What will it take?

[Schmoeman5]

20 hours ago, a-wan said:

And Jermaine Palacios is the starting SS next year after Correa opts out?

No, that'll be Nick Gordon

[Major League Ready]

45 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Oakland, Cleveland and Tampa have combined for two (2) World Series appearances in that time, with zero (0) championships. Add the Twins (#4 on your list), and...those numbers don't change, as we're all painfully aware.

Maybe they should have gone for it more often. What they're doing ain't working, in my estimation.

Hell, just using "90 won seasons" you've combined to list fourteen (14!) teams, nearly half of MLB, and they've put up only a combined fiftysix (56!) 90 win seasons in over 20 years. That's out of a possible two hundred ninety four (294) for those 14 teams. That's a 19 percent success rate, for a relatively low bar such as a 90 win sesson.

 

 

One team in the bottom half of revenue has won the WS since 2003 and that's the Royals who have one 90 win season.  They are far from a model of success.  The other two winning in the period I have addressed are the marlins in 2003 and the Dbacks in 2001.  They are also not examples of how to run a MLB franchise.  The facts are very clear that teams in the bottom half of revenue are FAR less likely to win the WS so again you make a misguided argument. 

I don't understand the second paragraph at all given what I was doing was illustrating that Oakland / Cleveland and Tampa have had much more sucess than the other teams in the bottom half of revenue.  Even when presented with very clear facts you somehow manage to totally misconstrue the point.  You can continue to put your head in the sand where the realities of revenue are concerned if you like but assessing success and/or strategy without the context of revenue is really simplistic thinking.

Win records for teams in the top half of revenue are below.  Only 5 teams have produced more 90 win seasons and those teams are the highest revenue teams.  Oakland / Cleveland and Tampa have achieved 90 win seasons more often than three-quarters of the league despite their revenue deficit. 

 Yankees    15
Red Sox    13
Cardinals    12
Dodgers    11
Braves    10
Giants    8
Angels    7
Astros    6
Rangers    6
Cubs    5
Nationals    5
Phillies    4
Mets    3
Blue Jays    2

[Schmoeman5]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

Oakland, Cleveland and Tampa have combined for two (2) World Series appearances in that time, with zero (0) championships. Add the Twins (#4 on your list), and...those numbers don't change, as we're all painfully aware.

Maybe they should have gone for it more often. What they're doing ain't working, in my estimation.

Hell, just using "90 won seasons" you've combined to list fourteen (14!) teams, nearly half of MLB, and they've put up only a combined fiftysix (56!) 90 win seasons in over 20 years. That's out of a possible two hundred ninety four (294) for those 14 teams. That's a 19 percent success rate, for a relatively low bar such as a 90 win sesson.

 

 

Could not agree more. Those 4 teams. Tampa Bay Oakland and Cleveland and the Twins all put a competitive team on the field consistently. They give their fans just enough to keep the revenue coming in without huge investments on their part. Don't mention Donaldson or Correa because neither were LONG TERM. They will develope young talent and unload said talent before it costs them big money. This keeps the fans happy and interested and most important spending. The other thing they all have in common, is for all the times those teams have reached the playoffs, not 1 has won it all. Let's just pretend for a moment. If Lewis, Kiriloff, Miranda, Larnach, Ryan, Duran, all become superstars, perennial all-stars whatever. How many will sign long term with the Twins when they're eligible for free agency. That would be a big fat 0. Same number as world series championships they will win using their current M O. And don't say Buxton, because if he weren't so fragile he wouldn't be here either

[jorgenswest]

I appreciate TopGunn steering us back to what we would do. Let’s leave the conversation about what the front office may do or has done out of it.

I would be all in for the only season I am guaranteed to have Correa. I would trade the prospects necessary to win the deal that brings me back the best starting pitcher moved at the deadline. I will also pay up for a reliever at the top of the pen.

