Major League Ready

It's pretty common to see a pitcher really elevate their ceiling by adding or even improving a secondary pitch. I would agree that it would be a win to get a decent RP in the 15th round. However, we should all be intrigued by the possibility of Varland becoming a starter. He reminds me a little or Lance Lynn and wouldn't be great if he ended up as good as Lance Lynn.

They should have left him on the bench hoping someone would take him off our hands.

This is what I was thinking when I posed the question. They could make it work with all 3. They just already have a lot of guys looking to get ABs at 1B, especially if Donaldson's defense continues to decline.

I had the same reaction after watching a couple of Varland's starts. He could make it as a RP with his reliance of the FB but his ability to make it as a SP at the major league level will depend on the development of his secondary pitched. Of course, that's what they are supposed to do in Milb.

I too have been hoping for Rortvedt's bat to develop. His defense is great and he will stick at the MLB level. A little better offense and he is really something. The question is ... How do we handle the roster with Garver looking like he can sustain his offense closer to 2019 than 2020. Do we trade Jeffers or do we use Garver at DH / 1B and catcher? Obviously, we don't need to make any decisions now.

Nice plan! The only thing I would do slightly different is move Donaldson if a good decent is available. I think our chances of being a real contender in 2022 is very low. By 2023 he will be in his age 37 season. I would rather give Miranda or perhaps even Lewis a chance to get established in 2022. Miranda is unlikely to ever be as good as Donaldson in his prime but there is a good chance he is as good as 37 y/o Josh Donaldson. Take that money and invest in pitching or a SS next year and you are no worse in 2022 and better (probably) in 2023. We would need to send money with him. However, it could be distributed over this year and next with no obligation in 2023. With Berrios leaving, this plan definitely does not bet on 2022 but it is also far from a rebuild. Adding Ryan and Strotman to Balazovic / Duran / Canterino / Winder / Enlow / Sands plus whatever we get for Berrios and Pineda gives us a very good bet to establish 3-4 SPs over the remainder of this year and next. That will provide the financial flexibility to retain Buxton, sign a top FA pitcher and even sign a SS if needed.

For starters, the Twins are not clearing out their ML roster and I have not heard anyone suggest they do so. However, that practice has been both common and successful when teams are looking to rebuild. KC started their rebuild that led to a WS victory after 20 years of futility by trading Zack Grienke. Their CF (Cane) and SS (Escober) came from that trade. The Astros traded every player on their roster with any experience when they started their rebuild. The Whitesox trade Sale and Eaton and they would not be in the position they are today without the multiple good players that came out of that trade. We could go on but what's the point because that is not what the Twins are looking to do. So far, the Twins have traded one player on an expiring contract and will trade more expiring contracts. I guess what I would suggest where this practice is concerned is to look around the league a little. Read some baseball news or listen some baseball radio shows/podcasts. Literally EVERY (when out of the playoff race) purges expiring contracts in hope of future improvement. It is not just common, it's standard practice. So, yes, failure to acknowledge this is a standard practice is going to put you in the minority because most of us pay attention to the practices across the league. Where Berrios and/or Buxton are concerned, that's a little different. The are under contract until the end of 2022. The difference is basically two-fold. They could bring back players that are difference makers for 6+ years. The FO has to weigh the value of the impact on 2022 by keeping them IF they get a great offer VS the impact on multiple years. Some of us weigh those variables and conclude the team would be better off taking the assets than betting on 2022 based on the fact we have many holes to fill. Others want to avoid letting good players go under almost any circumstance. You might want to take a look at what the Rays have done in recent years. They have clearly demonstrated the value of maximizing asset value.

I was with you up to the point where you made a sweeping statement about spending as if it were fact. Houston let Cole go? How are they doing? Cleveland's largest contract ever is $60M and they have had many 90 win seasons. The Ray's have had exactly one big contract, Longoria 100M and an AAV of 16.6M. The Royals largest contract was $72M and the Pirate's was $60M. One of the best decision the Cardinal's ever made was letting Pujlos go and one of the worst was signing Small/mid market teams making bad decisions is a way to be bad for a very long time. It also does not do any good even for big market teams with a core of affordable talent. Philly signed both Harper / Wheeler and Realmuto. They have not been good for a while. How about the Angels. They drafted the best player in the game and signed expensive free agents and have done very little for the last several years. Pujlos contract, even with their revenue, hurt them badly.

He is going to get bought out for 2.75M in 2023 unless 2022 is quite a bit better than 2021. I would love for him to rebound enough in 2022 that they want to pay him $14M in 2023. Who knows. He was great in 2019. Wouldn't it be nice to have that guy back because this guy is kind of hard to watch.

