Major League Ready

If we toss out Buxton's first season when he had wRC+ of 5 and look at the next 3 seasons, he had a wRC+ of 86 / 92 & -2. Buxton played in exactly one-third of the games played. Is it at all puzzling the team did not extend early on? It would have been great if they had because it probably would have been a great deal. Would Buxton have signed the type of deal his performance to that point would have merited? IDK but it's not hard to understand why the Twins did not extend him early on like an Azuna or most recently Wander Franco. If they were going to get it done the time was probably after the 2019 season. However, he once again played in only 87 games. It's not surprising they were reluctant to bet big at that point and it would not be surprising that Buxton would not sign when he had the opportunity to greatly improve his value. I guess what I am saying is that this situation is not exactly an enigma.

Buxton or no Buxton, they need 3 SPs, a couple BP arms, and a SS. They also need to transition a corner OFer prospect to the majors this year. Transitioning a 3B is also just around the corner too. I would say they have some rebuilding to do with or without Buxton.

Hard to understand this one. I can accept if they invest in the future by devoting this year to retooling. However, if that's the case, give Contreras or Boyd a shot or just cut Cave and make a trade for someone with upside.

Honestly, I don't know what to think. He was incredible early this season. One the other hand, that was a very small sample compared to 5 years of very modest offensive performance. I find myself hoping they sign him but if I get objective for a moment it could be detrimental to the team if they get exactly what they got the last 5 years. Yet, I am still hoping they sign him because I want to believe he will perform more like the early 2021 season and less like previous to this season.

Actually, it means he is playing it has nothing to do with how well he is playing. The CBA prohibits any of the incentives to be based on quality of performance. Try to get that deal working in any other profession. If I show up, I want you to pay me like an elite performer regardless of how I perform. I really hope they sign him too but I don't have any problem understanding their caution.

I am going to use your favorite term. Which teams with below average revenue operate in a manner expecting to contend every year? There are not any. Once again, you will just ignore the facts. Prove me wrong with examples. Who said the add has to be a JA Happ type? Second, are you saying that it does not matter if our prospects get innings/experience at the major league level? Don't expect to respond with anything other than where are your examples if you follow your normal pattern and avoid backing up your statement by providing examples of teams that expect to win every year.

They could also add a couple guys to help with the transition to the guys coming up. That gives them a decent product (sells tickets) and provides a better opportunity to build a homegrown pitching staff which in turn will provide a better path to building a contender. There is often a presumption among fans that every year is a go for it year. That presumption does not exist in a FO.

I sure thought it was more fun winning 100 in 2019 then losing 89 in 2021.

When the Twins were out of it we all wanted the prospects to get a shot and we hated it when players that were not part of the future got playing time. The same is true of these other teams. Are we supposed to penalize them for trying to rebuild their teams. I don't believe they are trying to lose. They are trying to develop players and the practices which best facilitate getting better result in losing for a period of time.

Amen!

You have manipulated what I said to fit your needs. I included the range of anyone to "exceptionally skilled" in other areas not directly providing the skillset to run a baseball team. You are high on the list of people who think they are more skilled than this front office but I am sure you have a lengthy list of credentials that make that a reasonable presumption.

or they could be saying that they learned something from Milwaukee, Miami, Cleveland, Tampa, and Oakland. Maybe they are thinking the only way they can truly contend is to build from within.

It was definitely a mistake to share actual experiences pertaining to why the front office does the things they do. Of course, I too dislike some of their transactions. I am not adequately informed in terms of their operations to have an informed opinion where that’s concerned but I probably would not agree with some of their operating practices either. What an ego to believe an extensive business education and actual profit and loss experience responsibility for a 9 figure businesses would provide a little perspective. I realize now that it makes far more sense that the angst with the Twins or sports team in general is a result of the average person or even people exceptionally skilled in other disciplines being more skilled and having a superior perspective to running a team than the people who worked their way up to these jobs. Who wants to hear that the experience working their way up might provide insight the average guy does not possess when you want to rail about their incompetence. Of course, there are no out of check egos involved in believing one has a superior understanding of how to run the team no matter how inexperience one might be in actually running an organization because it’s a simple job. Why they pay those guys multi-million dollar salaries is a complete mystery.

