Falvey: "...We're going to target impact pitching."

[howieramone2]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 11:25 AM, akmanak said:

This board drives me crazy sometimes. My rebuttal to the constant criticism of the owners not caring about this team is this: When is the last time the Twins actually spent some decent money on payroll? Year after year we hear the same things at the end of the season and still people fall for it .

Signing Cruz, Schoop, and Cron didnt show that managment has turned a new leaf, all it showed was they got lucky. Statistics do not lie and all you have to do is look at our overall payroll to see that nothing has changed nor will it.

Luck had nothing to do with it. I recall reading where several national writers stated our off season was sneaky good. Falvey isn't being extended after there were vague rumors the Red Sox were interested in him, because he's lucky.

[howieramone2]

 

  On 10/15/2019 at 9:53 PM, Mike Sixel said:

No one is asking for the Twins to go get 4 expensive players.......how about 1?

Most likely they with come up with 2. They just aren't going to spend stupid money on the likes of Darvish or Pat Corbin. Take a look at what Baseball-Reference considers similar pitchers to Corbin. You will recognize some names.

[nicksaviking]

 

  On 10/15/2019 at 8:41 PM, Battle ur tail off said:

This is so untrue its not even funny. 

 

Top players will come here if they are paid at the market rate or slightly above. These guys care about one thing, most of them and that's money. Well, maybe 2 things. Money and winning. The Twins can provide both right now. 

 

I can't speak for the players, but I could list at least a half dozen MLB cities I would never move to if I was offered a raise to move there. I'm sure plenty of people would chase the money, but I'd bet most of humanity wouldn't put that at the top of their list. It would probably be about 4th on mine, and I'd find it hard to believe that most other people don't feel the same way. Most of these guys have wives and children, baseball isn't automatically their top priority.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 3:49 PM, howieramone2 said:

Most likely they with come up with 2. They just aren't going to spend stupid money on the likes of Darvish or Pat Corbin. Take a look at what Baseball-Reference considers similar pitchers to Corbin. You will recognize some names.

FWIW, Baseball-Reference "similarity scores" aren't necessarily "similar pitchers" in anyone's opinion -- they just have similar career counting stats. So they can easily mislead across eras (especially with pitchers and innings pitched), and they're calculated cumulatively for careers, so Corbin is getting compared based more on his admittedly pedestrian ages 22-27 (104 ERA+, 7.9 K/9) than his much-improved age 28-29 (137 ERA+, 10.8 K/9).

 

A similar case would be Charlie Morton -- the guys in his similarity scores are pretty marginal, but Morton's been fantastic the past few seasons since re-inventing himself. It would be foolish to consider these similarity scores as anything more than trivia in any case, but it would be especially foolish to do so while ignoring the shape of a particular player's career.

 

And that said, I would have preferred taking our chances in the postseason behind Darvish or Corbin, rather than Dobnak or "TBA".

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 3:57 PM, nicksaviking said:

I can't speak for the players, but I could list at least a half dozen MLB cities I would never move to if I was offered a raise to move there. I'm sure plenty of people would chase the money, but I'd bet most of humanity wouldn't put that at the top of their list. It would probably be about 4th on mine, and I'd find it hard to believe that most other people don't feel the same way. Most of these guys have wives and children, baseball isn't automatically their top priority.

I get where you are coming from, but I suspect us "regular Joes" are wired quite a bit differently than most pro athletes.

 

I'm sure some cities still have an advantage, but I wouldn't want to overrate that advantage, especially since the actual difference in home cities (~90 working days a year, spread out over 6 months) is relatively small compared to the other family sacrifices they are already making regardless of where they play their home games (road trips, spring training, night games, etc.).

[nicksaviking]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 4:24 PM, spycake said:

I get where you are coming from, but I suspect us "regular Joes" are wired quite a bit differently than most pro athletes.

 

I'm sure some cities still have an advantage, but I wouldn't want to overrate that advantage, especially since the actual difference in home cities (~90 working days a year, spread out over 6 months) is relatively small compared to the other family sacrifices they are already making regardless of where they play their home games (road trips, spring training, night games, etc.).

