Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Forums

Article: Official Rule 5 Draft Day Thread

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 05:51 AM
The Winter Meetings in Las Vegas have been fairly quiet against in 2018. Certainly there are meetings, but there haven't been a lot of si...
Full topic ›

Buxton: "Pissed" at Twins for No Call-Up Decision...

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 04:59 AM
According to the Star Tribune, Byron Buxton is displeased with the Twins after not being called up in September of 2018. According to Byr...
Full topic ›

Derek Falvey Interview on 1500 ESPN

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 01:08 AM
Falvey discusses Sano, payroll, etc. http://www.1500espn....an-mackey-judd/
Full topic ›

Twins Minor League Coaches/Coordinators

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 01:01 AM
The Twins made some changes this offseason already in their minor league system. Pitching coaches Ivan Arteaga and Henry Bonilla were let...
Full topic ›

Harold Baines and Lee Smith are Hall of Famers

Other Baseball Yesterday, 11:33 PM
MLB announced tonight that a 16-person committee decided that DH Harold Baines and RP Lee Smith are now Hall of Famers.   Here is th...
Full topic ›

Rundown: The Next Eovaldi, Cleveland Trade Rumors and More

Nathan Eovaldi is one of the hottest free agents on the market right now. Jon Morosi of MLB.com reported that the Astros have joined the mix of 10 teams confirmed to have interest in the 28-year-old right-hander. With that much competition, Eovaldi figures to land himself a handsome contract. It’s difficult to see the Twins coming out on top of the bidding war should they join the pursuit, but what they really should be doing is trying to find the next Nathan Eovaldi.
Image courtesy of © Richard Mackson-USA TODAY Sports
Eovaldi had a solid 2018 season, but his postseason performance for the Red Sox really put him over the top. He missed the entire 2017 season and the two years prior to that pitched to a 4.45 ERA in 279 innings with the Yankees. Sounds a lot like Michael Pineda, right? Fingers crossed.

In trying to come up with a similar buy-low, high-upside option I landed on Eovaldi’s Boston teammate and fellow free agent Drew Pomeranz. From 2014-17, he had a 3.24 ERA in nearly 500 innings. Forearm issues caused him all sorts of problems in 2018, including a dip in velocity. He had a 6.08 ERA for the Red Sox last year and was demoted to the bullpen. So obviously there are some red flags, but MLB Trade Rumors predicted that he’d be available on a one-year, $6 million contract. I’d take that gamble.

I floated that idea out on Twitter, but Darren Wolfson of KSTP was kind enough to let me know the Twins had not made any contact with Pomeranz at this time. Maybe that will change once they address more urgent matters, who knows? Also, for those wondering, Drew is not related to former Twin Cities broadcaster and minor league pitcher Mike Pomeranz.

Doogie also noted on Twitter that the Twins have been in contact with Patrick Corbin’s agent. Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic reported that Corbin, the top pitcher on this year’s free agent market, is expecting to receive six-year offers. Corbin has met with the Phillies, Nationals and is expected to meet with the Yankees. Jim Pohlad is notoriously averse to long commitments, and there’s some logic in that stance, so it still seems the Twins would be a long shot to land the lefty.

It seems pretty odd that Cleveland is apparently forced to shed a lot of payroll this offseason, but even more strange is who they’re inclined to move. Bob Nightengale of the USA Today reported that there’s a sense the team is more amenable to send away Trevor Bauer than Corey Kluber or Carlos Carrasco. Not only is Bauer the youngest of that trio, he also had the best 2018 season of that group. Jon Morosi of MLB.com reported today that the Dodgers are in trade talks with Cleveland and its believed one of the members of their rotation would be headed to LA if any deal is agreed upon.

The Twins could certainly use a boost in their rotation, but I doubt Cleveland would be motivated to deal one of their best players to their top division rival. Still, someone like Bauer potentially leaving Cleveland, along with their other pending free agents, will obviously give the Twins better odds of winning the division.

Rob Huff of MLB Trade Rumors projected the Twins to have a $125 million payroll for 2019. That means they'd have $48 million to spend this offseason. Given the comments by ownership and the front office, I would be surprised if they went that high. But again, if Cleveland sheds talent the Twins should absolutely get aggressive.