I have NEVER suggested they are a low revenue team. As a a matter of fact I have been careful to point out they are below average and also pointed out they could follow some of the practices of the Rays but use their incremental revenue to do some things the Rays can't. You won't find the A's or the Pirates or other similar teams signing Josh Donaldson. In other words, I agree they can definitely do more than the lowest revenue teams but it makes no sense to believe there is a problem if they don't sign guys at the very top of the market., especially when they are already carrying Donaldson's salary. The reasonable comparison would be to look at teams of similar revenue. I included any teams with below average revenue just to provide the opportunity for anyone to use any of these team's signings as an example. You might notice that whenever I ask for examples, I get tangential responses, never an acknowledgment of these facts or any sort of a response with actual examples. People prefer to ignore the facts and believe what they want to believe in when presented with hard fact.

Same is true for constant insistence of sports fans everywhere that management is incompetent. The reason for this perennial assumption that teams are being managed so poorly could not possibly be that it's the sports fan that does not understand. They are all experienced senior level management running 9 figure businesses.

It's am afraid it's necessary to point out the actual issue is revenue disparity given the fact that there are many people here who can't seem to grasp the concept you can't spend money you don't have.

Apparently you are more skilled than Billy Beane.

This is not germane to the point I was making. I responded to a poster who said the Twins are not a serious MLB team because they did not sign Berrios or give him a 7 year deal or however you want to interpret it. I pointed out that there is literally one example of a below revenue team making such a signing. Point being that it's not something low revenue teams do. People constantly bitch about the Twins not doing things that none of the low revenue teams do. It's an ignorant bitch. It would be great if people had enough common sense to ask themselves if this is a Twins thing or a product of being a below revenue team. The argument they should follow bad practices because they have not been good at the practices essential to lower revenue teams is so ill-conceived it boggles my mind. Wouldn't the best course of action be to improve those practices. For example, get a new PBO and GM. Replace the people managing identification and development as well as improving analytics. I don't know yet if they have succeeded at these tasks. However, I am absolutely certain pursuing inferior practices because we have not excelled at best practices in the past would be the height of incompetence.

How many other teams with below average revenue signed SPs to 7 year deals in the past 25 years? The answer is 1. Colorado signed Dan Hampton which was a horrific signing. Is Colorado the only serious MLB team among those teams with below average revenue? Tampa traded Snell last year. Are they not interested in winning? Oakland is looking to trade their established SPs. Does this indicate they are not a serious MLB team. Was Billy Beane demonstrating he was not interested in winning when he traded Jeff Samardzija for Bassitt and Semien?

Sorry to be harsh. I had to evaluate hundreds of people over my career at various levels ogf management and also as a consultant. Passing judgement on people is a difficult role / responsibility and should not be done without being fully informed. The kind of observations you are using are not even remotely adequate to form an educated opinion much less pass convey that opinion publicly. You are also assuming he is afraid to make a big trade when it is quite possible a big trade is not the best strategy. How many below average revenue teams have made a trade in the past 10 years for the type of established elite players called for by fans. They are relatively rare. Look at playoff teams with below average revenue and you will find the number of players acquired as prospects outnumber established players acquired for prospects by a wide margin. Tampa has thrived in part because they understand asset management and 5 or 6 years of control has more value than 2 years of control. Fans love trades for established players because they are impatient but there is a premium to be paid for established players that does not favor small market teams. Trades might be the best strategy when you have San Diego's incredibly deep farm system and/or you have all the other pieces. Does it make sense to make a big trade with all of the holes this team has presently. It might if they could convince a couple top FA SPs and a SS to come here. What you assume is fear is simply good judgement, IMO.

So how do you reduce the years of control significantly without absolutely destroying the ability of small market teams to compete which in turn will hurt the game's popularity and reduce the overall revenue. Therefore, reducing the amount of revenue available to pay players. The average fans view of these dynamics does not account for the owners desire to what's best for the game. The players are much more focused on getting theirs right now.

Do you think there is even a remote chance the Players Union would ever allow pay based on performance? They are all about guaranteed pay.

The fan base does not have his job because they are not the best judge of what should be done. They don't pay people millions to do this job because anyone can do it. The fact you would make this statement about someone without ever so much as having a conversation with him is good evidence you don't have the skill set to judge him.

The other teams don't recognize the same benefits from signing a top pitcher? Plus, if he brought in 5,000 extra fans who all spent $100 that would not cover half his salary. That's assuming he had the same impact in road games.

The CBA does not allow these types of bonuses. The union only accepts bonuses based on appearances / ABs. They won't accept bonuses based on a high level of performance.