bean5302

One of the worst trades I've ever seen. Isiah Kiner Falefa wasn't a starting shortstop in the Rangers' eyes. They doubled down on that by signing two shortstops to replace him. You're talking about trading Mitch Garver for a AAAA shortstop or a utility player and little better than a PTBNL pitching prospect. This makes Ramos for Capps look like an A+ trade MLB has slotted Henriquez in as the 20th prospect in the Twins' system. Like WTF?

I question your lack of source, lack of citation and lack of statistics.

If there is a 120 game season, I don't expect Buxton to play more than 60 games and I do believe last year was largely a fluke. I'll comfortably take the under on his 4.2 fWAR. I do think Sano will post an OPS north of .778. It's a contract year for him and that OPS sholdn't be too far above league average for an all bat guy like Sano to get. Larnach I'd easily take the under OPS .750. I don't think he has what it takes as there's almost nothing other than a fastball he was able to hit last year, but I'd take the over .750 OPS for Kirilloff in a heartbeat. He's the real deal in my opinion. I expect him to have an excellent bat. Joe Ryan and Bailey Ober I'd expect both of them to be right around 4.00 ERA. I guess slightly over. If we're sticking with .750 OPS, I'd take the over .750 OPS on Brent Rooker. His expected outcomes and advanced metrics showed him just getting totally fleeced by luck last year. I'd take the over 3.5 fWAR for Josh Donaldson if the season is 120+ games.

Same thing. Find a credible source. Credible statistical analysis or shut up.

Put up your own data or shut up.

It was rhetorical. @Ted Schwerzler contributes an enormous amount to the site and threatening him with the ban hammer would have been absurd. Sorry, Ted. It wasn't fair of me to use your article in this fashion.

I still remember when the league tried to enforce the pace of play rules limiting batters from stepping out of the box and guys like Gardy lost their minds when strikes were called https://www.twincities.com/2008/06/15/gardenhire-irate-over-speed-up-called-strike-in-loss-to-brewers/

No numbers have been released for 2021 yet. Profits for MLB teams, on average, have followed an odd trend. Slowly increasing before tumbling at during the 2007-2011 CBA, quickly diminishing in the early years of the 2012-2016 CBA, and then skyrocketing after the last CBA started in 2017. https://www.statista.com/statistics/193478/mlb-franchises-average-operating-income-since-2005/ If I were to hazard a guess on 2021 using Forbes' game day revenue projections based on 2019 of $165MM per team and the 33% reduction in average attendance from 28,000 to 19,000, game day revenues would have dropped about $55MM per team. Payrolls also decreased, between 2019 and 2021, but by $6MM. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2020/04/17/the-mlb-stadium-revenue-at-risk-for-every-team-if-games-are-played-without-fans/?sh=38e35f287a35 The net impact would be an average profit of about $1MM per team ($55MM - $6MM = $49MM decrease subtracted from 2019's average profit of $50MM). So half the league probably lost money again in 2021, but certainly not like 2020. It's really tough to say since a beer was like $9,821,187 or something at Target Field last year. Maybe a brutal price hike in concessions increased revenue... or maybe it was too high and decreased revenue? Not sure on that so all I can do is throw a hypothosis out there based on normal season league revenues and sources. 2005 = $13MM (3 CBAs ago) 2006 = $17MM 2007 = $17MM (2 CBAs ago) 2008 = $17MM 2009 = $17MM 2010 = $16MM 2011 = $14MM 2012 = $13MM (2 CBAs ago) 2013 = $10MM 2014 = $20MM 2015 = $23MM 2016 = $34MM 2017 = $29MM (1 CBA ago) 2018 = $40MM 2019 = $50MM 2020 = ($60MM) 2021 = $1MM *ball park estimate based on numbers explained above

I have professional, published, nationally respected data sites. How about you? Do tell!

Here is an actual statistical analysis of attendance including month to month variances. https://eda.seas.gwu.edu/showcase/2020-Spring/mlb_attendance.html The Twins are scheduled to play 27 games prior to May 1, which means rebates would already be hitting before the end of April. In an normal year (25k average attendance, $33 per ticket, 27 games) which I expect 2022 would be for attendance, the Twins would lose approximately $23MM in ticket revenues alone. Another $5MM in concessions revenue. That's in addition to the start of rebates for TV broadcasts.