The Indians are already losing Michael Brantley, Andrew Miller and Cody Allen. The fact that there’s so much speculation that they’re looking to shed payroll means they’re certainly not going to be signing any big free agents.

Michael Clair of Cut 4 predicted that the Twins would win the AL Central next season. One of the things he points to in the team bridging the gap to Cleveland is luck. So many things went poorly for the Twins in 2018 while Cleveland avoided a lot of those unforeseen issues, outside of their bullpen problems. If they traded Bauer and one of Francisco Lindor or Jose Ramirez was forced to miss a significant amount of time, that team would be very ordinary.

The first Twins Hot Stove Show of the offseason was recorded Wednesday night. You can listen back to the full episode here. Derek Falvey and Rocco Baldelli were the guests. There was a lot of talk about culture, leadership and forming partnerships.

A couple members of the 2018 Twins are moving on to other organizations. La Velle E. Neal III of the Star Trib provided details on Jeff Pickler joining the Reds coaching staff and Chris Gimenez becoming the game planning coach for the Dodgers.

Over at Twinkie Town, Hayden looked back at the 10 dumbest things that happened to the Twins in 2018. I laughed, I cried, I realized there was lots of dumb stuff I’d already blocked out of my memory.

A name you can expect to be hearing a lot is Yusei Kikuchi. The Seibu Lions are expected to post the 27-year-old lefty next week. He’s already in the US and was spotted at an Anaheim Ducks game. Here’s some video of Kikuchi on the mound:

I haven’t seen the Twins linked to Kikuchi in any way, but he seems like a player they should definitely have interest in. He has a 2.81 ERA in more than 1,000 innings in the NPB. If you’re interested in learning more, Yankees site River Ave Blues did an excellent job profiling Kikuchi.

  • nclahammer likes this

  • Share:
  • submit to reddit
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

94 Comments

i CRINGE at the thought of dealing Thorpe. He's probably the next best pitcher down on the farm besides Graterol and he's a season at most away from the majors. He will be much better than Kohl Stewart IMO.


If you cringe that means the offer is getting closer to fair value. It's gotta hurt to acquire a player like Thor.
    • Mike Sixel, DocBauer and cmoss84 like this

Tom, if anything, I think some people are stuck in the mentality that if you have 2-3 pretty good starting pitchers, then starting pitching is not a weakness.
 
It may not be the Twins' BIGGEST weakness, but it quite possibly is the one that could best be addressed via big deals from outside sources (trades or FA).
 
For better or worse, the lineup is likely to be improved (or not) based on what Buxton and Sano do. There are internal options and/or mid-range external options for middle infield and 1B. 
 
There are good relievers available, but I don't think you pay huge prices (in money or prospects) for relievers.
 
Which brings us back to the rotation. 
 
There's no doubt that the rotation is looking stronger than it did a year ago. But I think it's becoming more and more clear that DEPTH is critical. It's not enough to have 2-3 good starters and a couple of guys that can hold their own. 
 
It looks to me that teams that are going to be serious contenders for any stretch of time will have rotations that are 8 men deep. Naturally, that means that about half of that number will need to be young and home grown, with MiLB options remaining, that can be yo-yo'd between Rochester and Minnesota as needed.
 
Nobody this side of Seth Stohs is a bigger fan of Twins' prospects than I am. That said, if 3 years of Thor are available, everyone in the Twins system - big leagues or minor leaguers - are on the table. No, you don't make a Hershel Walker kind of lopsided deal, but even the best minor leaguers are still question marks.
 
Don't believe me? Ask how many would trade Buxton and Sano in a deal for Thor right now. How many would have made that deal for a similar top pitcher 4 years ago?
 
No, I don't think the Twins FO will make this kind of move this season (if ever). They finally are putting together their own development/coaching staff and probably believe those coaches can make serious improvements with their current internal options (or at least want to take a year to find out).
 
It's just unfortunate that the uncertainty over Buxton & Sano is resulting in this being an offseason of moderation, rather than the aggressiveness that it should have been, given the payroll flexibility.


AD, I liked your post but haven't commented until now, a couple days later, and reflecting and re-reading.

