Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,641 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
News
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
I sure hope it does not cost Lee even though I am not as high on him as some. My hope is that Seattle really likes Polanco or Kepler or both. IDK what else we would have to add but it's not a Lee level prospect.
-
Yet, without any real knowledge of the situation you have determined they are grossly incompetent. You also continue to suggest they are representing this as a total loss "can't make any money" from broadcasts. That has never been their representation just your interpretation. The fact is they don't have any broadcast partner for 2023 and it's hardly unwarranted to forecast a decrease in revenue. Incompetence would be for them to develop a budget assuming no loss in revenue.
-
Are you kidding? We would be in much better shape had they not invested so heavily in a team that was not even close to being a real contender. CES would be the starting 1B. He started off a little slow but he was already a beast the last 6 weeks of the season. He could be an elite hitter. Kirilloff would play both OF and 1B. CES would play 1B/DH and could also cover 3B when Lewis is out, has a day-off or covers SS when Correa is out. CES would look great on this roster. Steer takes Farmer's spot or even Polanco's spot. He is a much better hitter than Farmer and he can play in the OF, Farmer's 6.6M or Polanco's $10.5M goes toward a RP or part of the investment in a SP. The two of them would fit here exceptionally well right now.
-
Great post. I highlighted the cost portion because we often see people do the math without any idea of the production costs. There is so much we don't including what the group MLB hired to address the problem has come up with. It seems reasonable, MLB will want to develop a model where the teams and the league control distribution.
-
You are trying very hard to manipulate the facts to satisfying yourself. Even if there were zero start-up costs or they applied none, revenue will still be down significantly so your point about start-up costs are speculative and self-serving.
-
Who has ever suggested they will lose ALL of their TV revenue? This is not the kind of problem that is resolved quickly. It's all together possible a distribution will develop that allows the twins and other effected teams to gain back 100% or more of their revenue but that model will have to be built and marketed before that happens. It seems like you want to blame this on incompetence to make yourself feel better. The problem here is not them. It's the people who think anyone who can't reverse the impact of an industry changing event in a short period of time is "grossly incompetent".
-
You beat me to it by a minute RB. Who here did not wonder what would happen to spending upon learning of the loss of TV revenue? Isn’t it highly probable a reporter would happen to ask how this will impact spending? Yet, the assumption is this was leaked. Even if they were not asked, perhaps they wanted the average fan to understand they would not be spending much on free agents because they are going to be losing a portion of a significant revenue stream. The vast majority of people understanding record spending is going to be curtained a bit in such an instance so communicating this is the best way to deal with most of the fan base. There is a small portion of the fan base that won’t be happy no matter how they handle it. How many times have we seen people complain on this site that they make a politically correct statement instead of just saying what they are really thinking? They had record spending, and they are they are losing a large chunk of revenue. There is no risk in revealing they will cut spending to anyone viewing this through a rational lens. There is not a company on the planet that would not cut cost if they suddenly lost 10% of their revenue. Let’s face it, some sports fans don’t always view these things through a rational lens.
-
I wondered about how they value these guys. Some are more proven than others but you make a good point if they feel equally as comfortable with all five. That just did not seem likely to me. Damn nice for them if that's the case. It's going to be tough to make that deal because there will be great competition for whomever they give up. We helped put the Reds in great shape to beat out us for Seattle's pitching.
- 71 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- edouard julien
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
I pray Correa is much better this year and I also hope Lee is better than 1.1 WAR in 2025. It will really sting if Correa is not closer to his career norms. That money could have been spent on a top pitcher and Lewis or Lee at SS. As a group we can't complain about a FO mistake when most people here were absolutely adamant about retaining him even when he was getting 12 years. I guess there were quite a few of us against the initial $300M+ contract but I was one that was OK with the deal when it became a 6 year deal. I would take it back now but I would still be crazy enough to invest in SP while understanding why the FO is very reluctant.
- 71 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- edouard julien
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
Arraez was replaced by Julien which resulted in basically no loss of production. We also had Polanco short-term and Lee long-term. Who is replacing Jeffers that won't result in a significant drop in production not to mention we have no depth a catcher in general which makes it even more risky. Move Polanco and free up the payroll space to sign a significant free agent or trade Polanco plus others to Seattle for one of their young guys. If necessary, trade Polanco and one of Kepler / Farmer to provide payroll space but let's not trade away highly productive / low cost players with several years of control.
- 71 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- edouard julien
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
Does Seattle need to trade one of their top SPs to get a bat like Polanco or Kepler or both? Would we want our team to trade away a top SP so that we could get a prospect added to the deal. Of course not. They could get Polanco and Kepler or similar players from other teams for one of their less established pitchers so why would they trade any of their top arms? Anything is possible but it makes no sense for Seattle or any other team to trade away a top arm unless the return is Juan Soto.
- 71 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- edouard julien
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
It's so hard to say with BP guys so I am glad we have room for now to take another look at these guys. They can stay on the 40-man until we need room. Who knows ... maybe Winder can tweak his delivery at Driveline as JMlease1 suggested and Sands does have great movement on his slider. He just has to learn how to avoid the long ball. There are quite a few guys coming up behind them that hopefully become the story of 2024. If one or two of these guys breakout, great!
