Major League Ready

I like the creativity but I seriously doubt he takes a contract for half of what he can get guaranteed. That's a lot of money to put at risk. Having said this ... I would endorse making such an offer, WCS he turns it down.

The solution I would like to see is resigning Escobar and Sano weighing in for spring training at 235 lbs. I would be fine rolling with that infield. That still leaves a hole at 1B but that one should be easier to fill than the others. We even have a couple prospects that might be ready by then.

I am glad you brought this up because I was thinking the same thing. I would hope they keep Romero and Gonsalves given Odorizzi and Ginson are FAs after 2019. Would Slegers and/or Littell get us a 2B? I guess we could add DeJong and Enns to that list as well. Perhaps even May. Are any of these guys bringing back a 2B or would we have to part with Romero/Mejia/Gonsalves? I also thought the AAA starters might net us some Bullpen help. We could also target a SS and move Polanco to 2B. We need to find away to extract value from that depth.

Random thoughts on this thread … The Dozier deal came down to the final hour. The two most likely scenarios are 1) The market did not value Dozier as much as Twins fans or 2)the F/O held out for too much and we stuck in the position of dealing with the last team needing a 2B. Looking at his stats for the year, and especially the last 2 months, I am guessing the former. Maybe Dozier had become a problem in the clubhouse. The Twins made no attempt to extend him and he is playing very poorly going into FA. He was anticipating a big payday and that’s not going to happen. Maybe the Twins saw something in Raley that they believe provides greater potential than others see in him or maybe they think Smeltzer will thrive in a bullpen role. Maybe it’s all they could an get for a rental of Dozier and his 700 OPS. Escobar WAR = 2.5 / Dozier = 1 ----- Why is it a surprise Dozier brought less in a trade? Looking at team batting for the past 2 months …. Dozier is barely above 700 OPS. Robbie Grossman’s OPS is higher than Dozier Why do people keep insisting we have no solution a catcher? Garver has been the Twins 2nd best hitter behind Escobar for the past 2 months. He still needs work as a receiver but that appears to be improving as well. June-July

I too have thought about the scouting personnel. It's possible you have a point. However, any reasonable evaluation of proficiency, practices, and personnel requires unrestricted access access and evaluation waaaaaay beyond guilt by association. You are ignoring that the new regime made some changes to the scouting department. We could not possibly know the extent or merit of those changes but very good people asked to use poor practices and managed poorly will produce less than optimal results. You also are ignoring that the new regime reorganized the metrics dept which combined with better process & practices could help significantly improve the results of the current staff. I am curious because I don't know. Maybe the scouting was not the issue. Maybe it has been development. IDK but taking a hard stance on a hunch that the problem was the people instead of the methods and management while having very little information is a very poor way to reach a conclusion.

I think it's too early to tell. Berrios, Gibson, and Odorizzi are set baring injury. They are going to take a good look at Mejia. That leaves only one position open If he gives reason for the team to believe he is part of the solution. They have at least three solid contenders for the final spot in Pineida, Romero, and Gonsalves. Pineida is only a few days away from starting a rehab assignment. The Twins desire to acquire additional SP is going to be dampened if he finishes the season looking good. Romero is another guy who could diminish the odds of the Twins acquiring addition SPs this winter with a good showing the rest of 2018. They have additional depth in Slegers, Littell, DeJong, and even Stewart. Alcala will get here quickly if he can gain a little better control. I just don't think it makes any sense to say we need to SPs until we see what happens the rest of the season.

We are less than 48 hours removed. They are never going to just go nuts with DFAing players to open spots the way some fans would like. Let's see what happens in the next 2-3 weeks.

I should have prefaced my post with that I knew you were just putting his post in perspective and that we should all keep in mind that this was a pre-existing condition. I think the takeaway from this line of thought is that we have a a great deal of upside and selling opened roster spots that give us a head start figuring out the pieces. There are not all going to work out be we have many possibilities. 1) I would love to see what a 235 lbs version of Miguel Sano could do. 2) Romero and Gonsalves working out would dramatically change the trajectory of this team. There are enough other SP prospects that we will be in darn good shape for several years if those two guys can get r' done. 3) Let Cave, Wade, and Kepler sort out who is a starter and who is a back-up. Between them we should be able to come up with a good outfield. 4) I don't think Mauer is part of the problem but he is not exactly the solution either and we need to solidify that position. Let's give Austin a shot this year and look at Rooker in spring training. Maybe even move Kepler to 1B and spread the 1B/DH ABS out between Kepler, Austin, and Rooker. 5) Can we get Escobar back on a 2-3 yr deal 6. Use a couple BP spots for auditions the rest of the year. FA relievers are not the best investment but we may have no choice. Let's do everything we can to find internal solutions.

