chpettit19

It doesn't look like he really broke the rule because he didn't mention any player by name, but this is exactly what the players should want from their union. Everyone knew who he was talking about (the "Boras four") and having any team come out and say they're not paying a certain price for a free agent hurts that player's negotiating power. That rule is in place for a reason. While Joe looks to have flirted with the line without crossing it, the players should be happy their union is sending a message to the league that they need to watch themselves when it comes to undercutting player's negotiations publicly.

Why should we believe they were made in 22 and 23? Someone brings up the 23 BAM money in all these articles. Forbes said the Twins likely made about 16 mil in 22. That's them investing? If making 16 mil is them sacrificing financially for the betterment of their product I'm even more upset that they slashed payroll now. I'm not asking them to be the Padres or Mets and spend to the luxury tax. Convenient that you left out the Dodgers, Yankees, and Rangers in that, though. Especially the Rangers who invested big time and I believe they won a world series recently, no? And the article is literally about the DBacks so if you have a problem with me following the lead of the article perhaps take it up with Ted. I'm glad you're happy with the team's spending. Not telling you not to be. But I don't get how finally winning and then slashing payroll and not coming through on streaming is a praise-able situation. To each their own.

Trading Jorge Polanco to save money isn't investing. Using that money for a 38 year old 1B who can't hit righties isn't investing. Replacing Gray with DeSclafani isn't investing. It doesn't need to be an overpay, but the fact that they cut payroll and traded one of their better players sure would suggest it actually was an overpay. I want them to invest in the team. Signing an expensive guy over here while trading another one over there isn't investing. Clearing the way? Who have they cleared the way for? Bringing in Santana wasn't "clearing the way." DeSclafani isn't "clearing the way." A whole bunch of 30+ year old relievers with very little track record isn't "clearing the way." Farmer for 6+ mil isn't "clearing the way." And I hope they do keep them all, but, again, they haven't extended them and I'm not going to praise them for things they haven't done. The young guys with opening day jobs earned them last year. They didn't "clear the way" for them. I'm glad you're sold that they're automatically going to jump payroll next year. "Right-sizing our business" doesn't scream "we're about to spend a bunch more" to me, but we'll see. I'm not praising them for 2025 until I see what they do. All I know is that they went to the ALDS last year and had their fanbase more excited than it's been in literally decades. They had the chance to take a real shot at gaining another generation of fans. Instead they told us they needed to right-size and took a TV deal that doesn't include the streaming they sent Provus out to promote. You're more than welcome to be happy with things. Nobody is telling you not to be. I'm not. If you don't get that it's fine.

1. I acknowledged there were those fans. So we agree. But that's not what many of the complaints are on this site right now so it shouldn't just be a blanket statement about fans complaining about spending. 2. I've never said I'm not excited about the season. I can both believe they're shooting themselves in the foot and have a solid team. I don't think their team is better now than when they lost to the Astros, and that's what I care about. And an extra 10-20 mil in spending would help that. 3. Pohlad himself said they're done spending in any meaningful way. Could they add another $5 mil? Sure. That doesn't impress me. And waiting until the deadline to get into massive bidding wars with other teams isn't some magic bullet that inspires me. With the expanded playoffs there's far fewer sellers and far more buyers now than there used to be. It's not a store. They can't just wait and then go pick out the piece they want at the deadline. 4. I haven't said I do know what they're making. I know they're not losing money, though. Really not losing money during all the 90+ loss seasons they've produced over the last 20 years. And, again, me and plenty others aren't claiming that. We are saying their desire to look short-term hurts them in the long-term. St Peter was out last offseason questioning fans and why they didn't show up to support a team that lost the division by 14 games a season after they lost the division by 20 games. Then when the fanbase is actually excited they choose to kneecap themselves and will probably be super confused as to why the fans are mad again. I'm not even screaming "cheap Pohlads," I'm screaming "short-sighted Pohlads!" 5. They "invested" in Buxton at 1/2 the market rate. No, they don't get credit for that. They "invested" in Correa after he fell into their lap at a shortened, and discounted, rate for the 2nd straight offseason. They get 1/2 credit for that. Lopez is a nice deal for sure. When they actually make extensions I'll give them credit for them. They don't get credit for things they haven't yet done. I'm glad you're excited and have high hopes. Not telling you, or anyone else, not to feel that way. I see a team that's in the same general win range as last year which should lead to another division title. I don't see them any closer to the World Series. Is Baltimore mid-market? Cuz I'll take them over the Twins in a heartbeat (no, I'm not going to go cheer for them so I hope nobody says that. I can cheer for the Twins and still acknowledge Baltimore is younger and better than the Twins on paper). I would prefer Polanco, but I agree this is a solid roster. My problem is the Twins were handed the opportunity to make this roster more than "solid" while expanding their fanbase and they chose a short-term payday. It's their business and they can do what they want. But they better not be confused when the attendance still doesn't reach their projections after the decisions they've made.

