Joe Pohlad WCCO radio interview

[weneedneshek]

8 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

They used almost 50 players.  If you look through all of the sections on Spotrac you will see how much salary was payed to injured players and retained salaries.  They also put people like Winder / Sands / Celestino / Balazovic, etc in Minor League Salaries.  I looked at it quickly.  Maybe it's only 9 million or maybe it's 12.  A couple million bucks was not the point as much as that lots of numbers are being thrown around as long as they fit a narrative without proper context and comparison.

And I am trying to parse the context, this $11M is also a number you are just "throwing around" to fit your narrative. They could use 200 players but for every one they are putting on the roster they are also taking one off. They are only paying both the salaries in the case where one of the players is injured. The people covering those holes are usually making minimum and swapping players with options is a negligible effect. I would argue that $11M is significantly lower

[jctwins]

16 hours ago, KirbyHawk75 said:

I am so turned off by the Twins right now after the TV deal that screwed thousands and thousands of fans.  This doesn't help.  I am so turned off by the Twins and MLB right now.  I am an idiot and will still be a fan.  But I wonder how many fans will be turned away permanently?  

It will depend on how many wins they have come July to know the answer to this. Win and the fans will forget it. Lose and they'll go away until the team starts to win again.

[Vanimal46]

16 hours ago, KirbyHawk75 said:

I am so turned off by the Twins right now after the TV deal that screwed thousands and thousands of fans.  This doesn't help.  I am so turned off by the Twins and MLB right now.  I am an idiot and will still be a fan.  But I wonder how many fans will be turned away permanently?  

It’s already happening. 3+ years of the TV broadcast not on growing platforms like YouTube TV and Hulu. It’s been out of sight, out of mind for many casual fans. 

My friends with toddler age children don’t have any interest bringing the family to a game at Target Field. 

[Original_JB]

I guess after hearing the interview, and just watching the other developments, (expansion, really?), I just cant continue to pretend that Baseball is the game I grew up with anymore, especially with the owner coming out and stating as much. I mean, I know it's a business and have forever, but in my mind, tried to keep thinking of it as the game I grew up with. It came to me today that the closest business that MLB compares to is Six Flags.  It's all about the entertainment and ways to collect the consumer's cash. When your "at one time" biggest ride (Mauer) is broken down and used up, you put up another one (Correa). When you don't have the funds or wherewithal to add a new ride, you add "new" concessions, you add "concerts after the park closes", etc., to keep people coming in. Sounds just like Valley Fair, doesn't it? I hate amusement parks.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Vanimal46 said:

It’s already happening. 3+ years of the TV broadcast not on growing platforms like YouTube TV and Hulu. It’s been out of sight, out of mind for many casual fans. 

My friends with toddler age children don’t have any interest bringing the family to a game at Target Field. 

Mind blowing that the business folks don't seem to see urgency in that problem. I have to imagine they recognize the problem, but they seem so confused when they don't get fans that I question how much they're really understanding the mindset of the casual fan.

[Dave Borton]

15 minutes ago, Original_JB said:

...but in my mind, tried to keep thinking of it as the game I grew up with

Ah, how true. But then again, none of the professional sports are. 

Grew up in the 50's. Football? One game on a week, with Lou "The Toe" Groza kicking straight on and Jimmy Brown running like crazy. QBs arms were somewhat secondary to a strong running game. Team paraphernalia? There was none; only banners and cards

Basketball the same. Set-shots are gone; run and gun is now in.

I hold on to the memories but embrace the game for what it is rather than what I want it to be.

[nicksaviking]

19 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Mind blowing that the business folks don't seem to see urgency in that problem. I have to imagine they recognize the problem, but they seem so confused when they don't get fans that I question how much they're really understanding the mindset of the casual fan.

The men and women running the on-field operations of baseball are getting younger as that demographic tends to be more interested in mining new data and and developing new methodologies to get an advantage on the diamond. It's frankly surprising that that the owners aren't doing the same with the people running the part of the operation that is concerned with attracting more fans and more important to the owners, generating the money. Modern promotion of the teams and players, figuring out how to stream games to huge audiences, collaboration with other interested entrepreneurs and societal awareness of the brand seems to be a foreign language to most of these guys.

As annoying as it sounds, there are probably 30 17-year-old YouTubers sitting in their parents basements who could figure this stuff out better than the current 30 people trying to understand this modern baseball.

