Back in the Saddle: My Twins Offseason Blueprint

[Nick Nelson]

19 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

I can't imagine Kepler is going to get Maenea.  That seems really imbalanced.

In favor of Oakland? It's three cost-controlled years of a good outfielder for one year of a fairly expensive pitcher, and as usual the A's have a ton of pitching depth to offset his loss. 

Based on the responses here I think a ton of Twins fans are vastly underestimating Kepler's trade value.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Nick Nelson said:

In favor of Oakland? It's three cost-controlled years of a good outfielder for one year of a fairly expensive pitcher, and as usual the A's have a ton of pitching depth to offset his loss. 

Based on the responses here I think a ton of Twins fans are vastly underestimating Kepler's trade value.

Baseball Trades shows this trade favors Oakland but it's fairly close.

[tony&rodney]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

Baseball Trades shows this trade favors Oakland but it's fairly close.

Is it possible that this site is messing with our ideas too much. I think they are often in the range of reasonable but when I see Buxton's value versus others, just to use one of many examples, I question how much anyone should quote or use the values. 

Kepler is a super valuable player in my opinion even though I am frustrated with his ground balls into the shift. Oakland does have an interest in trading Manaea or Bassitt due to cost but I want to overpay for Montas and believe it is possible. 

 

[TheLeviathan]

4 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

In favor of Oakland? It's three cost-controlled years of a good outfielder for one year of a fairly expensive pitcher, and as usual the A's have a ton of pitching depth to offset his loss. 

Based on the responses here I think a ton of Twins fans are vastly underestimating Kepler's trade value.

No, in favor of us.  A SP has more value than a corner OF all things being equal.  I don't see any reason why the A's would take that deal when they can add OF for less than that cost.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

No, in favor of us.  A SP has more value than a corner OF all things being equal.  I don't see any reason why the A's would take that deal when they can add OF for less than that cost.

3 years vs 1 substantially influences trade value, especially when it's a cost controlled player in their prime.  One year just does not bring back that much in trades anymore as we have seen with numerous examples unless you are talking a Mookie Betts level player.  Trading players controlled for 3 or more years for 1 year of control is a good way to ensure long-term mediocrity.

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

3 years vs 1 substantially influences trade value, especially when it's a cost controlled player in their prime.  One year just does not bring back that much in trades anymore as we have seen with numerous examples unless you are talking a Mookie Betts level player.  Trading players controlled for 3 or more years for 1 year of control is a good way to ensure long-term mediocrity.

While true, the value of being cost controlled is still attached to the value you bring as a player as well.  While I think Max Kepler is a fine player, and perhaps a guy I'd rather bet on to rebound from last year, I'm not sure his production makes the ability to control his costs all that attractive.  

I could be totally wrong, I just don't see that the direction Oakland would go if they dealt Manaea.

[Major League Ready]

14 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

While true, the value of being cost controlled is still attached to the value you bring as a player as well.  While I think Max Kepler is a fine player, and perhaps a guy I'd rather bet on to rebound from last year, I'm not sure his production makes the ability to control his costs all that attractive.  

I could be totally wrong, I just don't see that the direction Oakland would go if they dealt Manaea.

I actually agree that Kepler is not the type of prize Oakland would look for in a trade for Manaea.  I was just being Captain Obvious pointing out the considerable added value of three years of control.  Frankly, I think trading for any of the highly coveted pitchers mentioned here is going to cost considerably more than what has been discussed.  Teams in the Twins position generally don't leverage the future for the present so I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed. 

[tony&rodney]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Teams in the Twins position generally don't leverage the future for the present

To a fair degree the Twins position is largely due to their unfortunate past two winters. The management has a difficult job now. The players generally sign for the best contract offered but being on a competitive team is important too. Sometimes the future is the players you have plus what can be acquired via trade or free agency. Look back over time and the prospects face a stiff challenge to reach The Show and then make a mark. The Twins can afford to trade a number of prospects as well as some of their current rostered players. It is Falvey who must find the right mix and if the Twins fall back to 90-100 losses the patience for The Twins Way may dissipate quickly. In fact, the traffic on sites like Twins Daily is tied to the hopes of the fans. This is a big offseason for the Twins as viewership and tickets are on the line coming out of two tough Covid years. Unless the team shifts to a rebuild, the future is now.

