11 hours ago, RonCoomersOPS said:

You should probably direct your anger at Berrios. It takes two parties to make a contract. One of the parties in this case consistently said he was going to test free agency, end of story, so the other party did what they felt was best in terms of maximizing the value of their assets.

That he immediately signed with the team the FO traded him to is at least as much an indication of Berrios' character, or a statement about the not particularly inclusive nature of his former team's fan base, as it is a condemnation of the FO or the Pohlads.

 

Right. I agree. That Berrios signed so quickly and so easily with Toronto doesn't imply the Twins didn't try, at least not to me. It implies that Berrios didn't want to be in Minnesota. He even said it himself ... he likes the diversity in Toronto, and his consistent messaging about wanting to experience free agency. How this unfolded to me is a clear indicator that no matter what the FO did, he was gone. So, we got something for him when we could. And so far, I'm happy with the returns, but I will be happier if the return performs to expectation. And while, yes, we need pitching and he'd be great to have, I never saw him as a #1 pitcher. He might have been the best we had, but that was more an indication of our pitching staff than Berrios being *that* good. 

All in all, I'm in the 'don't know' category. I've liked some things, disliked other things. Mostly it's an 'It's out of my control and I certainly could not do better and do not know what happens behind closed doors and I don't know who else I'd want' thing, so ... honestly, I don't know.

Well, their ability to make large, noteworthy, move the bar decisions remains unchallenged! 

14 hours ago, RonCoomersOPS said:

You should probably direct your anger at Berrios. It takes two parties to make a contract. One of the parties in this case consistently said he was going to test free agency, end of story, so the other party did what they felt was best in terms of maximizing the value of their assets.

That he immediately signed with the team the FO traded him to is at least as much an indication of Berrios' character, or a statement about the not particularly inclusive nature of his former team's fan base, as it is a condemnation of the FO or the Pohlads.

 

That’s some revisionist history. It’s not my intention to high jack this thread but all he asked for was a market rate offer now that he was in a position of being a 6 year veteran. 

(Now it's a matter of seeing if he can get the "best deal," at market price, from the Twins before the other 29 teams enter the bidding. Does he expect that? "Maybe. The Twins can do whatever they want," Berrios said. "If they come to us and make an offer, we'll see what the future has in store. But we waited a long time, worked very hard, to get to this position.")

5 hours ago, Squirrel said:

17 hours ago, RonCoomersOPS said:

You should probably direct your anger at Berrios. It takes two parties to make a contract. One of the parties in this case consistently said he was going to test free agency, end of story, so the other party did what they felt was best in terms of maximizing the value of their assets.

That he immediately signed with the team the FO traded him to is at least as much an indication of Berrios' character, or a statement about the not particularly inclusive nature of his former team's fan base, as it is a condemnation of the FO or the Pohlads.

 

Right. I agree. That Berrios signed so quickly and so easily with Toronto doesn't imply the Twins didn't try, at least not to me. It implies that Berrios didn't want to be in Minnesota. He even said it himself ... he likes the diversity in Toronto, and his consistent messaging about wanting to experience free agency. How this unfolded to me is a clear indicator that no matter what the FO did, he was gone. So, we got something for him when we could. And so far, I'm happy with the returns, but I will be happier if the return performs to expectation. And while, yes, we need pitching and he'd be great to have, I never saw him as a #1 pitcher. He might have been the best we had, but that was more an indication of our pitching staff than Berrios being *that* good. 

All in all, I'm in the 'don't know' category. I've liked some things, disliked other things. Mostly it's an 'It's out of my control and I certainly could not do better and do not know what happens behind closed doors and I don't know who else I'd want' thing, so ... honestly, I don't know.

I posted this in another thread, but what's more likely; that Berrios was asking for the world, wanted to force his way out (despite no reports of discontent and statements from Berrios himself that run contrary to that portrayal) got his wish, realized he'd overplayed his hand/miscalculated his market, then immediately settled on a deal that suites both team and player, or that the Twins never approached Berrios with a number he viewed as market value and Toronto was willing to meet that price? 

