Thank You Nick Nelson

[Seth Stohs]

 

He literally starts out that segment by saying "Why is it hard to figure out why the Twins don't spend with the Yankees or the Phillies?"

 

And a lot more than that... 

[Regular Sized Rudy]

 

And a lot more than that... 

Right, and I agree with a majority of the comments he makes regarding the payroll in this segment. But at times he makes mention of this misconception he has that fans think the team should be able to spend $150+ million each year, which is the condescending tone that tends to come across when he tries to discuss this (and to his credit he even admits he thinks he comes off condescending at times in this segment).

[Vanimal46]

Mackey is knocking down a strawman. If they acknowledge 96M is too low than why go after Gleeman?

 

This is the worst kind of sports talk. Mackey has generally been better than this, but this little Twitter strawman deserved to be called out. No one thinks the team needs a 200M payroll, but 96 is a slap in the face.

This kind of sports talk is the Skip Bayless formula... They're getting crushed in the ratings by their competitor KFAN so let's build strawman arguments to get fans riled up.

[gil4]

 

Nick: Fans don’t need to be talked down to or told they’re dumb because they want the team to spend more, or be more aggressive.

 

SKOR North (prolly Mackey tbh):

Classic false dichotomy / false dilemma. My guess is they could spend another $30M or more on payroll and not lose money unless the team loses 100 games again.

[Mr. Brooks]

And a lot more than that...

Unfortunately for him, it doesn't really matter.

He spoils anything intelligent he has to say later by starting off with a preposterous straw man argument.

 

If Mackey is being taken out of context, can you theorize why he'd even make that Yankees/Phillies comment at all?

[howieramone2]

 

Your recent Twitter thread should be promoted to all fans. I'm so tired of LEN3 and other media personalities tearing down fans that want to see a bold move.

The average fan doesn't know or care what they spend, the average fan has not been unhappy with the team for the past 8 years, and you couldn't pay the average fan to visit TD.  

[Nick Nelson]

 

And a lot more than that... 

Who cares? Honestly. If he wants to publicly present his arguments in such a way, nobody needs to feel compelled to listen to the rest. It's reductive garbage. 

 

What happened here seems pretty clear. Mackey is trying to prop up a new radio/content brand and give it some sort of relevance in the market. So he tries to get a bunch of attention by riling people up with "hot takes" that are actually just borderline-insulting strawmans, painting the Twins fanbase as a bunch of ignorant dopes. Then his station gets to promote bits about how "Phil takes on Twins Twitter!" (This literally happened)

 

If he was interested in honest and productive discussion, he wouldn't kick things off by suggessting that anyone is saying "WHY AREN'T THEY 10TH IN PAYROLL?!" He wouldn't kick off a radio segment implying that people think the Twins should be spending with the Yankees or Phillies. He wouldn't brazenly contradict his own previous assertions and then smugly dismiss anyone who calls him on his crap. 

 

Mackey is a smart and entertaining guy when he wants to be. But these days he decides to conduct himself like a condescending shock jock. It's a shame. The end result is that smart fans looking for quality discussion/content will (continue to) go elsewhere. And they're all welcome here.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't understand Berardino's argument.  He said (to paraphrase): Don't worry, they spent over 40M after this point last year!

 

But....that very same FO openly said they regretted that strategy.  If you're going to hang your hat on the idea that it is "only" January 18th it requires you to believe two things that are sorta preposterous: 1) That the Twins will repeat that strategy they told us helped sink 2018 2) That the talent available after this date is roughly equivalent to what has already been signed.

 

I'm confused why anyone would believe these things.

[Mike Sixel]

I don't understand Berardino's argument. He said (to paraphrase): Don't worry, they spent over 40M after this point last year!

 

But....that very same FO openly said they regretted that strategy. If you're going to hang your hat on the idea that it is "only" January 18th it requires you to believe two things that are sorta preposterous: 1) That the Twins will repeat that strategy they told us helped sink 2018 2) That the talent available after this date is roughly equivalent to what has already been signed.

 

I'm confused why anyone would believe these things.

Correct. They appear to be doing what they said did not work, or just not spending.

[USAFChief]

I don't understand Berardino's argument. He said (to paraphrase): Don't worry, they spent over 40M after this point last year!