 

I doubt pro athletes are wired much differently than the rest of us Average Joes, they're still humans who have worries, biases, fears and preferred comforts. We hear every offseason that Free Agent A wants to play on the West Coast or Free Agent B wants to be closer to his wife's family. 

 

I'd think the biggest difference in wiring is between the swinging young bachelors and the folks married with children.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 4:33 PM, nicksaviking said:

I doubt pro athletes are wired much differently than the rest of us Average Joes, they're still humans who have worries, biases, fears and preferred comforts. We hear every offseason that Free Agent A wants to play on the West Coast or Free Agent B wants to be closer to his wife's family. 

 

I'd think the biggest difference in wiring is between the swinging young bachelors and the folks married with children.  

I think there has to be a huge difference in wiring, just to achieve the goal of becoming a pro athlete. It's a special ambition, one that starts pretty early for these guys and pretty much dominates their teenage years.

 

And by that point, the goals of being a pro athlete often supersedes fan goals like playing for a hometown team or even sometimes winning a championship.

 

If you did a survey of free agents in pro sports, I suspect you'd find very few who signed where they already lived, even among those with families. Charlie Morton was last offseason's "sign where he lives" guy -- but two years earlier, he signed somewhere else, so who knows? Maybe it becomes a bigger deal the older a guy gets -- but those guys are generally less desirable anyway, with fewer suitors and more comparable offers across the board. (And generally not the subject of this tangent.)

 

We still hear this and that about free agents, but I'm not sure how much of it is actually meaningful. Apparently Patrick Corbin wasn't willing to sacrifice ~$40 mil or whatever to return to his home state. I doubt Manny Machado had much interest in playing beside his brother-in-law with the White Sox either.

[Battle ur tail off]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 3:57 PM, nicksaviking said:

I can't speak for the players, but I could list at least a half dozen MLB cities I would never move to if I was offered a raise to move there. I'm sure plenty of people would chase the money, but I'd bet most of humanity wouldn't put that at the top of their list. It would probably be about 4th on mine, and I'd find it hard to believe that most other people don't feel the same way. Most of these guys have wives and children, baseball isn't automatically their top priority.

 

If someone offered you another 25 million a year, I think you might consider this a little differently. 

 

We aren't talking about the difference between 100K and 125K. We are talking about the type of money that will setup 3 generations. 

[prouster]

  On 10/16/2019 at 3:57 PM, nicksaviking said:

I can't speak for the players, but I could list at least a half dozen MLB cities I would never move to if I was offered a raise to move there. I'm sure plenty of people would chase the money, but I'd bet most of humanity wouldn't put that at the top of their list. It would probably be about 4th on mine, and I'd find it hard to believe that most other people don't feel the same way. Most of these guys have wives and children, baseball isn't automatically their top priority.

You would turn down a very real, very immanent $300 million contract because you don’t like the city where’d you’d live about 100 days out of the year?

[Bomba2026]

At this point I'd just the Nats or Astros their opinion!! Haha We need some better decision making. I'd try to hire some pitching coaches from the above and Tampa teams, even in the minor league level...

[yarnivek1972]

  On 10/16/2019 at 3:57 PM, nicksaviking said:

I can't speak for the players, but I could list at least a half dozen MLB cities I would never move to if I was offered a raise to move there. I'm sure plenty of people would chase the money, but I'd bet most of humanity wouldn't put that at the top of their list. It would probably be about 4th on mine, and I'd find it hard to believe that most other people don't feel the same way. Most of these guys have wives and children, baseball isn't automatically their top priority.

I would bet the overwhelming majority of MLB players don’t reside full time in their home city (or surrounding area). They might rent an apartment for part of the year. As I understand it, for guys that “ride the AAA shuttle”, temporary housing is made available to them.

 

Point being, players work where they work and live where they live. No one forces them to move their families and many of them don’t.

[Riverbrian]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 4:33 PM, nicksaviking said:

I doubt pro athletes are wired much differently than the rest of us Average Joes, they're still humans who have worries, biases, fears and preferred comforts. We hear every offseason that Free Agent A wants to play on the West Coast or Free Agent B wants to be closer to his wife's family. 