This offseason alone should provide all the clarity necessary to see which scenario is more likely. The Twins were reportedly "nowhere near," the winning bid to the only upper tier arm they expressed interest in. If you're happy with the return, fine, but spinning Berrios' desire to get paid market value as some sort of dig at Minneapolis, or endorsing fan outrage at him because the Twins wouldn't even entertain paying him what he's worth, I mean, c'mon....

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I posted this in another thread, but what's more likely; that Berrios was asking for the world, wanted to force his way out (despite no reports of discontent and statements from Berrios himself that run contrary to that portrayal) got his wish, realized he'd overplayed his hand/miscalculated his market, then immediately settled on a deal that suites both team and player, or that the Twins never approached Berrios with a number he viewed as market value and Toronto was willing to meet that price? 

This offseason alone should provide all the clarity necessary to see which scenario is more likely. The Twins were reportedly "nowhere near," the winning bid to the only upper tier arm they expressed self interest in. If you're happy with the return, fine, but spinning Berrios' desire to get paid market value as some sort of dig at Minneapolis, or endorsing fan outrage at him because the Twins wouldn't even entertain paying him what he's worth, I mean, c'mon....

Oh come on. You have your opinion, I have mine. He consistently said he wanted to try free agency and then goes on to say how happy he is to be in a city with a lot of diversity I think points to he wasn’t going to sign in Minnesota regardless the price. I don’t have any ill feelings toward him as is with any player, it’s their right to choose. You can spin it all you want as FO malfeasance but in this case, I don’t buy given everything. So stop with the ‘oh come ons’ as if my opinion is out in left field. It’s not

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

Oh come on. You have your opinion, I have mine. He consistently said he wanted to try free agency and then goes on to say how happy he is to be in a city with a lot of diversity I think points to he wasn’t going to sign in Minnesota regardless the price. I don’t have any ill feelings toward him as is with any player, it’s their right to choose. You can spin it all you want as FO malfeasance but in this case, I don’t buy given everything. So stop with the ‘oh come ons’ as if my opinion is out in left field. It’s not

A player praising the city he just signed a long term contract to stay in; not exactly original or controversial in any way. I'm so tired of this MN inferiority complex constantly being used to distract from the fact that this club won't commit the years & money it takes to land top arms. Can you name a single instance where the Twins tendered the highest bid and were turned down? 

Like I said before, if you want to argue that moving Berrios was the right thing to do based on the return, there's an actual argument to be made there. I'm inclined to disagree, but it's at least a reasonable take. What I'm calling you out for perpetuating this idea that Berrios punched his own ticket out of town and that fan angst over his departure should be directed at him. 

We're on offseason number 6 with this FO, and it's been a slew of short term deals, and in what's arguably the most important 4-5 month stretch of their tenure, while the club is desperate for pitching, they sat on their hands as top targets all signed deals that were viable even within the Twins payroll structure. We've seen the long term deals the team was willing to give Kepler and Polanco, and it's painfully obvious why Buxton and Berrios were turning those offers down each year the Twins approached them with similar structures. Yeah, the notion that MN was willing to back up the Brinks truck for Berrios but he simply wouldn't hear of it, forced a trade, and then rushed to signed a reasonable deal with Toronto apparently due to some weird combination of relief and spite is ahhhh "left field," to put it nicely. 

5 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

A player praising the city he just signed a long term contract to stay in; not exactly original or controversial in any way. I'm so tired of this MN inferiority complex constantly being used to distract from the fact that this club won't commit the years & money it takes to land top arms. Can you name a single instance where the Twins tendered the highest bid and were turned down? 

