bean5302

Prestige.

The rebuild is necessary. The "tank" part is not.

So what you're saying is that you don't know, but you're absolutely sure you know. It wouldn't surprise me if players asked to raise the ceiling on the competitive balance tax and reduce the penalities associated with exceeding the limit along with shorter team control. The commissioner may have chosen his words to be inflammatory, but they would still be accurate in that case. When auto workers strike for better pay and benefits at Ford, they're not doing it to build better, more reliable and cheaper cars. The same goes for MLB players. MLB players and the MLBPA are not saints fighting for the fans or MLBs best interest. They're not your friend or your hero. They're trying to maximize their compensation package through collective bargaining because they want to be compensated at the maximum amount they can to do their job. That's why I feel like it's ridiculous for people to tie themselves to this dispute so personally.

This is false, but common, logic. It's like arguing everybody should be executed at age 41 because Kobe Bryant died at age 41. If Kobe didn't live past 41, nobody should!!!!

No, owners won't pay more, but they'll shift where the money goes and it will de-incentivize owners from using the current tanking strategy where they refuse to sign their own players and instead trade them off for many years of cheap control over prospects. Tank and rebuild won't be as viable.

You're arguing against yourself when you point out revenue is not static and when you show how market size has no impact on revenue with St. Louis and Miami. The Twins and any other team in MLB has the ability to field a competitive roster. When they don't, it's the choice of ownership to follow a different strategy. The slash payroll and live off revenue sharing strategy.

The owners proposed reducing the luxury tax to $180MM and creating a $100MM floor back in September and are still pushing for it. No team in baseball has ever hit a $300MM payroll. The Dodgers in 2015 hit $273MM. Next highest is again, the Dodgers in 2017 at $242MM. In most years, the top team is around $220MM. Side note... you believe the NFL is more competitive than MLB? Number of teams in the World Series since 2010 = 14 of 30 (47%) Number of teams in the Super Bowl since 2010 = 15 of 32 (47%) World Series since 2000 = 21 of 30 (70%) Super Bowl since 2000 = 21 of 32 (66%) Number of teams in MLB playoffs since 2010 = 28 of 30 (93%) Number of teams in NFL playoffs since 2010 = 26 of 32 (81%) Despite having 2 more teams in the league and 4 more playoff teams every year, fewer NFL teams have made the playoffs in since 2010 and the same percentage of their teams have made it to the championship game.

I mean, is there any wonder there's strong support for a payroll floor among owners? It's not like the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers don't know what teams like Tampa Bay and Minnesota are up to.

Actual revenue or potential revenue? Also. No. The Twins are not far below average. The Twins are not remotely close to small market, either. Last numbers which are available on Statista show the Twins' revenue at $111MM in 2019. Median was $116MM (Toronto, Pittsburgh). MLB owners have great control over their revenue plan and how much revenue they actually bring in. In fact, there are no "small market" teams in MLB. The smallest market in MLB is Milwaukee. Population 594,000. Population density, 6,000 per square mile. Metro area, 1.5MM. Milwaukee's average attendance in 2019 was 36,090. The average ticket price was $28.44. Gate revenue estimate $102.6MM. TV contract $28MM. Estimated total revenue $295MM. Payroll? $123MM. MSP is the 16th largest metro in the US with the 19th highest metro per capita income in the US. The Twins were filling Target Field with ticket prices far exceeding MLB average when it was opened. Average attendance in 2019 was 28,436. Average ticket price was $32.68. Gate revenue estimate $92.9MM. TV contract $43MM. Total Revenue $297MM Payroll? $120MM. The Texas Rangers had an estimated $330MM in revenue in 2019. Similar attendance, similar gate and TV revenue as the Twins. Less than a 10% advantage in overall revenue. Is Arlington/Dallas/Ft. Worth small market now? San Diego's metro is smaller than MSP at 3.2MM vs. MSP's 3.7MM. San Diego the city itself is larger than Minneapolis & St. Paul with a population of 1,390,000 vs 720,000, but with a substantially lower population density (4,256 per sq/mi). They charged only $22.22 for their average ticket at PETCO in 2019 and managed 29,585 fans per game. Revenue? $299MM. Their gate revenues were similar to the Twins. Is San Diego "small market"? The Twins just can't compete. They're too small. How in the hell does San Diego, a smaller metro with a weaker brand, lower gate revenues and weaker potential revenue put together one of the largest payrolls in MLB? How do they go out and get Darvish and sign Machado and Hosmer? How do they compete in arguably the strongest division in MLB? If that Padres team was in the AL Central, they'd have won 100 games. How is it the Twins' maximum historical payroll is lower than massive large market teams like the Kansas City Royals and Cleveland Guardians? The poor, poor Twins and their teeny tiny little po-dunk 1,000 square miles of cornfields in flyover area that is middle America just can't compete against juggernaut metros like San Diego, Kansas City and Cleveland. Maybe Minnesotan's are just so poorly traveled or self defeating they don't recognize Minneapolis/St. Paul is huge? The friggen Olympic Games have routinely asked Minneapolis to bid for the games. Over and over. Revenue sharing balances the equations. Teams like the Red Sox, who pull in more than $500MM in revenue don't field teams with $300MM payrolls because of revenue sharing. There is no team in baseball who cannot compete. There are just strategies involved and living off the high revenue teams by abusing the revenue sharing system is how the supposedly "small market" teams tend to operate. There's no risk. They'll always make a little money if they keep payrolls low and feed off the revenue sharing fund. For conservative owners or owners trying to force new stadiums through, it's the method of choice.

