Major League Ready

Sorry. I did in fact quote the wrong post. This is the post I meant to quote. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It’s only been said a million times on here. Most by me haha. What does everyone prefer? A.) A team that continually wins its division and plays the course every year using the farm system to supplement FA losses. Never making any big moves and always getting to the playoffs but never having enough firepower to make an October run to the World Series(2000’s Twins). B.) A team that builds from Within. Stacking up high draft picks in order to build a team. Continually at the bottom of the league. Finally getting a core, makes very aggressive moves and trading away top prospects to supplement your core. Making the World Series 2 years in a row and winning it once. After that returning to the bottom to hopefully do it again in 5-10 years.(2013-2016 Royals). There’s no such thing as dynasties anymore in MLB. You get to chose one of these. Which do you pick? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I should add I don't agree with the concept. I agree dynasties are a pipe dream, especially for mid-market team. However, sustaining a window or success or however you want to measure it is possible. I watch almost every game / every year. The Royals sucked for most of 20 years, got hot as a wildcard team one year and they were a dominant team for one year. Now the suck and probably will continue to suck for a long time. Not a model I care to emulate. I understand there are a lot of fans who prescribe to the go all in theory. I don't find that to be sound judgment given that particular outcome happens once every 30 years if our franchise wins their fair share and I don't want to watch 100 loss teams.

Were the Dodgers, Angels and all of the other teams interested just cheap too?

I am not sure why you use the Royals as an example of free agents contributing to winning a world series. The free agents they had are they type that are ridiculed here. The problem I see here consistently is the insistence that signing free agents is the path to post season success. Have you noticed this position is never supported here by any actual history of success. The were actually better and won the WS after their big acquisition was gone. Cueto was a deadline pick-up so that example does not support complaining they have not done anything yet. Cueto who had nothing to do with getting them there as he pitched relatively poorly. He was decent in the playoffs but they won 4-1. Pretty hard to say his acquisition was essential to the Royals winning the WS. The trade for Davis was actually more important to them winning the WS and he would certainly not been considered a big acquisition at the time of the trade.

Davis made $18M last year / $17M this year. Our BP total is $16.5M. It's not likely to get any more expensive the next couple years either. Between the BP and the rest of our core we are in a position to take a chance on Ryu's durability or just sign Donaldson. I would like to see them trade Rosario and sign both.

So you assumption is because they have not signed a 4th established starter by Dec 20th. that the current roster is their completed plan. Man you would be a tough guy to please as a sales manager.

I really wanted Wheeler because I thought he had the capacity (stuff) to elevate his game during the playoffs and be a difference maker. However, I was engaged once too. Family is strong draw and getting bent out of shape because a FA had other priorities. I also listened to Vanwagenen and Duquette which caused me to question my position. His former team and at least one GM were quite sure there were better ways to spend the money. I guess the point is that I was not so sure about Wheeler that I was going to get bent out of shape given these considerations. Ryu could end up being the best option outside of Cole / Strassburg so I am not going to react until he is off the board and even then, we have 3 months to make a trade.

Fair enough. It's not the greatest analogy but that hardly detracts from the point that the Yankees had $400M more in revenue. The premise that this does not matter and the Twins should follow the same practices demonstrates that fanaticism can trump even those most basic business premise / logic / common sense, whatever you want to call it.

Yankees revenue in 2018 was $688M / Twins $269M. Do you really not understand the Twins can't follow the same practices as the Yankees? Do people who earn 50K have the same spending habits as people who make $150K? Going nuts for a guy who very probably a post-season separator is also quite different than a guy most people think is a mid rotation SP.

I have always said there are a handful of position players. Where I have said it does not exist is in 5+ year SPs so don't change my position for your benefit. I have always conceded the Greinke signing . If you think the billion dollar TV contract they just signed does not make this an aberration we just disagree on that example. Bumgarner is a legit example. What can we learn from this example. Does the fact AZ was his 1st choice perhaps solidify the premise that they have to want to be here? Show me examples of success stories. There is an awful lot of take my word for it and when I actually go look, the facts don't support these transactions were productive. For example, the As trade was an absolute disaster. You can't say the twins trying but losing out on prospects does not count and then say making a trade that is counterproductive counts. The Royals won the WS after their big trade asset left. They got very lucky that the included player performed far better than anyone dreamed. Cueto was mediocre at best when he first came over and he was not the difference in a Royals 4-1 lashing of the Mets. I am drawing a blank on Cleveland. When did they trade top prospects for SPs?

Are you saying the plan is to pay his so much for 2 years that the other 3 years don't matter? The bottom line is any opt out strategy relies on him staying healthy and AZ being in the market for a SP. Why? For the possibility he might make a little more. Of course, he has to go somewhere he does not want to be for two years and move again in two years. The problem with that logic is that he already said he left money on the table because he really wants to be in AZ so all you have done is spun a different scenario of pay him more so that he will come here.

