Why Minnesota Twins Might Not Extend Qualifying Offer to Ryan Jeffers

[NYCTK]

8 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

I understand the wish for a draft choice. I'm afraid that there is a chance that Ryan Jeffers accepts the QO. I'm ready for the Twins pitchers to have a real catcher to throw to and I really don't care about the bat. This is my opinion and I recognize the opposite side, but I disagree as do Cleveland and many other teams.

FWIW, I don't believe that Milwaukee would use Ryan Jeffers as a catcher.

Well, weirdly, I think the Brewers catching lab would somehow turn him into an above average defensive catcher. But that's cause they've got one of the best organizations top to bottom. 

I simply think Jeffers defensive woes are wildly overstated on this site. We can disagree on that. I think he's solidly mediocre, you think he's outright bad. I can understand why you'd just rather him not be on the team that being the case. 

I simply see zero risk in Jeffers accepting the qualifying offer. Like the Brewers when Woodruff accepted their offer last year, the Twins have money, he clearly improves the team over the alternative, and just letting him walk does nothing but make the team worse. 

[NYCTK]

31 minutes ago, killercarewoliva said:

attitude is everything and yours is not good. it's abrasive. it's not becoming of this site to talk like that and it's very typical of the New York Yankees fans who are by far the worst in the league.

I'm a Mets fan. And therefore we agree that Yankees fans are the worst in the league. 

And there's no denying New Yorkers are abrasive. Proudly so. We deal with way more people than the average American on a daily basis, and we don't entertain nonsense. New Yorkers can be incredibly helpful and friendly if you know what you're doing. But rude and nasty if you're wasting our time. 

[USAFChief]

OP - "Besides, the rest of the league might like to play Jeffers more, but they're unlikely to be keen on giving up a draft pick to do it."

 

Nitpic: Teams don't "give up a draft pick" by signing FAs with a QO attached. They keep their own picks.

The team losing such a FA gets a extra pick inserted either after the 1st round, before the 3rd round, or before the 4th round.

 

Stupid rule, IYAM because EVERY team gets their regular picks pushed back, equally. 

 

But signing teams don't forfeit a pick.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-qualifying-offer-contract-predictions-2026-27-offseason/

[dxpavelka]

On 10/30/2026 at 9:14 AM, rdehring said:

Is Jackson still on the Saints roster and under Twins control in 2027?  If so, should they sign Jeffers to an extension or he stays via the QO, there is a real chance they trade Caratini.  Don't know what they could get or how much of his salary they would have to keep to get anything back.  But should they keep Jeffers and Caratini departs, their overall spending at catcher may not be all that much more than this past year.

I said at the deadline that they should trade Caratini rather than Jeffers and nearly got jeered off this site. 

[dxpavelka]

Making the offer to Jeffers is a no brainer.  The worst possible outcome is that he declines and we get a draft pick.  If he accepts we pay him.  Shouldn't be a big deal.  If it IS a big deal than we have problems.  Sorry but that's the truth.  If we consider Culpepper, Jenkins & Rodriguez to be big league players and no longer prospects, four of our top seven (maybe ten depending on which rating you use) prospects are catchers.  However, NONE of them will be ready to contribute at the big league level this year.  $23 Million for one of the best catchers around to be a bridge to the young fellas would be a wise investment.

[LastOnePicked]

16 hours ago, SE23 said:

Use the $$$ to build value. Starting with the value that was lost when Jeffers wasn't traded earlier.

But you can't spend free agent $$$ in a way that compensates for lost prospect value. Free agents by definition are market rate players. It's rare to get a bargain. But teams can often get a bargain from the first few years of an MLB-ready player.

If the idea is that the Twins can compensate for the prospects they lost out on by keeping Jeffers, they'll have to spend well beyond their previous record high payroll.

[LastOnePicked]

2 hours ago, NYCTK said:

the Twins have money, he clearly improves the team over the alternative, and just letting him walk does nothing but make the team worse. 

All of this is correct, but making the team worse is a Pohlad speciality. It's what happens when you don't understand what you own because you were given it instead of purchasing it yourself.

[JD-TWINS]

On 10/30/2026 at 10:14 AM, rdehring said:

Is Jackson still on the Saints roster and under Twins control in 2027?  If so, should they sign Jeffers to an extension or he stays via the QO, there is a real chance they trade Caratini.  Don't know what they could get or how much of his salary they would have to keep to get anything back.  But should they keep Jeffers and Caratini departs, their overall spending at catcher may not be all that much more than this past year.

Exactly - don’t need to read any other comments.

Trade Caratini and eat half of the $10M owed inclusive of his buyout for ‘28.

