target are those being heavily shopped by others, and the worst, are those highly protected.

If the Twins think "it is better to sell low a player, then let him expire (ie. walk)," then as buyers, they are stuck inside the player market.

Likewise, since teams are often reluctant to shop high-upside prospects, it would be foolish to target those players.

Above all, the Dodgers. With their willingnees to outspend everyone, they are a dominant buyer and drive up the price for prospects singlehandedly. What if they fail to make the playoffs? The price will only go higher, I think.

And so it is these market imperfections that should also influence the Twins' FO's play this fall and at the winter meetings. It is not all about immediate or future need, when your goal is to maximize returns, ie. actualized player WAR/$, adjusted for interest and inflation (where applicable).