Jump to content
Our first free agents ranking has launched, click here to see the top 40+ names in free agency! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

DJL44

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,952

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by DJL44

  1. DJL44
    I count 4 revenue sharing recipients: Royals, Cardinals twice, and Marlins plus World Series losses by the Rays (twice), Indians, Royals, Cardinals and Rockies. That's 10/22 years with a small market team in the World Series.
  2. DJL44
    Edited that down to the clearest nugget for you. The NFL recognized that fixed player costs could make them a ton of money. and they were able to break the weaker NFL players union. The games are all sold out, win or lose and the TV money doesn't change for good or bad teams.
  3. DJL44
    Small market Cleveland and Tampa are sitting right there at the top of the list as well. Well run clubs win. Poorly run clubs (like the Orioles, Pirates and Padres) lose. The large market teams can't fill all the playoff slots every year. Once a team is in the playoffs they have nearly the same chance to win as everyone else. No, I'm suggesting they should make money by putting people in the seats, not by fielding a Triple-A team and cashing revenue sharing checks. I'm sure the Pohlads would love to have a guaranteed profit from revenue sharing every year even if Target Field is empty. That's not a competitive baseball club, it's a hedge fund with a 1/30th share in MLB. That also gives the small market teams an incentive to just let the Dodgers win every year because the Dodgers can grow their marginal revenue faster than the small market teams can. Eventually we would see contraction as the cheapskate teams are bought out by the large market teams so they can keep more of the revenue they generated. I wanted to see prospects get a shot. Instead they kept Pineda, promoted AAAA retreads like Kyle Barraclough, Nick Vincent, Derek Law and Andrew Albers and used older non-prospects like Charlie Barnes and Griffin Jax while they kept the actual prospects in AAA so they didn't start service time clocks. That gives them at least another year before their actual young talent reaches free agency. They didn't want to promote any pitcher under age 25.
  4. DJL44
    I'm saying that the playoff structure is set up now so every team making the playoffs has nearly the same chance to win the World Series. This is especially true if the team with the worst record buys some reinforcements at the trade deadline. With so many teams making the playoffs everyone has a chance to win the World Series. If fans aren't happy with a chance at the World Series every so often then I don't know what to say. It's impossible for everyone to win every year. This isn't tee ball with participation trophies for everyone. It's funny your chart here shows that the massive payroll difference of the Dodgers has netted them exactly one more 90 win season than Oakland. They're spending all that money to gain a couple more shots at the World Series than the lowest payroll teams in the league. It also doesn't show the absolute futility of the high spending Angels. Money doesn't buy anything if you don't know how to run a ball club. I'm in favor of reduced revenue sharing because it forces teams to invest money in their product to make money. Tanking works because teams can just slash payrolls to the minimum and become more profitable even without drawing any fans. It's wrong when the worst team in the league with the fewest fans is the most profitable because the successful large market teams are giving it a bunch of money to exist. I want the Twins to make the most money when they win and the least when they lose so they have a financial incentive to win.
  5. DJL44
    That's where I'm at. I'd probably subscribe April to June, then see if the team was worth my time the rest of the summer.
  6. DJL44
    I am 100% in favor of expansion. MLB has never had as much pitching talent as it has right now - see the ever increasing strikeout rates. Careers are ending earlier than they did a decade ago due to the availability of young talent. MLB level players like Freddy Galvis are signing with Japanese teams just to get playing time. It has been nearly 25 seasons since the last expansion - a period of stability as long as any other period in baseball history. I don't think anyone would even notice a difference if two more teams were added. This is one thing I worry about with increased revenue sharing. Do you really think the Yankees and Dodgers will vote to have their revenue siphoned off by two more teams? There are no expansion locations that would be more profitable than the median team but several as good as the lowest revenue teams. Encouraging MLB expansion should be a core strategy of the player's union. That's 52 more MLB jobs and 8 more minor league teams.
  7. DJL44
    I expected to see Royce Lewis and Austin Martin on this list.
  8. DJL44
    This I can get behind. Pay minor leaguers more once they reach AA. They don't have to touch the signing bonuses to do it either. AA is getting $600/wk and AAA is $700/wk minimum. They get the $25/day meal per diem on the road and there is an agreement to provide housing now. That still seems a little low ($800 to $900/wk would be better) but there has been tremendous progress on this in just a couple years. So yeah - minor leaguers in AA and AAA deserve a $200/wk raise. $200*30 players*60 teams = $360,000 a week * 20 weeks = $7.2M.
  9. DJL44
