Jump to content

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

Article: Rundown: Twins Cold Stove, New Beat Writers and More

mlb trade rumors mlb free agent rumors twins spring training
  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#21 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 700 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 01:45 PM

 

Either those guys come through or they don't. If you take the bet that they turn things around, then you surround them with adequate support. If you bet they won't, you find a taker who will and move them. The least efficacious strategy is to watch them finally put it together and THEN invest in supporting players.

I agree with this.But, the bet that results in cutting bait and reloading relies on the 'failing' assets having some semblance of reasonable value.The 2018 fail was so epic in the case of these two (and the roles so key to the future), that the FO is almost forced into a 'wait-a-bit-more' approach.Truly painful.Maybe that just argues that the FO should consider themselves forced to go all-in around them for 2019?

 

Not an easy/obvious call for the 2019 off-season, IMO. How the Buxton and Sano sagas have unfolded since they took over, has to be the absolute worse nightmare that either Falvey or Levine could have imagined when they took the jobs.


#22 lukeduke1980

lukeduke1980

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 356 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 03:51 PM

 

I do not know if we should have moved on anything yet, but all the coach maneuvers are not about to excite the fan base, if they care about the fan base. 

It's a process and this year the focus will be on evaluating how the new coaches impact the current talent.  

  • birdwatcher likes this

#23 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 04:00 PM

 

It's a process and this year the focus will be on evaluating how the new coaches impact the current talent.  

What has the FO accomplished the last 2 years then? Edit: yes, I know the coaching staff hasn't been here two years but if you're a FO and you're on year 3 and you've accomplished nothing and your year 3 plan is to do nothing to improve your crummy roster and just evaluate your new coaches, then I think we've got a problem.

 

A good team doesn't take a full year just to evaluate their coaches impact on their mediocre roster. Have you seen our current roster? If every pitcher on our team had their best season in 2019, we still wouldn't be a world series caliber team.

Edited by S., 05 December 2018 - 04:10 PM.

  • Mike Sixel and mikelink45 like this

#24 Monkeypaws

Monkeypaws

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,160 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 04:10 PM

 

What has the FO accomplished the last 2 years then?

 

A good team doesn't take a full year just to evaluate their coaches impact on their mediocre roster. Have you seen our current roster? If every pitcher on our team had their best season in 2019, we still wouldn't be a world series caliber team.

When Sano, Buxton, Dozier, and Morrison have historically bad seasons, and your ace and starting catcher lose the season to injuries, and your starting shortstop gets busted for PEDs, I'm not sure the front office is to blame.

 

They made an honest effort to improve a playoff team: as nicksaviking pointed out, they signed the #9, #15, #16 and #49 free agents last year.

 

They were also players on Darvish and Ohtani. 

 

It didn't work out, but I'm not gonna blame the front office for not trying.

  • birdwatcher, Twins33, Danchat and 2 others like this

#25 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 04:16 PM

 

They were also players on Darvish and Ohtani. 

They lowballed Darvish so hard that I have a hard time saying they were even remotely serious about pursuing him. And every single team in the league was interested in Ohtani. We were never actually a contender to get him.

 

I'm not saying they've done nothing or haven't tried at all, but if their year 3 plan is to evaluate their coaches impact on the current roster, than they clearly have no real plan, because praying your prospects all pan out and every player on your roster improves drastically isn't a serious plan

 

Edit: Also, getting crunched in a 1 game wild card doesn't really warrant calling the 2017 Twins a playoff team in my book

 

Edit2: I should also add, that I'm not saying that is necessarily the FO's actual plan, this is all in response to the poster saying that it's a process and they think that is the FO's plan. For all I know, the FO is secretly wheeling and dealing and its just that there haven't been any leaks/rumors out there yet. This is all hypothetical, and predicated on the idea that their plan is to take 2018 to evaluate coaches impact. Which to be fair, I doubt is the plan.

Edited by S., 05 December 2018 - 04:26 PM.


