chpettit19

No he wasn't. He spoke on China and was pretty roundly destroyed for it. Providing a prime example that people don't take athlete's opinions as some earth shattering piece of knowledge.

If the point of them not playing is to create conversation they have already succeeded as we are all here talking about it. The idea that they need to have some sort of negative impact on their own lives to help create change is nonsensical. If they canceled the season and donated their paychecks for the next 7 seasons to social causes would that make you feel better? Would that make anyone suddenly say "oh man, they're right! Now I see that police brutality is a problem and there are inequalities in our country. I will also join the fight to fix these problems."? The answer is no. It wouldn't. Is their postponing 1 game some great, grand gesture of self sacrifice? Of course not. Does that mean it's not effective and incredibly meaningful to many of them? No. Do 100% of players agree with the idea that police brutality, inequalities, etc. are a problem that the postponement is supposed to highlight and further conversation about? No. Were there likely dissenting voices in every clubhouse in baseball? Yes. Did they have conversations and agree that postponing wasn't some terrible tragedy worth stopping once they saw how important it was to their teammates? Apparently. The idea that there needs to be negative consequences (thus the differentiation between consequence and punishment) to make this action meaningful is misguided. The consequences of their actions are people are talking about it. The conversation has been progressed and people who wouldn't have shared their opinions with others now have. There were no punishments for the players. And I don't see how that makes any difference as it wouldn't have effected the consequences in any meaningful way.

Why does the profession of anyone speaking about something that matters to them matter? I have no idea what you do for a living and you don't know what I do, but I don't think you'd say I should keep my opinions to myself because of the career path I've gone down. They are aware they'll lose fans over this. Nascar knew they'd lose fans over the confederate flag ban. The idea that they should "shut up and dribble," to steal a now semi-famous response to Lebron, is pretty extreme to me. What does the NHL owe your wife or the Twins owe you? (Don't mean that in an aggressive way as I know is often taken over the internet in these kinds of situations) They are a business that runs how they choose to and at different levels finances and PR are considered. They don't have to play the sports we all love. Just like I don't need to do what I do. They're both jobs that our society has allowed to thrive to different degrees based on how people choose to spend their money. Do I think any athlete's opinion is better, more informed, or more important than any of ours simply because they're an athlete? Of course not. And I don't think you'd find a significant portion of society that does think that. They have a more broad reaching platform than we do, though. The vast majority of us have some sort of social media. We have friends and family we see in person. Coworkers. Strangers at the gym. We share our opinions and act in certain ways to spread the information we want spread and make stands for what we feel is worthy of taking stands for. Athletes being able to do that in different ways shouldn't be stopped. People disagreeing with them shouldn't be stopped either. The American way is elitist. We, as a society, judge people off their finances and material possessions more than anything else. You're rich: you're important, have worked harder than everyone else, and are better than. You're poor: you matter on the fringes, are lazy, and less than. Our society doesn't "bail out" the poor because the poor don't matter. We bail out the rich because the rich matter. We're the richest country in the world so we're the best. Trump had our economy in a great place so he was great. Now it's crap so he's crap. America is elitist. Athletes having view points that run counter to yours or your wife's doesn't mean they shouldn't speak to them or stand up for them. You disagreeing with them can be handled however you see fit. To turn athletes taking a stand on something into "telling us what we should care about" is on you, not them. They're using their platform the same way you're using Twins Daily as a platform. I don't think it'd be appropriate for anyone to tell you not to tell them what to care about because they disagree with a post on here (on this subject or a bullpen decision or whatever). No athlete owes any of us their performance. They are not here to follow our demands. We all pay each other's salaries in many different ways. It feels more direct with athletes because we pay for a ticket and watch them play, but that's how everything in America works. You pay for certain items and I get paid to make sure you get them. I spend money somewhere and you get paid to make sure I get whatever I paid for.

This is what it's all about. Supply and demand. Football is once a week so you have to dedicate that time each week to it if you care about it or you miss it. Baseball is every day. You can skip a few days, a week, a month, and jump right back in because there are still games everyday. I love baseball and watch multiple games everyday, but to expect the average person to tune in to a 3 hour game every day when they know they can just watch the next day just isn't realistic. And by the time the playoffs come around the average person is burned out on baseball. I definitely have to agree that marketing is a huge swing and miss by baseball. They've been awful at it. They made some strides the last season or two with the "Let the kids play" stuff, but in general they're terrible. Access to highlights and social media content has been a complete disaster with them trying to control all of it. Trout isn't as well known as we'd like because he doesn't want the spotlight and isn't as charismatic as those other stars (and doesn't win). I like thinking outside the box on these things, but I don't see how these changes would bring in more fans to the sport. Robbing homeruns or making diving catches in a setup situation like this just doesn't show off the athleticism of baseball players the way dunk contests do. And I think getting rid of the game itself runs counter to the intended goal. Wouldn't you want to use the skills challenge stuff to get non-fans interested in baseball and then show them what the best baseball players in the world actually look like playing a real game of baseball? I would think that would be how you expand the fandom beyond regions and create more fans who are interested in watching teams from different locations because they fell in love with a guy during the all star game when they saw Joey Gallo hit a 500 foot homer off Jacob DeGrom after DeGrom had just made Bregman look stupid and the crowd went nuts from the drama of the Astros this year.