 

But....that very same FO openly said they regretted that strategy. If you're going to hang your hat on the idea that it is "only" January 18th it requires you to believe two things that are sorta preposterous: 1) That the Twins will repeat that strategy they told us helped sink 2018 2) That the talent available after this date is roughly equivalent to what has already been signed.

 

I'm confused why anyone would believe these things.

its pt2 that bothers me.

 

I go back to my "selecting players and accepting the cost, or selecting cost and accepting the players" point.

[jud6312]

What is Skor North?

[Mr. Brooks]

What is Skor North?

That's what ESPN 1500 rebranded themselves as.

[jud6312]

 

That's what ESPN 1500 rebranded themselves as.

Thanks. I swore off sports talk radio over a year ago, so I haven't been in the loop much.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Nick: Fans don’t need to be talked down to or told they’re dumb because they want the team to spend more, or be more aggressive.

 

SKOR North (prolly Mackey tbh):

The problem is how they framed it... I somehow highly doubt the Pohlads would be taking a multimillion dollar loss even if they signed Machado for 10% more than whatever he ends up signing for. 

[Badsmerf]

The problem is how they framed it... I somehow highly doubt the Pohlads would be taking a multimillion dollar loss even if they signed Machado for 10% more than whatever he ends up signing for.

 

They won't take a loss until payroll is over 150 million.

[USNMCPO]

 

They won't take a loss until payroll is over 150 million.

I'm not sure we know that. Along the lines of what Seth has stated, there are a lot of costs associated with running a MLB franchise. Do I think they could open the vault little more? Absolutely! As for Mackey, he is a jerk and enjoys being a jerk. I have listened to KSTP for a long time, but turn it off when he is on.

[scottz]

 

They won't take a loss until payroll is over 150 million.

 

Losses are not always straightforward calculations. When you look at it from the outside of the business, you can say revenues were (for example) $110 million and expenditures were $100 million, therefore they profited $10 million. But if revenues were forecast to be $120 million, even if they profited $10 million, that might be a $10 million loss.

 

More and more I feel like this is a worthless conversation for fans to have. The team runs as a business. You don't cheer for the business. You cheer for the result of the people playing the game that make up the business.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone should just shut up about payroll, and fans certainly can be disappointed with the product if they don't like it. But the business will change when the product doesn't sell. Payroll won't change because people are disappointed with the product. Only when the revenue streams change. Arguing about payroll seems more and more silly.

[drivlikejehu]

 

Losses are not always straightforward calculations. When you look at it from the outside of the business, you can say revenues were (for example) $110 million and expenditures were $100 million, therefore they profited $10 million. But if revenues were forecast to be $120 million, even if they profited $10 million, that might be a $10 million loss.

 

More and more I feel like this is a worthless conversation for fans to have. The team runs as a business. You don't cheer for the business. You cheer for the result of the people playing the game that make up the business.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone should just shut up about payroll, and fans certainly can be disappointed with the product if they don't like it. But the business will change when the product doesn't sell. Payroll won't change because people are disappointed with the product. Only when the revenue streams change. Arguing about payroll seems more and more silly.

 

Revenue streams will change more if there is an awareness that ownership is tanking the team's competitiveness to increase profits beyond industry norms. So without that "conversation," ownership will not be held accountable.

 

And no, you can't turn a profit into a "loss" by missing budget. Yes, firms often use that terminology as a way to hold executives accountable from a managerial accounting standpoint, but it's not a real "loss." You still owe the government taxes and your audited financial statements still show a profit, end of story.

 

The Twins have generated hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars in unrecognized (i.e., untaxed) gains as a result of franchise appreciation, on top of almost always running a straight-up annual profit. The club has generated an incredible amount of wealth for the Pohlad family and its absurd for them to hamstring the Twins over a relatively small amount of payroll dollars.

[scottz]

 

Revenue streams will change more if there is an awareness that ownership is tanking the team's competitiveness to increase profits beyond industry norms. So without that "conversation," ownership will not be held accountable.

 

And no, you can't turn a profit into a "loss" by missing budget. Yes, firms often use that terminology as a way to hold executives accountable from a managerial accounting standpoint, but it's not a real "loss." You still owe the government taxes and your audited financial statements still show a profit, end of story.

 

The Twins have generated hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars in unrecognized (i.e., untaxed) gains as a result of franchise appreciation, on top of almost always running a straight-up annual profit. The club has generated an incredible amount of wealth for the Pohlad family and its absurd for them to hamstring the Twins over a relatively small amount of payroll dollars.