Like I said before, if you want to argue that moving Berrios was the right thing to do based on the return, there's an actual argument to be made there. I'm inclined to disagree, but it's at least a reasonable take. What I'm calling you out for perpetuating this idea that Berrios punched his own ticket out of town and that fan angst over his departure should be directed at him. 

We're on offseason number 6 with this FO, and it's been a slew of short term deals, and in what's arguably the most important 4-5 month stretch of their tenure, while the club is desperate for pitching, they sat on their hands as top targets all signed deals that were viable even within the Twins payroll structure. We've seen the long term deals the team was willing to give Kepler and Polanco, and it's painfully obvious why Buxton and Berrios were turning those offers down each year the Twins approached them with similar structures. Yeah, the notion that MN was willing to back up the Brinks truck for Berrios but he simply wouldn't hear of it, forced a trade, and then rushed to signed a reasonable deal with Toronto apparently due to some weird combination of relief and spite is ahhhh "left field," to put it nicely. 

As I said, you have your opinion, I have mine. You have done your duty mischaracterizing what I said. So be it. I stand by my opinion. Yours is no more truth than mine.

26 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

As I said, you have your opinion, I have mine. You have done your duty mischaracterizing what I said. So be it. I stand by my opinion. Yours is no more truth than mine.

What's being mischaracterized? Are you not of the opinion Berrios forced the Twins to move him? Do you not support fan discontent being aimed at him rather than the Twins? 

Sure, we can ignore the fact that my pushback is supported by years of spending habits, similar contract offers, and reported contract details, and pretend that this a "my truth vs your truth," situation wherein objective reality ceases to exist. 

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

What's being mischaracterized? Are you not of the opinion Berrios forced the Twins to move him? Do you not support fan discontent being aimed at him rather than the Twins? 

Sure, we can ignore the fact that my pushback is supported by years of spending habits, similar contract offers, and reported contract details, and pretend that this a "my truth vs your truth," situation wherein objective reality ceases to exist. 

I don't think Berrios forced anything, and I never said that. I think that they weren't able to reach an agreement so the Twins did the only thing they could, traded him in the best deal they could. I do not think Berrios is a 'back up the Brinks truck' player, so I'm glad they didn't do that. He is a solid player, a good number 2 but I do think he over-estimated his value prior to his move. Do I wish the Twins had kept both him and Buxton? Sure. Absolutely. If between the two of them and were only going to re-sign one, they made the right choice with Buxton over Berrios. But when it became clear the Twins were not going to re-sign him ... for reasons that we can only conjecture at, and do not know for certain ... they did the best thing they could - traded him for two very good prospects. This is how it works, whether we like it or not. If you go back up to my comment about where I'm at with the FO, I said I don't know, because it's an 'It's out of my control and I certainly could not do better and do not know what happens behind closed doors and I don't know who else I'd want' thing, so ... honestly, I don't know.' But I do think that his comment on Toronto's diversity is a legitimate comment, whether it was a complaint, or relief, or whatever ... I do think it was more than just showing praise for the city of the team that signed him. I mean, he could have just said what a great city Toronto is, no, he talked about its diversity. That's pretty specific and telling, imo. That's my opinion and I won't get into why I think that, but I do, that there was more to it. And it wasn't him bashing Minneapolis, but I think he's very happy to be where he is, and good for him. It's not anywhere near the generalized complaint we hear how no one wants to sign here. As you mischaracterized it as a Minnesota inferiority complex, it's not that. Any more than your comment is nothing more than the tired excuse of 'the Pohlads are just cheap.'

5 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I posted this in another thread, but what's more likely; that Berrios was asking for the world, wanted to force his way out (despite no reports of discontent and statements from Berrios himself that run contrary to that portrayal) got his wish, realized he'd overplayed his hand/miscalculated his market, then immediately settled on a deal that suites both team and player, or that the Twins never approached Berrios with a number he viewed as market value and Toronto was willing to meet that price? 

