Major League Ready
-
Posts
7,755 -
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
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Major League Ready
-
Josh Bell was a pretty significant add but he was below league average. Now that he was traded, they only project at $90M for payroll so it's all together possible they spend some money on a bat or two. If the Twins can spend $150, Cleveland should be able to spend in the neighborhood of $120M. One big bat would be pretty impactful for them.
-
Let's just drop it. . You are speaking in vague generalities about a very specific measure. You are not willing to give an example as I have which shows your position is flawed. Show me where the assumptions used or wrong instead of just ignoring it and continuing with rhetoric And no, they don't go into a deal assuming they are getting nothing for 5 years. They assume it will decline.
-
Now we are exactly aligned. I am one who has documented the failures of free agent pitchers but replacing Gray has to be job one and I would prefer to do that free agency. I don't want to give up our premium prospects which is what it would take in trade. Of course, there are only a handful of guys we want and lots of teams with more money wanting to sign them so there might not be a need to clear the salary but the hope they are able to fill these holes with guys that are good enough that money becomes an issue.
-
Not that math. Did you check to see if the numbers made any sense as I did in the example I gave. You are making a claim that teams assume declining performance. I provided a reasonable model that disproves your theory that teams expect this to result in paying these players $8M per WAR. The assumptions were very straight forward. Do you disagree with the assumptions or are you just ignoring anything that does not align with your narrative? Do you think they are assuming these players are going to produce next to nothing after the half-way through the contract.
-
Where we drifted was I don't see it as Farmer vs Polanco but the discussion followed that path. I might move Farmer too. One of them probably needs to go. I see it as Polanco in a bench role reducing his overall value vs the players that take up that slack PLUS $10.5M. If I get a decent (not plus/plus) return for Polanco. I am moving him and spending the $10.5M elsewhere, probably on pitching. However, I am under the impression that money will be an issue this year and that's an unknown. I also think he brings a decent return but I am with you in that is very hard to predict given his injury history and lack of positional flexibility.
-
I don't know how you can make this statement without knowing the return for Polanco. I am assuming they get something pretty good. Trading established players from depth is how Tampa / Oakland and Cleveland have outperformed the Twins over the past 20 years. I think where we differ is I am putting value on the return.
-
We are calculating the WAR per dollar based on an assumed AAV so what you are saying makes absolutely no sense. The AAV can't change. I think what you are trying to say is that the per $ reaches in this theoretical value over $8M/WAR. Did you do the math? Let's come up with a reasonable example. If a player expected to average 6 WAR gets a 12 year $320M deal, they need to produce 53 WAR over 12 years o produce 1 WAR per 6M. At 8M the need to produce 40 WAR. Let's say the player only produces as expected for 7 years. That's 42 WAR. Do you think they are assuming that player produces nothing for 5 years? It happens but that's not what they plan. If that player does something like 4 / 2.5 / 1.5 / 1 / 0 WAR in the final 5 years that equates to $6.5M per WAR. I have already said there is a willingness and an ability among the largest markets to pay more on a per WAR basis for these superstars. It's the decided advantage held by clubs with 50 or 100% more revenue than the Twins. However, the plan is not to pay $8M and it's not a success when it happens.
-
I don't think that equates in general. Do 3 WAR guys get 25M/year or 4WAR guys get $32M? We know the 6 war guys don't get 48. I think the really premium guys do get a higher salary per projected WAR. It makes sense, the superstars are a bigger draw and they have a bigger impact. They are also signed by teams with double the revenue who of course can afford twice the amount per WAR.
-
We just have to agree to disagree. Polanco did not outperform Farmer against LHP as I see it. Farmer's OPS against LHP was .781 and Polanco .775. Farmer's wRC+ 117 and Polanco 115. Farmer is also a much more versatile defender which is a crucial element of this role. You also completely dismiss the salary difference and return on Polanco. I will take Julien and Farmer's versatility on this specific roster plus a decent return on Polanco and never look back. We will find out what the front office thinks over the winter.
-
You are bending this to suit your argument. When did I say all of the Free Agents need to work out or anything similar. I said that producing at the average rate for free agents is not going to help the cause much. For example, if the twins spend $40M on Gray / MAT and a $10M OF bat and produce 5 WAR, that's not a winning formula. They got 5 WAR out of Gray alone. They need tom produce 7-9 WAT to be effective which is more like 5-6M per WAR and that's consistent with what will be offered.
-
Video: Twins 40-Man Roster Considerations
Major League Ready replied to Tom Froemming's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
I would add Erod / Martin / Severino and Camargo leaving two open spots. Gordon gets traded or non-tendered cut making three available spots and if necessary, we can DFA Henriquez. I also would bet Polanco gets traded. That would make 8-9 spots available. I don't see many additions. One front of the rotation SP, a back-up CFer, and possibly a RH bat. EVen if they also added a BP arm, they could add as many as 5 prospects to the 40-man if they trade Gordon and Polanco and DFA Henriguez. IDK if there will be 5 but Camargo should be on for sure. I am giving him a generous Milb deal to have catching depth. -
If they are willing to spend significant money in the BP, I prefer they get a LHer.