#26 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,628 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 04:32 PM

 

I agree with this.But, the bet that results in cutting bait and reloading relies on the 'failing' assets having some semblance of reasonable value.The 2018 fail was so epic in the case of these two (and the roles so key to the future), that the FO is almost forced into a 'wait-a-bit-more' approach.Truly painful.Maybe that just argues that the FO should consider themselves forced to go all-in around them for 2019?

 

Not an easy/obvious call for the 2019 off-season, IMO. How the Buxton and Sano sagas have unfolded since they took over, has to be the absolute worse nightmare that either Falvey or Levine could have imagined when they took the jobs.

 

 

Yes, I agree completely, and I think they're doing the right thing in "forcing" themselves to take the over on those two for 2019.

 

I do hope they're aggressive here in the FA market. I'm concerned however. Wish I could sit the whippersnappers down and talk some sense into them:

 

1. Quit worrying about Sano and Buxton, other than to do what you can to set them right, whatever that may be. The rest is up to them, but just ASSUME they'll be good and act accordingly.

 

2. Don't get cute with your valuation models and your fancy arithmetic when it comes to bidding for talent in FA. Decide who fits, and outbid the competition unless the price is stupid. Lots of fanatical fans will think $130M/6 years for Paxton isn't stupid, but if you do, fine, Just don't pass on some premium relief pitcher because his agent wants an extra $2M and an extra year. Suck it up and overpay. You have the cash.

 

3. Operate with the mantra that you have 25 roster spots and not one spot should be occupied by a player who creates a deficit. If Tyler Duffey is one of your solutions? No, just no! And stay in your hotel room and binge on Netflix during the Rule 5 crap. You're past that stage, and not as smart as you think, Derek.

 

Good boy.

Edited by birdwatcher, 05 December 2018 - 04:37 PM.


#27 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,705 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 05:00 PM

 

This is the logic that escapes many of us. Either those guys come through or they don't. If you take the bet that they turn things around, then you surround them with adequate support. If you bet they won't, you find a taker who will and move them. The least efficacious strategy is to watch them finally put it together and THEN invest in supporting players. They have the wherewithal to fill the half dozen gaping holes right now with unexciting but perfectly cromulent players because all the options are there via FA.

 

I am going to provide a theory as to why this alludes many. There is no disrespect intended here. It’s purely an observation. Fans could care less about profitability and profitability is right at the top of the list of a GM's responsibilities. Many even think the business that is the Minnesota Twins owes it to the fans to disregard profitability. This is going to create a disconnect. It's also not a unique concept to pro sports. I doubt any of us cares if Cub Foods or the dealership where we buy our car or any other business maintains a healthy profit. As a matter of fact, virtually nobody would feel bad if the car dealer added up their costs incorrectly and sold them a car a cost.

 

The common position here is “what if Sano and Buxton are good” It also possible we could construct a good BP and get a middle infielder and maybe add some SP. Why wouldn’t the Twins max payroll and perhaps trade away some prospects too? Why take a chance we could miss an opportunity?

 

The answer is because if they fail, they will recover only a small portion of the incremental $40-50 or even $60M many here expect them to spend. (See Baltimore / Texas / Detroit) I don’t think anyone here is so naïve as to think the odds of success are high. Therefore, if you say this position eludes you, you are saying you can’t understand why the Twins would not invest 10s or millions with a low probability of success. I would absolutely love it if the Twins did not care about profitability but the reasons they don’t manage the business certainly don’t elude me.

Edited by Major League Ready, 05 December 2018 - 05:02 PM.

  • MN_ExPat likes this

#28 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 05:20 PM

 

I am going to provide a theory as to why this alludes many. There is no disrespect intended here. It’s purely an observation. Fans could care less about profitability and profitability is right at the top of the list of a GM's responsibilities. Many even think the business that is the Minnesota Twins owes it to the fans to disregard profitability. This is going to create a disconnect. 

I think it is more that many fans simply expect the ownership to be able to field a competitive team at some point. I'm sure there are some fans who expect the Twins to spend the same amount as the Dodgers and completely disregard any consideration of profitability, but I think that is probably a small amount of fans. I think a reasonably large amount of fans expect the FO to be able to make a profit while also fielding a competitive team. It isn't like the MLB is some league where only New York, Boston, and LA can compete because they spend the most money. Teams with our type of payroll have managed to win the world series in the last 15 years, yet we've only managed to win a combined 2 playoff games in those previous 15 seasons.