This is much ado about nothing. Like Seth said, this is just how the system works. It's about trying to set new precedent. It's not about the difference only being about 300k this year for the Twins, it's about if they give in on that 300k this year it shows the arbitors that players of this level are worth more than what they've been granting players to this point. 4.35m is the top end for first time arbitration eligibile starting pitchers. Right now the teams are winning basically every time (Keuchel beat it after winning the Cy Young) when a player tries to go above that. If the Twins give in and go higher then next year the arbitors will go with the higher number. This is simply the business side of baseball and Berrios has been very open from early on that he understands the business side and he is more than happy to push things and is not taking any perceived discounts. It is no coincidence that he went with 4.4 instead of 4.3. He's trying to extend the upper limit just a little for future players. Absolutely driven by the players union. Them going through arbitration with him didn't improve or hurt their chances of extending him. He has been very open that if the team brings him a market level deal he is willing to consider it. He's just not taking a discount to extend.

The teams basically ask "is there anything wrong with him" and the other team tells them about any major medical concerns. The actual medical records are not shared until after it has been more or less fully agreed upon as the team wouldn't want any minor concerns being shown if a deal isn't going through and the player has privacy rights that restrict the teams from just throwing around their medical records all willy nilly.

This is a lot like the conspiracy theories that the Sox are trying to get out of it because of unexpected bad PR. There is a 0% chance Bloom, and the rest of the org, didn't expect huge blow back on trading Betts. They were never going to get equal player value in return and it's why they made taking Price part of any possible deal. The team doesn't care that NBC Boston wrote a bad article about them. Bad articles are written every day about every team. The teams don't care. Now that doesn't mean that the Twins aren't pushed out of this deal and end up with no Maeda and Graterol back. But it has absolutely nothing to do with John Tomase writing an article about Brusdar. Media influence has played no role in this trade.

I believe this was basically 2 trades. The Twins agreed to send Graterol to the Dodgers in return for Maeda and the Dodgers then moved Graterol to the Sox in the Betts portion of it. With the Twins only getting Maeda in return I think it's reasonable for them to say "if we're kicking in more we want more" or "this is all we're willing to pay for Maeda." Graterol and Verdugo were the return for Betts and Price (and there was money stuff) so the Twins are certainly within their rights to say "it's not our problem that you don't feel you got enough for Betts, we agreed to a swap of Graterol for Maeda." But then, to your other point, the Dodgers could then pull out of the Maeda part of the trade and give up their own prospect or find a 3rd team. But there is definitely a real reason for why the Twins wouldn't kick in any more and the Dodgers would pay the difference. Not to say they won't, but they have no reason to beyond really wanting Maeda.

I agree. The idea that Bloom is just now realizing that Boston fans would be upset with him trading the face of the franchise and a top 3-5 player in all of baseball is pretty out there. The better idea would be that they didn't look hard enough at whatever medicals they had on Graterol, or are getting different info from their in house drs. Worst case is the Twins did something shady, but I find that to be almost as far fetched as the idea that the Red Sox didn't know they'd take a PR hit by trading Betts.

Lucas Giolito, Tyler Glasnow, Alex Reyes, Berrios, Jose De Leon, Jon Gray, Robert Stephenson, Archie Bradley, Carson Fulmer, Mark Appel, Anderson Espinoza, Francis Martes, Michael Kopech, Jeff Hoffman, Reynaldo Lopez, Riley Pint, Walker Buehler, Brent Honeywell, Hunter Greene, Mitch Keller, Triston McKenzie, Kyle Wright, Mike Soroka, Forrest Whitley, Casey Mize, Sixto Sanchez, Dylan Cease, Nate Pearson, Matt Manning, Luis Patino, Ian Anderson, Dustin May. Those are most, didn't go to every rating site out there, of the RHP prospects who have rated higher than Graterol as a prospect in the last 5 years (That doesn't include the lefties so you could probably add another 15-20 to that list if you wanted to do overall pitching prospects). As in Top 50 overall prospects during the last 5 years. So many people in here acting like they just traded away the next Pedro with 100% certainty. I think some folks need to reassess what Graterol is and quit acting like he's already an established MLB arm let alone established MLB starter. He's thrown 15 innings above AA for goodness sakes. I listed 32 guys who have been rated better than he ever has and only a handful of them have shown they are any better than Maeda. Another handful aren't completely out of baseball, but aren't seen as viable ML arms. In less than 5 years Mark Appel went from the best young arm to out of the game completely. Lets get a grip on what any of the Twins prospects are and quit acting like they just traded Greg Maddux for Boof Bonser. Prospects are exciting and it is fun to dream on potential, but the certainty with which some of you speak about what Graterol will become is absurd. Maeda is not a sexy name and he is not an ace. But he is a proven ML talent. The Twins didn't "win" this trade, but they didn't get fleeced. Quite frankly, even if Maeda falls apart and Graterol does become the next Pedro this isn't a bad trade. It's not exciting or overwhelming, but it is a logically sound trade. Lets all chill and at least let the season start. A month ago these boards were blowing up about how the team isn't doing anything and are cheap and are just going to run a bunch of rookies out to the mound every day. Things can change quickly.