 

OK, so let's say all of this is true - even the part about it being absurd (which doesn't really strike me as a true/false, but rather is an opinion). What does anyone get out of this conversation about payroll? Does it make your experience as a fan better if the team makes less profit, but gets 4 more wins than the year before? What if the team made more profit, but gets 4 more wins? Is your fan experience any different?

 

I get it. It is very logical that teams that spend more do so because they are likely paying for better players, so it follows that if you spend more, you have a better chance at winning. Fans want their teams to win so they want their teams to spend more. Makes sense.

 

But there are 30 MLB teams, and 30 different owners, and given that no team has the exact same payroll/expenditures and revenues, it's pretty safe to say there are 30 different ways to run a team. The one commonality is that they all want to make money. So some will try to make money at a steady clip and ride the waves of success and failure. Some go for broke, buy a championship, then sell it off (Miami late 90s/early 2000s). Some are flush with cash and buy the best players every year (Yankees). Some recognize they are terrible, make the decision to bottom out and rebuild (Astros). Zero of them make their financial decisions based on the outrage of their fans about their payroll. I don't think the "conversation" changes anything.

 

I like the Twins. I don't like the way they operate sometimes, but I like the Twins. If I wanted to cheer for how a team operated, I think I'd be an Astros fan, at least right now. I think I'll still be a Twins fan if the Pohlads ever sell, and I think I'll still be a Twins fan if they don't. I just think the argument about payroll is fruitless.

[nicksaviking]

I can't imagine the Twins are any different than any company on Wall Street. If you make a billion and 1 dollar in 2017 but only a billion dollars in 2018, it's a loss. Whatever the team is currently netting, I can't imagine they're satisfied if it's the same amount every year, they'll want that number to continually increase. If revenues aren't increasing at the same rate as expenses, typically expenses start getting shedded, and players equal expenses. 

 

This sport needs significantly better revenue sharing to fix the stagnant player salaries and the tanking. The owners need to stop saying things like they need to stay financially competitive. As far as the fans are concerned, no they don't, you don't have to keep up with the Jones', you don't have make sure you made as much as Toronto or San Diego. I've never seen a trophy given out to the best MLB CFO.

[Nick Nelson]

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone should just shut up about payroll, and fans certainly can be disappointed with the product if they don't like it. But the business will change when the product doesn't sell. Payroll won't change because people are disappointed with the product. Only when the revenue streams change. Arguing about payroll seems more and more silly.

I think the issue ties to a larger discussion that's causing a lot of frustration for people who care about the game of baseball. Revenues are skyrocketing for MLB clubs but payrolls and salaries aren't growing in tandem. In fact, in many cases it's been the opposite effect.

 

The Twins are receiving these league-wide revenue infusions, and playing in a tax-funded stadium, at a time where their long-developing rebuild should be coming to fruition. Yet their relative payroll expenses have gone right back to Metrodome levels after a brief initial two-year spike. When you throw in the lack of forthright transparency about team revenues it all just doesn't sit right. 

[Battle ur tail off]

I can agree with you about the payroll argument being fruitless if it didn't have a basis. 

 

The thing is, the Twins have continually been cheap. Year in, year out. So much so, that other players and agents don't even want to sign/play here. And it isn't just that. Even when we had good cores and great players before, the organization didn't resign them. For christs sake, they had one of, if not the best pitcher in their history in his prime and wouldn't fork over the money needed to keep him! That should be and would be unacceptable almost anywhere else. Throw in the fact that they received a huge publicly funded mansion of a stadium and people probably feel like it is owed to them.

 

If they aren't making much money, then open up the books! Show the people you aren't killing it. Because as of now, all over MLB, the Minnesota Twins are thought of as a penny pinching organization and have been for some time. 

 

 

[nicksaviking]

I think the issue ties to a larger discussion that's causing a lot of frustration for people who care about the game of baseball. Revenues are skyrocketing for MLB clubs but payrolls and salaries aren't growing in tandem. In fact, in many cases it's been the opposite effect.

 

The Twins are receiving these league-wide revenue infusions, and playing in a tax-funded stadium, at a time where their long-developing rebuild should be coming to fruition. Yet their relative payroll expenses have gone right back to Metrodome levels after a brief initial two-year spike. When you throw in the lack of forthright transparency about team revenues it all just doesn't sit right.

