tobi0040
-
Posts
5,776 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
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
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
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 tobi0040
-
At the time, Maybin and Miller were big time prospects.
-
Clarification, I only support this hypothetical not going to happen deal if Stanton agrees to an extension.
-
the math comment was aimed at the Twins. Not at you.
-
Yeah, the Tigers gave up a marginal OF for the Padres and a good reliever for the Red Sox for one of the best players of all time. I will say, the Tigers don't rely on prosects the way the Twins do.
-
Regading the Stanton deal.....I am not expecting much out of Wheeler. I think Rosario still needs to prove he can be a corner OF bat. Walker is still quite raw. Sano, while a great prospect has some uncertainty about his position. I agre with DRJIM, that is not enough but I would do that deal.
-
I think 8/200 is reasonable if he was a free agent. My deal reflected he fact that he is effectively on a 2 year deal at $20M total now. If we ripped that up and gave him 6/110 we would effectively be giving him $22.5M a year extension on his existing deal, or paying him another $17M over the next two years. I go out 6 years and you go out 8. But I don't think we are miles apart. Call it 7/133. He gives up some money in exchange for security.
-
Both interesting ideas, but I don't see the Twins moving seven prospects right now, or turning around and dropping the $200M to sign those two guys. As a stand alone, I love the Stanton deal. He has two years left until free agency and that would solve our LF issue! If we ripped that deal up and gave him a 6 year, $110M deal it would be nice. Basically adding 90M over four years to what he is likely to make in arbitration. Not sure what the appetite would be for an NL team to get Sano given defensive uncertainty.
-
Unfortunately we know math.
-
I think Lester, Max, Ervin, and Shields are out on payroll concerns. If you take Nolasco's 5.38 ERA this year.....we can improve upon that in the market. But if you take his carer 4.37 ERA I am not sure we sign anyone who is a lock to be better than that. Some guys are more lotto ticket types that could be much better, or much worse. Volquez, Liriano, Mccarthy, etc. Wandy Rodriguez. Dempster.
-
Unless it is a bad contract for bad contract move and we think the other guy will be better over the remainder of the deal.....I agree. Keep the guy. This would be a sell low and he has a good shot IMO to be much better than this season. Paying him to play somewhere else does not make sense after one injury riddled year. Then having to buy another pitcher.... One potential catalysts for a better team next year is 2015 Ricky being much better than 2014 Ricky. Before this year his ERA was 4.37. It was 5.38 this year. Give the guy 200 innings and that is a 22 run improvement. We move from 29th to 27th in runs allowed. OK, that was depressing.
-
I actually agree, unfortunately. We are at $60M. I think we cut Burton. I think Plouffe and Duensing bring payroll up $5M (or let Duensing walk and replace him in the same range). I think we sign a LF for $5-7M. Then throw the typical low risk/low reward minor league free agents and call it a day. We may really swing for the fences and add another #6 starter, a vet for $6M a year so he can block promising prospects.
-
I said it was misleading. It was true, but when revenue has gone up 61% and payroll has gone up 4%.....I don't really care that the payroll is technically higher.
-
Payroll will be about the same next year. Scratch Kemp and Hamels. You could get really creative, but the Twins have said they don't want two players making 50% of payroll as well. Not. Going. To. Happen.
-
I guess I take the comment at face value. That payroll will be around 50-52%. I don't take it as, when the stars and moon align and we feel like we are one player away, then we will go up to that point. If I tell my wife I am committed to bringing her to Manny's, she probably thinks it will happen more than once in five years and counting (2010 - 2015) If it needs to go down to 35% in a rebuild, truly being committed to 52% means you should meaningfully go over on the upswing.
-
Maybe it is higher? I trust the folks at Forbes over the Pohlads.
-
So yes, we were mislead on many fronts. Payroll has not been 50-52% sans 2010. It has not made a difference. And these guys are laughing all the way to the bank.
