Thank You Nick Nelson

[bird]

 

Maybe they could expect to own the division if they did something big.

 

Honestly, the argument often put forth here and elsewhere..."wait until you're ready to win before you go get the player(s) needed to win"...is astoundingly illogical and self defeating.  

 

I wouldn't word it quite this strongly, but it always strikes me as unrealistically ideal to think in terms of "windows".

 

I like to stay out of more general conversations about payroll and spending. The article by Mr. Warne is so nicely written. What a breath of fresh air to see a nuanced and reasoned examination of the situation as an alternative to some of the juvenile rants about cheap owners not wanting to win. I very much appreciate intelligent and fair-minded comments like those from Don Walcott here.

 

I tend to think about two things in tandem. One is what holes need to be filled to put the team in contention. The other is what I think of as spending capacity.

 

When it comes to filling holes, I'm not going to pass early judgment about the FO's decisions. I'll question them for sure, and wonder about the quality of a decision. For example, I wonder about the Perez decision and similarly found the Pressly trade unsettling. But for me, waiting to see how it turns out is only fair, and cutting the FO slack when the results turn out unexpectedly below expectations (Morrison for example) is only fair. That said, I don't begrudge others who like to have strong opinions about whether they should have passed on Cron and signed Bour or whatever. A big part of the entertainment value for me is hearing all these opinions being expressed with varying levels of conviction and passion.

 

Right now, from what I see as a consensus out there, we'd all think it would be good to fill a hole in the bullpen with one more "shut down" guy. Right now, they have obvious financial capacity. Maybe the Twins think we're all wrong, I don't know. So for me, if they present us with a statistically sub-par result (IN 2019!!) out of that pen after passing on opportunities and leaving capacity unused? The FO will deserve the criticism. 

 

Anyway, I just really appreciate it when people express disagreement without rendering these harsh criticisms about motivations, judgement, and especially character ahead of the results, especially when the criticism exceeds the perceived crime.

 

Back to YOUR point, Chief. This strong hint we're getting that Levine and Falvey have this Pounce Strategy in their heads? Yeah, I disagree with that. Not from a spending perspective, but because of the incredible performance volatility inherent in baseball players. A window is not a reliable concept.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Back to YOUR point, Chief. This strong hint we're getting that Levine and Falvey have this Pounce Strategy in their heads? Yeah, I disagree with that. Not from a spending perspective, but because of the incredible performance volatility inherent in baseball players. A window is not a reliable concept.

Agreed.

 

I'd say there's a few clubs each year who are definitely not in any kind of window (of success). The Twins shortly after TR took over (either time) would qualify. If those clubs want to say "not us, not now" to big moves, I'm not going to argue (too much ).

 

But the rest? Some clubs are definitely in better positions than others, but I think all of the remaining clubs are sort of bunched together as simply trying to be as successful as they can, for this and the next couple seasons.

 

I guess if you narrow the big-move criteria down to, "what clubs should trade an elite prospect for a rental?" -- then yeah, you'd going to want to be in the window of present-day World Series contention before you do that. But that's such a narrow definition as to be almost useless -- there are plenty of less extreme "big moves" which can be made to improve your club, which includes significant FA outlays, trading non-elite prospects for help, and even trading top prospects for mid- to long-term assets (like the Brewers did with Yelich, etc.).

 

A .500-ish team can't put a bunch of preconditions on actively pursuing moves like that.

[USAFChief]

I wouldn't word it quite this strongly, but it always strikes me as unrealistically ideal to think in terms of "windows".

 

I like to stay out of more general conversations about payroll and spending. The article by Mr. Warne is so nicely written. What a breath of fresh air to see a nuanced and reasoned examination of the situation as an alternative to some of the juvenile rants about cheap owners not wanting to win. I very much appreciate intelligent and fair-minded comments like those from Don Walcott here.

 

I tend to think about two things in tandem. One is what holes need to be filled to put the team in contention. The other is what I think of as spending capacity.

 

When it comes to filling holes, I'm not going to pass early judgment about the FO's decisions. I'll question them for sure, and wonder about the quality of a decision. For example, I wonder about the Perez decision and similarly found the Pressly trade unsettling. But for me, waiting to see how it turns out is only fair, and cutting the FO slack when the results turn out unexpectedly below expectations (Morrison for example) is only fair. That said, I don't begrudge others who like to have strong opinions about whether they should have passed on Cron and signed Bour or whatever. A big part of the entertainment value for me is hearing all these opinions being expressed with varying levels of conviction and passion.

 

Right now, from what I see as a consensus out there, we'd all think it would be good to fill a hole in the bullpen with one more "shut down" guy. Right now, they have obvious financial capacity. Maybe the Twins think we're all wrong, I don't know. So for me, if they present us with a statistically sub-par result (IN 2019!!) out of that pen after passing on opportunities and leaving capacity unused? The FO will deserve the criticism.