I am leaving Thor out of this comment, as im concentrating on the depth issue. FWIW, Im actually in on Thor minus Lewis, Khirilloff, Berrios and probably Gibson. Berrios should be obvious, but so should Gibson. Removing a quality SP to add a better one helps, but not sure it really does the job at the end of the day.

I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but I actually feel pretty good about the rotation heading in to 2019. At least, better than I've felt in years. I have been a fan and believer in Berrios for years and feel he's only going to get better. I defended Gibson and his first couple of years, but was ready to give up until his turn around the second half of 2017. He is is a legitimate #3 who sometimes pitches like a #2. (Extension please). I was hopeful but disappointed in Odorizzi until the season was done I spent time looking at his numbers and ML rankings and realized he was, frankly better than I have him credit for. (I still want him as my 4 or 5 starter, however). There is no question Pineda is an unknown at this point. And it's so disappointing he didn't get to shake the rust off at the ML level to close out the '18 season. And he is no stud, to be sure. But his career numbers are more than solid. The arm is healthy. I don't think its misguided at all to think he could be solid next season.

Like you, I am also high on a lot of the Twins prospects. I think Stewart and Littell were pushed, but I was happy to see the aggressiveness. I have always believed, and stated, that I felt Gonsalves would struggle when given his first opportunity. He's long, has a quality change, decent low 90's FB, a couple budding breaking pitches, control, and the "pitchability" equation shown at every level. Yes, his control came and went in 2018. And that is no reason to dismiss him. He just doesn't have any truly dominating pitch to equal "early return" optimism, which is why I felt he would struggle initially.

Like it or not, and I've finally come around to the merits, the idea of an opener makes sense. At least when breaking in a young SP. Sorry, I forget who and what post, but someone recently posted the numbers for both Gonsalves and Stewart when they were the primary vs the starter. And the numbers were flabergasting. Now, we're those numbers simply because there was an opener vs personal growth? Difficult to say. Some have opinioned for a time that breaking an arm in the pen was a good option. Maybe having on opener is an even better option.

Despite the cascade of everything that went wrong in 2018, and the list is depressingly long, the thing that sticks out to me is almost setting a record for most 1 run losses in a season. How much of that is on the starting staff would be impossible to quantify. I'd equate it to the pen, and the offense, poor season's and injury regardless. Despite such a disappointing season, winning half of those games gives our beloved Twins a better than .500 record.

The 4 we have penciled in, a better bullpen, I feel pretty good about the rotation...designated starter or not...with Romero, Gonsalves, Stewart, Littell and Thorpe getting close. I think there is depth and optimism.

Again, not saying no to a big move like Thor. I'd love it, if it doesn't cost Lewis and Khirilloff or decimate the ML roster, but I'd do feel there is potential and depth here.
    • Mike Sixel, SD Buhr and terrydactyls1947 like this

If you cringe that means the offer is getting closer to fair value. It's gotta hurt to acquire a player like Thor.


Agreed.

Were I the Mets, I'd begin with Thorpe and Kepler and go from there. I might take Romero over Thorpe, but there are valid arguments both ways. I'd probably ask for Gordon as well. Despite angst many TD posters have, he's a very talented young man just waiting for a breakthrough. 3 guys ML ready or close. I'd need another top 20 prospect to seal the deal. Depends on how close to ML ready you feel you need.

But that's kind of the rub if you're the Twins, right? You/We/They all know we are on a damned precipice. Sano, Buxton, Kepler and I'll include Polanco have so much damn talent you are just waiting for all the tease to go away and see the fruition of all that talent! (Not discounting Rosario or the improving Garver). Those guys with some smart lineup additions and a better pen, and suddenly you want to make sure you hold on to Romero and Thorpe!

The b**ch is, what path do you take?
Photo
Major League Ready
Dec 04 2018 06:44 AM

 

I think they should still be aggressive even with the ifs that are Sano and Buxton. When will be the next time they will have this flexibility in payroll? I say take the bet that Sano and Buxton will come through and add big. Add like they are expecting them to. If they don’t come through we will be better off because we added something. If we don’t add and they don’t come through, we will be lucky to even match our wins of this last season. But if they do come through and we haven’t added, that will be another wasted season. There is no way to know either way, so take the leap of faith.

