chopper0080

and I think that is because a lot of people take post-season success into the conversation of organizational mediocrity. For me, not winning a playoff series in nearly 19 years and not winning a playoff game since 2004 but still making the postseason 9 times is the exact definition of mediocre. Essentially not always a terrible team but not close to contending either. The difference in this is that you are counting that as "good" and a lot of folks don't. And frankly, if the top end of the spectrum is a non-competitive playoff team and the bottom end is a terrible team, that averages out to mediocre in my book.

I understand your frustration with some of the responses but I also understand where those responses are coming from. Just because you define mediocrity a certain way doesn't mean that others will agree with that definition. Just saying.

It is interesting how looking at the past 19 years differs from the past 11 and how that differs from the last 5. I know you specify that you are not including the postseason but it is tough to exclude an organization's performance in the most important games when discussing whether or not a team has been mediocre. Where I struggle is that I don't feel like the team has competitive for a World Series since 2010. I don't know if that is because there has been a lack of star power or what, but even when we have recently been a playoff team, we have never felt like a team that could win. To me, that is the ugly world of mediocrity for an organization.

I like opening up the DH spot for multiple players to use vs having a dedicated DH, especially when I am trying to evaluate and grow multiple young players. Keeping Sano takes that away. I also like the ability of putting young players at the positions they are most comfortable at. I would rather play Kirilloff at 1B and Miranda at 3B if that is where they are comfortable and project the best. That doesn't mean Miranda can't get some 1B reps and Kirilloff can't get some OF reps but having three spots for each of them to get at bats on the roster is valuable along with being able to keep Donaldson fresh.

If the Twins don't re-sign Buxton then they are playing us all for suckers. He is pretty much the pivotal piece to indicate the Twins intentions over the next 5 years. If you are not going to pay your Berrios and Buxton prospects who actually produce at the major league level without having younger MLB producing players ready to replace them, what is the point?

I agree with your Polanco stance. Why mess with the one part of your lineup that produced above expectation to put him somewhere he has failed at previously? It makes zero sense.

If there is a serious desire to get Miranda regular reps in the majors, the move is to move Sano. Donaldson is a fairly consistent player that young players can depend on, he can play a couple different spots as needed, and will take pressure of young players to produce. He is the type of guy you keep with a young roster. Sano is just too inconsistent to have hang around because his strikeouts are a lot for a roster to deal with that is trying to build confidence and grow, Also, his lack of versatility hinders the managers ability to shift players around to give young players and vets the rest they need. I like Sano, but he is a player best suited for an established roster. Keeping Polanco at 2B should be priority 1 and should not be shifted to give unproven MLB players reps. Putting consistency around Larnach, Miranda, Kiriloff and the other young players on the verge should be priority 2. I feel like Donaldson does that more than Sano.

I agree that we need to have someone beat him out for his role before we just ship off a moderately talented player on a team friendly deal when we lack moderately talented players. Same argument for Donaldson though he is more talented but also a chunkier contract. I feel the argument to move off of Sano is stronger than Kepler.

We will of course see what becomes of the Berrios trade. I would only cite that our rotation looks a lot better for 2022 with Berrios, Ryan and Ober in terms of a young core and that would have been prior to Maeda getting hurt. I don't bring this up to dredge the Berrios/contract/payroll convo again, but just that I would not say it was a "good" move. #1 for me is Polanco as long as they leave him at 2b. This team is desperate for young, consistent players. Polanco has shown to be that this year. Even if he dips a bit next year, he is still a solid piece. It is important to have those types of players when you are trying to call up younger players who will naturally be more inconsistent. Probably the biggest argument against Sano is that he puts a lot of pressure on other players in the lineup to produce and the lineup will already be inconsistent with Larnach and Kirilloff and Buxton.

Sponsorship dollars matter far more than attendance so the corporate population of Minneapolis matters more that it's metro population in terms of revenue dollars. Minneapolis is tied with Atlanta for the 4th highest US city in terms of fortune 500 headquarters. The Twins are operating at 30 mil less payroll than Atlanta despite an equal corporate ad dollars market. The argument regarding baseball payroll is always funny because it tends to devolve into you can't possibly spend what the Yankees, Mets, and Dodgers spend. That is 200 mil and no one is really advocating for that. There is a huge gap between 200 mil and the 117 the Twins spend. Polhad has people convinced that this franchise needs to operate like a poverty franchise that can't afford to keep any of it's home grown stars unless they take a discount but that is false. If the Twins are going to pay a FA SP 20 mil, there is an easy argument to be made that with their market, they can afford that extra 5 - 10 mil to keep players like Berrios. Same for Buxton.

