Major League Ready

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.

They are a well below 500 team so attendance is going to be down. Do you want them to do what is necessary to make the team better for years to come or do you want them to put marginally more fans in seats. I will say this ... you are consistent in focusing on the present without regard to the future. Of course, this is your prerogative. However, that approach is destined to perpetuate failure which is why MLB teams don't operate that way. Even the biggest revenue teams have learned developing young talent is the most crucial component of building a winner and operate accordingly. Many of us have also learned this lesson. We don't want to continue to suck so we are willing to invest in the current team in order to improve our chances of building a team that can win for the next several years. Some of us want a better team next year and for many years to come. So, our preference is the team employee strategies that have the best chance of creating long-term success.

My guess is that a couple starters get converted but they might stretch out to 2023. Valimont / Varland come to mind and I hate to say it but Duran might end up in the BP. From the chatter so far on newly acquired Drew Strotman sounds like he could end up in the BP. Not sure what to think of Jax Reminds me a little of Matt Wisler. I am looking forward to seeing him the rest of the season. Really hoping Pineda and Happ are moved by the deadline to make room for auditions.

You are welcome to your opinion. I just don’t think anyone was saying those poor baseball players don’t get paid a decent wage in 1970. IDK, I was in grade school but I never heard of anyone opting to do something else because of the pay level. When it doubled 5 years later, I really doubt anyone thought they were underpaid for six months work. I would also assume that if it was an acceptable wage when it was half just 5 years earlier, most found the wages good. If not, when just 3 years later average salary increased 123% from double the amount in 1970, I am betting people at the time were thinking holy cow I wish my salary had more than quadrupled in just 10 years. I am really doubting anyone was thinking the poor baseball players only make 5 times the average American family. Then, baseball salaries nearly doubled again in 1981, 3 year later. Player salaries were 10X the average US household. I am thinking 99% of the public was thinking baseball players were fortunate to be so well compensated. Then, they doubled again four years later in 1985. I more than doubled again by 1991. Can we quit feeling sorry for them at this point with their salaries having gone up 2900%. That’s correct 29 fold in 21 years. Because if that was not enough, salaries roughly quadrupled over the next 20 years. If you are keeping track, that’s almost exactly 100 times what they were paid in 1970. Average US income grew roughly 5X over the same 40 year period. Oh ... and after they increased 100 fold, average salary went up over a million dollars per year. To put that in perspective, their raise (not their income) after increasing 100 fold is equal to 12.5 times the average household income in Minnesota. I think our (fans) concern where labor relations is concerned is that we don't lose a season and the preservation of the game. I see absolutely no reason why the average guy should give a crap about players getting even greater compensation. Top pitchers get paid the equivalent of 13 years income for the average house hold (not individual) for ONE GAME, For the season, the make the rough equivalent of what a an average couple would make in 400 years. I really don't know why we should care in the slightest if they get a raise.

I was a critic of Sano when most here did not like him criticized. However, I have to agree he is far from a bust. His career wRC+ is 116 which is 7 point s above the league average for 1B. Even his last 100 ABs produced a wRC+ of 111. I would trade him if someone else wanted to bet on his resurgence. In other words, we got something for him but I would not just dump him during a lost season. That males no sense.

Just to be clear. I don't know why any of us care how the dollars are distributed. The owners and the players are the beneficiaries of an industry that has grown steadily for 50 years. What I think we should care about is our experience as fans and the general good of the game. Work stoppages are not good for our experience as fans. We would not need to worry about work stoppages without the union and the players are certainly not an oppressed group that needs protection. The sport also needs whatever changes can aid in creating parity. Shorter team control control will further erode parity. Universal DH / Shifts, toy name it. The union will fight it if they can find a way to get a bigger slice of the pie. None of this is good for the fans or the game. Both sides are focused on money. That should not be a surprise but the owners have a greater interest in preserving / improving the game. I seriously doubt the current players care if the game shrinks and player salaries are reduced 10 years from now. I might have some concern for player salaries If the average payer did not make more in a year than the average American made in a lifetime, My concern is the preservation and improvement of the game and not losing a season because the best paid profession in the United States wants even more.

Show me one where the employee compensation is well over 100X more than what it was 50 years ago. Let's also not pretend that freedom to play elsewhere is all that important to most players. The ability to shop their services to the highest bidder is monumentally more important to the players than playing in a specific city. The vast majority would stay with the same team their entire career if that team would and could pay them the highest salary. I will leave you with a figure I like use to illustrate the great fortune of MLB players. That figure is $3.17M. That's how much the average American would make annually if average income had grown for everyone else as much as BB players.

No, it didn't work 50 years ago. The union does not have much impact today on how much teams spend and therefore what players make collectively. Any business is going to spend just so much. Teams are not going to suddenly spend more because players become free agents earlier and they would not spend any differently today if the union went away. There is also the fact that competition provides a competitive wage for other highly skilled professions without unions? Why does it work for Doctors, Lawyers, Managers and all the people in Technology and numerous other skilled professions but Baseball players somehow won't get adequate compensation without a union? There was a time where unions were necessary across many sectors of labor. Baseball is no longer one of them. People making an average of $4M/year don't need a union to get adequately compensated. The players association has become as much a hinderance as it is an asset to the good of the game and it might be leaning to the side of hinderance. I know you don't agree but show me another group / profession where wages have climbed at double digit rates for 50 years. Yes, I am aware that growth has flattened. The BB world changes too requiring many more employees and revenue is tapering off. The owners are going to try to make changes to counter the slowing interest in MLB. How much do you want to bet the union will fight those changes?

There is some merit to what you say in general but it's not nearly this simple.

It looks like they have about $400K above slot values to use to tempt Birdwell / others.

In hindsight it would have been a great move to capitalize on Kepler's value after what looked like a breakout season. However, it's very difficult to trade a high quality / established MLB position player for established MLB pitching. Not impossible but very difficult especially for a corner outfielder. They probably could have gotten pitching that would be ready in 2022 but that would not have gone over well with the fan base.