This has to be the most irresponsible, inflammatory and inaccurate take by a fan I've seen in the entire negotiation process. Canceling 1/6th of the baseball season doesn't hurt teams but helps them because they don't have to pay the players? @Brock Beauchamp brought out the threat of the ban hammer for an inaccurate statement made by a poster the other day. I assume so long as the take is critical of ownership the accuracy of the article or post isn't relevant, even if it damages the credibility of the staff at this site... The average team in baseball lost $60MM in 2020. The losses ranged from $20MM for Cleveland Guardians to $190MM for the New York Yankees. Payments on debts still need to be made. Facilities still require maintenance. Training staff, coaches and front office employees who are working still need to be paid. All of that without virtually any revenue.

The past 3 CBA's? You mean where players were steadily and consistently earning 50% of league revenue? The players were not at any disadvantage and the head of the MLBPA, Tony Clark, is in quotes about the economic position (split) being fine as late as 2018. The primary gripe was about service time manipulation until just recently. The inaccurate myth that players were earning far less than the 50% split just never goes away on this site, but now we have to play one-uppy on the misinformation and go back 3 CBA's? https://www.statista.com/statistics/193478/mlb-franchises-average-operating-income-since-2005/ Owners were the ones watching their profits erode during the 2007-2011 and start of the 2012-2017 CBAs. The cable TV contracts which became so popular dramatically floated profits but it's a bit like drinking poison as baseball alienates a lot of their fan base by requiring expensive cable contracts to access the games long term. Taking in the incredible losses from 2020, owners profits are averaging $20MM a year since 2014, despite large increases in revenues. That means owner profits are down as a percentage for the better part of the last decade. ...anyway, back to the topic, while a salary floor would do far more to help the vast majority of players, MLB's interest in the salary floor has next to nothing to do with free agent compensation. MLB wants the salary floor to placate owners who are being forced to provide funding for teams who are abusing the revenue sharing system. i.e. the Yankees basically pay for the Rays' players. You could see how that would make Steinbrenner a little hot. The other aspect of the salary floor is to increase competition and discourage tanking (something the MLBPA says they care about). The MLBPA's negotiating team is totally disingenuous... or collossally incompetent. I'm not sure which is worse. Ownership has made proposals or agreed to major concessions which align with everything MLBPA says they want, but there's no agreement. At this point, it's dubious to believe a vote of MLB owners would result in a final vote of acceptance for what's been negotiated.

Just $5MM, eh? Is that all? Except the MLBPA is trying to remove $200-300MM from revenue sharing which, combined with the additional $5MM you're guessing at here would put a bunch of teams in MLB underwater in terms of operating income. The MLBPA has requested an additional $80MM for just the pre-arbitration players (roughly $3MM per team). MLB has already proposed an increased expenditure of $150MM for arbitration eligible players (roughly $5MM per team), though I'm not sure where that is at this point. Then there is the minimum salary increase proposed by the MLBPA which will cost each team approximately $3MM per team. That's $11MM per team in payroll right there. Seeing a reduction of $10MM in revenue sharing for the smaller market teams coupled with $11MM in additional expenditures sees an overall operating income swing of $21MM. That's catastrophic... You're talking pure expenses with zero revenue to offset it, and topping it off with a shortened season. If you don't understand how ludicrous the MLBPA's asks are, you're not doing the math or looking at the big picture.

The owners have done the following: Agreed to increase the luxury tax cap proposal by 30% Agreed to eliminate draft penalties for exceeding the cap. Agreed to eliminate escalating cap penalties. Agreed to eliminate qualifying offer draft pick penalties Agreed to pre-arbitration bonus pool. Agreed to increase the minimum salary. Agreed to a draft lottery system. Agreed to a age 29.5 maximum for free agency. Agreed to grant draft pick compensation bonuses for not manipulating service time Agreed to a $100MM payroll floor. I continue to be bewildered by the hate directed at MLB owners.

As somebody who's spent many a night until after 10pm at Target Field, I'm all for the pitch clock. Also, one only has to look at existing MLB rules to see the pitch clock is conservative. MLB rule 8.04 states a pitcher with possession of the ball and a batter in the box, the pitcher must deliver a pitch within 12 seconds or there will be a called "ball" for delaying the game when no runner are on base and the pitcher has the ball. A pitcher can be ejected from the game for multiple violations. I think of the pitch clock as a tool to enforce the rule more than a revolutionary concept. MLB has attempted to curb batters stepping out of the box and encourage pitchers to get the pitch to the plate faster in recent years, but just like the "sticky stuff", pitchers have refused to follow the rules and that necessitates a more stringent enforcement. The difference between a 15 second time and a 22 second time is about 0.15mph from the linked source below. The linked source explains 0.2mph = 10 runs or 1 win/WAR per season across an entire pitching staff, in theory. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/pitchers-are-slowing-down-to-speed-up/ Honestly, rules to speed up game play, I believe, will improve fan engagement.

