big dog

Based on what? Some states have zero income tax, others go to a top rate as high as 13.3% (CA), and San Francisco has its own income tax, I believe 1.5%. You apply those rates to millions of dollars, why wouldn't that be at least something to consider?

It's clear he preferred the Mets to the Twins for some collection of reasons, but getting more money to pass on to his great-great-grandchildren probably wasn't it. The tax situation is really complicated, but I think when you add in the NYC local income tax, the much higher property taxes (assuming he buys a place), and other costs of living, the Twins offer was at least very competitive in terms of net dollars. He also could have continued to play shortstop. That wasn't enough. Playing with Lindor and other big stars, chance to take a big-stage team where it hasn't been in a long time, an ego that only cared about the average gross salary and not the net, who cares, I am long past time to move on. I really wonder what the issue in the physical was, and what the Mets are prepared to do about it. I'm going to cheer for good performances from Twins players, and just give up on any realistic chance of competing. MLB risks becoming like the NBA, with a few teams grabbing superstars who want to play together and can somehow all be paid. But without a salary cap that's going to get incredibly ugly. I can't control what "my" team spends, I'm not going to get angry about it. Life's too short to be controlled by what various rich people do with their toys, which make them billions of dollars in taxpayer-subsidized Sports Cathedrals. Screw it.

True, but he also just gave up 50 million extra dollars with the NY deal. That counts as well. The top CA state income tax rate is higher than in NY, but property taxes are higher in NY and there are lots of details that will affect the tax paid.

Per the NY Post, the Mets will be paying a luxury tax in the general area (Edit: per MLB.com, the luxury tax will be "over $50 million this year")/ Wow. I wonder how many years Cohen will be willing to pay that? Looks like the owners of the Marlins will have more money to pocket next year.

Taking cost of living and higher taxes into account, Correa is almost certainly making less net money on that Mets contract. I wonder what the Twins front office is thinking this morning? Did they plan to take stock of the situation today and consider a new offer, or had they already decided to keep moving in whatever direction they just chose? Did Boras give them a head's up that the Mets made an offer? I would think they knew what was going on and chose to stay out of it, but it would be interesting to know how it all played out.

I think there's a mistake here- the author of this piece must be Randball Stu. Only possible explanation.

I am just so relieved to hear that he will finally be able to give his family a good life. Can't wait for all the things he says about how great the Bay Area is. Hopefully he can buy a mansion near a Dior store.

I'm happy for Jake Cave. He's done yeoman work at AAA after being a big leaguer, glad to see him having some success. That triple last night was a big hit, at least for my blood pressure.

Happ managed a 2.22 ERA with the Cardinals in August, then regressed to a 5.96 ERA in September and appears to be out of baseball. A sudden change, but a pretty short one. I hope Duffey can turn it around and get back to big leagues eventually, ideally in the National League. He's a lot younger than Happ.

Very true. Jax and Megill both had blown saves in that game where the White Sox kept coming back and finally won. Still, 19 blown saves is a terrible sign, even though it thankfully doesn't mean 19 losses.

Given his last month, yeah I hope that Cleveland claims Smith too. If not them, then the White Sox please.

Nice work, Aaron Sanchez.

Trigger warning: depressing opinion from a usually somewhat-optimistic poster. Keith Law's new Top 60, out this morning, includes two Twins (Lee #40 and Rodriguez, #50+). One can't be traded yet, the other is out until spring. Our top four prospects from the start of the season- Lewis, Martin, Miranda, and Balazovic- have turned into three question marks and a guy who is about one-quarter of the team's offense right now. That pretty well describes the team's situation right now. It's a MASH unit with a few very good young or young-ish players and a bunch of A/AA prospects that are pretty far from elite. What are we going to be able to offer for any top-end pitchers? Barring some other GM going completely nuts and ignoring better offers from other teams, I'm afraid that my dreams of getting top talent in trade can best be summarized by a quote from "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid": It's over, don't you get that? Your times is over and you're gonna die bloody, and all you can do is choose where. All we can do is look forward to this year's version of Sergio Romo, I think. And maybe that's for the best, since we seem to be about 5 players short of a real major-league roster at the moment and perhaps for the foreseeable future. People get healthy, or we keep sinking. I don't think we have an option, other than finding that insane GM I mentioned.

My last game was ‘88 so I don’t know about those years. It was a great place for a day game and the night games were usually nice. Coliseum night games were fun. You hoped Candlestick night games weee survivable.

I remember watching that game, and thinking that Aggie was going to carve him up. I couldn't believe it when Fox hit that ball that far. Absolutely a terrible, terrible turning point. The Twins weren't loaded, but that was a very good team. Agreed on the huge underperformance by the A's of that era. I lived in the Bay Area from 1982-89 and watching that team develop was really impressive. They were loaded. Bill King and Lon Simmons were great broadcasters, too. As much as I hated the A's that was a really interesting team to follow. Plus you could go to almost any game, pay a few bucks, and walk up to sit anywhere you wanted, generally in great weather.