This offseason alone should provide all the clarity necessary to see which scenario is more likely. The Twins were reportedly "nowhere near," the winning bid to the only upper tier arm they expressed interest in. If you're happy with the return, fine, but spinning Berrios' desire to get paid market value as some sort of dig at Minneapolis, or endorsing fan outrage at him because the Twins wouldn't even entertain paying him what he's worth, I mean, c'mon....

Most likely a bit of both, value is in the eye of the beholder and value changes.

to that end, if Berrios were willing to accept the deal he got from the Jays to stay a Twin, I’m embarrassed for both parties to not budge from their assumed starting points

17 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

I don't think Berrios forced anything, and I never said that. I think that they weren't able to reach an agreement so the Twins did the only thing they could, traded him in the best deal they could. I do not think Berrios is a 'back up the Brinks truck' player. He is a solid player, a good number 2 but I do think he over-estimated his value prior to his move. Do I wish the Twins had kept both him and Buxton? Sure. Absolutely. But when it became clear the Twins were not going to re-sign him ... for reasons that we can only conjecture at, and do not know for certain ... they did the best thing they could - traded him for two very good prospects. This is how it works, whether we like it or not. If you go back up to my comment about where I'm at with the FO, I said I don't know, because it's an 'It's out of my control and I certainly could not do better and do not know what happens behind closed doors and I don't know who else I'd want' thing, so ... honestly, I don't know.' But I do think that his comment on Toronto's diversity is a legitimate comment, whether it was a complaint, or relief, or whatever ... I do think it was more than just showing praise for the city of the team that signed him. I mean, he could have just said what a great city Toronto is, no, he talked about its diversity. That's pretty specific and telling, imo. That's my opinion and I won't get into why I think that, but I do, that there was more to it. And it wasn't him bashing Minneapolis, but I think he's very happy to be where he is, and good for him. It's not anywhere near the generalized complaint we hear how no one wants to sign here. As you mischaracterized it as a Minnesota inferiority complex, it's not that. Any more than your comment is nothing more than the tired excuse of 'the Pohlads are just cheap.'

You literally said you didn't think he'd sign for any amount. I don't see any way in which that isn't forcing his way out but ok. 

I'm not going to play the game where anything short of the Twins coming out and saying "we didn't want to pay him," means every opinion on the matter is pure conjecture and therefore all opinions are assigned equivalent weight. If you want to leap from "Nobody really knows," to pulling "Berrios didn't want to be here," from praise for a new city, and then land on "blame him not the Twins," go for it, but again, we can see empirically that this FO doesn't want to commit long term to pitching.It's baffling to me that something so widely accepted at this point, i.e. the simplest solution, can't be the answer, and we need to do these mental gymnastics to protect hurt feelings. 

54 minutes ago, Sconnie said:

Most likely a bit of both, value is in the eye of the beholder and value changes.

to that end, if Berrios were willing to accept the deal he got from the Jays to stay a Twin, I’m embarrassed for both parties to not budge from their assumed starting points

One answer assumes a lot more than the other. 

I think it's pretty likely the Twins didn't make Berrios a market value offer.

For one thing, the "Berrios made it clear he wanted to be a free agent" thing is more urban legend than actual fact. I challenge anyone to find a Berrios quote stating that. There's "we've gotten so close to where every player wants to be" from last summer, but that's a far cry from "I won't sign". And, in fact...he DID sign. 

2nd, reporting last summer included quotes about he and his family liking Minneapolis, so I don't think the quotes about Toronto are anything different or any indication he didn't want to be here.

Third, reporting last summer included all kinds of talk about Buxton negotiations, but none about Berrios. In fact, just the opposite...there were, according to this article, no offers made.

https://m.startribune.com/jose-berrios-twins-free-agent-contract-status/600079217/

 

It's impossible to say with certainty, but given the Twins obvious reluctance to give out lengthy market value pitching contracts, I think the most reasonable reading of tea leaves leads you to conclude the Twins never tried very hard to extend Berrios. And didn't try at all last summer.