 

I'd think the biggest difference in wiring is between the swinging young bachelors and the folks married with children.  

 

If I had to guess... I don't have to... but I will. 

 

It's probably always a case by case basis of course... but I do think you are right in this sense, this is their first chance to control their destiny. If you grew up in Northern Texas and grew up a die hard Rangers fan and dreamed of playing for the Ranges but were drafted by the Mariners and your rights were held by the Mariners until now... This would be your chance to finally make a decision on your own behalf. 

 

However, I think the "Money" is the first filter they have to go through and after going through that money filter... There are probably not a lot of choices left.

 

Market forces will pretty much dictate that.

 

The player probably sits down with his agent, they get a price in mind and I'd imagine that they would ask for more than most teams are comfortable paying to see if they can get it. This alone will limit your choices to just a couple of teams. 

 

The player will then have to choose between the Twins and the Yankees, who are the teams willing to play in the neighborhood created by the player and agent unless he lowers his ask to include more teams and choices. 

 

If the Rangers ain't paying... Now you are taking a serious haircut to play in a preferred location and then it just becomes case by case. The Twins will do 6 years/180 Million, The Yankees will do 6 Years/170 Million. The Angels will do 4 Years/130 Million. 

 

If his wife says... I'd really like Southern California. The agent may try to leverage the Yankees and Twins and try get the Angels up to 6 years r at least 5 years but if the Angels don't...  

 

The wife will probably then tell her husband to sign with Minnesota because they should be competitive for the length of the contract, while the Yankees will be going down in flames in the future, leaving him in the middle of losing misery. 

 

It is obviously case by case based on what is most important to the player but "Money" has to be the first filter and the hardest filter. When it is all said and done. Most players won't really be choosing from 30 teams, they will have a couple of choices... a handful if they are lucky. 

 

 

 

[D.C Twins]

Washington and Houston are likely the WS duo.

 

Both have at least TWO pitchers better than Berrios.

 

High bar, but the one that needs to be cleared if we want to be anything more than The Playoff Patsy (TM pending

[nicksaviking]

  On 10/16/2019 at 7:06 PM, Riverbrian said:

If I had to guess... I don't have to... but I will. 

 

It's probably always a case by case basis of course... but I do think you are right in this sense, this is their first chance to control their destiny. If you grew up in Northern Texas and grew up a die hard Rangers fan and dreamed of playing for the Ranges but were drafted by the Mariners and your rights were held by the Mariners until now... This would be your chance to finally make a decision on your own behalf. 

 

However, I think the "Money" is the first filter they have to go through and after going through that money filter... There are probably not a lot of choices left.

 

Market forces will pretty much dictate that.

 

The player probably sits down with his agent, they get a price in mind and I'd imagine that they would ask for more than most teams are comfortable paying to see if they can get it. This alone will limit your choices to just a couple of teams. 

 

The player will then have to choose between the Twins and the Yankees, who are the teams willing to play in the neighborhood created by the player and agent unless he lowers his ask to include more teams and choices. 

 

If the Rangers ain't paying... Now you are taking a serious haircut to play in a preferred location and then it just becomes case by case. The Twins will do 6 years/180 Million, The Yankees will do 6 Years/170 Million. The Angels will do 4 Years/130 Million. 

 

If his wife says... I'd really like Southern California. The agent may try to leverage the Yankees and Twins and try get the Angels up to 6 years r at least 5 years but if the Angels don't...  

 

The wife will probably then tell her husband to sign with Minnesota because they should be competitive for the length of the contract, while the Yankees will be going down in flames in the future, leaving him in the middle of losing misery. 

 

It is obviously case by case based on what is most important to the player but "Money" has to be the first filter and the hardest filter. When it is all said and done. Most players won't really be choosing from 30 teams, they will have a couple of choices... a handful if they are lucky.

 

I’m not trying to throw the Twins into the mix specifically, but if there’s a guy who prefers the East Coast, or a large market, or George Costanza or whatever is at the top of his Pro’s list, I don’t see this Twins offer winning out over the Yankees offer in this scenario.

 

And if Twins have to top another team by two years at 30M per to win a bid, well that’s messed up and the game needs a salary cap. We should be talking about 5-10% pay differential tops, not 30%.