Max effort pitching probably has the biggest impact on innings pitched, to be honest. There's also perception that pitchers become less effective as batters have the opportunity to see the pitcher's offerings multiple times through the order, though there are plenty of pitchers out there who have results which contradict that line of thinking. Based on personal experience, putting maximum effort into anything, from lifting weights to sprinting to chopping wood results in a massive drop off in stamina. Fatigued pitchers become injured pitchers.

Professional sports revenue is unsustainable. MLB owners need to cut costs. MLB owners need to cut ticket prices. MLB owners need to refuse regional sports channel money. MLB should only cut player pay by a factor of 10+ There is hyper inflation You cover a lot of ground here. I think the general idea is baseball and other sports are too expensive for you and you don't contribute significantly to the revenues for pro sports, but maybe you would if they made their sport way less expensive. I think a lot of people share your opinion in regard to the cost of pro sports attendance; however, until people who are contributing suddenly stop contributing to pro sports and new people refuse to take their place, costs will likely continue to increase. The part in bold is the major factor on whether or not MLB would, respectfully, care about your opinion. I actually think the entertainment industry in the United States is in pretty good shape for capitalism overall. Supply and demand are largely dictating the marketplace with some noticable warts (Ticketmaster, "Ebay" aka Stubhub, cable TV networks, cough, cough). In regard to hyper inflation, that's a much broader subject better to cover on a totally different site.

This is probably valid... but also makes me want to stab myself in the eyeballs.

I have no idea. I think it depends a lot on how much of the season is lost. Season ticket holders are going to be irate and rightfully so. If a significant portion of the season is lost, I'd be willing to bet many will not renew. In terms of impact to the sport as a whole, more important is game changes to make it interesting to watch and appeal to younger audiences.

Mitch Garver should play catcher as much as possible because that's where he benefits the Twins, and himself, the most.

So what you're saying is... it's horrible these families are receiving life alterning money and their teenagers are going to an academy which gives them some limited education and safety because MLB could single handedly alter the economic conditions of entire large countries. Got it. Aside from that, your position would probably benefit from some research. https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-path-to-the-sugar-mill-or-the-path-to-millions-mlb-baseball-academies-effect-on-the-dominican-republic/

The rules are being put in place to level the playing field between teams and avoid damaging MLB's reputation as international scouting and tactics become more aggressive. It's that simple.

I'm extremely skeptical Jax has any value. While Jax's slider shows great movement, it was not effective. https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/griffin-jax-643377?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb There is some potential bad luck in there, but Jax didn't have a single effective pitch last year and the expected numbers were mostly pretty poor. Duffey's curveball was far better than Jax's slider when Duffey came up while Duffey's fastball was probably in the same area as Jax's. I think it's a lot more likely Jax could fill a spot start or middle relief, low leverage role.

That's what OPS+ and bWAR are for. Griffey, Jr. and Mays had similar performances and similar value to each other when compared to their peers. I don't know what number either of them wore and I don't care. Justin Morneau wore #33. Does that make him better than Mays? You're free to like Mays better than Griffey, Jr. but Griffey, Jr. was just as good for the start of their careers and Griffey, Jr. is arguably more popular than Mays on top of that. I like Eduardo Escobar more than either one of those guys, haha. Personal favorites aside, your assertion that Griffey, Jr. isn't in the same league as Mays offensively, defensively, popularity-wise, etc doesn't stand up to to data.

My older brother had knee issues in sports and was told to strengthen his knees when he was in his teens/early 20s. Helped him immensely. Young or old, if the muscles around your joints are weak from not working that specific group out, the joint takes a pounding and fluid buildup, inflammation and tendonitis are sure to follow. I started having knee pain years ago and I added muscle to my legs and poof, haven't had any issues in years and years. It's crazy. Those muscles act like reinforcement for the tendons and ligaments, preventing them from stretching and pounding the joint. Such a bummer. I don't like working out, haha.