And personally, I'm ok with that.  

 

 

Last season was rough, and this offseason hasn't been encouraging, but overall I like them. They overhauled the pitching program, which was done reasonably well (and at worst should get an incomplete). They evaluated Molitor, then moved to their guy when it was right. They went for it when it looked like the team could make a move, by getting Cruz and Donaldson. They made the Maeda trade, which was shrewd. Some of the FA pitching has blown up in their faces, but that happens to every team.

I think the true point to evaluate is how this crop of minor league pitchers develops and what happens with Lewis and Martin. That is where the investment has been biggest. If those players don't result in a consistent playoff caliber team, it's time to restart with a new FO.

Going into last season, I said I thought Levine should be on the hot seat. I have not been impressed by him and have constantly stated that his job, when he took it, was to supplement the strong core and keep the window of opportunity open longer than it should be open. He failed to do that. I was willing to give Falvey a bit more slack, in part because I'm not convinced he was too blame, maybe he's the "big picture guy." But so far I've been pretty unimpressed by his pitching pipeline or his minor league system. How much of that is on Falvey, I'm not sure. But I'm ready for both of them to go. 

I'll also say how I detest how the Twins are lowering expectations. A few years ago they were promising us that they'd remain competitive through 2022, locking up Kepler, Polanco, and Sano past those years and we'd still have Berrios and Buxton as well. Now it looks like we'll be lucky to be .500. 

So, yeah, I'm ready to move on. 

Assuming as much as some have here in developing conclusions in an actual business is a good way to never be given any authority to make decisions.  We don't know nearly enough to be taking an adamant stance.  We should all remember what happens when we assume.

Maybe they just really liked the two prospects they received and felt the best strategy was to take the two prospects and spend the Berrios money on a true ace when the time was right.

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Maybe they just really liked the two prospects they received and felt the best strategy was to take the two prospects and spend the Berrios money on a true ace when the time was right.

The first part of this sentence, sure, and they're not necessarily in the wrong for wanting the prospects more than Berríos. While I disagree with that approach, it's not obviously wrong and it comes down to opinion at that point.

The second part of this sentence, I just can't buy that at all. They didn't spend ace money after 2017. They didn't spend ace money after 2019 when the team won literally over 100 games. They didn't spend ace money after 2020 and back-to-back division titles. This offseason, the need couldn't be higher and the quantity of available arms greater, yet again they... didn't spend ace money.

At some point, we need to just admit they're not going to spend ace money. The "time has been right" at minimum three times in the past five years and they haven't spent more than $10m on a free agent pitcher during that time.

It's just not black and white for me because they have so many different and almost unrelated responsibilities.

Kudos to them for modernizing the organization. It couldn't have been easy because while they surely had some game plan to bring the franchise to the 21st Century, there was so much infrastructure and so many employees that needed to be updated and replaced, and it's not easy to wholesale replace employees; especially when you're walking into an Old Boys Club.

On the other hand, when it comes to roster construction and prospect hoarding, not much has changed from the last front office. The fear of making a mistake seems to outweigh the joy of making a great move. 

I really wish they were as bold with the players as they were with every other employee they hired. Considering Falvey built the front office, and Levine as the GM is supposedly in charge of the players, I wouldn't at all be opposed to just getting rid of Levine to see if that changes anything. 

2 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

They didn't spend ace money after 2017. They didn't spend ace money after 2019 when the team won literally over 100 games. They didn't spend ace money after 2020 and back-to-back division titles. 

Came here to read this. Leaving satisfied.

18 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The first part of this sentence, sure, and they're not necessarily in the wrong for wanting the prospects more than Berríos. While I disagree with that approach, it's not obviously wrong and it comes down to opinion at that point.

The second part of this sentence, I just can't buy that at all. They didn't spend ace money after 2017. They didn't spend ace money after 2019 when the team won literally over 100 games. They didn't spend ace money after 2020 and back-to-back division titles. This offseason, the need couldn't be higher and the quantity of available arms greater, yet again they... didn't spend ace money.