    Of course the Yankees get an advantage because they get more shots on goal. That doesn't mean other teams don't get to take a shot every once in a while. Pretty much every team HAS taken a shot in the past 5 years. With the current playoff structure a team can get a little lucky and end up in the World Series. It's possible to be the underdog, predicted to win 45% of your playoff games, and still flip heads enough times to win it all. All this garbage about "knowing my favorite team never has a chance" is so much whining. Go ask the Rays or Royals if a small market team never has a chance.
  10. DJL44
    The Yankees haven't won a World Series since 2009. Are they the team that doesn't have a chance? Are you referring to the Mariners - the team with the longest playoff drought? Is revenue sharing the key to a Mariners or Rangers World Series victory?
  11. DJL44
    You should care about the minor leaguers who become major leaguers. Most of the guys in the minor leagues are there to give the prospects someone to play against. Minor league careers are typically quite short and I don't see any reason to pay minor league baseball players more than we pay an EMT or kindergarten teacher.
  12. DJL44
    If they do expand playoffs then they really don't need to make ANY changes to improve parity. Seriously, if your favorite team can't put together a .500 ballclub every so often they just aren't trying.
  13. DJL44
    Expanded playoffs are a net loss if you're interested in seeing the two best teams in the World Series. It's a net gain if you want to watch mediocre teams play game 163 after the regular season is over. What disparity? The disparity of only having 20 different teams make the playoffs in the last 3 seasons? I get that some people like the NHL/NBA model of "everyone makes the playoffs" but honestly I completely ignore the NBA until the Finals. What is glaring about ALL of these suggestions is that NONE of them address problems with the game that are relevant to fans. We need more action and less waiting. Their response is "How about more playoffs? We stand around and do nothing even longer then! Plus, we guarantee the games will start late enough that you won't be able to watch them until the end!"
  14. DJL44
    Why is forcing more parity a goal? Are people not watching baseball because the Pirates haven't been to the playoffs in 6 years? I don't think this is the issue. 20 team have made the playoffs in the past 3 seasons. The teams with the longest postseason drought are the Mariners (20 years), Phillies (10), Tigers (7) and Angels (7). None of those are low-revenue low payroll teams.
  15. DJL44
    Actually revenue has been growing much faster than salaries. Teams are not spending the vast majority of new revenue on salaries. That's the whole reason there is conflict this time around. The players agreed to increased revenue sharing in the last CBA and saw their percentage of that revenue decline. They're not falling for that BS again.
  16. DJL44
    Why would MLB want that to happen? The league makes more money when the Yankees make more money. It isn't like the Rays are generating the revenue sharing money.
  17. DJL44
    Everyone agrees that Bally Sports has been a disaster.
  18. DJL44
    It makes sense to direct bonus money to a select few, the most talented players, especially if you want the next Dave Winfield to pick baseball. Regarding free agency time - the general managers figured out they can keep college drafted players as serfs for basically their entire career. Draft them at age 21, minors until age 25-26, free agents at age 31 or 32. If those players automatically get to become free agents at age 30 the team probably brings them up to the majors earlier. The players also get one chance at a market-rate contract during the prime of their career. Would you rather see the 24 year old prospects in the big leagues or more innings pitched by 30 year old AAA retreads?
  19. DJL44
    It would certainly decrease broadcast TV revenue. MLB games are highly rated regionally but people don't generally watch MLB games that don't feature the local team.
  20. DJL44
    The NFL model works because every game is broadcast on national television and every game is a guaranteed sellout (because there are only 8 home games). There is little revenue difference between owning a large market NFL team and a small market NFL team. None of that is true in baseball.
  21. DJL44
    The owners want to lock that in at 45%. With complete revenue sharing your team's financial success is guaranteed by having a franchise and winning matters even less. It is good for MLB to have marquee teams in large markets like the Dodgers and Yankees. It maximizes the revenue of the whole league. You want to encourage success in large markets without completely shutting off the chances of the Royals or Rays to win. You don't want complete parity. Overall league revenue will grow slower with more parity.
  22. DJL44
    Who is the juggernaut? The Braves? Rays? Nationals? Astros? Red Sox? Cubs? There are a few teams that don't seem interested in competing (Pirates, Orioles) but everyone else has taken a shot at the playoffs in the past 5 years.
  23. DJL44
    I agree with this. Start from a higher floor with mandatory 25% raises each year on the roster. If the player is cut he becomes a free agent and anyone can re-sign him at the $800k minimum. After year 3 go to arbitration.
  24. DJL44
    No thanks. I don't think there is any evidence that people with hearing loss have been discriminated against by MLB as a class, (unlike the other categories you mentioned). Hoy wasn't nearly good enough as a player to get a plaque. If he's going to be recognized you might as well recognize the "first guy named Jayden in MLB" or some other such "first". I hope this isn't what Bud Fowler's induction sets as a precedent.
  25. DJL44
    It depends on the CBA
×
×
  • Create New...