 

Taking a leap of faith is a fun notion for fans but don't be disappointed when it does not happen. Pretend for a moment you are accountable for the results. In that position you and the 10 people who liked this can appreciate that any business school in the country would reject this position with extreme prejudice. We are taught in business programs and later in leadership positions to never take a leap of faith, at least not when the cost or even potential costs are high. 

 

Taking a leap of faith is a fun notion for fans but don't be disappointed when it does not happen. Pretend for a moment you are accountable for the results. In that position you and the 10 people who liked this can appreciate that any business school in the country would reject this position with extreme prejudice. We are taught in business programs and later in leadership positions to never take a leap of faith, at least not when the cost or even potential costs are high. 

Make it 11.  Woohoo!  I took something to eleven.  Anyway, what if you change 'leap of faith" to "calculated risk?"  How about then?  Depending on your definition of success, a business predicated upon attempting to be the 1 in 30 that can truly be considered a success each year seems like a bad business to be in in the first place.

    • Carole Keller, birdwatcher and Vanimal46 like this
Photo
Carole Keller
Dec 04 2018 07:51 AM

Taking a leap of faith is a fun notion for fans but don't be disappointed when it does not happen. Pretend for a moment you are accountable for the results. In that position you and the 10 people who liked this can appreciate that any business school in the country would reject this position with extreme prejudice. We are taught in business programs and later in leadership positions to never take a leap of faith, at least not when the cost or even potential costs are high.

First of all, you are once again injecting your same old post, as you do whenever someone suggests aggressiveness, that they need a lesson in business without relating it to anything in this thread let alone anything with the Twins. You’ve been told to stop doing that. If you have something specific to add about the Twins or this thread, great. But don’t take it down the path of generalities of ‘You don’t know how businesses works.’ Because it’s my post, I’m not going to hide yours or assess a point, but if it had been anyone else’s, I would have.

Secondly, I haven’t really laid out a plan, but this team has a lot of flexibility to go big. I’m not talking about a $200million payroll here, but they could spend equal to what they did last year and it would still be aggressive because they have that much flexibility. It’s disappointing for me to hear they didn’t even try for Thor, that they won’t be in on Machado (even though I know he probably wouldn’t have signed here anyway), and that they picked up Cron (ugh) as that shows me once again they have no serious plans to compete and I think they are missing an opportunity. Further, Pohlad seems to be laying out the excuse that it’s Sano’s and Buxton’s fault. Great way to say you don’t believe in them to put anyone really good around them and just go with average or less than average. Good way to lose your biggest source of revenue ... the fans ... and that can’t be smart, either. And good way to set in motion the possibility of two great players walking at the first opportunity. Maybe we’ll be happy with that, but there is still a very reasonable chance we won’t. But, the off season isn’t over, so I’ll give them leeway to see what we have in March, but I’m not holding my breath.

Third, you don’t need to manage manage my disappointment by trying to dash my hopes. I’m an older adult and know how hope and disappointment work. However, I do happen to think that ‘hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies.’

Calculated risk ... great way to put it. Thanks, Han Joelo.
    • Han Joelo, birdwatcher, Mike Sixel and 3 others like this
Photo
Major League Ready
Dec 04 2018 09:07 AM

 

Just think of the deals the Twins could have done if they traded Buxton when he was #1 prospect in the game. Now look what we have, an injury prone outfielder that spends more time on DL than playing.

 

Same could be said about Gordon. One of the Twins top prospects and top 25-40 in the game and now where would you place him?

 

Prospects should be used to acquire proven talent if you are a contending team. A prospect has maybe a 10-15% chance to succeed.

 

I don’t think we can make this type of blank statement. For starters, “in contention” is a relative term and a team’s willingness to part with prospects (defined as top prospects) depends on their relative position in terms of contention. Obviously, the Red Sox, Yankees, Astros, Athletics, Dodgers, Braves, Nationals, Brewers and Cubs are in a window of contention. Several other teams are relative close but teams like the mariners are opting to tear down. Chicago tore down with a more proven roster than the Twins have now and they had a legit ace with 3 years of control

You also have to consider the revenue of any given team. The lower the revenue the more necessary it is to retain low cost talent. Will, Tampa, a 90 win team, be willing to trade away top prospects? Very doubtful. When have they EVER? They never do purely from a business requirement prospective. Oakland and Tampa have generally traded away established talent, even top talent (Price) because of their need for low cost talent.

