Major League Ready

People keep saying this but it's not true. I am not sure how you are measuring success but since the turn of the century Cleveland and Oakland have both been more successful by win percentage. Tampa is actually significantly lower win a win percentage of .497 compared to .518 for Oakland and .516 for Cleveland. Oakland and Cleveland have both had ten 90 win seasons compared to 9 for Tampa. If you bump up to 92 wins Oakland has 8, Cleveland has 7, and Tampa has 6. Let's not ignore that these three teams have been significantly better than all of the teams in the bottom 1/2 of revenue over the past 2+ decades. If you look at how they built their most successful teams, you fill find all three organizations did a great job of trading for prospects. See the table below that lists the percentage of WAR based on acquisition strategy. TaP is traded for as a prospect where a player is considered a prospect that has never had a season where they produced 1.5 WAR of greater. These three teams have produced far more WAR by trading for prospects than the draft. BTW ... Using KC as an example makes absolutely no sense. They have the lowest win percentage of any team in the league and they have had the fewest 90 win seasons of any team in the league. The got good after collecting high draft picks for a decade. 8 Oakland Athletics WINS Drafted Intl TaP Trade FA 100% Oakland 2002 103 36.0% 12.0% 43.0% 0.0% 9.0% 100% Oakland 2001 102 65.9% 14.3% 11.4% 8.3% 0.0% 101% Oakland 2019 97 25.0% 0.0% 54.0% 10.0% 12.0% 100% Oakland 2018 97 51.8% 0.0% 29.1% 19.0% 0.0% 100% Oakland 2013 96 24.5% 5.0% 39.3% 10.0% 21.0% 100% Oakland 2003 96 46.2% 21.1% 27.7% 5.0% 0.0% 100% Oakland 2012 94 10.7% 0.0% 37.4% 5.3% 46.6% 100% Oakland 2006 93 23.0% 0.0% 45.0% 9.0% 23.0% Oakland Total 97.25 35.4% 6.6% 35.9% 8.3% 14.0% 7 Cleveland Guardians WINS Drafted Intl TaP Trade FA 100% Cleveland 2017 102 22.9% 20.0% 43.9% 8.0% 5.0% 100% Cleveland 2007 96 31.3% 36.5% 32.2% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2016 94 6.4% 17.3% 76.3% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2019 93 23.0% 18.0% 44.7% 14.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2005 93 7.5% 21.8% 51.4% 2.5% 16.8% 100% Cleveland 2022 92 26.8% 24.0% 49.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Cleveland 2013 92 14.9% 0.0% 50.1% 10.2% 24.8% Guardians Total 94.57 19.0% 19.7% 49.6% 5.0% 6.7% 6 Tampa Bay Rays WINS Drafted Intl TaP Trade FA 100% Tampa Bay 2021 100 25.0% 6.0% 45.8% 7.0% 16.0% 100% Tampa Bay 2023 99 13.8% 9.8% 66.2% 0.0% 10.2% 100% Tampa Bay 2008 97 45.7% 0.0% 33.2% 4.5% 16.6% 99% Tampa Bay 2019 96 18.6% 0.0% 45.8% 9.0% 26.0% 100% Tampa Bay 2010 96 64.7% 0.0% 22.1% 9.1% 4.1% 100% Tampa Bay 2013 92 50.7% 0 28.6% 8.5% 12.2% Tampa Bay Total 96.67 36.4% 2.6% 40.3% 6.4% 14.2% Average All 96.16 30% 10% 42% 7% 12%

It would help if Lewis, Correa, and Miranda were not out.

There are a lot of assumptions here we can't validate. The first one is that they spent all of their allocated budget. It's quite possible for example that they had a budget of $130M and the additions they felt fit best left them with a little extra. It's also possible the TV deal was a little better than they expected but by the time they figured that out the roster had been constructed. We also don't really know what they forecasted for attendance. It's quite possible that their messaging was they were hoping for 2M fans while they used 1.9 for constructing a budget. The attendance deficit you cited was also decreased by about 38,000 in the just the last 3 games. With Lewis, Correa, Miranda, and Stewart all back very soon, they might believe they can still beat last year's attendance, especially with an addition that boosts fan confidence in this team. I don't know what they projected or budgeted either. You might be spot on but we all just guessing.

I tracked his defensive stats all of last year to see if the numbers supported what I thought I was seeing and the numbers tracked as you stated. I was down low near the IF last night and his defense was fantastic. I don't understand why some people to take a negative view and won't give credit when players improve their defense.

As does the constant bitching. The appropriate measure of the entirety of the twins FO is Levine getting a job elsewhere that he doesn't have here? Had they followed the advice of the majority here we would have Polanco at 2B, Jordan Montgomery and his 6+ ERA instead of SWR, Hoskins at 1B instead of Sanatana with Lee still in the minors.