[FilthyMogwai]

On 2/21/2024 at 12:31 PM, Twins_Fan_in_NJ said:

And Pohlad's comments, meh, no surprise. Snell is going to get 5+ years from someone. Montgomery as well. Correa hates Bellinger so he was never going to be in Twins' plans. And Chapman, no real spot for him. I give him credit because he's kind of falling on his sword for no reason. Twins' fans shouldn't have had expectations for those players and if they did, welp, reality called...

Where did you hear that Correa hates Bellinger. I must have missed that.

[FilthyMogwai]

23 hours ago, Cris E said:

Last June I wrote this on this site:

Several of those guys righted things and finished OK, but none were close to being in the running for a Cy Young.  Montgomery and Snell were very good in 2023, but neither feel like the solid foundational guys you build a roster around at the price they're holding out for. Belinger and Chapman are even less likely to be that guy.  When Pohlad says we're not signing expensive free agents he's mostly saying we're not signing these expensive free agents. I believe not spending now means they can make a move later in the year if things change, but p*ssing away a bunch of money on a low leverage name like JD Martinez might mean we can;t.

I would agree, if the same Pohlad logic didn't also apply when there were players worth spending money on, this off-season or any other.

[nicksaviking]

14 minutes ago, FilthyMogwai said:

Where did you hear that Correa hates Bellinger. I must have missed that.

I think it's the other way around. Bellinger was pretty vocal about those involved with developing the Astros garbage can technology.

[FilthyMogwai]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Mind blowing that the business folks don't seem to see urgency in that problem. I have to imagine they recognize the problem, but they seem so confused when they don't get fans that I question how much they're really understanding the mindset of the casual fan.

Which is crazy because the packed stands for those playoff games last October should have been the only hint they needed. 

[jctwins]

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

The men and women running the on-field operations of baseball are getting younger as that demographic tends to be more interested in mining new data and and developing new methodologies to get an advantage on the diamond. It's frankly surprising that that the owners aren't doing the same with the people running the part of the operation that is concerned with attracting more fans and more important to the owners, generating the money. Modern promotion of the teams and players, figuring out how to stream games to huge audiences, collaboration with other interested entrepreneurs and societal awareness of the brand seems to be a foreign language to most of these guys.

As annoying as it sounds, there are probably 30 17-year-old YouTubers sitting in their parents basements who could figure this stuff out better than the current 30 people trying to understand this modern baseball.

I would agree, and what's funny is that this is probably bad for the business of baseball. When owners were closer to looking for eye test players as opposed to farming that out to people with no financial interest, the product was better.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

10 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

IDK all that much about bankruptcy law but I would think Bally's had to satisfy the court in settling with the Guardians and Rangers.  The Twins no longer had a contract.  Therefore, their negotiation was purely about the market for their TV rights.    Those other teams would appear to have been in a better negotiating position so it does not necessarily stand to reason the Twins took the exact same percentage of reduction.  It did not seem like the Twins had any serious suitors for their broadcast rights.

Agreed on the Guardians and Rangers. Being in-line with bankruptcy court gave them a significant lever in the tv contract negotiation.
 

Hard to say how many suitors the Twins had, but according to the Athletic article DSP was quoted in, in his usual very vague terms it sounded like The MLB was pressuring the Twins to take a 1 year TV only deal. I would imagine that might significantly limit the negotiation leverage for the Twins.

[Guest]

MLBPA may file a grievance against Joe Pohlad for being honest. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlbpa-considering-formal-complaint-over-twins-executives-comments-about-free-agency-per-report/amp/
The players should be ashamed of their union.

[Werbellik]

Joe is ill equipped. Jim should pay more attention.

[Linus]

Wow. Seems like comments get made like this all the time. I’m not happy with this off season but Joe was at least honest (which isn’t in large supply with this club) and now he is going to get crap for it. Baseball is something……

[Werbellik]

It's obvious the ownership doesn't know what's in the CBA. Perhaps they should.

[Jocko87]

1 hour ago, Werbellik said:

It's obvious the ownership doesn't know what's in the CBA. Perhaps they should.

Maybe they do know a few things.  That's an incredibly ignorant post to assume someone doesn't now the rulebook for their business.

 

I just read CBA attachment 49 Re: Use of media and re-listened to the interview.  I found a report that referenced CBA pg 329 as the violation.  No telling what the lawyers might get into but I don't really see the violation.  The hard no answer was in response to a possible repeat of a Correa situation, not a specific free agent and the memo gives firm examples of what he can say, highlighted below.  To me, all he did was deny that they were engaged in negotiations with any of an unmentioned group of players.  I believe the memo is very specific that it is in reference to a single named player, not a general group. 