You do realize that the only change in terms of competing next year with the deadline moves is that we lost Pressly, right? So, while I agree the list is long, that's exactly why selling was the right move. This team had prohibitive issues both immediate and long-term. Moving those players had significant value to next year in the form of auditioning prospects now. Hopefully, we can find a solution or two and bring the required off-season moves into better focus.

I might be more inclined to watch depending on who is added a when. I was sick and tired of watching Dozier try to pull pitch after pitch on the outside edge of the plate regardless of the situation. I am quite interested to track the progress of Garver and Sano. I looked up the stats for catchers over the past 2 months and Garver was 4th in MLB in terms of OPS at 15 points behind Realmuto for 2nd overall. We should get a look at some of our SP and BP prospects. Sano's progress is essential to rebounding in 2019 so that will be worth watching. Cave is a great story worth following. Polanco makes for good entertainment if he gets back into the form he had for an extended period last year and anytime our young pitchers get a shot will also make it interesting to follow for me.

Looks like Dozier is headed to the Dodgers. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/minnesota-twins No report on the return. Let the guessing / hoping begin.

I would be happy with a modest amount of International Bonus Pool money in return. BTW ... The only player that has been traded who had any influence on our ability to compete in the future was Pressly. One year of a decent reliever. That's the net impact.The cries of future doom have no foundation. If you want to be mad about missed opportunity, be mad the previous regime took Gordon instead of Nola or Jay instead of Benintendi.

I don't recall differentiating their would be contribution to a great season but any season but the odds are certainly at least 50/50 it's a better season than this one. You will have to show me where I suggested their contribution would come when we are the division favorites. I have said repeatedly that the division favorite or winning the division is not a great measure. That's not the goal by which to measure, IMO. Are we trying to build a great team or win a very weak division. If you modify the definition of success to be winning a playoff series the odds get very thin. We all know those odds are very difficult to determine/predict the future contribution of a prospect or group of prospects. It's not difficult to determine this season is very likely lost and therefore there is little risk associated with trading pending free agents. I would define this as the cost of trading those players for the purposes of this conversation. For this minimal cost we added 5 players, all with a relatively low probability of actually making it to the ML. However, if one turns into an average ML player the benefit is of value for 6 years, not 1 year. Somehow, I can't get you to grasp the value proposition of keeping these players is a combined 3 years, and two of those combined years is a year with an extremely low probability of winning a playoff series. No, we don't know things will improve and therefore these future players might also be contributing to a poor team but it's a mathematical certainty that passing on these opportunities reduces our chances of being better in the future.

You completely ignored what I said. You justified an earlier point by saying the reduction in odds was 25% which of course is true if we agree to the assumptions being used. The fact is the degradation in odds is a result of really poor odds which is why the FO made this move. Is it or is it not true that the teams odds of winning the division would not have gone down nearly as much if they were reasonably positioned to win the division? If it's true which is a mathematical fact, your point about the odds going down only serves to support management's decision to sell where you are trying to use it as a reason for supporting riding it out.

In what world is the 2018 Twins a good team. There are only two teams outside the central division with a worse record than the Twins. Only 8 teams in all of baseball worse than the twins. The three players who are arguably most important to the team are playing horribly. Our bullpen sucks. In what universe is this a good team or a team with a chance to do anything in the playoffs. You are ,mesmerized by the chance to win a really bad division. Shouldn't the goal be to build a good team, a team that won't be a huge underdog in a playoff series.

Dozier's history of coming on in the 2nd half might entice a team to take a chance but I don't like our odds of getting a decent prospect. Lynn would not be a shock because he too has performed in the past. Plus a couple of the contenders are still short on SP.