 

Anyway, I just really appreciate it when people express disagreement without rendering these harsh criticisms about motivations, judgement, and especially character ahead of the results, especially when the criticism exceeds the perceived crime.

 

Back to YOUR point, Chief. This strong hint we're getting that Levine and Falvey have this Pounce Strategy in their heads? Yeah, I disagree with that. Not from a spending perspective, but because of the incredible performance volatility inherent in baseball players. A window is not a reliable concept.

among the problems with waiting till you're good to go get what you need is, at that time, what you need might not be available.

 

Get talent whenever you can.

[ChrisKnutson]

If we happen to win the division, great, but my take on it is that if we can end the year above .500, and 1-2 of our core players take another step forward, then I believe the FO should go all in on Arenado and sign any of Cole, Pressly, Grandal, Rondon, Teheran, Wheeler, Chacin, or Allen as complimentary pieces.

 

Think about it, not only would we be bringing in a few high profile free agents, but we’d also be expecting the arrival of several ML impact players like Lewis, Kirilloff, Graterol, and Alcala. ‘If’ we’re willing to spend, I honestly believe that 2020 could be our year.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If we happen to win the division, great, but my take on it is that if we can end the year above .500, and 1-2 of our core players take another step forward, then I believe the FO should go all in on Arenado and sign any of Cole, Pressly, Grandal, Rondon, Teheran, Wheeler, Chacin, or Allen as complimentary pieces.

 

Think about it, not only would we be bringing in a few high profile free agents, but we’d also be expecting the arrival of several ML impact players like Lewis, Kirilloff, Graterol, and Alcala. ‘If’ we’re willing to spend, I honestly believe that 2020 could be our year.

So, they're not even going to look at Machado, Harper, Corbin, Keuchel, Robertson, etc. this winter.

 

But a year from now, after another .500-ish season, we'll spend whatever it takes to land Arenado, Cole, etc.? (Nevermind those targets may not even reach FA.)

[ChrisKnutson]

So, they're not even going to look at Machado, Harper, Corbin, Keuchel, Robertson, etc. this winter.

But a year from now, after another .500-ish season, we'll spend whatever it takes to land Arenado, Cole, etc.? (Nevermind those targets may not even reach FA.)

You’re probably right about Cole, although I’m not so sure about Arenado. Look, I’m just as frustrated as you are about this offseason, but this is our reality (ownership being cheap).

[Major League Ready]

 

You’re probably right about Cole, although I’m not so sure about Arenado. Look, I’m just as frustrated as you are about this offseason, but this is our reality (ownership being cheap).

 

Apparently you did not see BW's article which showed that the Twins have actually spent slightly above their relative revenue position.   Do you not understand this concept or are you electing to ignore it?  If you want to complain that the twins revenue position is sub-par, fine.  However, the position they are cheap is a product of being unwilling to become informed.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Apparently you did not see BW's article which showed that the Twins have actually spent slightly above their relative revenue position. Do you not understand this concept or are you electing to ignore it? If you want to complain that the twins revenue position is sub-par, fine. However, the position they are cheap is a product of being unwilling to become informed.

except that “revenue” being quoted is not “revenue” in the SEC defined manner that some people make it out to be. The Twins like all but 1 mlb team is a privately held firm. They aren’t required to disclose to shareholders. Every take on income and profit is either an estimate or put through a lens that makes their position look better to the intended audience.

 

It’s aggravating to hear that the Twins have a cruddy TV deal with FSN North without the acknowledgment that they chose that deal in order to get an ownership stake in the network.

 

So revenue is down but equity is up.

 

Poor billionaire Pohlads and their gobs of cash.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Apparently you did not see BW's article which showed that the Twins have actually spent slightly above their relative revenue position.   Do you not understand this concept or are you electing to ignore it?  If you want to complain that the twins revenue position is sub-par, fine.  However, the position they are cheap is a product of being unwilling to become informed.

Or, maybe they are informed but just disagree with you.

[Mike Sixel]

Ever year, five to ten teams aren't trying. Keeping them in any measure of relative spending is stupid. I wonder how they rank when trying? The first two years in the ne stadium, they spent. Since then, below median of all teams, let alone how it change when you take out those not trying.

[drivlikejehu]

The Twins are currently projected for around 83-84 wins. That is *exactly* the type of team that should have invested in additional assets, because a relatively modest improvement results in a massive increase to playoff odds. Baseball Prospectus had a good article on that years ago . . . the math is pretty easy, and obvious.

 

Falvey and Levine know that full well. They are paid to lie on behalf of ownership. As has been discussed, this is to some extent a league-wide movement . . . they really have no choice, if they want to work in an MLB front office. It's not a war crime or something, I don't think it makes them bad executives or people, but we also don't need to pretend that something else is going on here.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Ever year, five to ten teams aren't trying. Keeping them in any measure of relative spending is stupid. I wonder how they rank when trying? The first two years in the ne stadium, they spent. Since then, below median of all teams, let alone how it change when you take out those not trying.