 

I understand that fans span the spectrum in terms of their expectations, and many of those expectations are completely absurd and unrealistic. But i also think it is absolutely 100% reasonable for fans to expect the ownership to produce better results than the Twins have had in the previous decades. 1 playoff series win in 25 years just isn't cutting it for me and I don't think the Twins need to max payroll and entirely disregard profitability to do better. But I do also understand that simply spending money doesn't necessarily translate to better results. Signing some better players than a lot of the garbage we've trotted out there in recent years probably wouldn't hurt though.

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#29 mikelink45

mikelink45

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 2,139 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 05:24 PM

 

When Sano, Buxton, Dozier, and Morrison have historically bad seasons, and your ace and starting catcher lose the season to injuries, and your starting shortstop gets busted for PEDs, I'm not sure the front office is to blame.

 

They made an honest effort to improve a playoff team: as nicksaviking pointed out, they signed the #9, #15, #16 and #49 free agents last year.

 

They were also players on Darvish and Ohtani. 

 

It didn't work out, but I'm not gonna blame the front office for not trying.

They tried, but they did not react.Sorry but the FO is still on my questionable list.

 


#30 ND-Fan

ND-Fan

    Member

  • Members
  • 189 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 10:29 PM

This front office in my opinion missed good chance to win there first year here but because i believe they came in with the impression that the Twins were so screwed up they were looking to tear down whole team and start over. If they had gone out the first off seasnon and signed couple of relief pitchers and looked for serviceable starter they had chance not only win the wild card but could have won the division. They still had chance even at before trade deadline but again they became sellers of this team and even with this team still made it in as wild card. these oppertunities don't come along often. Then last year yes they added free agents to team that had made wild card but with the back up plan they could sell these Free Agents off for prospects and guess what that is what happened. Second they then decided to trade away some our core players who were becoming free agents because they had not signed any of these players to extension. This would have been logical if we had propects being held up by these players but the fact is we had nothing in pipeline for several years. Also since we waited to last minute to sell these players we got very little in return several A ball players that have potential but we all know that even with high potential very few will make impact at major league level. So now we sit with all our hopes on our top prospects from 3 years ago if they can figure it out and perform at major league level. They are trying to follow the Houston plan to the Tee but what have worked for Houston is no gurantee it works for us. We all know that picking people in draft is not like basketball or football top picks don't necessary mean in three years competing competitively. Weall have seen it where you picked higher in draft doesn't mean your pick is going to be next star. Look we had chance to pick Mike Trout once and we were not only other ones either because he wasn't picked until 22 round. Now he is best ball player in baseball so you see this idea of tanking may turn out great but it just lead us to another several years of loosing. Right now i don't see how they expect us to buy tickets to watch this team its bad enough if i want to watch them on TV. I love baseball but this past year its hard to watch this team. The analyticals have made baseball boring and it takes for ever to get game done. We have pitching changes nearly on average 4 to 5 times a game and then add in defensive shifts that create for slow pitching and lowering hitting of players we get game takes 4 to 5 hours with reduction in offense. 

Yes this has been done to win games but at what cost because with these changes we have ended up in slow moving game and hitters striking out more and trying to hit for home runs. Since baseball has changed because of analytical people making changes to the game we need to have new rules to offset what these people have done to the game. First is we need to limit number of pitching changes in game to say three and if you need a forth pitching change you loose that pitcher for say another 3 games. Also we need to set number of pitchers a team can carry on team. Second would be that position players you need so many on each side of second base and they need to have one foot on dirt cut of the infields this would limit number of shifts in baseball. Changes like this would be no different than what NBA has done with shot clocks, and outlawing zone defenses or Football limiting how players are set on lines or how people are defensed with limiting contact after line of scrimmage. I have been saying this for quite a while we have been in tear down mode slow way with the hope prospects we had would develop to build winning team around if not just continue sell of the pieces look to try to put winner on the field by 2021. I as a fan just hate to be used like this if this your plan tell the truth and then we know what were facing but this like slow torture of hoping they will make a move and in end nothing happens other than taring down and rebuilding.


