Frozen in Place: AL Central Teams Sitting Out an Active Hot Stove Season

[RpR]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

That wasn't my suggestion, it was the other poster. Martin isn't really replacing Kepler, Wallner is. And it's a very clear upgrade overall for the Twins.

Miranda was a better overall hitter than Santana. 

You're not worth discussing this with because your stance on all of this kind of stuff is that the veteran is the better option no matter what. So keep giving me the thumbs down and laughing faces and I'll just enjoy my night.

That is what you said.

Your stance is that the rookies, or forme rookies are better no matter what , so you are no different than I am.

Thumbs down mean we disagree, if that is a point you must mention, it bothers you and it should not.

I get plenty and take them for what they are.

Happy New Year.

[chpettit19]

17 hours ago, RpR said:

That is what you said.

Your stance is that the rookies, or forme rookies are better no matter what , so you are no different than I am.

Thumbs down mean we disagree, if that is a point you must mention, it bothers you and it should not.

I get plenty and take them for what they are.

Happy New Year.

You realize that every MLB player is a former rookie, right? You can't become a veteran without first being a rookie. And my stance is absolutely not that rookies, or young players (I assume what you really meant) are always the best choice. My stance is that bad veterans are bad investments because they have no upside. If they're good I'd love to have them. But the ones that can be easily replaced by guys making the minimum are not worth investing millions in.

I understand what the thumbs down mean. They don't bother me, that's why I continue to tell you to just click that button and move on. I request that you do that to save us both the time of the pointless discussion that will follow.

[NYCTK]

18 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

...It's a good team. They won 82 games last year... 

Which is it? Make up your mind. 

And like someone pointed out, they were 69-79 against teams that weren't the worst team in major league history. 

[Major League Ready]

20 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Good question.

I used articles published last November (2024), but rechecking the revenue numbers are, indeed, from 2023. I guess numbers for 2024 are not out anywhere. This does change things certainly and i apologize for the error. As such, the expenses should be from last year and not the projected 2025 numbers. The payroll numbers below are rounded using 40 man roster plus MLB costs of benefits and bonuses applied to all teams.

MIL. $144 Rev. 320  45%

DET  $110 Rev. 306   36%

CLE. $125  Rev. 315   40%

KCR  $143 Rev. 302   47%

MIN  $149 Rev. 342   44%

CHW $157 Rev. 288   55%

FYI

Thank you the question. I don't usually go over this stuff too closely. Seems like teams are more or less doing what they can, but we might be able to see how some teams can add or understand that the White Sox are a mess.

The reason I asked is that all MLB teams in 2023had a $50M anomaly in the form of BAM money so all of those revenue numbers are probably in the neighborhood of $50M less in 2024.  In the Twins case, their TV revenue also went down so they were probably down $60-70M.  Therefore, comparing 2024 payroll with 2023 revenue is going to skew the percentage of payroll numbers fairly significantly.  That said, I know you usually just compare to teams with similar revenue which is perfectly reasonably in terms of determining level of spending to expect.

[tony&rodney]

1 minute ago, Major League Ready said:

usually just compare to teams with similar revenue which is perfectly reasonably in terms of determining level of spending to expect.

That is all that was intended. I messed up with the revenue and also didn't add a note about either BAM or TV reduction. Thus, the post was a bit of a loss. 

My preference for roster discussions is a focus on the possible instead of the refrain of "owner imposed" blah, blah, blah. 

[bean5302]

At the moment, assuming a AAA replacement team would win 45 games in a season, FGDC shows
Twins +45.0 WAR (90 wins)
Royals +40.9 WAR (86 wins)
Tigers +40.0 WAR (85 wins)
Guardians +38.1 WAR (83 wins)
White Sox +22.0 WAR (67 wins)

I expect the Twins to lose some WAR and the Royals and Tigers to pick some up. The Tigers, in particular, have been connected to many big names this offseason like Flaherty, Bregman, Santander, Ha-seong Kim, Fedde, etc. The Royals haven't been mentioned much, but India and Massey are both candidates to significantly outperform the FGDC expectations. The Royals have been on record regarding the pursuit of a big bat for the middle of the order. On the rotation side, they're moving Bubic back into the rotation. If he's able to perform similar to last year in the rotation instead of the 'pen, there's major upside there, too.

The biggest difference in the Royals and Tigers vs. the Twins is the expectation both Kansas City and Detroit could easily add $40MM to their payroll right now. The Twins are expected to cut $10MM.

[mnfireman]

19 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

Saying the Twins look like they need a rebuild is just out of touch with reality. It's a good team. They won 82 games last year even with the historic collapse and people act like they won 60.

I don't think these guys calling for a rebuild understand what a rebuild entails - totally tearing the team apart and (gasp), running the kids out there, just the kids. Minnesota is not the Yankees, Dodgers,  Mets, Red Sox, etc... that buy their way into (and out of) contention, the farm system needs to produce.

That being said, the Twins have a nice mix of pre-arb, arb eligible, and veteran players and are trying to find the right mix to win the AL Central.