Really, if you read the memo it says we should never hear anything until an official team announcement and we all know that ain't how it works.  Players association can pound sand on this one.

[Riverbrian]

13 hours ago, Verified Member said:

MLBPA may file a grievance against Joe Pohlad for being honest. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlbpa-considering-formal-complaint-over-twins-executives-comments-about-free-agency-per-report/amp/
The players should be ashamed of their union.

So... Let me get this straight. 

If Joe Pohlad speaks honestly about off-season plans. He is not only torn apart by the fan base who is always at the ready to get pissed about words spoken... but also by the players union who don't want any inside negativity attached to any players while they are in negotiation positions.  

It makes you question why Joe agreed to be interviewed in the first place. What possible benefit could be gained for Joe and the Twins organization by speaking to the public? 

Perhaps the biggest lie being told is from the fan base or an electorate that demands the truth. The truth is... we demand the exact opposite. We rip the truth to shreds every... single... time.

Joe is new to this... he will learn to stay behind the scenes and let the PR people craft the message. 

Teaching moment for Joe. 

[wabene]

11 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

So... Let me get this straight. 

If Joe Pohlad speaks honestly about off-season plans. He is not only torn apart by the fan base who is always at the ready to get pissed about words spoken... but also by the players union who don't want any inside negativity attached to any players while they are in negotiation positions.  

It makes you question why Joe agreed to be interviewed in the first place. What possible benefit could be gained for Joe and the Twins organization by speaking to the public? 

Perhaps the biggest lie being told is from the fan base or an electorate that demands the truth. The truth is... we demand the exact opposite. We rip the truth to shreds every... single... time.

Joe is new to this... he will learn to stay behind the scenes and let the PR people craft the message. 

Teaching moment for Joe. 

I'm not so sure Joe needs any teaching here. People cry about anything and even nothing, lol, like when they complain that management is keeping them in the dark. Social media becomes a problem only when you pay attention to it. If I'm Joe, I'm sleeping well knowing I avoided tainting my vocal chords with corporate speak and instead opted for the straight dope. 

[Riverbrian]

23 minutes ago, wabene said:

I'm not so sure Joe needs any teaching here. People cry about anything and even nothing, lol, like when they complain that management is keeping them in the dark. Social media becomes a problem only when you pay attention to it. If I'm Joe, I'm sleeping well knowing I avoided tainting my vocal chords with corporate speak and instead opted for the straight dope. 

More power to you. 

Sadly... you and I both know that social media only gets to it's current scale because of people paying attention to it. 

 

[wabene]

20 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

More power to you. 

Sadly... you and I both know that social media only gets to it's current scale because of people paying attention to it. 

 

Disclaimer; I do pay attention to two forms of social media, Twinsdaily and TelemarkTalk. That's enough for me and I don't want to be hypocritical. The din of X is inescapable. Even without ever having downloaded the Twitter app it is constantly referenced by media. You do hear athletes and other public figures say they completely avoid it. That makes a lot of sense for them. I would also think that while, of course, public relations is very important to large organizations like the Twins, the immediate shrill of Twitter should be ignored during daily decision making. 

[chpettit19]

15 hours ago, Verified Member said:

MLBPA may file a grievance against Joe Pohlad for being honest. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlbpa-considering-formal-complaint-over-twins-executives-comments-about-free-agency-per-report/amp/
The players should be ashamed of their union.

It doesn't look like he really broke the rule because he didn't mention any player by name, but this is exactly what the players should want from their union. Everyone knew who he was talking about (the "Boras four") and having any team come out and say they're not paying a certain price for a free agent hurts that player's negotiating power. That rule is in place for a reason. While Joe looks to have flirted with the line without crossing it, the players should be happy their union is sending a message to the league that they need to watch themselves when it comes to undercutting player's negotiations publicly.

[Riverbrian]

20 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

It doesn't look like he really broke the rule because he didn't mention any player by name, but this is exactly what the players should want from their union. Everyone knew who he was talking about (the "Boras four") and having any team come out and say they're not paying a certain price for a free agent hurts that player's negotiating power. That rule is in place for a reason. While Joe looks to have flirted with the line without crossing it, the players should be happy their union is sending a message to the league that they need to watch themselves when it comes to undercutting player's negotiations publicly.