At some point, we need to just admit they're not going to spend ace money. The "time has been right" at minimum three times in the past five years and they haven't spent more than $10m on a free agent pitcher during that time.

I have to admit I was projecting how I would approach it.  They have quite a few guys that could become 2s & 3s.  They also have depth and if they actually build a homegrown staff it would provide the financial ability to sign a top of the rotation guy while retaining Buxton and filling other holes.  Maybe they saw it as they could pay market for Berrios or they could pay for any other "Berrios type SP" and also get two good prospects.  It did not seem like he had more desire to be here as opposed to somewhere else.  Therefore, our odds are no worse at signing his replacement.  Plus, we gain two good prospects.  That's how Tampa would do it.

The fact that they did not get it done does not mean they were not willing.  There simply were not any Ace types available last year unless you count Bauer.  Not going there would have to be considered good judgement.  I think they really wanted Wheeler but Wheeler wanted to be on the East coast.  Insisting they should win a bidding contest with a team that has $100M more in revenue and the player really wants to be there is not very reasonable.  The 2nd choice of posters here was Bumgarner and signing him would have done more harm than good.  

 I guess the bottom line is they can spend the money that would have gone to Berrios elsewhere and they have two good prospects.  In addition, they have never produced a homegrown staff which would position them to spend on one great pitcher instead of 3.  They have that opportunity now.  IDK if it's going to happen but the possibility is exciting. 

25 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

IDK if it's going to happen but the possibility is exciting. 

Everything you said is solid logic, the question I really have is, was this the expectation the last few years? That they would take what was given, make a few upgrades here and there to be competitive but not really go for it, so that 2021-2024 could possibly be exciting? I know it wasn't mine.

4 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

 

The second part of this sentence, I just can't buy that at all. They didn't spend ace money after 2017. They didn't spend ace money after 2019 when the team won literally over 100 games. They didn't spend ace money after 2020 and back-to-back division titles. This offseason, the need couldn't be higher and the quantity of available arms greater, yet again they... didn't spend ace money.

At some point, we need to just admit they're not going to spend ace money. The "time has been right" at minimum three times in the past five years and they haven't spent more than $10m on a free agent pitcher during that time.

The 2nd part also assumes at just the right time, there will be an "ace" just sitting there, waiting for a Twins offer.

1 hour ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Everything you said is solid logic, the question I really have is, was this the expectation the last few years? That they would take what was given, make a few upgrades here and there to be competitive but not really go for it, so that 2021-2024 could possibly be exciting? I know it wasn't mine.

You are mixing where we were with present reality.  They were on a path.  I am sure (like every other team) they hoped things went perfectly and all those pitching prospects didn't miss a year and then all be hurt the next year.  I am sure they hoped Kepler's breakout would be sustained and Sano would find some consistency.  I am sure they hoped Buxton would stay healthy etc etc.  **** happens.  How you deal with it is what matters.  

Ultimately, the FO does what the owner wants.
Put up a new poll for the ownership staying or going.

There's a quote attributed (probably wrongly) to Mark Twain: "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can’t read them."

The analogy of this wisdom to the current discussion is straightforward.  The front office who does not sign good pitchers has no advantage over one who hasn't the money at all.

We are continually instructed that this team won't spend simply to spend, and that they will spend when the time is right, and that high-end pitching ends up being a waste of the high-end money anyway, and that funds should not be committed because then there won't be any when they are needed, and if funds were committed to a player who didn't work out then the purse strings would have to be summarily tightened.  It's double talk, talking points being adapted on the fly to suit a particular argument.  And so here we sit.  Through ups and downs, one season after the next.  It turns out that it's never quite the right time to go big on pitching.