 

Even the highest revenue teams have been very reluctant to trade top prospects. Theo Epstein was unwilling to trade Bellinger / Buehler / Urias etc. and he has been quite consistent in his unwillingness to trade top prospects even though they are clearly in contention. How about the Yankees? Were they willing to deal Sanchez when they had an established veteran? Were they willing to deal Severino? No, The Yankees have not been inclined to give up elite prospects. They have actually benefited more from trading for prospects than trading away prospects. Stanton did not cost elite prospects because of the salary attached to Stanton. Sheffield is an exception and the circumstances are extreme. They have assembled a 100 win team but need SP if they are going to have a chance to win their division and compete deep into the playoffs.

Boston is the one team that has ponied up top prospects but of course they were able to do this because they were stacked with young talent and also able to spend $200M+ in payroll. They are also in a position to sustain a team that is among the most dominant in MLB history. That is a mile away from the Twins situation.

 

Three points come to mind when looking at the trends around the league.

1) Even very rich teams that are clearly in contention are very reluctant to give up top talent. History is very clear in this matter.

2) 2) Below average revenue teams are even less inclined and teams that are not probable contenders also are much less inclined to trade top prospects.

3) The Twin’s scenario is not remotely in a similar scenario to the teams that have traded top prospects. Those teams are top contenders and we are a relative long shot. Low cost players are more important to a team with the twin’s revenue and we are a long way from comparable in terms of being an established contender.

    • birdwatcher likes this
Photo
birdwatcher
Dec 04 2018 09:22 AM

 

Just think of the deals the Twins could have done if they traded Buxton when he was #1 prospect in the game. Now look what we have, an injury prone outfielder that spends more time on DL than playing.

 

Same could be said about Gordon. One of the Twins top prospects and top 25-40 in the game and now where would you place him?

 

Prospects should be used to acquire proven talent if you are a contending team. A prospect has maybe a 10-15% chance to succeed.

 

 

Your final statement is a generalization that is not factual and that doesn't hold water. The statistical probabilities of success for an elite prospect are higher by multiples.

 

You use two examples that perhaps support your case. Why leave out examples that don't? Do you think the theoretical trade value for Benintendi, Machado, Syndegaard, or Harper would have exceeded the value they delivered?

 

That said, I was all for having them dangle Gordon out there, because he is a surplus asset IMO.

 

Every potential deal has to be weighed on its merits. But it's important to recognize that when these evaluators project the value of a player into the future, they know their software and video doesn't make a calculation that's worth a whole lot. The decision is a bet.

 

The reason Lewis is untouchable is because evaluators are betting he's a Barry Larkin type guy.

    • Major League Ready likes this
Photo
Major League Ready
Dec 04 2018 09:44 AM

 

Make it 11.  Woohoo!  I took something to eleven.  Anyway, what if you change 'leap of faith" to "calculated risk?"  How about then?  Depending on your definition of success, a business predicated upon attempting to be the 1 in 30 that can truly be considered a success each year seems like a bad business to be in in the first place.

 

I have absolutely no problem with the team taking a calculated risk. By this I mean making the trades and spending the money in free agency in order to put together a true contender. However, I have seen nothing resembling a calculation of the odds of any plan resulting in contention. Legit contention would take at least a 95 win team given the current balance of power in the American League.

 

There is no doubt that every single plan presented here would make the team better but contending would require several improbable things to come to together of which the cumulative odds are very low. The point being we cant say its a calculated risk without calculating the odds of success. 

I have absolutely no problem with the team taking a calculated risk. By this I mean making the trades and spending the money in free agency in order to put together a true contender. However, I have seen nothing resembling a calculation of the odds of any plan resulting in contention. Legit contention would take at least a 95 win team given the current balance of power in the American League.

There is no doubt that every single plan presented here would make the team better but contending would require several improbable things to come to together of which the cumulative odds are very low. The point being we cant say its a calculated risk without calculating the odds of success.