So Bailey, Hill, and Chacin are blocking our young guys and also not making it through the year on the roster? Not sure how you can have both of those things be the case. Did you actually mean to say the Twins have signed veteran guys to compete with the young guys and provide much needed depth since it is a 100% certainty that they will actually need more than 5 starters for the year and now they have 8-10 guys that have at least a decent chance of being average or better arms? That must have been it.

Kepler, Buxton, and Kiriloff (and Lewis if he's moved to the OF) are the only 3 (4) guys listed here that have the chance to be above average ML outfielders. Larnach looks to be a solid average MLB starting corner OFer. Wade, Cave, Rooker, Raley are all decent players who can be nice 4th outfielders, but if you're relying on more than 1 of them to be an everyday outfielder for you you're not winning the way we all want the Twins to win. (I don't mention Rosario cuz I think it's a foregone conclusion that he isn't extended beyond next year) The idea of trading any outfielder not named Kepler, Buxton, Kiriloff, or Lewis (maybe Larnach) and getting back "impact pitching" that can slot in at or above the Berrios/Odo level is a pipe dream. Nobody is giving up that kind of pitching for a combination of 4th OFs that can possibly hit, but not field. Could you get a Pineda type for them? Sure. Older guy who is good, not great, and slots in at your 3 or, preferably, 4 spot in your postseason rotation. I don't know that I'd call the current situation a logjam outside of Kiriloff being currently blocked by Rosario. With the injuries that happen throughout the year (and Buxton's history alone) this isn't a logjam, it's needed depth. The hope is that Kiriloff is over his wrist injury from last year and comes out the gate mashing. At that point when one of your ML starters goes down you mix him in to get him some exposure. If it gets to playoff time you aren't relying on a mix of 4th OFers or a guy with no ML experience. If he pulls an Arraez and never lets go of the job Rosario becomes your 4th OF and LH bat off the bench. Or part of DH rotation if Cruz finally shows his age or is hurt himself. If it's the bottom of the 9th and the tying run is on 3rd and winning run is on 2nd with 2 outs and a chance to go to the WS on the line I don't want the season coming down to Raley, Rooker, Wade, or Cave having to knock in those runs.

For sure. This signing does prove they're willing to spend as long as they feel like it's the right deal. They aren't willing to overspend, but they are willing to sign the right big money deals. Does that mean this deal turns out better than any of the deals those arms signed? Nope. But I'd guess the FO has a whole lot of info and reasons why they were willing to do this one, but not go any higher than they did on the arms. Now we just cross our fingers that we get production worthy of the price tag.

No. It doens't. At all. Wheeler wanted to stay on the east coast and MadBum wanted to be by his horses in Ari. Those are reasons outside of money that what many perceive as front end FAs didn't want to come here. I haven't seen anyone claiming that no front end FAs will ever want to come here, but there are reasons outside of money. It's not even debatable. Those 2 players specifically stated they had reasons outside of money for why they signed with the teams they signed with. Not to mention Rendon stating publicly that he didn't want to play for the Dodgers because of the Hollywood type lifestyle that comes with it. That is a reason outside of money that a player didn't want to go to a specific team.

Well I guess he's super lucky that there's raincoats available and others around him with umbrellas they don't want or need and are willing to give him theirs. And I wouldn't spend $50 on an umbrella that has holes in it even if it's pouring rain. I'll find something else to put over my head in the meantime while I wait for the umbrella I'm making to be complete or for one that works and is actually worth $50 to come available. I'd also not spend $50 on an umbrella that gets me out of 1 rain storm, but not any others and then not have the $25 I should have left to get another umbrella later because I paid twice as much for the original umbrella because I freaked out over 1 storm and lost my mind.