Take the $5M saved on Vic and add it to Jeffers $6M already being paid in ‘26. …… so he gets a $12M bump above Catcher spending in ‘26.

Other option is to offer a lucrative 2 year deal to Jeffers (2 for $18.5M/year, as an example) as a firm bridge to Lackey & the other 2-3 young Catchers in the organization.

Gotta do something positive to be “competitive”. ……….Can’t have Caratini as “lead Catcher” going into’27!

Having Lee & Lewis & Keaschall all in the proper defensive spots to start the season would be a big boost over start of ‘26.

Lopez out all season - Sands out 3/4 of season - Festa out all season - Banda out 1/2 season - Abel out 80% of season………etc. ……… Staff will start the year MUCG stronger in ‘27 even if Lopez isn’t ready & Banda is gone ………… assuming ”someone” will probably injured as well.

[LyleCole]

17 hours ago, bjorks said:

I think one of the labor issues they're trying to address is you can be rinky-dink and screw the fans over, but at the end of the day ALL professional sport team ownership is about the $ and whether you win the WS or you're the Oakland/Sacramento/LasVegas/Bend/Waco/.Blackduck/International Falls Athletics, the profit is there. 

Maybe nobody in the media or with the org will say this publicly, but i believe the Twins were pulled off the table (temporarily) last year because the Pohlads would've been fools to sell before the the CBA and media deal gets figured out. Just by operating at the status quo when the sell at a minimum will net them $300-$500 MILLION more just by waiting 12-18 months. 

Yeah.  Normally I am all for ownership and profits.   That is how innovations and high paying jobs are created.   Without the incentives for capital formation our lifestyles would not be much greater than that of Medieval times, hand to mouth subsistence living.

But high level professional sports ownership is different because the franchise is limited.  There are only 30 major league baseball teams.  These corporations trade at multiples to cash flow that are very high because not every billionaire gets to own one no matter how much they want to.

So there should be an obligation to the fans/customers of these special types of business, which are also, btw, heavily subsidized by local governments, to create a product that maximizes the fans value.  

The Pohlads have never done this.  Nor did the Griffiths.  The fact is, Minnesota is not a sports friendly environment.   Our local revenues are minimal (see all of the problems getting the local sports broadcasting done for the region).   And although the market size is not small, it is the 15th largest television market in the United States, the value is just not there.  And I think our local ownership of all of the sports franchises reflects this.  

It even carries into college level athletics.  One of the pieces of evidence I present in support of this thesis is look at the states in the US that have only one D1 FBS basketball and football teams.   Minnesota is by far the largest.  Minnesota has 80% more population than Iowa, yet Iowa fields 2 D1 football teams.  Minnesota has 700k more people than Alabama, yet that state has 6 D1 FBS football teams.   

 

[DocBauer]

Napkin roster construction and payroll approximates:

1] TWO solid FA RP...1 RH, 1 LH...$20-22M. We'll go high. 

2] Bauers at 1B $12-13M. Again, we'll go high.

Post FA departures and moving on from Larnach, Ober, and Lewis, payroll sits approximately $100M.

$100M ÷ $22M + $13M = $135M.

3] Add a versatile INF to replace Lewis, or keep Lewis and hope he accepts the role of utility (unless he proves worthy of more) $3-5M.

4] Jackson as #2 catcher or similar FA option, or possible trade for someone like Henry Davis from Pittsburgh (examples like this have been offered previously) $2-3M.

$135M + $5M + $3M = $140M

Twins 2023 payroll FOUR YEARS ago: $157M

Expected AVERAGE ML payroll for 2027, approximately $180M plus. 

So we're talking $17M LESS than payroll FOUR YEARS ago, and $40M less than the expected AVERAGE ML payroll for 2027. 

If Jeffers really loved Minnesota and being a Twin...and his family felt the same...he could approach the Twins on a deal of 3yrs and $45M and see what they say. By all reasonable expectations and projections, he's going to get an offer of at least 3 for $45. The QO is $22M. MLB contracts are guaranteed. So unless he is thinking about retiring after 2027, or really, really wants to stay a Twin for at least one more season, why on earth would he take $23M instead of $45M plus? Or even 3.and $36-39M?

You offer the QO, get a draft pick, and you end up with...I believe...5 of the top 100 selections. (3 team selections and 2 comp picks, IIRC). 

What are the actual odds of Jeffers taking the QO and saying NO to a larger, guaranteed payday? 

But let's say for some reason he does. $140M plus $20M (factoring in $3M already accounted for) equals $160M. That's only $3M more than 2023, and STILL a good $20M less than the expected ML average for 2027. And come 2028, you've got $33M coming OFF the payroll.