#31 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,705 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 07:10 AM

 

I think it is more that many fans simply expect the ownership to be able to field a competitive team at some point. I'm sure there are some fans who expect the Twins to spend the same amount as the Dodgers and completely disregard any consideration of profitability, but I think that is probably a small amount of fans. I think a reasonably large amount of fans expect the FO to be able to make a profit while also fielding a competitive team. It isn't like the MLB is some league where only New York, Boston, and LA can compete because they spend the most money. Teams with our type of payroll have managed to win the world series in the last 15 years, yet we've only managed to win a combined 2 playoff games in those previous 15 seasons.

 

I understand that fans span the spectrum in terms of their expectations, and many of those expectations are completely absurd and unrealistic. But i also think it is absolutely 100% reasonable for fans to expect the ownership to produce better results than the Twins have had in the previous decades. 1 playoff series win in 25 years just isn't cutting it for me and I don't think the Twins need to max payroll and entirely disregard profitability to do better. But I do also understand that simply spending money doesn't necessarily translate to better results. Signing some better players than a lot of the garbage we've trotted out there in recent years probably wouldn't hurt though.

 

The expectation and frustration you describe is completely reasonable and I join you in that frustration. We could have had Nola and Benintendi. We have not made any trades like Cleveland did to put together their staff. We have sucked in general at developing ML talent and it would appear we were significantly behind in developing an analytics team.

 

This frustration explains why people want the team to go all in. It does not explain why many posters are at a loss as to why the FO would not just take a leap of faith. I responded to a very specific exasperation voiced here by many that the team refuses to just go all-in, especially in terms of payroll. That disconnect exists because fans place zero value on financial performance and the primary goal of any business is financial performance. It's that simple.

 

From a business point of view it makes far more sense to at least get a couple months into next season before making a big trade. It probably makes more sense in terms of building a winner. There are many variables beyond Buxton/Sano but even if it were just those two, it might make the most sense to trade for a replacement for one of them. It certainly does not make sense to do that now. 

Edited by Major League Ready, 06 December 2018 - 07:21 AM.


#32 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,628 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 07:36 AM

 

I am going to provide a theory as to why this alludes many. There is no disrespect intended here. It’s purely an observation. Fans could care less about profitability and profitability is right at the top of the list of a GM's responsibilities. 

 

If you say this position eludes you, you are saying you can’t understand why the Twins would not invest 10s or millions with a low probability of success. I would absolutely love it if the Twins did not care about profitability but the reasons they don’t manage the business certainly don’t elude me.

 

You may not mean any disrespect, but i think your radar is on the blitz, my friend. As has been pointed out before, a MAJORITY of your frequent contributors here do a great job of putting themselves in the GM's shoes and have as good a handle of the concept of profitability as you do. Whenever you say one of us can't understand something? That statement is dripping with condescension.

 

You make such thoughtful, insightful comments. I for one just respectfully ask you to reconsider your viewpoint about the level of understanding you think the rest of us have. Case in point: many of our pals here put together offseason blueprints. MOST of them carefully considered the business side of things, and did so with dexterity. A lot of them were quite impressive.

 

As for your own understanding of the business side of things, let me make one observation. You mention the notion of investing tens of millions with a low probability of success. Frankly, I see comparatively few ideas here that fit that description. I see many more ideas where the TD'er is suggesting a move that has a decent probability of success. Moves that don't financially cripple the operation. Acquisitions of assets with liquidity, i.e. players who can be flipped, or discarded without real damage. Moves that will boost wins, boost attendance, and probably boost profitability.

 

Yes, there are annoying exceptions, that small handful of ignorant ranters about how the Pohlads owe it to us the cook the Pepsi books and sneak that cash out and over to the Twin's tills, but they're few and far between. And when someone argues that Paxton at $130/6 is a good idea, just as many comment that it's a deal that they're happy the team passed on. Because they want sustainable success too, and they respect and grasp the business side of things like you do.