Maybe a comparison of what the other playoff teams that did not get Cole have done so far this off-season will make people feel a little better. I would think the off-season is not over for any of these teams. Dodgers – Signed Blake Treinen Nationals – Lost Rendon / No adds / resigned Gomes& Kendrick Astros – Lost Cole & Miley / resigned Joe Smith and signed Garneau (650K) Rays – Lost Garcia & DeArnaud Brewers – Lost Grandal & Moustakis & Lyles / Picked up Garcia & Lindbloom A’s – Lost Treinen and Anderson / Resigned Diekman Braves – Signed Will Smith / Cole Hamels / DeArnaud / Resigned Oday & Culbertson

Not to mention BV would essentially be saying he screwed up so badly after 1 year at the job that he already needs to tear down the team. Not happening.

So you are saying he should chose to come here for more money and then not care if it cost him a pile of money to opt out and go to Arizona? Of course, players never get injured where Arizona would not want him at all. I mean that never happens, right?

You misrepresented what I said. Show me where I said $200M in revenue. I said equal or less revenue than the Twins every time I asked. Why? Because revenue has changed substantially over the years and I was being fair to allow for a reasonable comparison as revenue changed. Also, because I knew someone would bring up the Cardinals, Giants or some other team with far more financial resource and that comparison makes no sense. To ask for examples form a subset of teams in a similar position is business analytics 101. I welcome your explanation as to why asking for meaningful examples it is exhausting or if you prefer why examples of teams with $60M or $90M or $180M of incremental revenue is an equivalent example.

What if Arizona is not in a position to sign a FA SP to a high AAV at the point. They likely spend that money elsewhere or they may reach a point where it makes sense to rebuild. Would you bet Arizona will be a contender two years from now if you have the deal you really want today? The scenario also requires Bumgarner to remain effective and healthy. My guess is his agent is well aware of how often free agent SPs fail after the 1st year. In case you missed it. I provided that history here last year and as they say "the truth is ugly".

I already stated with specificity what I would do. Even posted the roster with a budget. It jsut so happens that with the exception of Wheeler and a LH RP, the team has done exactly what I planned. Here is what I wont do. I won't complain because they did not sign Cole or Strassburg. Only the top couple markets had the capacity to land those two players land Strassburg was not leaving his team with that kind of offer on the table. Anyone who pays any attention to the national media heard the same message. I won't complain because they were unable to land the one guy I thought was both a real upgrade and within the financial parameters the Team could absorb. The premise that family is an important consideration in where someone elects to live is not foreign to me. I won't complain about Bumgarner because I did not believe he still had the ability to dominate in the playoffs. I might be wrong but several other teams including his current and both LA teams agreed. I won't suggest they are unwilling to spend as much as SLC that grossed $480M more than the Twins. I will appreciate that the Twins actually spent $230M more of their available revenue. (Rev-Op Cost) I won't complain they have not made a trade for two reasons. One, I can't think of a single SP that plays for a team I believe would make such a trade. Two, teams generally look to the trade market after FA options have been exhausted. We are not there yet. I finally, I won't complain until the off-season is over. You would think last year would have been a lesson.

No. The buyout is only good (used) if you don't feel he was worth the amount of the option year. There is some merit to what you say in that the agreed to rate is $5M even if he was so great as to merit a higher contract in 2021.

You know ... what I would love to see is someone concede that the Bull&^%$ about the Twins unwillingness defies any logic. The unwillingness to spend requires the absence of logic. At least every now and then Mike admits it's just a product of fanaticism. I keep bringing up the prospects they have not traded because you and others insist other teams WOULD trade them. When I ask for examples of top 20 prospects they have traded in these success stories the topic is ignored. It might even makes sense to use that capital but the hole song and dance about the success of others was a product of trading elite prospects is not based on solid examples. BTW . I don't need any lessons on basing conclusion on facts. You either did not check the facts when you claimed the Twins were less willing to spend because I don't believe you fail to understand the $480M additional revenue produced by the Cards constituted an incremental ability as opposed to a difference in willingness.