Are there a lot of fans asking for the Twins to "consistently lose money?" I don't see much of that. I do see a whole lot of fans suggesting making a long-term investment in the team coming off its first playoff win in 2 decades with its fan base the most excited its been in the same time frame as opposed to immediately throwing water on its own consumer's excitement. And there are absolutely teams that make that decision. Ted is suggesting here that the DBacks are making that very choice. Are there fans who scream "cheap Pohlads" every season no matter what? Of course. But this offseason is very different. They had the choice to sacrifice a little financially to dramatically grow their reach with the fanbase. I believe it was Gleeman who said they're in basically 1/4 of households in their viewing area. They chased short-term money over the chance to significantly increase their reach at the perfect time with some actual success last year. Everything came together as they got out from the TV deal they themselves have complained about for years while they were hitting an exciting point in their team development and they chose to go back to the same terrible TV situation while delivering terrible messaging and hurting their connection to their fan base. The DBacks are showing that some teams do take short-term financial hits to improve their long-term outlook. I don't think it's too crazy that fans suggest the Pohlads could make the same decision.

I think you and I are probably 2 of the higher folks around here on Kirilloff. I think he's a natural born hitter and am just hoping to see a healthy season out of him so we can see what he can really do. Julien-Lewis-Kirilloff could be really fun for the next 5-10 years if they all hit their peaks. I would disagree that there's not a spot for Lee right now. I think the DH spot is wide open. I don't think they should be rushing to get him to the majors after his solid, but far from spectacular AAA debut last year. But if he looks like one of their 9 best hitters during the spring they could definitely call him up, start him at 2B, and use the DH spot to fit their 9 best hitters in against righties and lefties. With the way they're talking him up I've actually started leaning towards them maybe hoping he tears spring apart and gives them their 9th hitter against righties and lefties that they traded away with Polanco. I'm so excited that we actually get to see game action starting tonight and we can start discussing actual play instead of all our hypotheticals and predictions!

Yes? I don't believe Carlos Santana is taking Alex Kirilloff's job. They have a DH spot. So while I don't think Kirilloff is a 1B only, there's also a possibility he doesn't play in the OF. I don't think they're going to refuse to play him in the OF, but I don't think the Santana signing is some sort of indication that he isn't playing 1B primarily, or even solely. So I don't believe any story is ended. They have Larnach as a lefthanded OFer so does that end the story on Kirilloff playing the OF? I don't see any story being ended at all, sorry.

Yeah, like I said, I don't see them making any trade that takes away from their current major league lineup. Was just saying, hypothetically, if they did, and those were the 3 options on who they traded, I'd trade Kepler. I love Kirilloff's bat, and if he's worth anything in trade it's because he's putting up more .850 or .900+ OPS months. I'm not trading that.

I don't see what story this ends at all, but you're welcome to complete any story you'd like.

Right now they have an opening at DH so I'd put Kirilloff (and/or Julien) there. But I don't know why they wouldn't put Kirilloff back in the outfield if that's what gives them the best fit. I wouldn't actually trade any of these guys. I think they need to bring a bat in, not trade them away. But if you're giving me Lee, Kirilloff, and Kepler as my options for trading at all between now and the deadline there's no doubt Kepler is the guy I'm trading. His Twins career is almost guaranteed to be over after this season. Kirilloff's and Lee's aren't. I'm trading the guy who's leaving anyways before I'm trading the guys I still have cheap control of.

I remember them saying he's going to focus on 1B, but I don't remember anything about him being a 1B only. It goes against their standard operating procedure to limit him to 1 spot and say they'll never move him. Even Lewis this offseason said he's not totally locked into 3B only. It'd be Kepler vs Kirilloff, to me, because I'd assume they take the future into consideration when making any trade. They certainly did with the Polanco trade. What's coming back in return? What do the standings look like? How is everyone playing? Lots of factors would go into it so it's awfully hard to make too strong of a stance either way right now. But of the the 3 guys you listed 2 of them are controlled into the future and 1 isn't. I actually wouldn't expect them to make any mid-season trades that included sending out part of their major league lineup, but if they did I'd think they'd certainly factor in Kepler's lack of team control. If Lee has convinced them that he's a better hitter than Kirilloff they're certainly not trading Lee, but if Kirilloff has built up enough value to be a worthwhile trade chip why would they want to move him? If anyone from the major league lineup is being traded at the deadline I'd assume it's a guy who's about to be a free agent (Kepler, Farmer (unlikely his option is picked up), Santana types).