Agreed

Player X is trying to negotiate for a 6 year deal with Teams A, B and C. 

The general manager, owner, manager of Team D says publicly that Player X is asking for way too much money, he has an injury history that is concerning, he can't hit a breaking pitch, he doesn't listen to his manager and he doesn't shower after games so therefore we are not interested.  

I think it is quite understandable that the players union would have a problem with that type of thing and also quite understandable that they have stipulations preventing such things in the CBA that is painfully negotiated between representatives of owners and the players. 

[Major League Ready]

On 2/22/2024 at 10:28 AM, weneedneshek said:

And I am trying to parse the context, this $11M is also a number you are just "throwing around" to fit your narrative. They could use 200 players but for every one they are putting on the roster they are also taking one off. They are only paying both the salaries in the case where one of the players is injured. The people covering those holes are usually making minimum and swapping players with options is a negligible effect. I would argue that $11M is significantly lower

It's not that hard to figure out but instead of proving your point you have done like the others and just thrown out an assumption.  All we need to do is compare opening day payrolls.  This is their opening day roster as per MLB.  
Press release: Twins make final roster moves, finalize Opening Day 2023 roster (mlb.com)
The post I responded to was using $159M.  The opening day roster was actually $150.  (see below)  I constructed this using the opening day roster reported by MLB and salary figures form Spotrac.  There is a $9m discrepancy which changes the ratios that were thrown around here significantly.  That opening day number from last year also misrepresents the comparison because the numbers being used had $0 for players on the injured list.  Last year we had $7.5M in dead money for Mahle.  

I saved the best for last.  The 2023 opening day roster included replacements for Polanco, Kirilloff, and Lewis.  The 2024 number does not have any injury replacements.  That difference is a little over 2M when comparing 2023 to 2024.  The combined total is $11M.  I was not just "throwing around" a number.  I looked before I criticized as opposed to your approach of saying "I would argue that $11M is significantly lower" based on assumption that you understood the numbers without looking..  There is a lot of that kind of assumption and even misrepresentations made here.  They misrepresentations might not be intentional but they are inaccurate non the less.  Why are people so opposed to an accurate portrayal of the facts? 

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

It doesn't look like he really broke the rule because he didn't mention any player by name, but this is exactly what the players should want from their union. Everyone knew who he was talking about (the "Boras four") and having any team come out and say they're not paying a certain price for a free agent hurts that player's negotiating power. That rule is in place for a reason. While Joe looks to have flirted with the line without crossing it, the players should be happy their union is sending a message to the league that they need to watch themselves when it comes to undercutting player's negotiations publicly.

I would expect something from them on the Ricketts comments as well as that looks to be at least toes over the line.  We get reports all the time about teams being out on free agents from Ohtani to Kiki.  It doesn't effect negotiations all that much to know the A's are out on Ohtani.

Now that the agent has put out the Kiki news, an apparent violation, do the Twins get to say anything?  The way I read it, they can deny the interest which would really throw a wrench in negotiations-the whole reason for the policy.

Its one of those things the PA should be careful with bringing too much attention to.  They get more benefit from the loose enforcement than we probably know.

[chpettit19]

8 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

I would expect something from them on the Ricketts comments as well as that looks to be at least toes over the line.  We get reports all the time about teams being out on free agents from Ohtani to Kiki.  It doesn't effect negotiations all that much to know the A's are out on Ohtani.

Now that the agent has put out the Kiki news, an apparent violation, do the Twins get to say anything?  The way I read it, they can deny the interest which would really throw a wrench in negotiations-the whole reason for the policy.

Its one of those things the PA should be careful with bringing too much attention to.  They get more benefit from the loose enforcement than we probably know.

The agent wasn't on the radio saying directly that those 4 teams are in on his guy. There's a difference between the leaked things from "sources" and individuals going out publicly and speaking on things. Joe got himself in questionable waters by saying things publicly. The PA shouldn't be careful at all about bringing attention to actual public comments from individual owners that include a number (30 mil in this case) attached to specific free agents (where Joe saved himself even though everyone knew who he was talking about). Generalized leaked information from anonymous sources is not the same thing. "The agent" may have put out the Kike news, but his name is nowhere to be found on it. It's not "loose enforcement" when there's no name attached to the report. "Source" can't violate a rule. And that leak didn't include contract numbers which is another important factor.