While not happy with this off-season at the moment in almost every way, Buxton being the obvious good news, I have resolved myself to not only attempt some patience and ignore recency bias, but to take a step back and look at their entire tenure. Sorry if I repeat points already stated.

1] I think they had a very large task to re-make the franchise from the top down. This includes the analytics department, coaching staffs, instructors, approach changes from said coaches and instructors, and just about anything else you can name. I think they've done a great job across the board there. Look no further than other teams pilfering our off the field talent and some beginning to copy changes in hiring practices by looking at college coaches and younger coaching options vs the standard old boys network and the such.

2] While I haven't liked or agreed with every trade  made, or every draft selection, I feel the talent acquisition has been quality. The Odorizzi and Maeda moves were borderline outstanding. And they brought in additional arms in 2021. 

3] Like it or not...and I don't care about any other team...the lost 2020 season tossed a serious monkey wrench in the development of the next wave of pitching prospects in the system. YES, they need to overcome and adapt. The Maeda move gave this team a top of the rotation arm to join Berrios in 2020. So I object they haven't made a serious move after being told a hard NO from Wheeler. Hill also helped out. The ST version of Maeda in 2021 was everything we could hoped for. But then everything went wrong once the season began. Impossible to predict. It's easy to look back and chastise the Happ and Soemaker moves NOW. Shoemaker was a smart move based on his career and his 2020. He was to be a solid, veteran, mid rotation bridge. In fact, he looked decent early. Shoemaker was a cheap depth piece flier with some optimism. On paper, the rotation was set up to be quite good. Because everything that could go wrong did is the fault of Falvey and Levine? 

So when I step back and look at the big picture, all the changes, improvements, moves made, wins, etc, I am happy and supportive even with the allowance of a mistake or two. I think they have been good to excellent in what they have built and I recognize the overall plan they have in their construction, even if things have been knocked off the rails a bit recently. 

ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, I have SEROUS ISSUES with how this off-season has been handled thus far beyond the Buxton extension. (And I'm not going invest in the Berrios debate because it's almost it's own topic and I feel there are points, counter-points and probably missing information we will never be privy to).

Forget MY blueprint plan or anyone else's. They're just a fun exercise after all. The fact is the Twins had some serious money to spend to re-tool for 2022 with a solid lineup in place, the potential for a quality bullpen, but real needs in the rotation.  And the Buxton extension does nothing to blow up payroll and address additional opportunities. This FA class offered up MULTIPLE options to re-tool without blowing up payroll or adversely affecting the future. Stroman, and his contract were a perfect match/opportunity. And he signed with the Cubs? Pick your FA SP? They virtually all signed for chalk, 3 or 4yrs at almost exact predictions. Even if we didn't sign Stoman to lead the staff, we couldn't absorb a pair of $14M deals to front the rotation for 3 to 4yrs? Even if/when the current pipeline starts producing....as it started to with Ober and Ryan last year...the payroll would fine with those minimum additions, plus Donaldson comes off the books in 2yrs if kept, plus Maeda and his easily navigable salary is only 1 more year, (maybe a fairly inexpensive re-sign?), plus the 2 arms signed this off-season might hold quality trade value in a year or two.

Win-win! You spend $ to front your rotation and keep your team competitive. You put butts in the seats for ownership. You give your team a legitimate shot to, well, take a shot. You work in your young talent over the next season or two, and you might have trade assets.

Instead, you have Bundy. Now, I'm not upset about Bundy. Some combination of his 2 best seasons in Baltimore and his 2020 with the Angels is enticing. But IMO, they have WASTED opportunity gift wrapped to them.

Unless they are going to just waste the opportunity to compete in 2022, they have few avenues now to correct the current direction. And sorry, signing the good but questionable Story for $20M+ and 5yrs isn't the answer.