[Riverbrian]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 11:08 PM, nicksaviking said:

I’m not trying to throw the Twins into the mix specifically, but if there’s a guy who prefers the East Coast, or a large market, or George Costanza or whatever is at the top of his Pro’s list, I don’t see this Twins offer winning out over the Yankees offer in this scenario.

And if Twins have to top another team by two years at 30M per to win a bid, well that’s messed up and the game needs a salary cap. We should be talking about 5-10% pay differential tops, not 30%.

 

I was mostly joking in my scenario.

 

We are talking about tie-breakers mostly. Money is the biggest filter and you got to get to the ball park to get to a tie-breakers. 

 

The Yankees will probably be chosen in my scenario because a free agent will believe that the Yankees success is sustainable.

 

Nobody wants to sign a 6 year contract with a team that ends up picking first in the amateur draft. 

 

The Twins still got some proving to do in that department. 

 

The hometown discount or liking Dallas better than Seattle is another tie-breaker. 

 

Yes... Baseball needs a cap. What baseball needs more than anything, right after younger demographics and #2 on the list is:  Hope in Pittsburgh. 

 

When Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Kansas City and the smaller markets feel like they have hope... all of the numbers that baseball needs to survive go up. 

 

[wabene]

Baseball is played in the summer which is more enjoyable here than, say, Houston. I can understand an NBA player from the south not wanting to come here but with baseball I think most just don't know anything about the area. You do hear players saying after getting to know Minnesota that they want to stay. There are good quality of life factors, especially for a family, in this well run state. None of this helps us with free agents who know nothing of the place.

[ashbury]

 

  On 10/17/2019 at 11:37 AM, Riverbrian said:

I was mostly joking in my scenario.

 

We are talking about tie-breakers mostly. Money is the biggest filter and you got to get to the ball park to get to a tie-breakers. 

 

The Yankees will probably be chosen in my scenario because a free agent will believe that the Yankees success is sustainable.

 

Nobody wants to sign a 6 year contract with a team that ends up picking first in the amateur draft. 

 

The Twins still got some proving to do in that department. 

 

The hometown discount or liking Dallas better than Seattle is another tie-breaker. 

 

Yes... Baseball needs a cap. What baseball needs more than anything, right after younger demographics and #2 on the list is:  Hope in Pittsburgh. 

 

When Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Kansas City and the smaller markets feel like they have hope... all of the numbers that baseball needs to survive go up. 

When my kids were college shopping they didn't apply to three preferred schools plus 27 safety schools. You don't need that many options to find the best fit. I suspect free agents use similar logic, and you've listed several ways they narrow down the list to something that aids their thinking due to a smaller size.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

  On 10/15/2019 at 10:51 PM, Major League Ready said:

They need 3, IMO. I am going to guess one of (Wheeler / Kuechel / Bumgarner + Odorizzi & Pineda costs roughly $50M AAV. Would you prefer that trio or Cole / Odorizzi and one of our rookies which is also around $50M AAV?

 

I am not sure $50M is the number. They need to make sure they can cover the arbitration increases over the next couple of years. 

 

BTW ... I like the idea of 2 of the 1st group + Pineda.

Odorizzi should get $18m as a QO or ~$16m over multiple years. Pineda will be prorated to around $10m.

 

No way those other guys are $20-25m guys.

 

I'd be mildly surprised if those three went much over $40m as a group. Except for Wheeler, I'd pay a bit more for him.

[Major League Ready]

 

  On 10/18/2019 at 12:47 AM, Brock Beauchamp said:

Odorizzi should get $18m as a QO or ~$16m over multiple years. Pineda will be prorated to around $10m.

 

No way those other guys are $20-25m guys.

 

I'd be mildly surprised if those three went much over $40m as a group. Except for Wheeler, I'd pay a bit more for him.