There is no doubt you and I have very different professional backgrounds. I would be more than happy to list my credentials if you really want to compare credentials.

It's only significant because they have horrible odds. It would only be a 4% reduction if they had a 50% chance of making the playoffs. Would it make more sense for them to trade Escobar and Pressly if they had a 50% chance?

Agreed. They obviously traded two players with more to contribute than the player's you listed. So, I don't think there is any reason to believe they won't trade all of the players given a remotely reasonable return. The bad news is none of them are going to return much. The good news is it will create opportunities for players who could possibly contribute to the solution.

I have acknowledged the risk on numerous occasions. This was a very specific comparison of measures. The other poster was comparing the odds of one of the players making it to the ML level with the odds of getting to the playoffs. My point was that those odds measured one year of benefit but if one of the prospects made it to the ML team, they would likely contribute for 6 years. Yes, they might flame out by their arbitration years or they could be a 10X all-star. If just one player contributes in a meaningful way this is a huge win. There is the possibility more than one makes it which obviously would be enormously advantageous. If we were to beat the odds and make the playoffs, the benefit would be playing a team that very likely gives us an ^$$ kicking. I am pretty sure I am taking into account all of the +/- whereas the detractors are thinking only of this season and they are also considering making the playoffs the goal. All of the analysis in terms of percentage are measured by winning the division. Granted, it's a personal perspective but I would not call losing a playoff series a win and I certainly would not give up any future assets for the benefit of losing a playoff series. This is common practice with these type of odds. Do you suppose it's all of the GMs with the benefit of an analytics department who follow this practice who don't understand cost benefit analysis or is it possible that your particular area of expertise is not cost benefit analysis.

Trading a pending free agent and a RP with one more year of control is blowing it up?

I guess I don't understand how the "coin-flip" metafore ever had any relevance. Their odds of winning the division are so low that foregoing an opportunity to add to the farm system would be negligent on the part of the F/O. A significant part of that evaluation is that if one or more of the players make it, they will contribute for 6 years or more. You still have not acknowledged this and I think that is a significant part of the disconnect. The other is the extreme weight you put on the present. I support your desire to never give up. I can't and won't support your insistence that the F/O apply extremely poor management practices because you are unwilling to give any weight to benefits that take place in the future.

Sorry ... That was from ND-Fan and I was thinking it was from you.

I have a very hard time following your logic, not just here but in general. I thought you meant odds of getting into the playoffs. No kidding they are not that far off from a coin flip on a given game. A 90 loss team has a 44.4% chance of winning any given game. There are two other points where we simply differ in opinion. You view the goal as getting into the playoffs. I view the goal as building a great team. If Cleveland folds the rest of the way and we get in as a 500 team, so what. We are still a bad team. The odds makers would give us somewhere around a 30% chance of winning a playoff series which I include when assessing our odds of success and consequent buy/sell strategies. Again, what difference does it make if we get crushed in a playoff series? That's not success in my opinion. Therefore, I am looking at the probability of success as the odds of getting into the playoffs multiplied by the odds of winning a playoff series. I think the core of our disagreement is you and the millennial fans you reference are unwilling to ,make even the smallest sacrifice to get better better in the future. Cashing in our small odds would require a bunch of players to completely turn around their performance. The departure of Escobar and Pressly does not preclude this from happening (see 2017). To address your question about the odds of the players we received contributing to the ML club, once again we evaluate that situation very differently. For starters the contribution of Escobar is this season with an extremely low odds of contending a decent RP in the same time period as well as next year where our chances of contending have to be at least a little better. The players we received in trade would contribute for 6 years if they make it to the ML club. Your focus on the immediate seems to have precluded this consideration. So, do I think the odds are higher of the players we received contributing to an actual contender, absolutely.

A coin flip is 50/50. We are not remotely a coin flip. Plus, the only reason we have a chance to make the playoffs is that we play in an extremely weak division. Is the goal to make the playoffs in a weak division or is it to construct a great team? It seems many of you are want to waste an opportunity to get better for a small chance to get into a playoff series where we would be the considerably weaker team no matter which of the opponents we draw. That is an incredibly misguided unless your goal is to stay mediocre or in our case not even mediocre.