#33 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,705 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 08:14 AM

 

You may not mean any disrespect, but i think your radar is on the blitz, my friend. As has been pointed out before, a MAJORITY of your frequent contributors here do a great job of putting themselves in the GM's shoes and have as good a handle of the concept of profitability as you do. Whenever you say one of us can't understand something? That statement is dripping with condescension.

 

You make such thoughtful, insightful comments. I for one just respectfully ask you to reconsider your viewpoint about the level of understanding you think the rest of us have. Case in point: many of our pals here put together offseason blueprints. MOST of them carefully considered the business side of things, and did so with dexterity. A lot of them were quite impressive.

 

As for your own understanding of the business side of things, let me make one observation. You mention the notion of investing tens of millions with a low probability of success. Frankly, I see comparatively few ideas here that fit that description. I see many more ideas where the TD'er is suggesting a move that has a decent probability of success. Moves that don't financially cripple the operation. Acquisitions of assets with liquidity, i.e. players who can be flipped, or discarded without real damage. Moves that will boost wins, boost attendance, and probably boost profitability.

 

Yes, there are annoying exceptions, that small handful of ignorant ranters about how the Pohlads owe it to us the cook the Pepsi books and sneak that cash out and over to the Twin's tills, but they're few and far between. And when someone argues that Paxton at $130/6 is a good idea, just as many comment that it's a deal that they're happy the team passed on. Because they want sustainable success too, and they respect and grasp the business side of things like you do.

 

I was quite specific the inability was related to the relative value placed on financial performance. Complete disregard for the financial implications does not mean someone is incapable of understanding. Are you going to tell me the difference in desire to spend between fans and the FO does not have a very high correlation to the difference in weight put on profitability between the two groups.

 

I agree that some TDers have put forth reasonable plans. What the he## does that have to do with the this specific conversation which is why some people can't understand why the Twins would not spend every available payroll dollar. Where your new argument is concerned, don't tell me I don't understand the risk / investment side of things. If you understand how this is done in a business environment, show us the actual calculation of the cumulative risk associated with Buxton / Sano / The BP even Rosario who sucked the 2nd half, the bottom 3 rotation spots, injury, probability of success with the FAs that would be essential to putting together a contender. Then, tell me the odds of success are good. Show me the financial projections. There has been absolutely zero data / content presented that measured risk / return or the probability that any given plan would result in X number of wins. What has been presented here is ideas that would no doubt make the twins better. I have not seen a single projection of wins or the revenue implications or risk assessment. 

Edited by Major League Ready, 06 December 2018 - 08:16 AM.


#34 lukeduke1980

lukeduke1980

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 356 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 08:14 AM

 

What has the FO accomplished the last 2 years then? Edit: yes, I know the coaching staff hasn't been here two years but if you're a FO and you're on year 3 and you've accomplished nothing and your year 3 plan is to do nothing to improve your crummy roster and just evaluate your new coaches, then I think we've got a problem.

 

A good team doesn't take a full year just to evaluate their coaches impact on their mediocre roster. Have you seen our current roster? If every pitcher on our team had their best season in 2019, we still wouldn't be a world series caliber team.

I don't disagree with your sentiment and as a (potential) ticket buyer I sure hope they do something.I just don't see them doing much this offseason - a couple of role players, a relief pitcher, more buy low candidates to minor league deals who will end up getting way too many at bats on the big club during the season.


#35 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,628 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 09:24 AM

"Show me the financial projections. There has been absolutely zero data / content presented that measured risk / return or the probability that any given plan would result in X number of wins."

 

I'm sorry, but this is just so much silliness. 

 

Please educate us. Tell us exactly what Paxton's production will be in 2019. How many innings, starts, ERA, the exact number of wins he's going to produce. 

 

Tell us how to plug those numbers, numbers apparently so obvious to a credentialed businessperson like you, into one of them there spreadsheet thingies. Now do it for five more years, and where's the column about changes in attendance on the days Paxton pitches, by the way?