2 pitchers in the top 20 of WAR in the entire league isn't credible to sustainable success? I'd disagree.

Do you have any evidence they didn't? My point is that saying "do whatever it takes" means you're theoretically willing to go drastically above what others did just to get the deal done. And to me that makes no sense. My guess is it wasn't as much the dollars as it was the years that gave the Twins pause with Ryu. I don't think we'll see this FO hand out many deals over 3 years for guys over 30 years old. They will try to do a few, but I don't think they like locking themselves into long term deals like that.

Yeah, I'm surprised Texas even has a farm system left after all they had to give up for Kluber. Earth shattering really. Boston is going to get under the tax threshold this year and the easiest way to do it is to get someone to take on a bunch of the Price contract. Ray is on his last year of team control and is not a top tier pitcher. Matz is the 6th guy on the Mets and not a top tier arm. Yes, there are other teams in the bidding for these guys, but they aren't going to ship out big time prospects for these guys either. Why is not wanting to overpay a cop out? When is overpaying ever a good thing anywhere in life? If you've decided something is worth X amount you don't go out and pay more than X amount to get it just so you can say you have it. That's bad business all around.

Correct. Have to be on your team for the entire season to qualify. So in season acquisitions can't be offered QO.

Indians 2016 draft picks to reach majors as solid or better starting pitchers: Civale- pick #92 Bieber- pick #122 Plesac- pick #362 Those are 3rd, 4th, and 12th round picks. Don't need to use 1st round picks on pitching necessarily. Not saying they shouldn't, just that the Indians aren't just loading up on 1st round pitching.

"Letting all the FA options go" is where you completely lose me. That isn't how this works. What would you have done different? Offer MadBum 5, 150? Ryu 4, 120? Wheeler 6, 200? Sign Cole to 400+ mil? Strasburg for 400? They aren't shopping at the store and just taking whatever items they want while leaving the others. They didn't "let them go," they set what they felt was an acceptable deal on the table and the players chose where they wanted to go. Spending drastically more than anyone else is willing to is not a good team building strategy. Full stop. And I've never argued they should go into 2020 with a 3 deep rotation. I have continually said they need to add. I am just not broken up over not overpaying for 2 guys who went to the places they wanted to be (1 of which I think is washed up) or a guy who has pitched 2 complete seasons his entire career. Falvey was one of the top developers of the Indians pitching system and I am willing to give him a shot at turning our young arms into legit starters. I want 1 spot available for them to rotate through and get experience until 1 of them takes it and runs with it. That leaves 1 more spot to fill in the rotation and I would like to see if they can get Price for nothing while taking on a decent chunk of his only 3 years remaining. Or go get Ray for what I think would be less than any of our top 5 prospects. Or Matz or whatever other guy they can get for a reasonable trade price. Or add a couple of the bounce back options and let them battle it out while Pineda is suspended.

I've already spoken to the injuries and suspensions drastically changing this team in October. If it had been Pineda I don't think there would be quite as much anger right now. Dobnak starting seems to have even convinced fans that 7 runs in 3 games was enough for us to have won if only we had MadBum! Or whatever other pitcher we haven't signed. Ryu has been great more often than not when he actually pitches. Problem is he doesn't actually pitch very often. And that is a problem.

It has been widely reported nationally and locally that Wheeler wanted to be in Philly cuz his fiancé is from there and wanted to be close to her family and that MadBum wanted to be in AZ. In fact both of them said as much publicly. Its been nationally reported that AZ didn't even call MadBum, but he actually went to them and said "if you can get close to what I want I'll come here" and they adjusted their plans.

I think him and his agent knew he wouldn't get similar to those 3 because he had a draft pick attached to him the second the Twins put that QO out there. And as the last 2 offseason have shown that drastically limits your negotiating powers in contract situations. Need an example? Keuchel and Kimbrel just last year. Be as skeptical as you want, but you are either ignoring what the QO offer does to a player's value or just don't quite understand that he was in a very different situation to those 3.

deGrom was a free agent this year? Must have missed that. Or him being mentioned in trade rumors. I assume you're actually talking about Ryu, but he didn't win the 2019 (or any other year) NL CY Award. And, yes, I am hanging my hat on the fact that a guy on the IL is not better than someone not on the IL. Would he have been a nice get on a 2 or 3 year deal? Sure. Do I think he'll magically put together 4 uninjured years after having 1 in the last 6 while now turning 33? No. And there is no logical reason why anyone would. Thus he is in the 2nd tier of pitchers, just like the 3 the Twins have, and not in the top tier with Cole and Strasburg. And you can't even make the argument that other MLB teams don't agree cuz he signed right in line with the 2nd tier guys and for a contract similar to what Odo will likely get next year.