The farm system is also producing some talented palyers. Some of these players never live up to their prospect status, some do and some over perform, it is on the manager and coaching staff to use the right combination win. Unfortunately, injuries do rear their ugly head and players get de-railed along the way, it's part of the game. It then becomes a game of next man up, which this team does not always seemed prepared for, whether it's the player's fault or the manager's, IDK. 

 

[RpR]

20 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

You realize that every MLB player is a former rookie, right? You can't become a veteran without first being a rookie. And my stance is absolutely not that rookies, or young players (I assume what you really meant) are always the best choice. My stance is that bad veterans are bad investments because they have no upside. If they're good I'd love to have them. But the ones that can be easily replaced by guys making the minimum are not worth investing millions in.

I understand what the thumbs down mean. They don't bother me, that's why I continue to tell you to just click that button and move on. I request that you do that to save us both the time of the pointless discussion that will follow.

Many here seem to be or want to be MLB team bankers; I do not pretend to know or care how the owners spend or do not spend their mney,; therefore, dollars are zero part of how I view any player.

To each his own.

 

[Riverbrian]

The Twins have always had a payroll that falls in a range with a bunch of other clubs. And all of the AL Central teams hang around primarily in that same range. 

While we worry about spending... they ain't spending either. 

 

 

[Hubie29]

On 1/4/2025 at 6:39 PM, mnfireman said:

The BP blew at least 10 games where Lopez, Ober, Ryan or SWR pitched well enough to win. Last year's team was closer to winning 90+ games than you might think.

It might be tougher to do this year, but the talent is there, the coaching staff just needs to draw the talent out.

And how is our bullpen going to be any better this year again? 

[Trov]

Outside of the very large markets most teams are in a wait and see situation with what is going to happy in revenue over next few years.  Even if they did, or will not lose, their own media contracts, MLB shares around 50% of media with each other.  Therefore, with many teams losing out on their media contracts and going to much lower profit of working with MLB there is less money to go around to all teams. 

The players are not going to agree to lower contracts based on that.  The AL central has 1 large market team that is fully rebuilding and is the 2nd team out of Chicago.  Detroit is a large market but they have not done well signing guys to long term deals lately.  They tend to be on a cycle of making big moves and it seems like they should be on the making a move. KC and Cleveland are as small if not smaller than Twins market is. KC made their moves last year as they have a lot of long term money tied up.  Cleveland is always looking to stay lower payroll and trade away guys nearing FA for younger guys all the time. 

This is always the risk when you pick guys to be your guys, Buck, CC, and Lopez, because when you sign long term deals you are tied to that guy for years, better or worse. You will not have much chance making more big splashes until their money is off the books. 

[Major League Ready]

16 hours ago, RpR said:

Many here seem to be or want to be MLB team bankers; I do not pretend to know or care how the owners spend or do not spend their mney,; therefore, dollars are zero part of how I view any player.

To each his own.

 

I am sure you understand that there are a number of teams that generate 150 or 200% of the revenue of the Twins and therefore can spend 150 or 200% of what the Twins spend.  If the Twin's roster produces the same WAR per dollar spent, it is absolutely certain the twins will not be remotely competitive.  Therefore, it could be argued that productivity per dollar spent is crucial to building a winning roster.   

As a result of this revenue disparity, acquiring and developing cheap young talent is by far the most crucial aspect of building a contender in a small/mid-market.  When you ignore this fundamental need to produce more per dollar spent in many of your posts, it suggests that you simply refuse to acknowledge this reality. It's not that we want to be bankers.  It's that we understand we have to be twice as productive per dollar spent to compete with teams with twice as much to spend.

[tony&rodney]

The Royals add a fair back end starting pitcher, Michael Lorenzen. I don't believe the Royals, tigers, or Guardians are done adding players.

[Major League Ready]

22 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

The Royals add a fair back end starting pitcher, Michael Lorenzen. I don't believe the Royals, tigers, or Guardians are done adding players.

The Guardians never spend but Detroit seems very likely.  They finished last year strong and right now only project at $107M payroll.  Detroit also has all of their most expensive contracts (other than Baez) expiring at the end of this season.  They will have $40M coming off at the end of this season.  Detroit also has one of the best farm systems in MLB.  It's not a stretch top say they are the best positioned among all of the AL Central teams for a prolonged run of success.  Can they keep Skubal is the big question, but they can afford it given all the cheap talent they have now.

[KirbyDome89]

On 1/4/2025 at 11:55 AM, Jocko87 said:

Gee, when you lay it out like that I don't mind doing very little even less.

The rest of the division is actively getting worse while the Twins are figuring out how to extract their talent. 

Advantage-push.  At worst.

The sky isn't actually falling.

The rest of this division, maybe sans Cleveland, was supposed to be trying to catch up to the Twins. Slashing payroll and falling back during what's supposed to be a contention window is a big deal. The fact that we're talking about at best sitting even with 3 other teams who are doing essentially nothing shouldn't be dismissed.