 

I'll take the intuitive capabilities of MOST of us over whatever garbage you're about to throw onto a spreadsheet. The performance volatility of professional baseball players turns your "probability" analysis into just so much pablum. FO's place bets and do a lot of educated guessing. So do other businesses, as you know from doing strategic planning for your own business. We're all just guessing here, and I personally come here to enjoy the impressive guesswork.

 

And we're not ignoring the financial side of things. I'm afraid that's a figment of your own imagination, no disrespect intended.

Edited by birdwatcher, 06 December 2018 - 09:28 AM.

  • USAFChief, Hosken Bombo Disco and Vanimal46 like this

#36 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,153 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 06 December 2018 - 09:27 AM

 

I was quite specific the inability was related to the relative value placed on financial performance. Complete disregard for the financial implications does not mean someone is incapable of understanding. Are you going to tell me the difference in desire to spend between fans and the FO does not have a very high correlation to the difference in weight put on profitability between the two groups.

 

I agree that some TDers have put forth reasonable plans. What the he## does that have to do with the this specific conversation which is why some people can't understand why the Twins would not spend every available payroll dollar. Where your new argument is concerned, don't tell me I don't understand the risk / investment side of things. If you understand how this is done in a business environment, show us the actual calculation of the cumulative risk associated with Buxton / Sano / The BP even Rosario who sucked the 2nd half, the bottom 3 rotation spots, injury, probability of success with the FAs that would be essential to putting together a contender. Then, tell me the odds of success are good. Show me the financial projections. There has been absolutely zero data / content presented that measured risk / return or the probability that any given plan would result in X number of wins. What has been presented here is ideas that would no doubt make the twins better. I have not seen a single projection of wins or the revenue implications or risk assessment. 

Please do.

  • birdwatcher likes this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#37 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,705 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 10:15 AM

 

"Show me the financial projections. There has been absolutely zero data / content presented that measured risk / return or the probability that any given plan would result in X number of wins."

 

I'm sorry, but this is just so much silliness. 

 

Please educate us. Tell us exactly what Paxton's production will be in 2019. How many innings, starts, ERA, the exact number of wins he's going to produce. 

 

Tell us how to plug those numbers, numbers apparently so obvious to a credentialed businessperson like you, into one of them there spreadsheet thingies. Now do it for five more years, and where's the column about changes in attendance on the days Paxton pitches, by the way?

 

I'll take the intuitive capabilities of MOST of us over whatever garbage you're about to throw onto a spreadsheet. The performance volatility of professional baseball players turns your "probability" analysis into just so much pablum. FO's place bets and do a lot of educated guessing. So do other businesses, as you know from doing strategic planning for your own business. We're all just guessing here, and I personally come here to enjoy the impressive guesswork.

 

And we're not ignoring the financial side of things. I'm afraid that's a figment of your own imagination, no disrespect intended.

 

Baseball is loaded with predictive analysis, is it not? FIP, defensive metrics in general, WAR, etc are all predictive in nature. It's interesting that this board screamed for an analytics driven approach and no that such an approach would likely prove the odds to be long, you want an intuitive approach which is what we had previously.

 

Actually, the approach could be to measure the probability of each individual factor required for the teach to achieve success. IE What is the projected WAR for Buxton / Sano and the entire rest of the team. I would agree if you were to say that model requires a lot of assumption. We could instead look at a much larger set of data while using a somewhat more intuitive approach. We could ask what are the odds of building a BP given the state of ours. What does history suggest. What are the odds of Buxton or Sano producing at the level needed for the Twins to contend. The Twins analytics team could put together a very credible estimate based on the history of all the similar players who failed or succeeded in the past. What are the Odds we get 1st half Rosario and the 64 wRC+ second half Rosario and so on.

 

Revenue is a tough one. I have read several articles trying to get a grip on revenue drivers and the KPIs are unclear and inconsistent. The Twins had stated in the past that they base payroll on previous year's revenue which would make the revenue estimates a moot point and I can see the wisdom in this approach based on the difficulty to forecast revenue.

