Major League Ready

I am not really sure, Mike. BP arms are so unpredictable. The question I am raising is basically … Are high dollar free agent RPs a good utilization of financial resources? Would we be better off spending our available free agent dollars on position players or is there a category of SPs that have proven to effective spending. This is by no means a suggestion we not spend for BP arms. I just does not look like the correlation between salary and WAR is very strong. I wish I had the data available to the FO. It would be a lot easier to recognize which practices (player profiles) have produced the best results. We are seeing changes to spending strategy across the league. There are teams recognizing they have built rosters that maximized their spending and resulted in good teams but not serious contenders and they are reconstructing those rosters. I am suggesting we not follow a path that leads to the same result … good but no real chance of becoming a serious contender.

Why are the only options the very highest AAV RPs or AAA players? The whole point of presenting the facts is to illustrate the very highest paid RPs have not been the most effective. Should the goal not be to follow the most effective practices for a mid market team?

Listed below is the fWAR for the top 8 RPs in terms of AAV. Jansen 2017 ------- 3.2 Jansen 2018 -------- .4 Melancon 2017 ----- .4 Melancon 2018 ----- .3 W. Davis 2018 ----- .9 Chapman 2017 --- 1.6 Chapman 2017 --- 1.9 Britton 2017 ------ .6 Britton 2017 ------ .1 A Miller 2017 ----- 2.4 A Miller 2017 ----- .4 Robertson 2016 -- .9 Robertson 2016 -- 1.9 Robertson 2016 -- 1.5 Nicasio 2017 ----- 1.5 Nicasio 2017 ----- .8 Average WAR ---- 1.175 1 of 16 seasons over 2.5 WAR 2 of 16 seasons over 2.0 WAR 2 of 16 seasons over 2.0 WAR 5 of 16 seasons over 1.5 WAR Listed below is the fWAR for this years top free agent RPs in terms of AAV. Britton ---- 0.6 / 0.1 Robertson - 1.9 / 1.5 Miller ------ 2.4 / 0.4 Familia ---- 0.3 / 1.7 Joe Kelly -- 0.7 / 0.7 Herrera -- 0.1 / 0.4 Average WAR for the past two years = .9 1 of 12 seasons with a WAR of 2+ Listed below are the 2018 top RPs in terms of fWAR 1 - Blake Treinen 2 - Edwin Diaz 3 - Josh Hader 4 - Jose Leclerc 5 - Craig Stammen 6 - Felipe Vazquez 7 - Adam Ottavino 8 - Jose Alvarado 9 - Will Smith 10 - Aroldis Chapman 11 - Taylor Rogers 12 - Ryan Pressly 13 - Joakim Soria 14 - Jeremy Jeffress 15 - Dellin Betances 16 - Jeurys Familia 17 - Kirby Yates 18 - Chad Green 19 - Tony Watson 20 - Mychal Givens

You will need to elaborate. If they signed a new contract with Fox Sports North or a new provider or bought into a partnership like half of the league why would they only get 1% of the increase they negotiated. Where does the other 99% go?

I would absolutely love it if the Pohlads decided to operate at break even. I just understand they are running a business. What about the teams that are making 4X the net profit as the twins, like the Redsox, Yankees, and Dodgers, for example. Do they on;y care about profit? The premise of relative spending matching relative revenue is about as simple as it gets. If you want to ignore this simple premise just as you ignore all of the facts I have presented, that is your right as well.

The Diamondbacks new TV contract is about double their old contract as I recall. I think they went from 35 or 40M to 75M/year. There is hope they could get to league average. It's a long / LONG way from the 8.5B contract the Dodgers signed but that contract is by far the highest in MLB.

Because I stated that it makes no sense to expect a team with below average revenue to spend at the league average. This is as simple as it comes so to refute the logic based on something St. Peter said about TV revenue (not total revenue) is a mess. I would add that the premise revenue does not impact ability to spend is beyond Naive. I would hope St. Peter does not think Twins fans are this stupid. That's why it's a mess. I sincerely hope this was taken out of context.

Why would it make any more sense that a team with less than average income spend the mid-point of payroll distribution as compared to the league average?

When the 2017 budget was constructed, the twins were coming off a 103 loss season in 2016. Therefore, it would stand to reason they would not maximize their budget in 2017. One could argue the Twins were still not serious contenders in 2018. However, the Twins FO took an optimistic approach and constructed a roster with the highest payroll in team history. The revenue part of this post is a mess. For starters, I did not say TV revenue, I said revenue. I don’t know the context of St Peter’s statement but there is no form of business (including non-profit) where revenue does not dictate relative ability to spend. The position the Twins should spend equivalent to the average MLB still team still only makes sense if their revenue is average. Whatever St Peter had to say has nothing to do with the validity of this equation. If their revenue was $375M which would equate to the team being roughly the same amount above average in revenue, would we be satisfied with them spending the average?