The BETA tests I was referring to are rule changes and I don't have any strong opinions there. For example, I am really on the fence on shift restrictions. I thought players who learn to hit the other way and bunt should be rewarded but it does not seem like players / teams are going to adapt. Therefore, maybe we should change thge rules, IDK. In terms of compensation, I think Milb players should make double what they make now. Why do you think we would disagree?

All of the BETA tests in Milb are a testament to the league's awareness of the problem. I suspect they also have examined a number of distribution options. Not knowing their plans, my confidence might be lower than warranted. It will be very interesting to see attendance numbers post attendance restrictions. I also wonder if the next CBA distributes the available dollars a little differently. I could see minimum salaries going to something like 750K / $850K / $1M over the first three year. Arbitration could start year 3 and the amounts could creep up. These factors would collectively redistribute dollars across to pre-arb and arbitration players.

Not so sure it looks that much different. Is revenue going to continue to go up? The momentum in popularity and revenue seems to have leveled off. I would guess revenue growth slows considerably. Then throw in the possibility of a work stoppage and that could turn even more people away. It would be interesting to have all of the local TV data. Is that slowing as well and along with it TV revenues? The Twins contract is among the lowest in MLB and it's up in 2023. I was hoping for a big bump but I am not so sure that happens. Hopefully, MLB finds a distribution strategy that makes it easier for all fans to get the broadcast. That could help TV revenues.

I am more concerned they sign Buxton than Berrios so don't get me wrong. I want them to sign him. My objection is two fold. One, people taking a hard stance with very little information. Two, he has performed at an elite level for a very short period of time AND he has not been able to stay on the field. So, the comparisons of players that have produced at an elite level and stayed relatively healthy is just not valid for determining compensation. The other point I will make is that spending wisely and winning has a more significant correlation as revenue compared to the top teams decreases. Let's just say we want to build a team with players producing 50 WAR. The Twins can spend about $3M per WAR and the top teams can spend $5M+ per WAR. Therefore, we have to be far more efficient with our spending. It's not an opinion. It's hard fact. Therefore, to not care about spending effectively is to not care about decreasing our chances to win.

No, I could not have made the same point. The point is no player with his track record has every gotten a guarantee anywhere near $125-150M you suggest is necessary to be legit. My point was that you used a very specific term "legitimate". Comps legitimize such a position not opinions. What you did was doubled down on an opinion. If your position is legitimate, there will be examples of other players with similar track records that have signed contracts for $125-150M accurate, I think you know those examples don't exist but persist regardless. You are comparing him to players with a much more established track record of production. Buxton has a career WAR of 11.1. His highest wRC+ 118 and that was a season in which he 135 PAs. His highest wRC+ in a season with more than 200 ABS is 111. He has not produced at a level that warrants 150M contract for more than a spurt. The really tough part is I agree with you and others who suggest there is a decent chance he will going forward. It's a very tough call.

Actually, if they fill the roster with strictly prearb players, assuming minimum salary goes to 650K and Maeda's contract pays as expected, the payroll would be $94M. The minimum is probably going to be higher than $650K but the difference probably not substantial in the context of this discussion. Arb numbers are in blue. They would need to spend quite a bit in the BP next year if they hope to contend. Starters SALARY 1 Jose Berrios 9,000,000 2 Kenta Maeda 9,000,000 3 Bailey Ober 650,000 4 Josh Winder 650,000 5 Jordan Balazovic 650,000 X Matt Canterino X Cole Sands X Blayne Enlow Free Agent Relief Pitchers 6 Taylor Rogers 8,000,000 7 Tyler Duffey 3,300,000 8 Jorge Alcala 650,000 9 Prospect 650,000 10 ? 650,000 12 ? 650,000 12 ? 650,000 13 ? 650,000 Colome (Buy Out) 1,250,000 Catchers 14 Mitch Garver 2,900,000 15 Ryan Jeffers 650,000 Infielders 16 Miguel Sano 9,250,000 17 Jorge Polanco 5,500,000 18 Josh Donaldson 21,750,000 19 SS 650,000 20 Luis Arraez 650,000 21 Nick Gordon 650,000 Outfielders 22 Max Kepler 6,750,000 23 Byron Buxton 7,000,000 24 Trevor Larnach 650,000 25 Alex Kirilloff 650,000 26 Rob Refsneider 650,000 TOTAL PAYROLL 94,100,000

I don't think any GM / PBO is going to determine an offer based on 27 games which is why I asked for a comp. He has ben a top 5 player for 27 games. It sounds like you are basing your offer on 27 games where he has been fantastic for sure. Now show us a comp of a $150M contract with even remotely similar past performance. I suspect you avoided the question because you know there is not a comp, not even close.