It’s impossible to have a discussion if you are unwilling to apply any objectivity. Kelly had been up and down over the course of 3 years. He was a decent player but there is no way he ever was an equivalent prospect to Lewis/Kiriloff. Brett Wallace may have been #27 with BA but that is one opinion and we know those rankings have lag. He never demonstrated Lewis or Kirilloff potential and he was traded by both the A’s and Blue Jays before he ever made it to the Majors and he had negative WAR for his career. We are just going to have to disagree that we don’t have a prospect other than our top 2 that are equivalent to Brett freaking Wallace, I am sorry. Let’s keep in mind the premise being debated here in general is what the twins are willing or unwilling to pay or give up in the form of prospects. Many here are calling for a Lewis or Kirilloff plus a couple other top prospects, perhaps even Balazovic. Let’s not pretend that is the same kind of sacrifice as trading a couple decent prospects for Goldschmidt. You guys are far too baseball savvy to say this with a straight face. It’s convenient. In terms of their WILLINGNESS to pay. I think many of you confuse willingness with ability. Since the Twins moved in Target Field they have averaged 233.67M in revenue and an average payroll of $109.4. The Cardinals have averaged $282M in revenue and $137.5M in payroll. In other words, they have average $48M more in revenue and 28M more in payroll. A reasonable measure of willingness to spend would be the percentage of revenue after operating expenses. By this measure, the Twins have been willing to spend $20M per year more than the Cardinals. I am not going to suggest you don’t understand the difference between able and willing in this context. Coincidentally, you are unwilling to see the difference. The Twins generated 438M less in revenue over 9 years. Therefore, they were unable to match their spending not unwilling. They actually spent a higher percentage of dollars available for payroll (Rev-Operating Cost) Therefore, the the Twins actually spent more aggressively than the Cardinals.

I understand the Cardinals have done some things the twins have not but let’s be more specific than they have acquired or extended certain players. I honestly don't know of any top 25 type prospects the Cardinals have traded away. Have they traded this type of prospect? I ask because there is a big difference between trading depth for Goldsmith vs trading away Lewis or Kirilloff. If not, what you are saying is that they have been willing to trade depth and spend more on free agents and/or extensions. Is this fair?

I thought we were talking about free agent acquisitions. You can't say the Twins largest contract is Santana If we are talking about extensions. Also, while we were not specifically about SPs, that has been the focal point so if you want to hold up the Cardinals as an example, they have gone their once in recent history and traded away the player the next year after he failed. As I said, I was not inclined to compare the Cards because they have substantially higher revenue than the Twins. Why don't we compare STL to the Yankees. How hard is it to figure out the spent more because they have more? You really have to bury your head deep to ignore the revenue difference.

I looked it up but did not respond. Partially because it does not make sense to expect the same practices from a team that was 7th in revenue with 356M in revenue as a team that was 22nd at 269M. However, I think the Twins compare quite well in terms of productivity of FAs. I have listed STLs transactions below. They did sign two 5 year deals. Dexter Fowler for $5/82.5M and Mike Leake for 5/80. Their FA transactions or perhaps I should say their largest FA contracts have had little impact on the team’s success. Fowler has produced 1.9 WAR total over his first 3 seasons. Leake had .4 bWAR in 2016 and was traded in 2017 and was not very good the remainder of the contract. Specifically where pitching is concerned. They did fairly well with Lohse on a modest contract. More recently, they signed to deals for high end RPs (Miller / Holland) that have been a complete bust. So, if the goal was total dollars spent, STL wins. If it’s productivity or impact we are measuring, I will take the Twins compare just fine. 2019 – Largest contract was Andrew Miller 2/25M. He produced -.4 bWAR 2018 – The biggest deal was actually Greg Holland for 1/14. 2017 – Dexter Fowler 5/82.5M. 2016 – Mike Leake. 5/80 2015 – There biggest deal was Pat Neishek 2/12.5M 2014 – Johnny Peralta for 4/53. He was very good the 1st year. Last 2 years were replacement level. 2014 – Carlos Beltran 3/34. Very good the 1st year / replacement level the last year 2013 - Kyle Lohse 3/33 2012 – Beltran 2/26

Atlanta and Houston’s largest FA signings back to 2012 are below. (from Spotrac) Houston’s biggest contract was Josh Reddick 4/52M. He produced 3.4 WAR in his first year and 1WAR each of the last 2 seasons. Brantley was quite productive last year but that deal is actually a much better example of getting production without signing the 5+ year deals. Will smith at 3/40 is Atlanta’s biggest contract in the past 5 years. Their largest was for BJ Upton 5/72.5M which was an absolutely horrible signing. So, holding up Atlanta as an example of building through high profile free agents also lacks substance. Houston 2020 – Dustin Garneau – 650K 2019 – Michael Brantley – 2/32 2018 – Joe Smith 2/15 2017 – Josh Reddick – 4/52M 2016 – Tony Sipp – 3/18M 2015 – Jed Lowrie – 3/23 2014 – Scott Feldman – 3/30M 2013 – Carlos Pena – 2.9M 2012 – Chris Snyder – 1/750K Atlanta 2020 – Will Smith - 3/40M 2019 – Josh Donaldson - 1/23M 2018 – Peter Burjos – 1/1M 2017 – Bortolo Colon – 1/12.5M 2016 – Mike Minor – 2/7.5M 2015 – Nick Markakis – 4/44M 2014 – Ervin Santana – 1/14/1M 2013 – BJ Upton – 5/72.5M Upton produced 1.9 WAR total over the 5 years. 2012 – Jack Wilson 1/1M BTW … The Atlanta area is quite nice with a very nice climate.

or sucks for 20 years like KC.

Because the union and the agents want to promote a culture of players accepting the highest bid.