I agree, except about that the rebuild should be coming to fruition. I think we have to consider the initial rebuild an utter disaster which is why the guy overseeing it was fired in the first place. The new guys weren't going to want to build a house from the debris left behind by their predecessors, they were going to want most of their own material using only the useful pieces still available. I think we didn't know it at the time, but we started a new rebuild two years ago and it only started in earnest at last July's trade deadline.

[Mike Sixel]

I agree, except about that the rebuild should be coming to fruition. I think we have to consider the initial rebuild an utter disaster which is why the guy overseeing it was fired in the first place. The new guys weren't going to want to build a house from the debris left behind by their predecessors, they were going to want most of their own material using only the useful pieces still available. I think we didn't know it at the time, but we started a new payroll two years ago and it only started in earnest at last July's trade deadline.

Then why are Polanco, Sano, and Buxton on this roster? And Kepler. And Garver. Or do you expect them all to be dealt? You really think they've just given up on those guys and Rosario?

[yarnivek1972]

Revenue is still climbing league wide. However, two key indicators - attendance and TV ratings - have been in decline for years. MLB has so far been able to increase revenues in other ways (online streaming, etc) but there is non denying that unless the attendance and ratings trends change, revenue growth will crest and maybe even start to fall.

[bighat]

 

This market lost a very good reporter and one that really dug for information when Berardino left. He wasn't the friendliest but at least he was good at his job. The current ones that work for PP and the Strib are worthless.

 

I don't know about everyone else being "worthless". But I was a big fan of Bernardino. Can't believe he left for a backwater market in Indianapolis.

[nicksaviking]

Then why are Polanco, Sano, and Buxton on this roster? And Kepler. And Garver. Or do you expect them all to be dealt? You really think they've just given up on those guys and Rosario?

No, I think they’ll keep who they still like, obviously everybody isn’t going to go. But so far, Rosario and Berrios seem to be the only proven reliable foundation pieces. Aside from all of the systematic front office clean up that was needed, they needed to fill out the MLB roster and four minor league teams in the way they wanted, and overhaul the coaches and manager. The former was going to take more than two drafts to rectify and the later was being hindered by ownership.

 

If Terry Ryan had this team primed to come out of a rebuild, he wouldn’t have been fired in the first place. With how stubbornly loyal ownership has been, even they must have known Ryan was nowhere near having the organization on the right track.

[TheLeviathan]

 

 

I like the Twins. I don't like the way they operate sometimes, but I like the Twins. If I wanted to cheer for how a team operated, I think I'd be an Astros fan, at least right now. I think I'll still be a Twins fan if the Pohlads ever sell, and I think I'll still be a Twins fan if they don't. I just think the argument about payroll is fruitless.

 

That is what it means to be a fan.  But if you boil down to "what do fans accomplish by complaining" - you could basically say this about everything involved with team operations.  So then why do we talk about anything involving our sports team?

 

I think the answer is rather simple - we're passionate, so we're passionate about all aspects of our teams.  We talk here because we find it easier to vent this way than to speak with our pocket books or our attention.

 

The danger to any team, however, is when fans stop being passionate.  If the Twins keep beating us over the head with hiked ticket prices and small payrolls, eventually it will take its toll.  People like Mackey and LENIII criticize fans for their passion and forget that very passion is what makes their jobs possible.  

[bird]

 

Revenue is still climbing league wide. However, two key indicators - attendance and TV ratings - have been in decline for years. MLB has so far been able to increase revenues in other ways (online streaming, etc) but there is non denying that unless the attendance and ratings trends change, revenue growth will crest and maybe even start to fall.

 

I think this factor is largely unknown, but while it shouldn't be used as an excuse or in defense of the organization's mostly indisputable record of below-average spending, it might explain some of the recent behavior we're seeing across the league.

[ewen21]

 

I think this factor is largely unknown, but while it shouldn't be used as an excuse or in defense of the organization's mostly indisputable record of below-average spending, it might explain some of the recent behavior we're seeing across the league.

Is baseball the only bastion of forever-increasing spending?  If the next 20 years were like the last 20 with he mean salary increase we will surely see players signing qualifying offers for 150 million dollars.  I think this is a sort of confusing time for baseball executives.  They are starting to ask WHY spend 200 million on ANY player?  I think that is a good conversation to have.