Seems odd to assume the team would be better if they had signed players who made more money. Did people want Joey Gallo back?

The 2024 Twins are a better team, via their record, than the 2023 Twins team. I cannot imagine anyone is satisfied with how the Twins have fared versus the Yankees, Cleveland, and Baltimore. Still the team is heading to the half way point of the season above expectations and there is a possibility that some players will be more solid contributors in the second half. 

If you do not like the roster, that is on Falvey. The amount of money budgeted for players is sufficient.

I agree that the TV debacle is an embarassment for the franchise. I will point out that MLB under Manfred has stumbled in more than a few areas.

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Sources Forbes for revenue and profit (operating income), Spotrac for salary.

So we don't really know, unless there is a uniform formula for operating income (which there isn't).

Again, not looking to argue, but these numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.  I find it extremely hard to believe the Cubs earn almost twice as much as the White Sox.

I think the Fire Dan Gladden meant to say damit injuries.  These injuries are keeping our team from being more competitive.  With injuries to Buxton and Correa and Lewis and early season slumps from Julien, Farmer, Velazquez, and Varland.  We haven’t been as competitive as we should be.  I doubt the front office would do much more if they had the budget anyways as there wasn’t many holes to fill on the team last offseason.  Bench and bullpen and maybe resign Gray if possible.  I’m not sure what else could’ve been done.  A higher budget would have us resigning Taylor instead of trading for Margot.  Maybe we don’t trade Polanco.  Not sure what else was on the table.  But early slumps which have ended and injuries sure took a toll on our competitiveness. 

11 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Baseball economics is different with some of the big market teams, not all.  Ownership for teams like the Yankees and Dodgers could pocket a larger percentage of their income, but they don't.  They spend it.

It isn't completely about the wins and losses.  It is about how we-as-fans are treated by ownership. 

I appreciate your spirit and passion. I support your interest in any topic fairly related to the Twins or MLB. However, in your attempt to trash the Twins season and FO you have presented a number of statements which have drawn sharp rebukes from some in the TD community.  Was. this your intent? If so, can you at least understand that some would find such attacks on the Twins more befitting of the Chisox or Guardians communities.

Final minor point - when you simply look at year to year spending of the so-called "big" market teams vs Mid market teams you are missing the bigger picture of the economics of professional sport - the increasing value of the team is where the true gains in wealth are realized! These professional franchises are worth billions, and billions can be had by simply holding ownership long enough.  So if the Twins are valued as X and the Yankees are valued at X x 10 - yearly spending by the Yankees is in part motivated by enhancing the brand because the gains are greatly magnified - the Twins would gain much less via their spending in terms of valuation. It is financially prudent in that context for the Yankees to spend much more aggressively than the Twins. 

23 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

It isn't completely about the wins and losses.  It is about how we-as-fans are treated by ownership. 

I don't feel badly treated. They won a play-off series last year and were in the hunt against the Astros. Yankees fans must have felt 'treated badly' by their missing the play-offs. They are in a good position to make the play-offs this year as well, and they have a lot of exciting, homegrown young players. The Twins made significant investments in their minor league operation as well as analytics, etc. It's not an accident the Twins keep raising MPH on their pitchers - it is investments that make that possible.

The Twins cut payroll this year primarily because of the TV revenue uncertainty - and you can find plenty of articles detailing how that impacted multiple teams, not just the Twins. Ultimately, MLB needs to figure that out, not just the Twins.

12 hours ago, GNess said:

I appreciate your spirit and passion. I support your interest in any topic fairly related to the Twins or MLB. However, in your attempt to trash the Twins season and FO you have presented a number of statements which have drawn sharp rebukes from some in the TD community.  Was. this your intent? If so, can you at least understand that some would find such attacks on the Twins more befitting of the Chisox or Guardians communities.

Final minor point - when you simply look at year to year spending of the so-called "big" market teams vs Mid market teams you are missing the bigger picture of the economics of professional sport - the increasing value of the team is where the true gains in wealth are realized! These professional franchises are worth billions, and billions can be had by simply holding ownership long enough.  So if the Twins are valued as X and the Yankees are valued at X x 10 - yearly spending by the Yankees is in part motivated by enhancing the brand because the gains are greatly magnified - the Twins would gain much less via their spending in terms of valuation. It is financially prudent in that context for the Yankees to spend much more aggressively than the Twins. 

So you are glorifying the "Minnesota Bipolar"?  You can't publicly berate the Twins because we do not do that in Minnesota?

You are correct in that teams value increases over time.  This is why their off-season moves were so discouraging.  They are worried about nickels today when the discussion is Ben Franklins in the future.  