1] Rodon was the one very obvious omission FA SP to not be gobbled up thus far. We all know why. He wasn't quite the same after his IL stint, but he wasn't bad. Unless there  is something serious lingering, he should be ready to go in 2022. If the Twins want to compete, then take a damn risk for once on a 1yr or 1+1 that could pay a huge dividend! They HAVE the payroll flexibility to do so. Then sign the next best FA you believe in or pull off another smart trade like Odorizzi or Maeda and give your team a workable rotation and promote and plug-in the prospects throughout the season. Add someone competent at SS, add one solid BP arm,  add a flier, maybe add a cheap 4th OF option, and you have a shot. All very do-able.

2] Make a trade for ONE quality SP, then sign the best FA option left you like and follow the rest of the plan laid out in the previous point. The results COULD turn out as well, BUT, you already traded for a SP. Could you possibly be smart and savy enough to trade for two?

3] You trade ML roster players and/or milb prospects for TWO SP. Maybe you hit a couple HR's here. But how much have you given up? What about building depth and sustainability? What have you given up for a couple 1 or 2yr contracts, potentially? And if you trade someone from the ML roster, who then replacez them?

My FO grade is probably a B+, maybe an A for everything they've done thus far for the ENTIRETY of what they've done thus far. And I DO NOT want my opinion of them to nosedive from a single off-season. But unless they find a way to correct what I see as a huge error of missed opportunity, they are currently crashing to an overall C grade at best. A few big mistakes can undo a lot of good things very quickly.

Going to be really interesting to see what happens after the lockout ends.

 

 

3 hours ago, USAFChief said:

The 2nd part also assumes at just the right time, there will be an "ace" just sitting there, waiting for a Twins offer.

That is 20% under market value, if history carries forward. 

2 hours ago, Einheri said:

Ultimately, the FO does what the owner wants.
Put up a new poll for the ownership staying or going.

You can do that yourself.

4 hours ago, ashbury said:

There's a quote attributed (probably wrongly) to Mark Twain: "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can’t read them."

The analogy of this wisdom to the current discussion is straightforward.  The front office who does not sign good pitchers has no advantage over one who hasn't the money at all.

We are continually instructed that this team won't spend simply to spend, and that they will spend when the time is right, and that high-end pitching ends up being a waste of the high-end money anyway, and that funds should not be committed because then there won't be any when they are needed, and if funds were committed to a player who didn't work out then the purse strings would have to be summarily tightened.  It's double talk, talking points being adapted on the fly to suit a particular argument.  And so here we sit.  Through ups and downs, one season after the next.  It turns out that it's never quite the right time to go big on pitching.

Great post.

14 hours ago, USAFChief said:

The 2nd part also assumes at just the right time, there will be an "ace" just sitting there, waiting for a Twins offer.

This is a fair point.  Top of the rotation FAs are in very short supply and Minnesota is not likely high on their list.  As I said, I was projecting my preference and basically a best case scenario.  Developing the other 4 spots would make signing an ace more viable.  They could afford to be very aggressive on one player.

The reality is they acquired two good prospects and they still have the Berrios money to spend. Does it really matter if they spend on Berrios or someone very similar.  The net is still two good prospects.  I guess my real point here was that Berrios or someone like him are not real difference makers in the post season.  I like the idea that they would be positioned and could possibly sign someone even better.  Granted, that's the best case scenario but I would hope they make moves to enable a best case scenario.  Spending the money on someone like Berrios can always be the fallback position.

One last thought.  Who have we really missed out on that would have been a difference maker other than Wheeler.  Obviously, we didn't sign these guys but who among them would have made a big impact. Cole at $300M+ was simply not realistic.  Are we glad we didn't get Bauer?  I know I am glad they didn't sign Bumgarner.  Darvish has never been good for an entire season.  Kuechel was not that highly regarded here but that would have been good.  Patrick Corbin was good early and he is now another good example of SPs who were good early in their contract.  Arietta was only 3 years at $25M/yr.  He was a popular choice here but he has been mediocre at best.  Ryu (at least so far) seems like the one realistic target they missed out on.  Who am I missing.