Let's start with contending in the AL Central. If Cleveland continues to sell off MLB assets to shave payroll, it may take 85-90 wins to win the division. Even with several key players under performing the Twins won 78 games. With status quo, and Buxton/Sano playing better than last year, they are probably projected to be an 82-85 win team. The hill is not that steep to climb into contention.
    • Carole Keller, birdwatcher, Mike Sixel and 2 others like this

 

I have absolutely no problem with the team taking a calculated risk. By this I mean making the trades and spending the money in free agency in order to put together a true contender. However, I have seen nothing resembling a calculation of the odds of any plan resulting in contention. Legit contention would take at least a 95 win team given the current balance of power in the American League.

 

There is no doubt that every single plan presented here would make the team better but contending would require several improbable things to come to together of which the cumulative odds are very low. The point being we cant say its a calculated risk without calculating the odds of success. 

 

Moves made to add long term MLB talent this year help for next year, and the year after, if not longer. Never adding MLB talent on long term deals is why the team isn't in a better position this year than last off season, because they added almost no one at all that would be here in 2019....unless you love the cheap but efficient Odo, Reed, and Pineda deals (they'll all be gone after this year, opening 3 more holes). Never adding long term MLB deals in trade or FA is a self fulfilling prophecy for not having any talent on the roster. And then, hey, ,they aren't close, so they shouldn't add talent!

    • Carole Keller, markos, SD Buhr and 2 others like this

 

I don’t think we can make this type of blank statement. For starters, “in contention” is a relative term and a team’s willingness to part with prospects (defined as top prospects) depends on their relative position in terms of contention. Obviously, the Red Sox, Yankees, Astros, Athletics, Dodgers, Braves, Nationals, Brewers and Cubs are in a window of contention. Several other teams are relative close but teams like the mariners are opting to tear down. Chicago tore down with a more proven roster than the Twins have now and they had a legit ace with 3 years of control

You also have to consider the revenue of any given team. The lower the revenue the more necessary it is to retain low cost talent. Will, Tampa, a 90 win team, be willing to trade away top prospects? Very doubtful. When have they EVER? They never do purely from a business requirement prospective. Oakland and Tampa have generally traded away established talent, even top talent (Price) because of their need for low cost talent.

 

Even the highest revenue teams have been very reluctant to trade top prospects. Theo Epstein was unwilling to trade Bellinger / Buehler / Urias etc. and he has been quite consistent in his unwillingness to trade top prospects even though they are clearly in contention. How about the Yankees? Were they willing to deal Sanchez when they had an established veteran? Were they willing to deal Severino? No, The Yankees have not been inclined to give up elite prospects. They have actually benefited more from trading for prospects than trading away prospects. Stanton did not cost elite prospects because of the salary attached to Stanton. Sheffield is an exception and the circumstances are extreme. They have assembled a 100 win team but need SP if they are going to have a chance to win their division and compete deep into the playoffs.

Boston is the one team that has ponied up top prospects but of course they were able to do this because they were stacked with young talent and also able to spend $200M+ in payroll. They are also in a position to sustain a team that is among the most dominant in MLB history. That is a mile away from the Twins situation.

 

Three points come to mind when looking at the trends around the league.

1) Even very rich teams that are clearly in contention are very reluctant to give up top talent. History is very clear in this matter.

2) 2) Below average revenue teams are even less inclined and teams that are not probable contenders also are much less inclined to trade top prospects.

3) The Twin’s scenario is not remotely in a similar scenario to the teams that have traded top prospects. Those teams are top contenders and we are a relative long shot. Low cost players are more important to a team with the twin’s revenue and we are a long way from comparable in terms of being an established contender.

 

And Tampa has no championships to show, and no fans. They barely make the playoffs. Given their competition, why not run the team the way they do and win 82-90 games and miss the playoffs, but make more money? Maybe if they, I don't know, traded for or signed big time players, they'd make the playoffs and win some post season games. It is their right to want to make more money, it is the fan's right to want them to try to win more. You know, the customers. 

    • Carole Keller and USAFChief like this
Photo
Carole Keller
Dec 04 2018 10:36 AM

 

And Tampa has no championships to show, and no fans. They barely make the playoffs. Given their competition, why not run the team the way they do and win 82-90 games and miss the playoffs, but make more money? Maybe if they, I don't know, traded for or signed big time players, they'd make the playoffs and win some post season games. It is their right to want to make more money, it is the fan's right to want them to try to win more. You know, the customers. 