I'd imagine it's pretty hard to get the value right for both teams in a Kirilloff trade right now. The deadline would probably be a more realistic time to see him dealt. Unless another team wants to pay you as if his May or July production from last year is his full season production it's probably best that the Twins see what kind of start he gets off to. And then I agree with @DJL44 and it becomes a question of Kepler or Kirilloff and there'd be a whole lot of other factors that went into that decision. But I don't know that I'd expect a Kirilloff trade before opening day.

Those are basically Jorge Polanco type OPS+ numbers with the 1 spike year in '64 being a standout. You got Jorge Polanco in the HOF?

So his glove and the fact that he played for 23 seasons. Fair.

@Schmoeman5 I'm not taking a shot at Brooks, but there's literally no way a hitter with his career stats makes the HOF without his glove. Like he's nowhere near a HOF bat. He had a nice, not great, but nice, 4 year run from 64-67 with the bat, but otherwise he was nothing special at all. He's in the HOF for his glove.

.280 and 20 isn't why he's in the HOF. He's in the HOF for his glove 100%.

Mind blowing that the business folks don't seem to see urgency in that problem. I have to imagine they recognize the problem, but they seem so confused when they don't get fans that I question how much they're really understanding the mindset of the casual fan.

With maybe a little more speed and WAY more walks. But the concern with him has always been that he doesn't impact the ball much better than a Madrigal type. That's really his make or break skill. How hard is he going to hit the ball to give him the chance to really use his eye.

Yeah, I think that's the more likely setup if/when he establishes himself in the bigs. The game is changing and teams are leaning more and more into just getting their best overall hitters at the top of the lineup (Acuna being the most obvious example, with Shohei rumored to be taking over for Betts in the leadoff spot in LA being another). Against righties I'm betting it's Martin 9, Julien 1, then into the Lewis, Correa, Buxton types. A 9 hole hitter with a .380+ OBP and some steals would be really nice in front of the boom those other 4 guys can bring.

Carlos Correa was signed for 6 years and 200 million. Pretty big long-term contract to leave out there. Along with Vazquez for 3 years and 30 mil. You left 43.3 million in annual contracts out.

This is a fun way to look at the roster. Expansion is definitely coming so it'll be interesting to see what the roster looks like then and do this exercise again. I think I'd probably go with the same 15 guys if this were happening tomorrow. Who they'd lose is always going to be tough to predict until you see all the available guys from other teams so you know where the strengths are. Fun exercise and will be really interesting to see how things go sometime in the next 5-10 years when it happens for real.

The TV revenue is not widely reported. We didn't know how much they were making on their TV deal until the bankruptcy hearing after their entire contract ended. They've now hidden their new 1 year deal. What's "pretty accurate" for attendance numbers? Where do those numbers come from? Now it's 4% variance instead of 5? 5% variance on the Twins revenue you showed is an extra 13.5 million. An extra 13.5 million jumps them from 25th in profit to 19th. An extra 5% on Boston's number is +/-26 million. That could move them from 4th in profit to easily #1 or down to #11. These aren't facts. They're guesses.

No, you said "I don't take hard positions without facts." But you take "hard positions" on the Twins spending constantly on here. Those are not facts you presented. If you're going to talk down to/about people who make claims without facts while claiming to have facts it's not petty to point out that you're not actually providing facts. Don't claim to have facts and then say "it went without saying that these are not audited." They aren't facts.

So not facts. Guesses. But guesses that you like so you claim are facts. Edit to add: The Braves and Toronto being the exception as those are actually team provided data sets.

I'm 100% on the "create new fans" bandwagon. When you haven't won a playoff game in 2 decades you've given an entire generation 0 playoff wins. That's hard to build upon your core fan base. On top of that you have a bunch of really bad teams that finish towards, or at, the bottom of a mostly bad division so aren't even reaching the playoffs. Then you mix in the recent years of lack of streaming options during the cord cutting boom, which is not their fault necessarily as they were already locked into a TV deal, and it makes it worse. But doubling down on that by knowing you're hurting your ability to reach more people by chasing a 1 year payment for a worse deal than the one you've been complaining about for years because you want as much revenue as you can get for 1 year is 100% their fault. And then they top it all off with St Peter and Pohlad being absolutely horrendous with messaging and you've just put a cherry on top of your "how to alienate fans and shoot yourself in the foot" sundae.