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

To a fair degree the Twins position is largely due to their unfortunate past two winters. The management has a difficult job now. The players generally sign for the best contract offered but being on a competitive team is important too. Sometimes the future is the players you have plus what can be acquired via trade or free agency. Look back over time and the prospects face a stiff challenge to reach The Show and then make a mark. The Twins can afford to trade a number of prospects as well as some of their current rostered players. It is Falvey who must find the right mix and if the Twins fall back to 90-100 losses the patience for The Twins Way may dissipate quickly. In fact, the traffic on sites like Twins Daily is tied to the hopes of the fans. This is a big offseason for the Twins as viewership and tickets are on the line coming out of two tough Covid years. Unless the team shifts to a rebuild, the future is now.

Go back to 2011 and look at the posts on this site.  The majority of fans ALWAYS think the future is now.  Year after year the cry was we are ready go for it now.  Fans are simply much more willing to trade away the future compared to GMs.  It's a lot easier to take that stance when you are not accountable.  

This team has far better odds of building a winner via developing internal pitching.  Therefore, any strategies that don't facilitate that goal are inferior strategies.  Prospects volatility is way overplayed for three reasons.  The most important one being that a below average revenue team has no chance if their prospects don't work out.  Second, free agents also fail at a significant rate.  Third, trades for prospects or yet to be established players has a bigger impact on building a team than trading prospects for established players for below average revenue teams.  

Leveraging the future with so many unknowns is very poor management practice.  Falvey and Lavine are very skilled regardless of what some people here like to believe.  I will be shocked if they trade away any significant assets this year.  

 

[tony&rodney]

On 10/27/2021 at 10:47 PM, Major League Ready said:

I will be shocked if they trade away any significant assets this year.  

The Twins traded Berrios (quite significant) and it seems understandable and now face a decision on Buxton (also significant). Willie Banks was seen as a very significant asset and might be compared to any prospect currently in value. Often trades benefit both teams. I'm curious about how many players can carry a "significant" tag. The Twins have redundancy in some positions and needs in other positions as do other teams. Falvey will be looking to improve the team via trades if there is really a plan to compete at .500 or better baseball next season. The free agent market can only fill a few parts. 

[Major League Ready]

On 10/29/2021 at 5:37 PM, tony&rodney said:

The Twins traded Berrios (quite significant) and it seems understandable and now face a decision on Buxton (also significant). Willie Banks was seen as a very significant asset and might be compared to any prospect currently in value. Often trades benefit both teams. I'm curious about how many players can carry a "significant" tag. The Twins have redundancy in some positions and needs in other positions as do other teams. Falvey will be looking to improve the team via trades if there is really a plan to compete at .500 or better baseball next season. The free agent market can only fill a few parts. 

I framed this poorly.  I meant they won't trade away top 10 prospects for short-term (less than 3 yrs) controlled established impact players to get better next year.  In other words, they won't leverage the future.  I could definitely see a trade of Donaldson or even Arraez and they are obviously significant assets.  Rodgers wouldn't be a big surprise if the return was good.  Buxton wouldn't be a shock but I am with those who really want to see him extended.  I think they might even trade Garver if they got a haul.  Of course, Kepler would be a significant asset and he would not be a big surprise either.

I believe they have too many holes to fill in one off-season without trading away a very significant portion of our top prospects.  That's why I don't think we see any top prospects traded similar to Snell / Darvish.  Any team could cash in the farm at anytime.  You just don't see below average revenue teams go there.  San Diego was absolutely loaded so they could afford to spend some of that capital.

[tony&rodney]

We are all wondering how the Twins plan to put together a roster to reach .500 in 2022. The attempts by TD readers are just "playing around" fun. It would be more interesting to see Falvey try something other than Shoemaker and it seems to make sense to look for a decent trade considering the apparent redundancy on the current roster.