-
We can get around the hangup of the extra money. The Twins could sell a 3% interest in the Twins for $21M and paid for the cost overrun. They would then own 97% of a team valued a $700M, or $679M. This is vastly more than the Metrodome value of $250M at 100%. The Target field payroll comment is misleading at best. 2007 payroll was 71M on 131M in revenue. 2013 payroll was 75M on 215M in revenue. Operating income more than doubled, from 14M in 2007 to over $30M in 2013.
-
People act like TD posters arbitrarily made up this 50-52% thing. IT CAME FROM THE TWINS
-
In about one minute of looking, I found St. Peter saying the stadium will allow us to retain stars. I am guessing you can find comments about competing. Here is a quick list of players that left due to money and lets not nitpick here. Maybe a guy or two would have been around one year in the dome but a majority of the deal would have been target field money. Nathan, Santana, Hunter, Cuddyer, Kubel (when he was still good), et. Payroll is about where it was the last year in the dome. As far as I am concerned, St. Peter is Pohlads mouth piece. http://bismarcktribune.com/sports/dave-st-peter-talks-twins/article_ffb7a737-cf70-55be-9942-4a5beaf29bca.html
-
I completely agree. This whole they kicked in more money thing is ridiculous. They owned something that was worth $250M and is now worth $700M, most of that appreciation is a direct result of the stadium. If you back out the $100M increase that was tied to the new cable contract....The Twins kicked in $170M and saw an increase of $350M. They didn't pay anything. They could sell all or part of the team, or get a loan based on a valuation of $700M. This is truly a financing discussion, not a discussion of kicking in money.
-
Please cite an example where a business has received a $300M payment from the governement and only put up $150M of their own money, with no strings attached. I cited TIF financing, which is not even close to comparable. Again, some companies are incentivized by certain cities or counties to relocate or build there. They receive a reduction of future taxes IF they meet about fifteen sets of criteria. The criteria ensures that the investment has a positive ROI for the city.
-
Totally agree Mike. This was really a silly comparison. Businesses dont fund investment projects with tax payer money. Some get TIF financing, but on a percentage basis they are a fraction of the 66% the Twins received for Target field. I should know, I worked with the department that tracks and files for them. Another reason why they are not even close, TIF financing for businesses almost always comes with many, many strings attached such as "number of employees hired at x salary by x date". This exists so a business owner can't say "build a stadium and we can compete" and then get the stadium and lower payroll.
-
What is the upside of making this comment? They come out and say Terry has no limit every year. Yet he basically let it slip that he does already have a limit and clearly discussions have already happened. We have ruled out several things already before all the uncertainty of the market, who is available via trade, etc. A comment like "it is way too early for us to have any clarity about next years payroll, our focus is identifying the next coach and we will go from there" would suffice for October first. This guy is totally inept. I would not hire him to market a lemonade stand for my daughters.
-
Like father, like sons. The season ended a few days ago. We don't really have a great idea of the free agent market given options and who will not be offered arbitratn. No idea what guys are demanding. The winter meetings are off in the distance. We don't know who will be available via trade. We could soon have seven new coaches with established networks that may recommend guys, and St. Peter already knows the payroll for next year. That is truly disturbing. For all the threads, comments, etc. about who we should go after. A Kemp trade, a Hamels trade, "we need one of the top pitchers"......it ain't happening. It has already been decided upon. Truly one of the worst ownership groups in sports.
-
Should the Twins Emulate the Royals?
tobi0040 replied to Nick Nelson's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
I would part with Sano on a Shields like deal if we extended the guy a the same time. Tack on 3/69 to his existing 2-25. Before we do anything like that, we should explore just signing a guy. Which would you rather have: Lester and owe him $150M over 6 years and keep Sano Or A pitcher like Shields that is not as good for 5-94 and be out Miguel Sano The reality maybe that the top pitchers arent coming here, or maybe it will cost 7-175 and not 6-150. But we should make a calculated decision. I don't think we should part with Buxton or Sano right now on a 1-2 year thing. One player doesn't turn round a 70 win team.