I know fans who used to go to a lot of games completely skip the season last year. Why? Because why go? And I'm there, too. At this point I'm not even excited to go to ST ... even when I'm already going to be in Fort Myers anyway. Why bother? To me that doesn't seem to be a way to run a business ... run off a big chunk of your revenue source.

    • USAFChief, TheLeviathan and SD Buhr like this
Photo
Major League Ready
Dec 04 2018 01:13 PM

 

And Tampa has no championships to show, and no fans. They barely make the playoffs. Given their competition, why not run the team the way they do and win 82-90 games and miss the playoffs, but make more money? Maybe if they, I don't know, traded for or signed big time players, they'd make the playoffs and win some post season games. It is their right to want to make more money, it is the fan's right to want them to try to win more. You know, the customers. 

 

You did not even remotely address the three points made. Are those points true or untrue? Are you really of the opinion revenue level does not matter in a teams willingness to part with top prospects? Is what I wrote about the Dodgers and Yankees inaccurate? Is the Twins competitive position even close to that of the teams that have traded top prospects in the past few years? Is Seattle not tearing down an 89 win team?

 

Lots of questions for you to address directly and you elect to respond with an answer that completely neglects all of them.

 

I have absolutely no problem with the team taking a calculated risk. By this I mean making the trades and spending the money in free agency in order to put together a true contender. However, I have seen nothing resembling a calculation of the odds of any plan resulting in contention. Legit contention would take at least a 95 win team given the current balance of power in the American League.

 

There is no doubt that every single plan presented here would make the team better but contending would require several improbable things to come to together of which the cumulative odds are very low. The point being we cant say its a calculated risk without calculating the odds of success. 

 

Perhaps Falvey and levine realize that the team is not really as close to being competitive as they thought heading into 2018.If Polanco had not been suspended and Sano, Buxton, Dozier & Morrison not totally stunk last season they might have though differently.But on offense this team took a huge step backwards last season and mostly on Offense. 

Photo
Major League Ready
Dec 04 2018 01:24 PM

 

I know fans who used to go to a lot of games completely skip the season last year. Why? Because why go? And I'm there, too. At this point I'm not even excited to go to ST ... even when I'm already going to be in Fort Myers anyway. Why bother? To me that doesn't seem to be a way to run a business ... run off a big chunk of your revenue source.

 

Tampa's revenue has increased steadily for the past 15-20 years. However, making it to the world series in 2008 had minimal impact on revenue. Seems to me they understand how to run their business just fine.

 

https://www.statista...ays-since-2006/

 

 

You did not even remotely address the three points made. Are those points true or untrue? Are you really of the opinion revenue level does not matter in a teams willingness to part with top prospects? Is what I wrote about the Dodgers and Yankees inaccurate? Is the Twins competitive position even close to that of the teams that have traded top prospects in the past few years? Is Seattle not tearing down an 89 win team?

 

Lots of questions for you to address directly and you elect to respond with an answer that completely neglects all of them.

 

I've never disagreed that revenue matters or not. Never. Not one time. I've never asked them to spend as much as Boston or NYY or whatever. Never.

 

But TB doesn't win anything because they never trade for MLB talent, or sign FAs. Which is what I'm asking the Twins to do. The Twins spent 125MM or whatever last year. They have less than 50MM committed after 2019. They have plenty of money to bring in long term assets.

 

Only signing players to 1 year deals means you have to fill those holes again and again and again. Signing great players to longer deals means that if Sano and Buxton are good, you have something when Kiriloff joins them, or Lewis. Or, you can never add great players, even when you have tens of millions of dollars of self imposed cap space, until the stars perfectly align and the team is already championships caliber (by never trading prospects or spending big), and they only need 1 more piece. That, of course, rarely happens for any team. 

    • Carole Keller and SD Buhr like this


Do people still want Eovaldi at this price?


Do people still want Eovaldi at this price?

Thats quite a jump. Seems more like a 10-12M per kind of guy.

Similar Articles


by Ted Schwerzler , 20 Sep 2018
Photo


by Seth Stohs , 21 Aug 2018
Photo


by Steve Lein , 21 Aug 2018
Photo


by Tom Froemming , 11 Aug 2018
Photo


by John Bonnes , 17 Dec 2017
Photo