I never understand why people use the MLB average payroll as a measure of what the Twins should spend. That would make some degree of sense if the Twins produced revenue equal to the MLB average. They do not. Plus, teams maximize spending when contending and the Twins have not been in serious contention in quite awhile.

I have read a few articles trying to figure out revenue drivers. It's a lot harder to forecast than I expected. The correlation to any given driver is not as strong as one might think. I doubt a "big signing" has any significant impact. They have never had a big free agent signing unless you count Mauer. I would actually think the core performing would be more meaningful to fans but it would think team success has much more impact on attendance than signing a free agent unless it's a Harper/Machado type signing.

Where do we sit today?

Already there … Attendance has been eroding since they peaked at 3,223,640 the first year at Target Field (2010). Attendance last year was 1,959,197 which is roughly 40% off the peak in 2010. If you look at 2016-2018, attendance went up roughly 90,000 last year when they made the playoffs and then dropped back this year to a level almost identical to 2016. 2018 - 1,959,197 2017 - 2,051,279 2016 - 1,963,912 2015 - 2,220,054 2014 - 2,250,606 2013 - 2,477,644 2012 - 2,776,354 2011 - 3,168,116 2010 - 3,223,640 2009 - 2,416,237

Using this simplistic of a model to evaluate asset management strategy fails to account for the differences in trades in terms of asset management philosophy and/or implications. It does not make sense to categorize the trades Cleveland made for Kluber / Bauer / Clevinger or Coraasco as the same asset acquisition strategy (trade) as the trade for Chris Sale. Cleveland probably gave up less future WAR in the acquisition of Kluber / Bauer / Clevinger / Coraasco combined and they produced a combined WAR of 20.8 last year and all came with 6+ years of control. The Yankees are another good example. If you look down their roster, especially with position players, half of their WAR is a result of trade and the other half drafting. However, the prospect cost for these players was marginal. Aaron Hicks / 4.7 - Traded for a BU Catcher (JR Murphy) Didi Gregorius / 4.2 - Acquired while value still minimal Giancarlo Stanton / 4 - Prospect cost reduced significantly by taking on salary Gleyber Torres / 2.9 - Traded for while in A+ Luke Voit / 1.3 - Traded for while in AAA Andrew McCutchen / 0.8 - Deadline Trade If you look a little deeper at the data, trading for prospects or MLB players that have yet to establish themselves and drafting (including International) are by far the most significant contributors to WAR. This is not to say acquiring Chris Sale is a bad idea. What it means is that drafting and trading for players before they are established is the best way to get to the position of adding final pieces like Chris Sale.

Giving Buxton a vote of confidence at this point makes sense. It's a good way to mitigate the riff between him and the organization. OK, Byron, we understand your frustration, hopefully you can understand our side of this too. We are going to give you ample opportunity to prove yourself, including naming you the CFer now. While I would not normally condone scholarships, the organization did not handle this well and this is a reasonable way to mend fences. Given Buxton's potential, giving him a lot of rope in a season full of question marks seems prudent even without the service time controversy.. If somehow all the other questions are answered positively but Buxton struggles, we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

I dislike bullpen games. It's just too taxing on the BP unless the other 4 SPs provide consistent starts. Give Mejia a shot. I just don't see him as a RP and it makes no sense to cut him. I would rather give him a shot for a couple months. If he continues to exit early, use the "stacker "approach with whichever AAA guy looks ready. That would be a good way to break guys in the type of guys we have at AAA right now.

Great idea but it seems like the often bantered Brian Dunsing fantasy trade. Can you name a couple trades where established SPs that are/were better than Berrios were traded for numbers of mediocre prospects? I suppose if they have 2 years of control or less that might be possible but that's NOT a good fit at this point. I am not sure I can think of one with even 2 years of control. KC traded the rookie of the year (future AS) and Odorizzi for 1 1/2 years of Shields. I just don't think you can get that type of SP without giving up a high ceiling prospect. Our pitching depth has none of those. If we had such a prospect, the last thing I would want to do right now is trade them.

Three reasons. 1) MLB Players are habitual creatures and most players prefer to stay if it does not cost them financially. 2) Eliminates the risk associated with injury or poor performance. 3) He just witnessed Dozier's value plummet.

I think it's a fair assumption that the only way getting to free agency a year later does not hurt Buxton financially is if he is so bad that he is non-tendered. It's a matter of how much. The impact will be very modest if his offensive production renders him a 4th OFer. If he reaches his ceiling, the impact will be $15-20M (rough guess). Of course, it could be anywhere between to the two extremes.