 

Also...why should we care where their payroll ranks relative to their team value?  There isn't much of a correlation there to care about IMO.  Plus, as you state here, the larger context of MLB is rife with issues for comparison.

 

All I've heard anyone hold them to is their own stated number of 50% of revenue.  I think some of these other attempts to contextualize the Twins' spending distracts from the root of the problem.

[ewen21]

All this talk about Machado. Have we given up completely on Sano at third?

We just got out from under a long term contract that pinned us down. We should be spending the Machado money on two really good players as two or three times over 7 or 8 years instead plopping it all down on one guy.

Arenado is another matter. He is actually better than both and a way easier guy to root for

[Don Walcott]

Also...why should we care where their payroll ranks relative to their team value? There isn't much of a correlation there to care about IMO. Plus, as you state here, the larger context of MLB is rife with issues for comparison.

 

All I've heard anyone hold them to is their own stated number of 50% of revenue. I think some of these other attempts to contextualize the Twins' spending distracts from the root of the problem.

Contrary to the complaint about fans in BW’s article, it seems like the only people consistently citing payroll figures relative to the rest of the league are people who defend ownership. Pretty convenient when a bunch of teams are “rebuilding” in a way that causes them to severely slash payroll.

 

This seems to distract from the question of whether the Twins can and should spend more on this team.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

All this talk about Machado. Have we given up completely on Sano at third?

 

We just got out from under a long term contract that pinned us down. We should be spending the Machado money on two really good players as two or three times over 7 or 8 years instead plopping it all down on one guy.

 

Arenado is another matter. He is actually better than both and a way easier guy to root for

I’m less upset over specific players and more upset over general apathy towards building a contender and upgrading the pitching staff overall. Machado and Polanco would make a fantastic SS/2B combo for a couple years, but until the pitching gets significantly better, it’s not going to move the needle enough. I’d be thrilled with Machado, but we need high leverage and long appearance pitching badly.

 

All we heard out of the FO was “we’re waiting” even though there was this huge bountiful tree of largest, juiciest, lowest hanging fruit we’ve ever seen. You darn near had to stoop over to pluck those watermelon sized apples.

[ewen21]

I respect your take, but there is something about Machado is just cant take. I'm also suspicious about him moving away from Baltimore. He lived a low leverage existence on a bad team in a hitters park. Put him in a different situation with a much publicized long-term deal and I'm not sure he doesn't crack.

 

I'm OK with this offseason. This should be the very last year I could say this for our GMs. I think we actually have a chance to make a little noise and if we do I would hope they get moving this trade deadline. If we are in contending mode at the deadline and they do nothing THEN I will be ticked.

[yarnivek1972]

I respect your take, but there is something about Machado is just cant take. I'm also suspicious about him moving away from Baltimore. He lived a low leverage existence on a bad team in a hitters park. Put him in a different situation with a much publicized long-term deal and I'm not sure he doesn't crack.

 

I'm OK with this offseason. This should be the very last year I could say this for our GMs. I think we actually have a chance to make a little noise and if we do I would hope they get moving this trade deadline. If we are in contending mode at the deadline and they do nothing THEN I will be ticked.

I’m more suspicious about moving him off third base. Machado may think he’s a shortstop. I suspect there are few people earning a paycheck in professional baseball who agree.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I respect your take, but there is something about Machado is just cant take. I'm also suspicious about him moving away from Baltimore. He lived a low leverage existence on a bad team in a hitters park. Put him in a different situation with a much publicized long-term deal and I'm not sure he doesn't crack.

 

Baltimore wasn't a bad team for most of Machado's tenure. 3 playoff appearances from 2012-2016, in a very competitive division.

 

And it was only rated as a very mild hitter's park -- never exceeding a park factor of 103 at B-Ref. Target Field was at 102 last year. And Baltimore rated as a slight pitcher's park last year, as did Dodger Stadium, and Machado acquitted himself pretty well.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Also...why should we care where their payroll ranks relative to their team value?  There isn't much of a correlation there to care about IMO.  Plus, as you state here, the larger context of MLB is rife with issues for comparison.

 

All I've heard anyone hold them to is their own stated number of 50% of revenue.  I think some of these other attempts to contextualize the Twins' spending distracts from the root of the problem.

yeah, the number/rank doesn't bother me.. What bothers me is who they didn't sign where there were clear needs. It bothers me that Craig Kimbrel is still available, and we could use an ace in the pen. 

 

I don't care if we are sitting at 100M if they loaded the team right. I get more upset that we are sitting at 100M with some obvious holes to fill.