Jump to content
Our top free agent ranking is up to 75 names; click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

drjim

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,759

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by drjim

  1. drjim
    But that also proves the point that if the contract makes sense, like Hunter for one hear, they'll do it and aren't as constrained on payroll as they were before and even have some space right now.
  2. drjim
    Oh, guys that walked/were traded before Target Field? I'm more thinking that everyone that had even a reasonable case to be extended (Hughes, Perkins) were given that extension. Morneau signed a 6 year deal for market rate. Aside from that, Mauer is only guy that was elite recently.
  3. drjim
    Actually only one of those three authors was around the team consistently, and he was the one who was most explicitly wrong with his assumption. I think it is more Terry Ryan and his philosophy. He has a payroll range and depends on how to spend it.
  4. drjim
    Enjoy your wait. They aren't going big on a FA, but they'll go big on their own guys. And this has nothing to do with big/small market, it is org philosophy.
  5. drjim
    None of those links have direct quotes by management (the first comes close), it is all speculation by the authors. In fact, the 2015 article by Phil Miller has this quote by him: Which was actually not true. It ended up within $10 million of 2011, about $20 million away from 2014. I agree that the payroll is too low, but I don't think it is crunched like it was in the aughts. They would be willing to add several million in the right situation, but they are hesitant (for better or worse) to add big money for 3, 4, 5 years. I think they could be more creative, but I think these are more baseball than money decisions (such as the Bastardo decision).
  6. drjim
    I don't recall them ever saying they are payroll strapped since they moved to Target Field. I think they absolutely were payroll strapped in the mid aughts. I do agree they haven't spent to their capability.
  7. drjim
    I would also add that from the mid 90s (time of baseball strike) until the recent explosion of tv contracts (about the time of Target Field), baseball revenues was driven primarily from stadiums. In that sense, the Twins were a small market team in the Metrodome, with the need for a new stadium to no longer be. And Pohlad saying he didn't want to lose money on the team strikes me as a reasonable position for an owner to take.
  8. drjim
    Do people still really call them small market? I would put them slightly below median (15-20 range), and payroll generally reflects that.
  9. drjim
    This strikes me as correct. Buxton will be the big swing player between slightly below .500 and a low/mid 80s win team. What pushes them from there to high 80s is better performance from rotation, slightly better years from Rosario/others, an unexpected big season from Mauer, or another leap from Sano. I'm very bullish on Buxton this year, so I have their baseline around 82-83, and would bet the over. One big reason is I think the org depth that could/should contribute this year is underrated and not captured well in predictions.
  10. drjim
    Possible, but he would do well to not swing at pitches far out of the zone. not only do you miss much more often, but any contact is usually weak, out-inducing contact. BB rate is always a shorthand for plate discipline, but much more important is swinging at pitches in the zone. Walks usually follow at an acceptable rate.
  11. drjim
    I was thinking more illegal immigrants using falsified (or unchecked) docs and the like - basically workers that will work the toughest jobs for the lowest wages. Migrant workers don't really apply, and there is a black market for labor that goes way beyond just illegal immigration. Also why I threw in the enforcement of labor laws as part of it. Punishing companies that hire illegal immigrants harder would do more for stopping illegal immigration flow as anything, and is something I would personally endorse much more than trying to stop immigration.
  12. drjim
    Now I'm tracking. I don't think one worker is more efficient than 1.5 workers, but that doesn't have to be the comparison anymore, since they will have to choose between a $15/hr of both options. For specific industries it might not change much, but Fast Food might start using more automated technology instead of labor, such as self ordering, more machines to cook. And for those industries that can, they will continue to outsource positions - but certainly won't be possible in many. It is an interesting combo to increase the low skilled labor pool (through more open immigration), demand a higher minimum wage, and shame companies that outsource/automate/cut positions.
  13. drjim
    Depends on how hard you want to enforce labor laws.
  14. drjim
    Where does the $10/hr come from? That would be below the new minimum wage. I'm assuming no black market here on the ownership side.
  15. drjim
