Are the Twins an unattractive destination for FAs?

[chpettit19]

12 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

When is that ever the case though? 

Ever? I'd think it's been the case with every FA the Twins have ever signed. Including Nelson Cruz and Josh Donaldson recently. The Twins are never going to be major players in the deep end of the FA pool. We need to stop expecting that. It's not going to happen. And their track record of receiving revenue sharing and comp picks supports the idea that they shouldn't be as they aren't bringing in the type of money people think they should be.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

So what are the parameters a player uses to make a free agency contract decision?

my guess:

1) money in total contract

2) contract length

3) competitiveness/perceived odds to go to post season

4) geographic/family priorities 

5) many personal preferences too granular for us to generalize 

 

we’ve heard Levine say they do not give 5+ year contracts to pitchers. The largest external free agent contracts the Twins have ever given out $92 million.

they may place a value on a player to target, but they also budget individual contracts lower than the deep end of the pool. If 1 and 2 aren’t competitive with other teams, numbers 3+ aren’t going to matter. 

[Karbo]

I think the lack of publicity hurts us as much as weather. We don't get the same press headlines and stories that the coasts get, we don't get as much time on national news like ESPN highlights that the coasts get either. Face it, there is a reason we are considered "fly over" country.

[Unwinder]

Hey, isn't this the sort of numbers game that baseball fans are supposed to be able to easily quantify? Someone who knows how to do this stuff, pull up some similar-market teams in the South and on the coasts, find the ones with the most similar spending habits, and compare their luck with free agents. It seems like this question should have a verifiable answer.

[Nashvilletwin]

1. Taxes - 3rd highest income tax and high property taxes, right? We are not CA or NY to offset that. 

2. Weather - it matters, sorry. 

3. Small to mid market - without the national media bias and attention

4. Growing big city problems. I’ll leave it at that. 
 

We have a lot of really nice things too. Don’t get me wrong. But we do have some things working against us. 

[USAFChief]

The biggest issue preventing big ticket free agents from coming to MN is money. We don't offer it. No other factors matter.

 

We rarely pursue mid-range free agents. Other factors start to play a role on those we do pursue. Of these factors, my guess is the biggest is a perception this team isn't serious about winning. You don't come to Minnesota expecting ownership to commit extra money if needed.

 

On Low-level free agents, many and varied issues come into play, depending on the player, but I'd bet opportunity for playing time is the biggest.

 

I doubt taxes, weather, "fly over country," or media bias plays much of a role for anyone. 

[TwinsDr2021]

7 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

The biggest issue preventing big ticket free agents from coming to MN is money. We don't offer it. No other factors matter.

I doubt taxes, weather, "fly over country," or media bias plays much of a role for anyone. 

Agreed on the biggest issue is money, but I will say I think taxes might play a part in some cases. Joe Mauer moved to Florida to save a few hundred thousand.

So guys pick the place they want to play regardless of the tax implications, but I believe others do look at that when it comes down to a couple of cities they have no real ties with.

If the Twins offer you 10 million and year and the Rangers offer you 10 million a year. That is someplace north of 400K a year. (Assumption is that only 5 million is made in MN at 9.85%) Now for us that grew up or live in MN that probably isn't a huge deal since dumb enough to live here already ? and we are still going to make a boat load of money. but for somebody that grew up in the south or maybe a country south of the US that could be a big factor.

[cHawk]

15 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

The biggest issue preventing big ticket free agents from coming to MN is money. We don't offer it. No other factors matter.

 

We rarely pursue mid-range free agents. Other factors start to play a role on those we do pursue. Of these factors, my guess is the biggest is a perception this team isn't serious about winning. You don't come to Minnesota expecting ownership to commit extra money if needed.

 

On Low-level free agents, many and varied issues come into play, depending on the player, but I'd bet opportunity for playing time is the biggest.

 

I doubt taxes, weather, "fly over country," or media bias plays much of a role for anyone. 

I disagree. I think they are as much of a factor as the money. There are specific examples of this. Charlie Morton is one of them.

[Battle ur tail off]

3 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Who has been signed and then traded? I honestly can’t think of a significant sign and trade unless things go completely upside-down, like last season and Nelson Cruz. 

You are actually right. I mis-spoke. Basically I meant trading away our talent because we can't afford them. Lots of examples of that. I mean this organization has traded away 2 Cy Young winners the year they held the award for christmas sake.

[Squirrel]

2 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

1. Taxes - 3rd highest income tax and high property taxes, right? We are not CA or NY to offset that. 

2. Weather - it matters, sorry. 

3. Small to mid market - without the national media bias and attention

4. Growing big city problems. I’ll leave it at that. 
 

We have a lot of really nice things too. Don’t get me wrong. But we do have some things working against us. 

1. Then why do California teams seem to have no problems attracting people? 

2. Maybe. It might matter if there is a 'tie' in other things, but I do not think it's a primary consideration, and I don't think any worse than some other places.

3. yes, this could be a factor, but again, I don't think it's primary

4. Eh, big city problems? And no other cities have this difficulty? Sorry, but I'm not sure of this in terms of being a major factor

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

The biggest issue preventing big ticket free agents from coming to MN is money. We don't offer it. No other factors matter.