16 hours ago, Brandon said:

I think the Fire Dan Gladden meant to say damit injuries.  These injuries are keeping our team from being more competitive.  With injuries to Buxton and Correa and Lewis and early season slumps from Julien, Farmer, Velazquez, and Varland.  We haven’t been as competitive as we should be.  I doubt the front office would do much more if they had the budget anyways as there wasn’t many holes to fill on the team last offseason.  Bench and bullpen and maybe resign Gray if possible.  I’m not sure what else could’ve been done.  A higher budget would have us resigning Taylor instead of trading for Margot.  Maybe we don’t trade Polanco.  Not sure what else was on the table.  But early slumps which have ended and injuries sure took a toll on our competitiveness. 

Outside of Lewis, injuries have not been the problem.

From an on-field standpoint, my biggest issue this offseason was pitching.  They did nothing to shore up the rotation after Gray and Maeda left, and the team is paying for it.
The Paddack and Varland gambles did not pay off.  Lopez has not been good.  This 22nd ranked ERA staff would be in shambles if it wasn't for SWR coming relatively out of nowhere and Ryan having an up season.

This team that supposedly had WS aspirations after last year made one move to build depth (Santana) and went all in on the youth (Wallner, Julien, Kiriloff) with no real contingency plans.  That has not exactly worked out well either.

16 minutes ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Outside of Lewis, injuries have not been the problem.

From an on-field standpoint, my biggest issue this offseason was pitching.  They did nothing to shore up the rotation after Gray and Maeda left, and the team is paying for it.
The Paddack and Varland gambles did not pay off.  Lopez has not been good.  This 22nd ranked ERA staff would be in shambles if it wasn't for SWR coming relatively out of nowhere and Ryan having an up season.

This team that supposedly had WS aspirations after last year made one move to build depth (Santana) and went all in on the youth (Wallner, Julien, Kiriloff) with no real contingency plans.  That has not exactly worked out well either.

1.  Maeda hasn’t been good this year so clearly the Twins were right to let him walk.  2. They were not going to pay Gray no matter what.  But Woods Richardson has been a nice find also Paddack has been successful mostly.  He has 2 starts with 16 earned runs in which skew his season.  I get critiques and that’s fine.  Complain about not getting 1 starter this offseason.  They did a good job of shoring up around that.  

22 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Outside of Lewis, injuries have not been the problem.

From an on-field standpoint, my biggest issue this offseason was pitching.  They did nothing to shore up the rotation after Gray and Maeda left, and the team is paying for it.
The Paddack and Varland gambles did not pay off.  Lopez has not been good.  This 22nd ranked ERA staff would be in shambles if it wasn't for SWR coming relatively out of nowhere and Ryan having an up season.

This team that supposedly had WS aspirations after last year made one move to build depth (Santana) and went all in on the youth (Wallner, Julien, Kiriloff) with no real contingency plans.  That has not exactly worked out well either.

I agree, but adding payroll wasn't the way it should have been fixed. Expensive pitchers are old pitchers and outside of the HOF type, old pitchers tend to be on the downslopes of their careers. The rotation should be upgrade via trades for controllable arms like in recent years, not pricey free agents. The Pohlad's are very rippable, but not because they didn't spend money on Blake Snell or Jordan Montgomery.

20 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

I agree, but adding payroll wasn't the way it should have been fixed. Expensive pitchers are old pitchers and outside of the HOF type, old pitchers tend to be on the downslopes of their careers. The rotation should be upgrade via trades for controllable arms like in recent years, not pricey free agents. The Pohlad's are very rippable, but not because they didn't spend money on Blake Snell or Jordan Montgomery.

I have never said signing FA pitchers was the answer.  The fact that they forcibly dropped payroll meant ANY move for a quality SP was a non-starter.  There are pitchers that could be had right now for basically nothing, but it would require a payroll bump.  

"As of the time of this writing, they are 17-2 vs CHW, COL, LAA, OAK.  These are 4 of the 5 worst teams in baseball.  They are 25-33 against everyone else".

Better still - The Twins are 18-2 vs CHW, COL, LAA, Oak as of this writing. 

Compared to the rest of the American League vs those same 4 teams: 

Los Angeles Ang: 3-0

Houston 15-5

Seattle: 12-4

Toronto: 9-3

Kansas City: 13-5

Baltimore: 9-4

Boston: 9-4

New York Y: 7-3

Chicago WS: 2-1

Cleveland: 15-8

Tampa: 10-9

Detroit: 7-6

Texas: 5-8

Oakland: 2-4

Why is everyone else in the American League not as good as the Twins?