 

We can also look at history to understand the impact on profits when a team invests and does not perform.In 2017, MIami / Detroit / and Baltimore all invested and did not perform. Collectively, they lost $125M. The top 7 in terms of profit were all contenders who spent within their budget even though they obviously had room to spend significantly more. The Cub / Phillies / Red Sox / Giants / Astros / Dodgers and Brewers combined for $539M in profit for an average of $77M per team. The Twins made $23M by the way in a year they went to the playoffs. Kind of puts the relative focus on profits in perspective.

 

If it were our money or we were bankers or Venture Capitalists we would would demand hard analytics for revenue, margins, capital requirements, competitive analysis and risk assessment. 10s of millions are not invested based on intuition. 

Edited by Major League Ready, 06 December 2018 - 10:19 AM.

  • birdwatcher likes this

#38 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,582 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 10:21 AM

 

When Sano, Buxton, Dozier, and Morrison have historically bad seasons, and your ace and starting catcher lose the season to injuries, and your starting shortstop gets busted for PEDs, I'm not sure the front office is to blame.

 

They made an honest effort to improve a playoff team: as nicksaviking pointed out, they signed the #9, #15, #16 and #49 free agents last year.

 

They were also players on Darvish and Ohtani. 

 

It didn't work out, but I'm not gonna blame the front office for not trying.

 

ESan missing the year was 100% predictable. Were they in on Darvish, because I keep reading how stupid that deal was.....that signing him was a bad idea. They could have called up Astudillo earlier to catch, they didn't. Then when they did, he didn't catch. This isn't just about bad luck. Oh, and lots of people said they should acquire another OF, in case Buxton or Kepler or Rosario wasn't good. They weren't close on Ohtani. 

 

They signed a bunch of 1 year deals, and a guy that they knew wouldn't play last year. They did nothing to fix this year, last year (well, maybe Austin, but they just signed his doppleganger).

I remain hopeful on Buxton and Sano.....but I'd not bet the franchise on them.


#39 BBAM

BBAM

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 10:32 AM

What about ticket sales going up because they sign someone like Bryce Harper or trade for someone like Trout?I know those are extremes but because we have had nothing in the last 10 years ticket sales are down or do you think they really don't care as long as they are making a profit.We think we deserve a competitive team and they want profits?Doesn't something have to give?Get us back on track, won't that increase ticket sales that leads to more profit?Was listening to MLB XM radio last night and they had Cards fans excited to go out and buy jerseys?When is the last time we had that excitement?Not since Target Field opened that I remember?

  • Hosken Bombo Disco likes this

#40 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,628 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 11:10 AM

Baseball is loaded with predictive analysis, is it not? FIP, defensive metrics in general, WAR, etc are all predictive in nature.

 

10s of millions are not invested based on intuition.

 

I get your arguments. Decision-wise, I'd side with you on a majority of them. 

 

I give many TD contributors credit for sensitivity about the extra financial capacity of the top revenue producing teams. 

 

Derek Falvey and all of his minions are acutely aware of the limited predictive power of all those metrics. That's why they, like other progressive organizations, are spending greater resources on things they might be able to better control, such as mental and physical health, fitness and training, instruction, etc.

 

I very much disagree that intuition takes a back seat.

 

In my first job, I was mentored by this old curmudgeon who'd been in the investment business since 1936. He was the figurehead at a prestigious blue-blood investment firm in NYC, like for 45 years. For almost half that time, the previous 21 years in fact, the Dow traded in a range between 800 to 1000. My first week on the job, Newsweek's lead article was questioning if the stock market was "dead". This old fart was out there screaming that it was time to hop on and enjoy the ride, because the Dow was going to shoot through 3600 "like sugar through a tin horn".The basis for his conviction? Inflation was about to die, because Reagan had just fired the air traffic controllers. That was his signal. Not one useful financial extrapolation. Just a solid contextual understanding of the long term history of financial markets.

 

I hope to heck this FO respects whatever intuitive capacity it has around there, and I think they do, as indicated by their retention of talent evaluators and their stated goal of valuing both analytics and scouting expertise.

 

Mainly I hope their intuition is "right" about Sano and Buxton, lol.

Edited by birdwatcher, 06 December 2018 - 11:16 AM.