[Jocko87]

2 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

The agent wasn't on the radio saying directly that those 4 teams are in on his guy. There's a difference between the leaked things from "sources" and individuals going out publicly and speaking on things. Joe got himself in questionable waters by saying things publicly. The PA shouldn't be careful at all about bringing attention to actual public comments from individual owners that include a number (30 mil in this case) attached to specific free agents (where Joe saved himself even though everyone knew who he was talking about). Generalized leaked information from anonymous sources is not the same thing. "The agent" may have put out the Kike news, but his name is nowhere to be found on it. It's not "loose enforcement" when there's no name attached to the report. "Source" can't violate a rule. And that leak didn't include contract numbers which is another important factor.

Leaks are specifically prohibited by the same policy, I put the snippets in the post above. I would agree it's different but still the same violation. Just harder to police. If they want to enforce it, they would just have to sanction the team.

It highlights how tight the Twins ship is, we don't hear much.

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

Leaks are specifically prohibited by the same policy, I put the snippets in the post above. I would agree it's different but still the same violation. Just harder to police. If they want to enforce it, they would just have to sanction the team.

It highlights how tight the Twins ship is, we don't hear much.

But there's nothing to tie a leak to unless you think the MLBPA and MLB are going to start going around demanding sources from reporters. And I'm pretty sure they don't have any power to force reporters to give up sources. We all assume that Kike leak is from his agent (and that's a rock solid assumption), but it's not policeable at all because it doesn't say it anywhere. Who files a claim against "sources briefed on his discussions," the MLBPA or MLB? MLB can't say "we're pretty sure that came from his agent so here's our grievance against them."

And that leak didn't include any numbers. Joe included a number. That's what the clause is really forbidding. You can confirm or deny that you're talking to someone, but you can't provide substance or details about it. Pohlad threw a number out. The Kike leak didn't. If Joe just said "we aren't in position to spend a significant amount moving forward this offseason" the MLBPA doesn't blink an eye. He specifically put a dollar amount on it, and was so obvious that there was no real question who he was referring to. He didn't actually say a name so it's fine, but the number is what got him in trouble. Leaks aren't prohibited, detailed leaks are.

[Jocko87]

47 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

But there's nothing to tie a leak to unless you think the MLBPA and MLB are going to start going around demanding sources from reporters. And I'm pretty sure they don't have any power to force reporters to give up sources. We all assume that Kike leak is from his agent (and that's a rock solid assumption), but it's not policeable at all because it doesn't say it anywhere. Who files a claim against "sources briefed on his discussions," the MLBPA or MLB? MLB can't say "we're pretty sure that came from his agent so here's our grievance against them."

And that leak didn't include any numbers. Joe included a number. That's what the clause is really forbidding. You can confirm or deny that you're talking to someone, but you can't provide substance or details about it. Pohlad threw a number out. The Kike leak didn't. If Joe just said "we aren't in position to spend a significant amount moving forward this offseason" the MLBPA doesn't blink an eye. He specifically put a dollar amount on it, and was so obvious that there was no real question who he was referring to. He didn't actually say a name so it's fine, but the number is what got him in trouble. Leaks aren't prohibited, detailed leaks are.

That's my point, enforcement is so difficult it's not really designed to be an enforced policy except for egregious conduct.  Its more of a general agreement to try to stay between the lines.  Leaks would be police-able, but it would be very, very ugly.   Again, its specifically called out as prohibited conduct.  I can't find Article XX(E) that would explain the enforcements but I would assume agents could lose access or certification, GMs suspended or draft picks taken.  The agents being certified by the PA complicates things tremendously.  It looks like the PA is just lobbing a reminder here but they should have lobbed it at Ricketts instead of Pohlad. 

As for the dollar figure, I disagree that the number is the problem.  I read it as the mention of a specific player is more-so the issue and the mention of specific teams by the player side would be more of an issue.  I listened to a ton of radio interviews with GMs during winter meetings and every one of them was choking when specific names were mentioned.  It was obvious that was a point of emphasis somewhere.  They also seemed very comfortable talking in general terms even though it was obvious the only person they could have been discussing was Ohtani.  Joe could have just as easily been talking about a trade for some player that happened to make $30m as well.

Also worth noting that Kiki's agent can say what teams he is looking at, as long as its true.  If the Twins weren't talking to him, then they could file a complaint.  I said earlier it was a violation but I should have said possible violation.  Maybe there is smoke around Kiki.

We won't know for sure, that's what millions of lawyers and billions of billable hours are for.  They will never be engaged here, its not worth the juice.