And of course we are going to have to give up a lot more to get that very good pitcher, I didn’t mean a couple of AA guys alone. I just don’t think Miranda should be part of the deal, and I certainly don’t think that Beckham changes my mind by even 1%. But that might be just me.

Agreed. That’s why I would give up one or even two of them for a very good pitcher. I’m not giving up Miranda for two months of a slightly above average pitcher. He’s not going to get us Castillo by himself- and if all we get is Castillo we are probably trading him for what ends up being one playoff win.

I look forward to Miranda being more productive than Beckham for a lot longer, myself. If we trade Miranda, and I really hope we don't, we're going to need real production from Steer.

Big Friday night for the pitching prospects with Jordy Blaze, Varland, Povich, and Hajiar all going. Let's hope for some strong performances.

I remember when the Twins went 3-3 against Baltimore and Seattle and we all thought it was a huge lost opportunity, because they had bad records. Those games happened not long before both teams went completely wild- looking back, those were better games than we thought. I don't worry too much about strength of schedule going forward, things change. And as others have said, acquisitions made or not made could be pretty important. Or, as is often the case, they could seem important and not work out. The White Sox looked to be unstoppable last year when they traded for Kimbrel, who was nearly untouchable that year with the Cubs and a dumpster fire with the Sox. I hope the Twins get a couple more players, but that doesn't mean it will work out.

10 runs for one win- I could see that, averaging over a whole bunch of games and teams. It would be interesting to note what that statistic does and doesn't control for, too. I assume that is for a team with an average pitching staff? I wonder if team ERA is used when people estimate number of wins from runs. I was using my numbers from today, which says 12 missing runs (just because the rank for runs moves around a bit depending on how much other teams scored since it is so similar, and over 96 games a little counts for a lot). If I take that statistic and move forward, we have 66 games left, so at the same pace it equals 8.25 runs over the rest of the season. If we use the figure of 18 runs, then it is a healthier 12.375 additional runs. So I might be surprised, but I'm guessing the statistical variation in this is pretty huge so I still doubt there is anything here that isn't swamped by luck. One win by getting 10 more runs, two wins by having a ball hit an outfielder's glove in play and bounce over the fence and a run scoring on a bad call when the other team had used its challenge up. I will take any and all wins, whatever the source.

Just looked at the numbers as of today. The Twins are now 11th in Runs per Game, so a couple of teams just above them must have had low scores last night. It is an extremely small gap among a large number of teams. They are currently at 4.563. Moving to fifth would now require 4.688, which would be another 12 runs, or 0.125 runs per game. That's an extremely tiny number to try and attribute to one or two specific reasons, given everything that factors into turning OPS into runs. I didn't do an innings adjustment, The Twins have played fewer extra inning games, so have fewer innings (they have 7 extras, league average is 8.5), but the ghost runners increase the number of runs scored per inning, so that's probably a net disadvantage for their stat. Does 12 more runs over 96 games matter? Mostly in one-run games, unless you have one of those games where Mickey Hatcher gets thrown out on the bases 3 times (that happened, right?). The Twins are 15-13 in one-run games, a .536 winning percentage that is just barely below their season winning percentage. It is better than some of the teams fighting for playoff spots (Tampa Bay, Boston, Philadelphia, St Louis, LA Dodgers, and SF Giants) and worse than the others, most of whom (other than Cleveland and Chicago) have better overall winning percentages than the Twins. I guess my takeaway, and yours could be completely different, from this statistical wool-gathering is that - it is unlikely anyone can find a particular reason to explain the run shortfall, at least any better than the vagaries of probability suggest; and - if you could find it, and you could fix it, getting another 0.125 runs per game isn't likely to add any wins, unless you could get them all in the bottom of the ninth and come from behind. Which I encourage this team to do, wholeheartedly. I also encourage Miguel Sano to grab the DH slot and catch fire. That could help a lot. Thanks for raising the question, TwinsData, I've enjoyed thinking about it.

Those are the odds as of 7/18. Since then, the Twins have picked up a game on the White Sox and 1.5 on the Guardians. So that's a good thing. My hot take is that I really don't care what a "rival official", whatever that is, tells Ken Rosenthal. Is it a rival trying to get the Twins to overpay to get someone from their team? A rival official who wants to feel important? Someone who got a phone call at an inopportune time and just wanted to say something quick to get off the phone without being rude? Too much noise, not enough signal. If I were a betting man, my most likely bet would be "someone other than the Twins" and my second-most likely bet would be "the Twins". Which is a terrible way to try and make money, kids, remember that gambling always favors the house. But if I had to pick a team right now, I'd pick the Twins. The White Sox seem the least likely to me, despite what seems like a loaded roster.

I'll just toss out that if everyone misinterprets what the writer believes s/he said, it might not entirely be the fault of the readers.

Agreed. Standard errors would shed some light on that, though only in a probabilistic sense.