You keep going back to the AAA example which is of very little relevance. ho you used as an example is behind Mejia who is a decent #5. He is also behind Steward and Gonsalves. They won't be resorting to AAAA SPS. You keep harping on the 1 year deal thing. How many times do I have to point out there was one deal last year that was actually a one year deal and it certainly was not the utter disaster Darvish or Lynn would have been. Why won't you address the relative ineffectiveness of free agents SPs on 4-5 year deals after the 1st year. You have insisted this is a must. Are you willing to address this fact or not.

Charlie Morton being gone is of little relevance to what we were discussing. You have been insistent we should sign long-term deals even if we are not ready this year because we will have them when we are ready. I wondered if you might have a point so I looked back to 2012-2015 to present to see how that strategy plays out. In other words, how have these SPs performed after the 1st year. Well, they only produced 3 seasons with a 3+ war / and 16 seasons with a WAR of 1.7 or less. The average after the first year was 1.27 WAR. You also used Arietta as an example of a good strategy. $25M on a 2 WAR pitcher is not only a bad strategy is self-defeating. The relevance of Charlie Morton was that he produced an additional 1.2 for $11M less which would pay for a premier BP arm which collectively is a much better strategy to produce wins. If we max the budget we would have roughly $60M to spend. Producing 5 WAR, assuming the 5th spot in the rotation is replacement level (Mejia is better than replacement level) is a very bad strategy. I just assumed you would defend the strategy you have been adamant about. Is an average of 1.27 WAR a practice we should follow. Did free agent SPs perform better past year 1 in a different period. It's not just you, Mike. Lots of people here insist we should makes these moves ready or not because it's been a long time since we have been good. I did not go back all that far but the hard facts seem very clear that free agent SP contracts have been bad after the 1st year and horrible the last 2-3 years. I serious doubt we have heard the last of "I am tired of waiting" yet not a single defense of this strategy.

60 ABs for a guy who has had 1000 ABs is going to have a meaningful difference? So much so it's worth of losing an additional year of control? Last year was also a lost season so him coming back was of no value to the team. Hopefully, this team comes together and they are in contention that final year. Is it not the job of leadership to make decisions that put a contender on the field? Why is it OK for players to always do what is in their best interest but the team is held to a different standard? Are they in the least bit interested in keeping the team together if they can get a little more money in free agency? Players are all too anxious to flee at the first opportunity. Dozier could not wait to be a free agent. I am with Riverbrian. We should be for us (team) first. I will take the extra year if I can get it.

I was listening to the MLB network on satellite radio yesterday and they said Iglesias has the highest fielding percentage in the history of the game. I did not know that fun fact but like you I thought that was the best route. Schoop does offer a really high ceiling. This has a bunch of high potential guys with high uncertainty so why not another one. If he does bounce back, we have a slightly better shot at signing him next year, especially if he is good enough to extend a qualifying offer.

It’s hard not to see both sides of this argument with even a minimum of objectivity. With the preface that hindsight is always 20/20, the Twins did not handle him or his service time well. He would not have had enough service time to make last September’s service time critical had they handled him properly. However, to put the blame purely on one side or the other is not very objective IMO. The team handles this poorly but Buxton’s performance warranted being sent to the minors before he was actually sent. Buxton should recognize that the fact the service time was so close was because the Twins stuck with him longer than probably should have. Is this situation all that different from any great prospect that was not called up? I mean, Glad Jr. did not get called up. If we polled baseball writers, which player would get voted most likely to succeed? The fact that Buxton has major league service time does not negate the fact that his ability to hit at the ML level is very much in question, perhaps more so than when he actually first came up.

Where to start …. Let’s start with one year bargains. When you started beating that drum I pointed out that only one of the players (Lynn) was a 1 year deal. Morrison and Rodney had team option attached which is even better than a two year deal. You ignored these facts and continue to beat this drum. You keep insisting we should sign FA pitchers now because then we will have them when we need them. I listed all of the free agents SPs listed over the past several years. The FACT is that after the 1st year they have produced an average of 1.3 WAR. Collectively, in 22 season they have produced 3 seasons over 3WAR after the 1stt season while producing 16 seasons of 1.7 or less and 13 seasons of 1WAR or less. How long are going to lean on the Yehlich deal. We would all love to make those deals every day. They are very uncommon. How many deals were made hoping for this result where the player traded for broke out vs performed at his current level and how many busted afterward. There are lots of examples of SPs who were traded that busted. It may have been injury related but the result is still the same. Teams don’t trade break out candidates and we can’t hope for other teams to do the stupid stuff the Marlins have done. That’s why so many teams are interested in Kepler. It would appear they think he is going to break out.