-
This is why you keep a player. You build around them, not trade them.
- 71 replies
-
- 7
-
-
-
- edouard julien
- matt wallner
- (and 1 more)
-
I agree the timing is right but this absolute expectation that they can be traded for front of the rotation established pitching is misguided. Front of the rotation starters require a monster package. If Kepler is such a reach, why would anyone take him in trade for the most coveted asset in baseball? These guys are rarely traded and when they are it's generally a rebuilding team that would have no interest in Polanco or Kepler. They want Lewis or Jenkins and probably both. Seattle is in a very rare position being a club that could contend and has enough pitching to let one of their young guys go but that's one team and what if they share the sentiment of many posters here that Kepler will return to a league average player? What if they think Polanco is too much of an injury concern or another team offers they like better than Polanco. I really hope they can put together a deal with Seattle but a whole lot of other teams are going to be competing for a SP if they trade one.
-
Listening to the shows on MLB radio, those guys pretty much all believe the Brewers are going to sell like hell!
- 70 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- sonny gray
- david festa
- (and 3 more)
-
We have 4 open spots and 2-3 of Polanco / Kepler / Vazquez / Farmer / Gordon / Miranda / Severino are very likely to be traded. It would not be surprising if a couple of the pitchers mentioned here were traded too. I don't see these guys getting bumped off the 40 man to make room for additions.
-
I assume pretty much everyone here looks at team stats which tell the story without much analysis needed. Where the production came from is very clear so it's a bit astonishing to me that anyone can look at the facts supporting the position of keep the young guys in the minors where they belong and play the veterans. The season would have been quite dismal without the contributions of our younger players. Perhaps even more baffling is that success for teams in the bottom half of revenue is absolutely dependent upon developing young players. Why anyone would detest the most important aspect of building a mid market team just defies logic.
-
I probably would not bet even money but <10% seems overly pessimistic. He was mediocre for the first two months and then hit at a 138 clip for the last 4 months to end up at 126. Did the shift get in his head? IDK but I just am not inclined to say there is basically no chance. I would put the odds of him breaking 120 at 40% so all I am saying is the completely writing him off is a little over the top.
-
Kepler was important. The other 4 guys ranked 8th,9th,11th and 15th on the team measured by wRC+. The top 4 guys were Lewis, Wallner, Jeffers, and Julien. Why you would even mention Celestino, Refsnyder, Cave, and Blankenhorn is hard to understand.
-
I think it's a really bad idea to make up a playoff lineup around appeasing players, especially one that was hitting as poorly as Vazquez. If Vazquez is going to be a problem because he is pouting, the better solution is to dump him for whatever they can get and get players who care about the team and winning.
-
I have never suggested he can be replaced by Larnach. My position has been the return would have to be significant for Kepler to trade him because we are thin in OF depth. You avoided the entire point of the post. I was asking for your opinion as to the potential for him to post numbers similar to Hernandez or even Soler and what would that mean for an offer. If Kepler produces a wRC+ of 126 like he did this year, my guess is he would get at least 3/50M in free agency. There would be very little in him accepting a QO.
-
Kepler's wRC+ was 138 after June 1 and 126 for the year. Of course he is also a plus defender. Is it conceivable he does not have a bad April-May next year and ends up at 126 wRC+ he produced in 2022 or even a little higher with a decent start? If so, what will he get for offers. Teoscar Hernandez is projected by MLB Trade rumors to get 4/$80M. Jorge Soler is projected at 3/45. Hernandez produced a wRC+ of 130 in 2022 and 105 last year. Soler was at 95 in 2022 and bounced back to 126 last season. Of course, he has no defensive value. If Kepler produced a wRC+ of 126 in 2023, you would have to believe his offer would be considerable higher than Soler at which point Kepler would be extremely likely to reject a QO? Is it really that certain Kepler could not play well enough to get a QO?
-
Good call on Duvall. I had not thought of him. I see that he still played a lot of CF last year. Interesting possibility if he can still play a good CF at 35.
-
The Hoskins move fits nicely. As you point out it makes Kirilloff available for the OF. I remain hopeful they can piece this together.
-
The only relevant metric in measuring spending capacity is revenue. If you want to measure the Twins relative willingness to spend, compare their payroll with the teams closest in revenue or use percentage of revenue. When the twins can start paying for player salaries with a "market score", it will be relevant and as Jocko has pointed out this is a relatively meaningless metric. Do you understand that if an executive responsible for the bottom line based their budget on a market metric as opposed to revenue they would be fired in a New York second? You are also only seeing what you want to see in this metric. Do you really think Oakland should be spending more than Boston? Does Philly generate more revenue than Boston? Should the White Sox be spending the same as the Cubs. Why aren't the White Sox spending far more than the Twins. It's absolutely meaningless in terms of current spending. You are using it because it suits your narrative. If you are actually interested in a meaningful comparison, show us how the Twins payroll percentage of revenue compares to other teams. Of course, it's been done here before and the Twins are in line with the rest of the league.