[tony&rodney]

On 6/10/2022 at 2:27 PM, Major League Ready said:

As LA Vikes Fan pointed out, none of these guys makes the Twins a true contender this year.

Like Atlanta last year, right.

[tony&rodney]

The Twins should not nor will they trade a ton of their best prospects to make a desperate attempt to win a World Series this year.

They are likely to make a trade or two and add a few significant players to strengthen the roster. My best guess is adding two pitchers. Who the Twins trade depends on what teams want or what the Twins get in return. Right now the Twins are not trading catchers because they are short on the position and there isn't going to be any interest in a Twins catcher. The only player on the 40 person roster I can see being traded is Balazovic and maybe Winder.  Many of the guys playing minor league baseball could be used in the right trade. I'm not sure anyone is off limits. 

I believe the Twins would be better now and next year by adding Montas and Puk. What that costs is up for debate and subject to the desires of Beane and Falvey. Maybe Martin, Miller, Balazovic, Wallner and Sabato would do it. I have no idea what Oakland wants, especially after the less than stellar returns for Bassitt and Manaea.

[Mike Sixel]

54 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

The Twins should not nor will they trade a ton of their best prospects to make a desperate attempt to win a World Series this year.

They are likely to make a trade or two and add a few significant players to strengthen the roster. My best guess is adding two pitchers. Who the Twins trade depends on what teams want or what the Twins get in return. Right now the Twins are not trading catchers because they are short on the position and there isn't going to be any interest in a Twins catcher. The only player on the 40 person roster I can see being traded is Balazovic and maybe Winder.  Many of the guys playing minor league baseball could be used in the right trade. I'm not sure anyone is off limits. 

I believe the Twins would be better now and next year by adding Montas and Puk. What that costs is up for debate and subject to the desires of Beane and Falvey. Maybe Martin, Miller, Balazovic, Wallner and Sabato would do it. I have no idea what Oakland wants, especially after the less than stellar returns for Bassitt and Manaea.

Who is saying trade a ton of prospects? No one. 

[tony&rodney]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Who is saying trade a ton of prospects? No one. 

Yah, that is just a way of pacifying those who are afraid of losing prospects in trades. My third paragraph suggests that it is ok to trade several prospects to improve the team. 

The Twins have young players: Jeffers, Kirilloff, Arraez, Miranda, Lewis, Palacios, Celestino, Larnach, Gordon, Ryan, Ober, Winder, Duran, Jax, Megill, Moran, and Sands. They can certainly afford to trade a few guys doing well and looking good in the minor leagues if it makes their team better.

[TopGunn#22]

Yes jorgenswest, that is essentially what I am saying.  They have a LOT of young talent that is starting to contribute and looks like true Major league talent, not just "a prospect with potential."   

Any trade the FO makes has to be made with the intent of making the team better this year, but also for 2023 and beyond.  A Montas or Castillo would absolutely need to be signed to a 4-5 year extension.  They simply can't give away a Larnach/Kiriloff, Miranda, Ober, Winder, Martin etc...without making sure that the guy they get back is leading our rotation for several more years. 

Bullpen pieces like Puk and Lopez would also be key.  I know bullpen's are somewhat volatile from year to year.  But arms like Lopez and Puk should provide stability in the future as well.  Lopez and Puk would also allow the Twins more flexibility with guys like Duran and Canterino.  Can Duran and Canterino become starting pitchers?  If they can, their "value" skyrockets.  If not, they would just add to a bullpen with electric arms and power stuff.

One guy that nobody talks about anymore is Miguel Sano.  With Kirilloff, Arraez, Miranda for 1B and each of these guys along with Sanchez and others for DH, where does Sano fit on this team ?  I would offer that he doesn't.  The problem with Sano is that he's a negative trade piece right now based on his $10-$12 million contract.  Who would want him ?  Much like Donaldson, he's a guy with offensive potential but a contract that impedes his tradability.  I've always thought Colorado or Boston would be good fits for Sano, but haven't spent anytime trying to see what a trade via MLB Trade Values would look like.   