Spotrac has the Twins payroll as 117 and change. They have the 12th highest payroll in MLB as Atlanta at 147 and the Padres as the 8th at 175. I feel it is a bit disingenuous to assert that there is not a reasonable argument to be made that the Twins could increase their payroll by 50 mil and still only be 10th in MLB. It isn't 200 mil like the Dodgers, Yankess and Mets or bust. There is a middle ground that the Twins are choosing not to enter.

Payroll is what you set it .

I guess my position is that I don't feel like significant progress has been made. I don't see an influx of young core players that I am confident in. I don't feel like we have ever been a serious AL Championship or World Series contender with this group. I think they have made the Twins mostly watchable and a team that might be able to win the division, but we haven't been nor do I feel we are on the way to being a contender. This organization payrolls and budgets like a mid market squad and yet Minneapolis has a ton of businesses and growth. We still speak about young superstar players like if they are really good we can never afford them long term. That is a poverty franchise mindset. I don't know that anyone has confidence in our minor league system to consistently produce talent even if they may have hope in it. I don't believe managers are a huge impact which means I can go either way with Rocco. All this said, I am a casual so maybe I am underselling the farm but I don't think I really am. The convo around Berrios and Buxton has really bummed me out as I thought the new stadium was supposed to enable us to retain our young superstar players. Instead, as I said earlier, the convo is that unless they take a below market deal, they are gone. It is just tough for me to be ok with being watchable as the bar for success.

The issue is that both the starting rotation and the bullpen look to be a mess. If the bullpen was solid I would think there would be a decent path to success. Trying to rebuild both is a different story.

All of this and I would say he is still the best player on our current roster...which tells you about our roster

I think you need good players to contend. We have very few good players right now and we just traded one in Berrios. I understand the injury concern but who else are we going to sign? The newest Josh Donaldson? More Michael Pinedas? Those guys are ok, but not players who are going to be considered slightly better than average. There is a reason the Yankees smash us and it is because our talent is just not comparable. Also, someone tell me why we have so much confidence in a farm system that has struggled to produce much of anything recently outside of "potential". In fact, two of the best things it has produced are Berrios (traded) and Buxton (whom people are concerned with keeping). We are a completely "middle" MLB franchise right now. Not good enough at developing minor league talent like the A's or Rays and not spending like the Dodgers, Astros, Yankees and such. Someone tell me how Jorge Polanco isn't our 2nd best player after Buxton and how that is not a huge problem.

I guess it is not shocking to me that fans would be less patient with a declining vet FA who they have no investment in vs signing a young, home grown player they have watched develop for 3 to 4 years. I feel like that is why we have posts on here apologizing to Polanco and not discussing how Donaldson has been an ok investment so far. Fans are invested in Polanco.

I guess my question is, if you aren't going to sign your own developmental players like Jose Berrios or Byron Buxton long-term, who are you going to sign? My understanding was that tax payer dollars going to build a beautiful stadium was to ensure the Twins were not the Oakland A's of the north.

I get frustrated by messing with guys who are running hot. -If you bring up Miranda, keep him at 3B where he is comfortable. See what he can do on the big stage for 30 days. -Don't mess with Polanco right now. Leave him at 2B. Polanco at 2B is like the one thing I think we can count on as a positive heading into next year. -The rest of it are just details IMO. 1B and DH and LF are just details. Figure them out between Simmons, Arraez, Donaldson and Sano. (and Rooker and Cave I guess)

Keep him at 2B.

Not a traditional DH but that is probably the spot you would want him to be consistently to get the most out of him.

In my experience, players tend to start with the dollar amount and then weigh the market and culture and competitiveness of their options. Also, professional athletes tend to like routine and familiarity which causes them to stay with their current team if all things are equal.

I am not going to claim that I have specific inside information regarding Berrios, but I will share overall info regarding pro athletes and contract extensions/negotiations. If the offer is right and it is done prior to an expiring contract year or an arbitration year, players are consistently willing to take the money now vs later. It is when you quibble with them regarding their worth or fail to offer a quality dollar amount that they choose to bet on themselves. I am confident in saying Berrios's agent either asked for a number or gave the Twins a number. I don't know if Berrios asked for 30 or if the Twins threw out a number what that was, but their reaction is why Berrios and his agent decided to put out there they would be testing free agency. My guess is the sides were not close.

(Edit: just to get back to convo regarding baseball and focus less on debating the meaning of overpay) "And yes, if you project Lance's price per inning pitched per year to Berrios, it comes out to around 25 mil per year, but I feel 5 mil over that to get to 30 is a tolerable overpay and does not hold back the franchise at all."

Also, regarding Rosario, we had Larnach, Buxton, Kepler, and Kiriloff on the roster or primed for a call up. We don't have that in starting pitching IMO.