Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,965 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
I completely agree but there are always going to be fans insisting that players don't understand it's a business. I seem to recall lots of posters saying that Buxton would never sign an extension. Some even were critical that they would not give him $150M+ guarantee. Now people are complaining about him getting $15M/year when he has produced quite well in 3 or the past 4 years. Now we are complaining that they avoided arbitration with every single player.
-
Dan Hayes Ownership update
Major League Ready replied to Carneal&Gordon's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Buxton has been a bad investment in one of the last 4 years. The other 3 years he produced a total of 11.3 WAR or $4M per WAR which is double the average production for free agents. How is that a disaster? -
Bean5302 went through the trouble of illustrating the rate or return and then compared it to other investments. The fact that he used the S&P 500 is a very fair an unbiased comparison given anyone could buy an S&P 500 fund. All of the moaning around her about the Pohlad's outrageous return is put in perspective. So, Bean did provide a lesson in finance even if you don't want to learn. He actually overstated the return because the $44M is not the only capital investment they made in the team. They put $185M in Target Field and probably made some other investments along the way.
-
That's a good point. I guess it could be a Cody Bellinger type deal. Alonso has not been good not great the last 2 years. He might not get anything close to what he was asking for in years or total dollars. Alonso/Boras might take a Bellinger type deal a hope he has a big year while being able to fall back on two player option years like Bellinger. I would not have wanted the Bellinger deal last year or Alonso on the same type deal this year because if he is good he is gone and if he is not you live with the deal for 2 more years.
-
No doubt some teams will have reduced revenue and you definitely have a point that this will create some opportunities. This is a good year to have payroll capacity like Detroit for example. Unfortunately, even if Alonso doesn't get what he is expecting, his contract would still mean a record payroll for the Twins and the only way that is even a remote possibility is if the sale is completed in the next few weeks and that's highly unlikely.
-
Alonso turned down $150M from the Mets and he is not signing a short-term deal as you suggested earlier. To frame this as "afraid to spend a single dollar" is fanatical. While I understand that those of us interested enough to follow the off-season and come here to discuss it are all at least a little fanatical. However, if we remain rational it's not at all hard to understand why Seattle and Minnesota have not signed Alonso. Refusing to accept the reality that baseball is a business will result in perennial disappointment.
- 94 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- derek falvey
- pablo lopez
- (and 5 more)
-
The Guardians never spend but Detroit seems very likely. They finished last year strong and right now only project at $107M payroll. Detroit also has all of their most expensive contracts (other than Baez) expiring at the end of this season. They will have $40M coming off at the end of this season. Detroit also has one of the best farm systems in MLB. It's not a stretch top say they are the best positioned among all of the AL Central teams for a prolonged run of success. Can they keep Skubal is the big question, but they can afford it given all the cheap talent they have now.
-
I am sure you understand that there are a number of teams that generate 150 or 200% of the revenue of the Twins and therefore can spend 150 or 200% of what the Twins spend. If the Twin's roster produces the same WAR per dollar spent, it is absolutely certain the twins will not be remotely competitive. Therefore, it could be argued that productivity per dollar spent is crucial to building a winning roster. As a result of this revenue disparity, acquiring and developing cheap young talent is by far the most crucial aspect of building a contender in a small/mid-market. When you ignore this fundamental need to produce more per dollar spent in many of your posts, it suggests that you simply refuse to acknowledge this reality. It's not that we want to be bankers. It's that we understand we have to be twice as productive per dollar spent to compete with teams with twice as much to spend.
-
The reason I asked is that all MLB teams in 2023had a $50M anomaly in the form of BAM money so all of those revenue numbers are probably in the neighborhood of $50M less in 2024. In the Twins case, their TV revenue also went down so they were probably down $60-70M. Therefore, comparing 2024 payroll with 2023 revenue is going to skew the percentage of payroll numbers fairly significantly. That said, I know you usually just compare to teams with similar revenue which is perfectly reasonably in terms of determining level of spending to expect.
-
Cleveland went from 76 wins in 2023 to 92 wins in 2024 without a significant addition. It has been very common for teams building a young core to make significant improvement based on the development of young players.
-
Are those revenue numbers from 2023?
-
Are you advocating they dump Correa and Buxton for salary relief and reinvest the money? If they are the problem you suggest, the most straight forward solution would be to trade Correa and Buxton even if it was only for salary relief and then reinvest the money. Most here seem to be very much against dumping Correa and/or Buxton and I agree. Their presence is not causing the Twins to get rid of anyone in order to keep them.
-
A trade for a "final piece" can be a great move but historically teams are not built on trades for impact players. The top 30 teams (measured by most wins) since 2000 among teams in the bottom half of revenue have not been built this way. Trades for established players have represented 11% of WAR. Players acquired as prospects represented 30% of WAR across the best 30 teams constructed since 2000..
-
I got it now. I thought you meant WAR was broken. I missed the bWAR part because you were using fWAR stats. My bad.
-
Yes, "Castro had a nearly identical bat in 2024 as he had in 2023." However, he played in 34 more games in 2024. I am sure you know WAR is a cumulative stat so why are you surprised Casto's WAR was higher in 24?
- 41 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- carlos correa
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
Last year his productivity was $4M per WAR so he produced roughly double the average free agent.
-
I think you might be overlooking a crucial difference between Detroit and Minnesota. The Tigers were below $100M in projected payroll before the addition of Torres and are now projected to spend $107M on payroll.
-
You are absolutely right but we should not be surprised when fans expect their team to pull off big deals nearly every year. It's kind of the nature of fandom. Among the teams in the bottom half of revenue, trading away very good players or just letting them go to free agency is far more common. I would add the guy I think of as the biggest deal maker among modest revenue teams in Dipoto and the Mariners have been the definition of mediocre. They have exactly two 90-win seasons in the last 20 years and not one season over 90 wins.
-
That's not possible. He made his MLB debut at the end of last season. Therefore, none of his is options have been used.
-
I like the odds of Larnach and Wallner outperforming Rosario's post-twins production and I like it a lot. I also like the odds that E. Rodriquez out performs what Rosario did post Twins and Jenkins is also on the horizon. Like Rosario, Kepler won't be missed. I just wished they would have packaged Kepler/Polanco for Ford. Who knows, maybe they tried but that was my dream scenario.
- 67 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- max kepler
- brent rooker
- (and 3 more)
-
Is the logical conclusion of them trading Luzardo for this level of prospect that his health is suspect enough to significantly reduce his value? I just don't not what else to think given the value of cost-controlled pitching.
-
Totally agree and I would prefer to have Keaschall but we should also recognize that there is a high probability Caba will be an excellent defender at a premium position. Therefore, Caba has a high ceiling and the floor is probably a weak hitting great defender at SS which has value. That's a pretty decent profile when a team is acquiring prospects.
-
Good point. Cleveland and Tampa are the kings of this practice. Lindor, Kluber, Clevinger, Bauer, and several others were all future focused trades. Even our old friend Carlos Santana was acquired as a prospect in trade for an established player (Casey Blake). Tampa has many examples as well.
-
By that logic of lagging a year, investment this year would not yield higher attendance this year. The Twins didn't even have a deal with Comcast. They had a deal with Bally's who had an agreement with Comcast. You can make an argument that the Twins should have taken the potential of Comcast not renewing the Bally's agreement but you can't say the twins should have extended with Comcast because they didn't have an agreement with Comcast.
-
They had record payroll in 2023. The attendance drop-off in 2024 was less than 300 per game even with the collapse so that really does not track. Can you elaborate on any available TV deals that they opted not to take? There are several teams in the same scenario this year and there are no TV deals to lock down. Twins Attendance