But essentially, the Twins could have Correa on this team for this year for certain.  After this year, it's all speculation and crystal ball type stuff.  As long as Correa is my SS I'm trying to win NOW.  The guy is just too good of a post-season player to take for granted.  The Yankees look epically good this year (and man, that's saying something when you're talking about the Yankees).  The Astros look tough with that lineup and a Hall of Fame Verlander fronting the staff.  The Dodgers, as always are loaded.  But baseball is a funny game.  who expected the BRAVES to emerge as last years World Series Champion ???   Get in the playoffs and see what happens !  

[Rosterman]

I always like "our trade scenarios" as we all (myself included) like to think other teams would be interested in players that we don't see the Twins having on their roster at all.

The key is - competition. What other teams are looking for the same pieces and what kind of depth those teams have to deal.

Yes, the Twins could use another starter. Do we deal with pieces that could be longterm Twins (Larnach, Kirilloff, Martin) or vets that might not make the next contract negotiation (Polanco, Kepler). 

Larnach et al are there to replace, say, a Kepler. Wallner, is he regarded higher than Kirilloff or Larnach? If so, he could be tradebait rather than lineup replacement, as an example.

What is interesting is looking at the Twins pitching pipeline. There are so many prospects, but we are seeing a few flame out right now (Balazovic, Vallimont, Henriquez...is Sands better than Barnes who got a lot of play last year?). None of those are/were tradebait...especially now.

The excitement at Wichita, names like Canterino, Varland, Enlow are still questionable. We have some hard throwers further down (Rozek)...but no pitchers to really entice another team to part with their "ace."

For the bullpen, there are always mid-relief arms available, especially those approaching expensive arbitration or free agency, so you can usually flip a depth prospect or two for one of those arms. But the Twins need a REAL Closer. Who is available? Could we outbid another team for such an arm?

You also have to look at the big FAILED picture. Would ONE STARTER or TWO BULLPEN ARMS get us deep into the playoffs and even to the World Series, or are we better doing what the Twins do best - give the illusion of being competitive (especially in a weak division) and keep what pieces we have and watch them become a a part of a future team or implode sooner rather than later?

 

[jorgenswest]

1 hour ago, Rosterman said:

You also have to look at the big FAILED picture. Would ONE STARTER or TWO BULLPEN ARMS get us deep into the playoffs and even to the World Series, or are we better doing what the Twins do best - give the illusion of being competitive (especially in a weak division) and keep what pieces we have and watch them become a a part of a future team or implode sooner rather than later?

Yes. As long as the starter is at the top of the rotation and a bullpen arm is at the top. With those moves I think the roster is capable of competing with the Yankees and Astros.

Where do you stand?

[TopGunn#22]

I think we CAN compete.  The Yankee series showed that.  It also exposed our inherent flaws that make us vulnerable to being swept out of the playoff (yet again).  The Astros pretty much handed us our heads earlier, but we're not really THAT far away from competing with them.

Past Twins FO's (after 1991) and I'm speaking primarily of the Terry Ryan years 2002-2010 or so (and to another degree 2019) have never made moves that would have put the team over the top.  That's what I would like to see done differently by the current FO while still guarding some of those top prospects.  They've already shown they are "somewhat" capable of that with the Petty for Sonny Gray deal.  (and with the Correa signing).  I'd like to see what else they could do.

[RpR]

When Sano comes off of the IL, the Twins will show, or he will show, his future.

[Trov]

First, to get what suggested needed, I would say it will take emptying most of our prospects to get 3 high end pen pitchers and a top end starter.  For say Montas, I bet it will take minimum Martin and a top pitcher, or 2 lower tier pitchers.  I am not certain that gets it done though, might depend on who else is looking to trade for him.  For the 3 pen pitchers, not sure who is out there, but they will take many mid level guys at minimum if not a top tier guy depending on the guy and who else is buying. 