-
Totally with you on Kepler Doc. Let me pose two questions where Polanco is concerned. Under what scenario would we rather have Polanco over the alternatives we have presently? Over Lewis at 3B. Not even close, right? SS? Of course not. Leaves us with 2B. Julien’s career OPS is 95 pts higher than Polanco. Farmer’s OPS is the exact same 95pts higher against LHP? So, is it fair to say we have better alternatives under every scenario? Obviously, depth is good but is the team better with Polanco or the $10M surplus used to sign pitching or even a RH bat in the OF? We still have not considered the return for Polanco. This is how the Rays and Guardians have stayed good. I think the probability Polanco is here on opening day is low and even lower at the deadline.
-
I agree to a degree. You make the same point I have made in the past about the value per WAR being far different for small and large markets. Therefore, how can $8M per WAR be the universal value? However, I don't agree that team's are content to get average production. Producing average production for free agency is not an effective way to build a team even for the largest markets and it's a recipe for failure for mid and small market teams. Average production in free agency does not produce a contender just as average success in any other aspect of roster construction won't produce a contender. Team's don't plan for the average or accept the average because do so is a failure.
-
FA Starting Pitcher Choices
Major League Ready replied to chpettit19's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
You hit this one on the head. Baseball's economic models and financial practices are quite different than other businesses / industries. However, there is one common thread, spending more than you bring in results in a loss. -
People often take fangraphs "value" which is a calculation of WAR produced per dollar spent and interpret that as the players value which it is not. No team goes into a free agency negotiation under the premise 1 WAR is worth $8M. The reality is that so many free agents are an absoluter bust that the average production is far lower than what teams would determine their value.
-
I don't know how it's even debatable. Julien was starting at 2B instead of Polanco and Polanco also was a back-up to Lewis.
-
and 50 million reasons he won't which is the rough amount of addition salary he will get in a multi year deal. If there we a line on this in Vegas it would be a 20:1 payout.
-
I think you are overlooking a couple things. For starters, Julien has already replaced Polanco. Polanco is a role player now and the Twins play match-ups. Two, the combination of Julien/Farmer is significantly better than Polanco. Julien's OPS is 95 pts higher vs RHP and Farmer's OPS is 95 pts higher vs LHP and Polanco is getting very few innings at 3B as long as Lewis is healthy. In terms, of back-up for Lewis, the combination of Castro/Farmer is at least as good as putting Polo at 3B where he is poor defensively. It also appears you are not considering the $10M salary. I will take a $10M RP and whoever replaces Polanco's bench role over Polanco not to mention they also will get something decent in return. The $10M could come in handy signing Montgomery or Rodriquez as well.
-
I am not so sure about that value proposition. Farmer has considerably better career stats against LHP. That increases his value as a role player. Julien is going to start against RHP and Farmer is better against LHP so Polanco's value is mostly in the form of injury back-up. We could make a case for letting farmer go as well. However, the value proposition as I see it is the replacement(s) for Polanco as a bench Player plus $10M spent elsewhere VS Polanco as a role player. In that equation, the team is better off next year by reallocating the funds for pitching. Insisting the return be for established players is not nearly as effective as getting a good return which has been proven over and over if you bother to look at how mid-market teams have built successful rosters.
-
They are not really relying on Milb players. Polanco would be a role player. Julien is the primary 2B, Lewis 3B and Correa at SS. Then, they have two proven back-ups in Farmer and Castro. I am not sure how to categorize Miranda but he could play into this as well. Spend the $10M on a really good SP or a back of the BP arm. That upgrade is more impactful than replacing Polanco with any of these options.
-
I don't see Walner making Kepler "redundant" I am pretty sure we need two corner OFers. We simply lack depth in the OF both at the ML level and AA/AAA. INFers are a different story. We have Lewis at 3B with Lee / Farmer / Castro / Miranda / Severino and perhaps Prato capable of stepping in in case of Injury. At 2B we have Julien with the same back-ups as 3B. Castro / Lewis and farmer are back-ups for SS.
-
OK. That was not a good example. Have you ever Googled various combinations of keyword phrases related to profitability and loss. I have spent a lot of hours over the years researching MLB finances. If you have done these searches, you ever know there are far more articles about profit than loss. The only time losses have been discussed frequently was 2020 during Covid.
-
he was worth 1 WAR more than the twins highest WAR player and he will be in his 1st year of Arbitration next year. He is not going anywhere. Neither is Santander unless they get a haul. Baltimore has a total of two players on Vet salary for a total of $13M. They certainly do not need to clear payroll space.
- 41 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- juan soto
- pete alonso
- (and 2 more)
-
I have done internet searches on profitability every year for at least the past decade. Generally, what I find are articles estimating profitability for all teams. I find very little on the least profitable teams but I do occasionally see articles on the most profitable teams like this one for 2022. Most profitable MLB teams IN 2022. If there is any bias, I would say it is to report on which teams made a bundle because it's more likely to capture the attention of fan that reads this type of stuff. BTW .... I don't remember an article that has ever had the Twins in the top half in terms of profitability. See a lot of articles with them in the bottom 10.