The Wolves and Wild TV deal just expired. This is a great opportunity for them to collaborate on a solution which would serve Minnesota sports fans far better than a baseball only service. A few people brought up the failed Victory sports model last spring but that was a far different time. There are a multitude of ways to distribute the product now and fans are more than ready to participate. It seems plausible that far greater accessibility could lead to equivalent revenue but that remains to be seen. What will happen starting next year is greater availability and I doubt we see any form of blackouts.

There was an article a couple months ago where teams were polled on how they rate other FOs? I don't remember exactly where the Twin's rated but 8th is stuck in my mind.

It would be nice to get Stewart back. Royce should be getting close. It's also good to see the high upside Milb players returning. Having Jenkins, Prielipp, and now Mercedes back makes for a little greater anticipation when reading the minor league report.

What if they would have kept Polanco and had signed Montgomery and Hoskins. Those were the three most common wants as I recall. Would attendance be up? As fans should we be happy with a better team and a brighter future or should we prefer they spent more money?

Not exactly sure I understand your point. Regional sports on cable TV are going away. It's a dying model. Streaming services are a lower cost alternative to cable.

I don't know exactly what all the services provide but I switched to one that carries ESPN / Fox / TBS and MLB on a single service. There must be others.

All of these networks are broadcast on a variety of streaming services.

Good question! I didn't think Seattle was giving up on of those SPs without a king's ransom. You have to believe they had lots of suitors, and it didn't happen.

I wanted to believe in Camargo. He has not been great at AAA and I saw him in person when Camargo he was up this year. He looked terrible and overmatched. Granted, that was one day but it was not pretty. I was hoping they would draft a college catcher last year in the 3rd-5th round. It would have been really ideal if they could have gotten a AA or AAA catcher for Polanco even if it cost them addition assets. Perhaps they could pull that off this off-season if Julien / Kirilloff rebound.

First of all, misleading your customers is a terrible way to run a business and you condoning it says a lot. Secondly, I simply don't buy your objection is the messaging. Even if it was, the catalyst for loss attendance is still the payroll decrease. Third, your claim in this thread was they cost themselves millions. Your continuous rant is all about how much this is costing the team and you don't even understand you have to count the cost savings compared to the revenue loss. Plus, there is a reasonable chance they make up that difference before the end of the year with continued good play going forward. BTW ... What would have been acceptable IMO would have been to say they would be very difficult to manage any multi year signings given the increases scheduled for next year and left it at that. .

Unless losing the BAM money somehow kept fans away it is completely irrelevant to this conversation The loss of BAM money will impact profitability but it has zero impact on attendance. Cutting payroll is the variable you are claiming resulted in 54,000 less fans. You might be right but what does that have to do with the presence BAM or lack therefore? How does BAM correlate with attendance? Absolutely nothing. So, yes, nice doing business with you while you demonstrate once again you don't understand finance.

They are down 54,000 fans at this point so let’s say they end 100,000 down in attendance. At $60/person which is generous that’s $6M and they give half to opposing teams. They spent $30M less and lost $3M. Your inability to see the net is the root of our disagreement. You also insisted (over & over) during the course of the spending conversation that anyone that did not understand losing Polanco was catastrophic just did not get it. Had they kept him, Polanco would be at 2B and Lee would be in the minors.

You just completely dodged the question. If they responded to a reporter, would you have criticized them for not being transparent. That's what I see here all the time is contempt when they are not completely transparent. When they answer honestly, you complain just the same. Should they have lied or misled. Would that have made you fell better. The messaging was bad no doubt but let's face this is 100% a bitch about reducing spending not the messaging. All of the other rhetoric is a platform for you to continue to squak about spending.

Did they make an announcement or were they asked my someone in media who reported it. Those are two very different scenarios. In the former, they innitiate the action. In the other, they responded. If they announced it, should they have deceived would be season ticket buyers in order to make more sales? In the case they were asked, should they have lied or misled? If they had dogged the question, the narrative here would have been they are devious / cheap bastards instead of their PR is poor. While they no doubt were poor from a PR perspective there is no winning with the portion of fans who are focused on spending.

They almost all get their shot because of an injury so I am not sure what we are arguing. My fingers typed Garcia when I meant Evan Carter. There are many examples of 1st players making an impact. Cleveland has the best record in the AL and they were built on prospects and prearb players. The Orioles are much the same.

Lee appears to be better equipped to make throws from all the odd angles required when playing 2B.

Griffin Jax and Jhoan Duran could have been included. Jorge Alcala has had his ups and downs and while we don't know if SWR is going to have a bumpy road at the ML level but his Milb experience was up and down.

How would Lee and Miranda have been able to "prove it" if they never got a chance because we are in the play-off hunt? How do you prove it's not just potential if you don't get a chance. Did you notice that Garcia played a major role in a world-series run and he did not even make his debut until September. Good thing Texas did not think you should hold players down if you are a playoff team.

Doncon has been the hotter of the two of late. Doncon has an OPS of .994 since 6/9. Gonzalez is .835. Gonzalez was out so he only has 60 ABs vs 108 for Doncon over that period. I am liking the exchange for Miller at the moment.

How long until we see Bengard to A+, Culpepper to AA, Mathews to AAA, Varland to the BP?