    Of course I don't think Trump's policies would do anything to help this situation. I don't think he has a policy solution to anything. But he can certainly tap into an emotional feeling that is not going away. I still would push back if you don't think cutting off an inflow of unskilled workers will have no impact on the wages of low skilled workers currently in the country going forward. I do think the tradeoff is worth it, if there is a more comprehensive system around it. I also agree that there is a market solution, but I am also skeptical it will be instituted. And sorry, government regulation is not the answer, companies with the resources will include enough exemptions and workarounds to make it useless on a large scale. The true solution is a more enlightened business class that, for self interest (if nothing else), sees the benefit of paying their workers a higher wage, and that stability in the middle to lower middle class is preferable to the current outcome. As you said, some of this is happening on a smaller scale, but it will also take better consumers, perhaps willing to pay higher prices for a more equitable society too.
  16. drjim
    I don't disagree, but the benefit for illegal immigrants for businesses is that they will work at such a low wage. If that wage is increased to $15/hr that will (theoretically) lead to more people willing to work that job that wouldn't before at the lower wage illegal immigrants would. Question would be if black market and under the table would pick up slack. While it certainly would to some extent, I still think overall it squeezes out the labor supply on the low end, leaving minimal demand for illegal immigrant labor.
  17. drjim
    This is all theoretical of course, but higher wage would increase the quality of applicant for available job. And it's not that natives were fired, just that jobs were filled with lower wage seekers. I hope we aren't talking past each other. The likely outcome is an overall squeeze on lower skilled jobs, as they are outsourced (if possible), eliminated or replaced by technology as much as possible.
  18. drjim
    True, but if minimum wage is increased, it will lead to more native employment taking those positions - and actually might lead to more underemployed college graduates (those in grad school, stay at home parents, etc) re-entering the work force, making the available jobs that much more scarce.
  19. drjim
    Fewer jobs on the low end. Immigration generally follows supply of jobs - which is why it slowed quite a bit the last decade. There certainly might be more under the table and dark economy action, but I don't think that will increase immigration.
  20. drjim
    I'm a son of lower middle class too, and I think evoking privilege here shows a lack of seriousness. This is fundamental economic issues - as in wages are stagnant and costs of previously attainable basics are increasing. People should absolutely not sit back and accept this as OK. And immigration absolutely has an impact of the stagnation of wages. It is far from the only thing, and probably not even the primary thing, but it is the most tangible thing and the easiest to lash out at. Low wages remain when there is a large supply of labor available and willing to do work for said low wages. Immigration keeps that flow going - why do you think business minded Republicans are so big into immigration reform? And why do you think poverty stays so strong? Perhaps because we bring in significant numbers who are in poverty and who prevent the easiest way to climb out of poverty (high wages). Raising minimum wage strikes me as very short sighted. At best a temporary fix to a more complicated and long term problem, and at worst the catalyst to accelerating a bad trend - by leading companies to adapt different business models.
  21. drjim
    More outsourcing, less immigration
  22. drjim
    I think the Twins are in a great position to use my pet theoretical bullpen strategy. I'm a believer that you need to keep relievers in pretty set roles at a given time, rather than constantly changing each game trying to chase leverage. With that said, I think you could do co-closers, a LH and RH, and match up the 8th and 9th accordingly depending on expected matchups. Use May as the 7th and occasional 8th guy, and let Jepsen and Perkins take the last two innings. Jepsen is a free agent to be and Perkins has a long term deal, so financially they could be amenable. The Twins briefly stumbled into it a couple years ago with Perkins and Burton, but Jepsen is obviously better. Of course, this would work even better if they had another good LH reliever to form the bridge with May to the co-closers.
  23. drjim
    Boom. Mike Strong. We're coming, we're coming.
  24. drjim
    Interesting, he has done better significantly better in K-BB against lefties the past three years but his OPS against is the opposite. Fluke! Small sample size! I actually can't explain it, but think there might be something there. Though Abad really should be the second lefty, if anything.
  25. drjim
    That makes sense, but there has been such a slow movement of position guys, I wonder if there is even that much of a market.
×
×
  • Create New...