Right, I used a 3 year opt out and you said 4. My bad but the point remains the same at 52M guaranteed. Having said this, I totally agree with you and I have now heard two ex-GMs detail their thoughts on the radio and they agree with you. I just think Buxton and his agent are holding out for a higher percentage of guaranteed money. That seems very plausible, right. We can all sit here and throw out terms that seem to make sense but it's all quite irrelevant if the player is holding out for a guarantee. Players really strongly prefer to be guaranteed the money regardless of what transpires on the field so this should be expected. The same is true for Berrios. Many assumptions the team would not give him 5/125 or something in that neighbor. Therefor, the problem is the team must be cheap. How do we know that Berrios refuses to forego free agency for less than 6/180? All of our solutions are meaningless without know the player's expectations/demands. One last thought on Buxton, I really want to get him signed. However, I am conflicted knowing he has never stayed on the field and with the exception of one month this year, he has never been much above average offensively. His history is a bit like JBJ and I bet Milwaukee is wishing they had that deal back.

I can't think of another player with Buxton's career stats that got $150M or even close? The best comp is probably Springer last season. He got $150 over 6 years, not 5. Springers career WAR is 26, Buxton's is 11.1. Springer's career wRC+ is 135, Buxton's career wRC+ is 96 with a high of 118 with the exception of 110 PAs this season. Do you have comps or are you coming up with this number out of the blue?

With the opt out you would be guaranteeing 39M. I doubt he Buxton's camp see's this as a better offer. Perhaps more to the point, the sticking point seems to be Buxton wants less incentive more guarantee which is no surprise. IDK why so many people are assuming he is willing to take a significant amount of incentive component in any offer. He has played in 37% of games played in the past 4 years. It's no surprise Buxton and his agent are hoping someone will overlook this fact.

On the positive side, Ober is looking like he is part of the solution. That's pretty big. I am looking forward to Winder, Ryan , and maybe Balazovic getting a chance to prove they belong very soon.

You would hope that possibility was also discussed. The Twins could just wait until the end of next season. Buxton is not getting a big guarantee if he does not play 140 games at a high level next year. He has never sustained big offense numbers. Other teams are not going to value him based on this year's production especially given the low # of ABs. I see the odds of them just holding Buxton and making a QO next year as higher than holding on to Berrios. I would like to see them move Donaldson this year. They will have to pay part of his salary. However, they could do that this year and next year and have the acquiring team take full 2023 salary. That would put us in a position to not only retain Buxton but have budget room for pitching.

The Dodgers have not traded away top prospects either since Friedman came over from Tampa. That practice has kept them on top so I doubt they change that practice. I was really hoping Washington would stay hot when they had that streak before the all star game. That would have helped.

I have been critical of Sano for years. However, he can't watch Simmons while moving to first base and finding the bag. Simmons made a mistake going to second and Sano is not to blame for expecting the throw was coming from Simmons.

IDK how the Twins walk away from Berrios for Abrahams and another one of Lange / Thompson. However, the Padres have not demonstrated a willingness to part with this type of prospect. They did not trade them for Snell or Darvish.

I was not talking about myself. You twisted the point which was they were not considered under paid in 1970 so one would think public perception is they were well compensated when their salary had grown 10X. If they did not think so at 10X, I am sure public and player perception was they were paid well when it reached 20X what it was in 1970. Then, after it reached this level of 20X what they were paid in 1970, their salaries grew another 5X and therefore more than 100X what it was in 1970. There are many holes in your position in terms of economic theory. Every profession has people that are the very top of their profession. Their salary is not determined by the ability of the company to pay. Compensation for people living in a free market society are determined by one of two things. Some get paid a minimum wage determined by law. Employers pay the rest an amount sufficient to retain their services. Some industries don’t pay as well as others so they probably don’t get the most skilled people. However, employees in the most lucrative industries don’t pay employees based on ability to pay. They pay an amount sufficient to attract these people from other industries. So. Let me ask you this … If MLB paid every player on the 26 man roster $1M/year? That would still be twice as much as the next highest professional BB league. What percentage of their employees would they lose? Maybe 2 to 3 tenths of one percent could play in a higher paying sport, right. How many could make more in a different profession? Perhaps more importantly, how many people here would stay in their position at ¼ the pay for the average and less than 5% of their current comp for top players? The answer is none. Of course, some industries pay more or less because of the relative conditions of employment. You have to pay a laborer more to do certain dangerous / dirty jobs. It's hard for me to conclude that MLB as an industry pays more generously than other industries even though their employees play a game for a living.