Personally, I am never a fan of trading top prospects for rentals.  I am okay with trading for at least a couple years of control.  I would not do it, because even doing so does not mean we win anything in the playoffs.  Many will say we will not win without it, which may be true, but clearing out your prospects for a little bit better chance to me is not worth it. 

First, I think we can make playoffs with current team, so any trades you talking about most likely would be to increase playoff chances.  So lets look at Montas, he would slot as top guy in our rotation most likely.  We do not know if he will pitch more than 1 game in the playoffs, even if he wins his first start, which is no guarantee, as we have seen any starting pitcher can have a bad start. 

Same thing with pen pitchers, our last playoff game had our "best" pen pitcher gave up a run without getting an out recorded, giving up 2 hits and a walk.  So you never know.  Sure, if we got overall better pitchers will it help our cause, of course, but how much of improved chances will we have?  I am sure Tiger fans wish they never gave up John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander, despite going 9-0 down stretch in regular season, with a 1.50 ERA.  Alexander pitched game 1 and 5 against the Twins, losing both games, giving up 6 in 7.1 innings in game 1, and 4 in 1.2 innings in game 5.  He helped them get to playoffs, maybe not needed, but back then it was harder to even make playoffs, but in the playoffs he pitched terrible, and Tigers gave up a HOF pitcher for it.

My point is, I think we can make the playoffs without upgrading starting pitching, or the pen, and giving up top prospects that can help us for years down the road, or build our team next year via trades, for rentals this year makes little sense.  There is no guarantee these moves pay off in playoffs. 

Yes, the Alexander example may be extreme and there are times were reverse pays off.  Most recent Verlander was a deadline trade to Houston in 2017 and he helped push them to win a WS, along with banging on a trash can.  All Houston had to give up, looking back is a pitcher that has yet get beyond High A, a 4th type OF and a backup catcher.  Of course they had higher hopes when brought them in.  

No matter the way the FO goes, we will never know if it works out, until it does, and we really we not know if the reverse would have been better.  

[KirbyDome89]

On 6/10/2022 at 5:06 PM, Mike Sixel said:

Not getting anything for Lewis.....

While I agree that trading top prospects for short term players is not a good strategy to do over and over, there are a lot of teams doing the opposite that are never good. As for Cleveland, they've not exactly lit it up lately..... And Oakland has been good, but not great. Only Tampa has really been able to pull this off, somehow. Only one team has really succeeded at this, despite more than half the league trying. 

I'm for one of the top two guys, but I am also aware that could be a mistake. I put the odds of the twins signing a top starter near zero, ever, with this front office. I think they'll trade for them.

It doesn't matter how many times this is reiterated, the same crowd will piss and moan about any "non Rays move." The part about identifying talent, acquiring it, and developing it into a high level contribution at the major league level is taken for granted all the time. 

[Tiantwindup]

On 6/11/2022 at 10:26 AM, TopGunn#22 said:

There is no way to "read the minds" of our own FO much less the minds of other teams FO's.  You can use MLB Trade Values to "create" a trade but it's all just speculation (but still fun to plot anyway).  

I believe the Twins SHOULD make a deal and spend some of that prospect capital not just for this season but to build beyond this season.  Any deal for a Montas or Luis Castillo needs to be made with a commitment to sign Montas/Castillo to a fair,  long term (5 years or so) contract upon making the trade.  

That said, here are two deals that would help the Twins this year and beyond:

Twins Get:  Montas 37.00 and AJ Puk .50    

A's Get:  Ober  15.8, Miranda 16.50  Steer  3.30  Wallner  3.00 and Strotman 1.50   The Trade favors Oakland 40.10 to 37.50.

The Twins will need to over pay to win the bidding war for a Montas caliber pitcher.  Oakland gets a SP, 1B/3B, 2B/3B, OF and RP at various stages of providing immediate talent to their major league roster and future talent.  Steer for example, is vastly under-valued at 3.30 right now in my opinion.  He's tearing up AA and AAA.  He's ready for a promotion.  Would the A's see it the same way ?  Hard to say.  But Montas steps into the #1 slot and Puk provides another lefty in the pen.