 

You might be right. I was also thinking $18M for Odorizzi but I estimated $12M for Pineda. My thought is teams will be inclined to keep his contract to two years given his complete lack of physical condition and the AAV might get to 12M as a result. Even at your projection of 28M that would only leave 12M for Wheeler to get to the $40M you have estimated. Like you, I would prefer Wheeler and I think someone is going to make a high offer hoping he gets back to his pre-injury form or his 2018 form. Your $40M estimate would require him to sign for $12M even if Pineda only gets $10M. Also, there was a strong trend last year for less years and higher AAVs. Add this all up and $50M might be a touch high but I think it’s closer to $50M than $40M but I would not bet much on my estimate. The AAV could be influenced significantly based on number of years with all of these guys.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 4:51 PM, prouster said:

You would turn down a very real, very immanent $300 million contract because you don’t like the city where’d you’d live about 100 days out of the year?

 

I guess it depends on what the second best options is... at some point, those extra millions don't really mean that much, but I can certainly understand if players are looking at this as their one big pay day and react accordingly... But if there's a $290 million dollar contract sitting as the next best option in a place that the player more desires, such as being close to family, taxes, or whatever, I think it happens...

 

Brian is right though, money is the primary filter, but it really is a case by case thing... if the contract from the desirable location is $200M instead... well, I think the player takes 3... 

[Major League Ready]

 

  On 10/16/2019 at 4:51 PM, Battle ur tail off said:

If someone offered you another 25 million a year, I think you might consider this a little differently. 

 

We aren't talking about the difference between 100K and 125K. We are talking about the type of money that will setup 3 generations. 

 

In what scenario is there a $25M/year difference. We are talking about players getting $25-35M/year. When would there ever be even close to a $25M difference?

 

This argument gets grossly over simplified. For starters, this type of player gets major endorsements. That opportunity and the amount of those endorsements is far greater in a major market. In many cases it's probably impossible for a small market to make up the financial loss of those endorsements.

 

There are two other factors that a impossible to measure. Many of these players want to play in a major market for the exposure. In other words, to feed their ego. Playing for the Yankees / Red Sox / Dodgers vs the Twins is far different in feeding that ego for many players. The other factor is the importance of winning. The Yankees and Dodgers with there massive revenue advantage are perennial winners. That's an important factor to a player signing a 5+ year deal when the player really values winning.

[prouster]

  On 10/18/2019 at 1:14 PM, Major League Ready said:

In what scenario is there a $25M/year difference. We are talking about players getting $25-35M/year. When would there ever be even close to a $25M difference?

 

This argument gets grossly over simplified. For starters, this type of player gets major endorsements. That opportunity and the amount of those endorsements is far greater in a major market. In many cases it's probably impossible for a small market to make up the financial loss of those endorsements.

 

There are two other factors that a impossible to measure. Many of these players want to play in a major market for the exposure. In other words, to feed their ego. Playing for the Yankees / Red Sox / Dodgers vs the Twins is far different in feeding that ego for many players. The other factor is the importance of winning. The Yankees and Dodgers with there massive revenue advantage are perennial winners. That's an important factor to a player signing a 5+ year deal when the player really values winning.

I don’t find the endorsements argument convincing for baseball (it’s definitely a factor in other sports). Forbes has 13 ball players on their 2019 list of the 100 highest paid athletes, and quite a few of those (Cabrera, Pujols, Lester, etc.) seem like they’re probably there only because of their salaries. The real endorsements go to the NFL, NBA, and pro soccer.

[Brock Beauchamp]

  On 10/18/2019 at 12:07 PM, Major League Ready said:

You might be right. I was also thinking $18M for Odorizzi but I estimated $12M for Pineda. My thought is teams will be inclined to keep his contract to two years given his complete lack of physical condition and the AAV might get to 12M as a result. Even at your projection of 28M that would only leave 12M for Wheeler to get to the $40M you have estimated. Like you, I would prefer Wheeler and I think someone is going to make a high offer hoping he gets back to his pre-injury form or his 2018 form. Your $40M estimate would require him to sign for $12M even if Pineda only gets $10M. Also, there was a strong trend last year for less years and higher AAVs. Add this all up and $50M might be a touch high but I think it’s closer to $50M than $40M but I would not bet much on my estimate. The AAV could be influenced significantly based on number of years with all of these guys.

To be clear, I said “much over $40m”. I think those other guys come in at $12-14m. Wheeler is maybe closer to Odorizzi money, like $16m a year.