There really should be no "risk" factor in offering Jeffers the QO. 

[killercarewoliva]

16 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

So Elon Musk, among many others, goes down to $1M per year? Ok. Sounds good. Deficit is conquered.

gosh, musk is not playing a ball game. you can't compare that. when I started talking about this money the players get. I really didn't think anybody anywhere would agree. somebody making super millions of dollars playing a game. I am very price conscious with everything but when it comes to sports it's crazy money out there. ridiculous absurd and we have to pay the price okay?

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, killercarewoliva said:

gosh, musk is not playing a ball game. you can't compare that. when I started talking about this money the players get. I really didn't think anybody anywhere would agree. somebody making super millions of dollars playing a game. I am very price conscious with everything but when it comes to sports it's crazy money out there. ridiculous absurd and we have to pay the price okay?

They aren't playing a game either. They are professional employees. I 1000000 percent disagree they shouldn't be paid what they are. 

[killercarewoliva]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

They aren't playing a game either. They are professional employees. I 1000000 percent disagree they shouldn't be paid what they are. 

ok

[bjorks]

48 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They aren't playing a game either. They are professional employees. I 1000000 percent disagree they shouldn't be paid what they are. 

Professional and Collegiate athletes are underpaid when you measure it directly to "jock tax" and other revenue generators linked to sports (hotels, travel, food, etc). I've been a consultant in the sports industry for 15 years and nobody can make an argument against professional sports salaries as it relates to tourism revenue for pro sports. MN has the 2nd highest jock tax in the country after California. Events like the gymnastics olympic trials or junior hockey championships bring in $5+ million to the state. You need to think of them not as employees, but entertainers. Does anyone complain when ScarJo or Brad Pitt make $50 million for a movie? No because it's based on the numbers and sports are the same. 

I'm not justifying it, but professional sports team ownership is the ultra, ultra exclusive and a very small group of individuals who benefit. WE (all of us) created the market through fandom and watching games. If there wasn't a demand, the salaries and TV deals wouldn't be what they are. All you need to look at are expansion markets across the Core 4 + MLS/NWSL to see States/Cities will do anything to get an invite the party. 

MLS/NWSL is pure speculation from an ownership standpoint. Teams lose money, but NWSL expansion fees will eclipse $250MM in 2028 for the next round of expansion, yet many of the teams barely can draw 5-figure attendance. BUT, because of perceived value of professional sports team ownership, ownership in MLS/NWSL can place almost any valuation on teams they want because of the way the rev share model works in both leagues. 

Ohtani and Yamamoto (and I suppose Roki) have been worth over $1B in direct economic impact from the Japanese markets alone since their signings. If anything, Ohtani and Yamamoto are underpaid versus their value. 

The really crazy thing is how NBA/NFL have really sold their souls and I'm not even talking about sports gambling. The Euro/Asian market for TV, merch, overseas games, etc. is literally finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (regardless if the leprechaun is in a tree). If you think salaries and stadiums are out of control now, just wait until they figure out expansion to non-US markets. 

The only solution (a lot due to revenue) is split, true global leagues with true "World Champions". If the NBA expands like they want to in the Asian markets (esp. China), you would see a nearly uncapped league or the "stars" like Ant, easily making $150+ million annually. 

[shimrod]

20 hours ago, Linus said:

If I have to choose between Jeffers and one of Bauers, Lowe or Chisholm, I take any of those three over Jeffers seven days a week. 

And if those three have the opportunity to choose between the Twins and anyone else do you think we sign them? The QO offer may be an overpay but the Twins have put themselves in a position where they will have to overpay to get any desirable free agent. 

[Linus]

17 minutes ago, shimrod said:

And if those three have the opportunity to choose between the Twins and anyone else do you think we sign them? The QO offer may be an overpay but the Twins have put themselves in a position where they will have to overpay to get any desirable free agent. 

We will if we offer them the most money. 

[IndianaTwin]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

OP - "Besides, the rest of the league might like to play Jeffers more, but they're unlikely to be keen on giving up a draft pick to do it."

 

Nitpic: Teams don't "give up a draft pick" by signing FAs with a QO attached. They keep their own picks.

The team losing such a FA gets a extra pick inserted either after the 1st round, before the 3rd round, or before the 4th round.

 

Stupid rule, IYAM because EVERY team gets their regular picks pushed back, equally. 

 

But signing teams don't forfeit a pick.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-qualifying-offer-contract-predictions-2026-27-offseason/

Actually, if you read further in the article, teams DO forfeit a pick if they sign a free agent who had received (and declined) a QO.