Trade #2

Twins Get:  Jose Lopez RP Baltimore .80 and Carmona 1.10 (a low level, somewhat low ceiling minor league 3B)

Orioles Get:  Cavaco 3B 2.40    The Orioles win this trade 2.40 to 1.9.  I actually think Lopez is undervalued as I think he's found a home as the Orioles closer and his stuff plays well at the back end.  Frankly, I'd make this trade even more one-sided and remove Carmona if I had to.  Lopez gives the Twins another option to close on days Duran can't and a good 8th inning option as well.  It pushes everybody but Duran back one slot.  Baltimore get a high upside guy who may benefit from a change of scenery.  Just the type of trade Baltimore needs to make.  

The trades may be laughable to some.  But they work on the MLB trade Simulator and there is at least "some" logic for either side to consider pulling the trigger.  

These trade ideas make me question the numbers assigned by MLB trade values. If I could trade Miranda for five Steers (exactly equal values) I would make that trade without hesitation and it seems to me that would be a very lop-sided trade. Am I missing something?

[Tiantwindup]

I would not make a lot of changes and give up a lot the way of prospects…it’s too early to know what I would do, but three factors to consider:

1.  The minor injuries to many starting pitchers has the upside of limiting innings so, for example, Gray and Ryan may be better positioned to go long in Sep/Oct. 

2. Maeda can be an added bullpen piece (or possibly a starter) that gets added at the traditional trade deadline. 

3. Twins have a roster/rule 5 crunch coming. Among miranda, steer, larnach, kiriloff, Arraez, Gordon, Celestino, etc they don’t have enough at bats to go around and they should be able to get some pitching help by sending a package that includes one or more of these as headliners and reducing the redundancy (depth) at these positions. 

[Original_JB]

Maybe it's just too many years of conditioned response, but I fear that if the Twins do go out and get some decent pitching heading into the playoffs, their ongoing  bouts of the bats going to sleep for long stretches is almost guaranteed to rear it's ugly head in the first playoff series.....

[Major League Ready]

On 6/11/2022 at 3:40 PM, tony&rodney said:

Like Atlanta last year, right.

Atlanta invested nothing.  So, to suggest they follow Atlanta's lead is not at all consistent with trading major prospect capital for a front of the rotation SP.  LA who was much better than the twins traded major prospect capital.  The Rays invested Joe Ryan.  Was that a good investment?

[nicksaviking]

Frankie Montas isn't an ace unless he's pitching at the Oakland Coliseum, and it's not looking like the Twins will be playing there this postseason. Unless you can get Miami to change course and move a young arm, I don't see anything near an 'Ace' that would be available.

To me the only way through this is for the Twins to keep getting their existing young arms experience.

Don't get me wrong, the team is going to have huge 40-man issues so they need to start making moves packaging multiple players together, but I don't see those moves being able to swing a front end starter. At least not what I'd want to see in a front end starter.

[wabene]

46 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Atlanta invested nothing.  So, to suggest they follow Atlanta's lead is not at all consistent with trading major prospect capital for a front of the rotation SP.  LA who was much better than the twins traded major prospect capital.  The Rays invested Joe Ryan.  Was that a good investment?

Atlanta traded for 4 outfielders last year in season; Joc Pederson, Eddie Rosario, Adam Duvall and Jorge Soler. Granted the price tags were of the bargain sort. 

[Mike Sixel]

52 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Atlanta invested nothing.  So, to suggest they follow Atlanta's lead is not at all consistent with trading major prospect capital for a front of the rotation SP.  LA who was much better than the twins traded major prospect capital.  The Rays invested Joe Ryan.  Was that a good investment?

 

I think the post you replied to was that teams can win, even if they aren't the obvious favorite, and that sometimes adding players to full holes works. Not that they added great players at great cost.