The Twins aren't remotely close to small market, but even a small market team can afford a competitive payroll. Twins fans might want shorter team control because it's fair. What Twins fans want doesn't really matter though. We don't have a seat at the negotiating table.

The small market teams are making a fortune gaming the revenue sharing system. It's not that any team in baseball can't afford a competitive payroll, it's just more profitable for some teams to intentionally keep payroll and revenue low while collecting revenue sharing.

I have no idea how things will play out or how quickly the players might break or how quickly MLB owners might break because there are so many complexities. That said, if MLB were to actually able to move forward with MiLB replacement players, I think the MLBPA would be broken in short order just like the NFL owners broke the NFLPA fast and easy with replacement players. Fans come to the games to see their team, not the specific players on the team and I've seen/heard no credible evidence to the contrary. Once fans start attending games, the MLBPA loses an absolutely dramatic amount of leverage.

Use the formula (new salary / old salary)^(1/((new year - old year)) - 1 to get the annual increase rate. The first CBA was significant, but after that, player salaries were much more market driven. I actually don't believe this work stoppage has much to do with true salaries, but much more to do with player freedom and abusive team control and collusion.

Nobody was okay with the losses from the strike and the strike was not successful. It was a disaster for players and owners alike. Year Min Salary Ann. Increase Avg Salary Ann. Increase 1967 6000 19000 1970 12000 26% 29303 16% 1975 16000 6% 44676 9% 1980 30000 13% 143676 26% 1985 60000 15% 371157 21% 1990 100000 11% 597537 10% 1995 109000 2% 1110766 13% 2000 200000 13% 1895630 11% 2005 316000 10% 2476589 5% 2010 400000 5% 3014572 4% 2015 507500 5% 3952252 6%

Manfred's letter sucks because it's obviously trying to tilt public opinion... but that doesn't help owners or players. All it does is stoke the fire of anger in fans. An angry fan base blaming the players or owners is irrelevant because when fans are angry, they quit following the sport. They stop going to the games. They stop spending their money. It doesn't matter who the fans are protesting when the revenue stream dries up.

That is the question, indeed. I think owners are pretty disconnected from what happened in 1994 and they've been used to bulldozing players in recent CBAs. The players? Many weren't even born yet in 1994 haha. Even a short strike would be catastrophic as the public will sour on out of touch crybaby millionaires and billionaires who wouldn't play nice to split up their vast wealth between each other. Even the loss of spring training will turn a lot of fans against both players and owners.

Sure. It's possible the Twins could be Bundy, Ryan, Ober, Winder, Balazovic on opening day. 3 question marks and two back end rotation options.

Okay, how come the Twins didn't sign Stroman at 4/$95MM? Stroman was signed for a STEAL. It shows the Twins had every opportunity, should they have taken it, to sign a very good pitcher for multiple years at or above what the market paid. Arguing maybe the Twins didn't have time to come back with 3yrs and 70,000,000.01 is ridiculous. Even had the Twins spend far more than that, Stroman would still have been a bargain.

I wonder how the cable networks and their agreement with baseball work in regard to lockouts? In any case, I don't think there will be lost games. Baseball can't afford it. Players or owners.

The Twins couldn't get Stroman at 3 years and $71MM? Seriously... like, I can't wrap my head around this one. Stroman and Rodriguez both look like steals.

Lets hope the Twins are able to find some lost velocity or some lost skill.

He pitched in 4 games last season. His velocity was over 95mph and his swinging strike rate was above his career average. He had control and was throwing first pitch strikes. Give the Yankees a smidge of credit; their front office isn't manned by complete morons. Having more than 1 top rotation starter is allowed in MLB.

Buy low starters rarely work out. People like pointing to Robbie Ray, but for every Ray, there are 10 Matt Shoemakers. We're now strongly into the position where it's clear they have no intention of spending the money they saved by shipping Berrios off. I'll never understand the "small market" label fans keep attaching to this team. The Twins are a strongly mid-market team.

A fun exercise. I'm not sure how accurate it is and I struggle to believe a .779 OPS would get anybody an MVP award in reality. Also, while you say $191.9MM is close to double Buxton's contract, that's not true. If Buxton wins an MVP with 574+ plate appearances, he'd have made $15 + $8 + $1.5 = $24.5MM. Since I'm not sure if he was garnering MVP votes in 2022-2024 or how many plate appearances he was having, it could make a big difference on his contract's value. Assuming the same number of plate appearances as 2025, and assuming his similar WAR resulted in say, #5 in MVP voting in those years, his contract would have been. 2022 - $15.5MM ($9 + $1 + $4 + $1.5) 2023 - $21.5MM ($15MM + 5MM + $1.5MM) 2024 - $21.5MM ($15MM + 5MM + $1.5MM) 2025 - $24.5MM ($15MM + 8MM + $1.5MM) 2026 - $15.0MM 2027 - $15.0MM 2028 - $15.0MM Total = $143MM vs. value = $191.9MM I think most people, including myself, would be happy with Buxton performing at the level shown in the video game.

I don't know the networks and affiliates for Twins baseball in Iowa. I'm just talking about blackout areas because somebody suggested expanding the metro hundreds of miles in Texas as proof Arlington is way bigger than MSP.