 

We rarely pursue mid-range free agents. Other factors start to play a role on those we do pursue. Of these factors, my guess is the biggest is a perception this team isn't serious about winning. You don't come to Minnesota expecting ownership to commit extra money if needed.

 

On Low-level free agents, many and varied issues come into play, depending on the player, but I'd bet opportunity for playing time is the biggest.

 

I doubt taxes, weather, "fly over country," or media bias plays much of a role for anyone. 

This. 100% this.

Players go where the money is. Is there some marginal difference if offers are nearly the same that weather makes? Probably. But really, the weather in MN isn't that different than Boston or NY or Detroit or Chicago (during the season). Is anyone saying free agents won't sign there? 

[Trov]

I do not think it is an unattractive destination for free agents.  I just think the front offices over the years have not wanted to invest heavy in any "big fish" free agent.  Really, outside of the big few teams, the LA's the New Yorks, Boston, Cubs, Nationals, Phillies, and San Diego(who has overpaid bad for a few guys), not too many teams have brought in that "big fish"  

Resigning your own is not bringing in a big fish, so even when other teams resign their own to big deals that were free agents, like Rockies who signed some of their own guys but rarely get other big name free agents., I think you would be hard pressed to find too many teams that have regularly gone out for big fish.  

Unless you are one of the few teams I listed, rarely do many other teams dip toe into the big name free agent pool, and it is normally a one off thing.  It also comes down to what is considered a big fish. 

Although we will rarely know what is the driving force for a free agent to sign somewhere.  It may be the money, it may be the team is close to a championship, it may organization, others around, the community generally.  I have a feeling that in most big fish talks, it is that Twins are not willing to invest the time and money the players end up getting.  Which, in my opinion is not always a bad thing.  I believe very few long term contracts pan out well for the team.  Yes, some do but overall, going out to get the most expensive FA has not normally moved the team to a championship, and in some cases the teams look to trade them away and do better with others.  

[TheLeviathan]

23 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

No. If the Twins start offering top dollar and continue to lose out on FAs, then we can start to talk about culture/geographical location. 

The thread was over right here.  You want someone to ink a contract?  Pay them to ink it.  It's really that simple.

[KirbyDome89]

6 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Ever? I'd think it's been the case with every FA the Twins have ever signed. Including Nelson Cruz and Josh Donaldson recently. The Twins are never going to be major players in the deep end of the FA pool. We need to stop expecting that. It's not going to happen. And their track record of receiving revenue sharing and comp picks supports the idea that they shouldn't be as they aren't bringing in the type of money people think they should be.

No. Ever as in, when does a player receive two identical offers?

[chpettit19]

15 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

No. Ever as in, when does a player receive two identical offers?

Probably pretty often. Or at least close enough to start considering other factors. The player can then tell their agent which location they prefer and the agent can do their thing to try to get them to up their offer and all that. But I'd guess initial offers are often times quite similar. Then the games begin.

[KirbyDome89]

32 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Probably pretty often. Or at least close enough to start considering other factors. The player can then tell their agent which location they prefer and the agent can do their thing to try to get them to up their offer and all that. But I'd guess initial offers are often times quite similar. Then the games begin.

I don't doubt offers can be similar but ultimately it's whoever flinches and throws in the extra year, $5M, ect that wins the bid. Even in the scenario you posed, money is still the deciding factor.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

7 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

1. Taxes - 3rd highest income tax and high property taxes, right? We are not CA or NY to offset that. 

 

You pay income taxes where the work happens. Pro athletes pay income taxes in dozens of states every year including NY, CA, MN and IL. half their taxes are MN half are in 15-20 states.
 

For those of us who work normal stationary jobs, sure 50k in MN or 50k in Texas, I’d take Texas, low taxes, but half your games are in higher taxes states. How much does tax rate “really matter”?

I’m sure it does to some extent, but I would think it’s down the list.

[Dman]

5 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

The thread was over right here.  You want someone to ink a contract?  Pay them to ink it.  It's really that simple.

Haven't there been multiple examples of players taking less money to be closer to family or their destination of choice?  I am thinking Wheeler and MadBum as the first two to come to mind.  Even Ryan Pressley said a big reason he re-upped with Houston was that family is close.  Those are just a few examples of players that didn't go for the biggest deal so money isn't everything to every player.  Also if players don't care about destinations why do they even have no trade lists?  If money is all that matters then there would be no such need.  It obviously matters quite a bit from what I see.

[Nashvilletwin]

7 hours ago, Squirrel said:

1. Then why do California teams seem to have no problems attracting people? 

2. Maybe. It might matter if there is a 'tie' in other things, but I do not think it's a primary consideration, and I don't think any worse than some other places.

3. yes, this could be a factor, but again, I don't think it's primary

4. Eh, big city problems? And no other cities have this difficulty? Sorry, but I'm not sure of this in terms of being a major factor

1. Did you watch the ATT this week?  I live in Carmel. Trust me - there are nice things in CA that might outweigh the tax burden.  But, 10% on a big number is a big number.  Better get something for that. 
 

2. Playing in Yankee Stadium? Fenway? The constant adoration and press?  Mauer is a first ballot no doubter HOFer if he was a Dodger, Yankee or Red Sox.

3. Perhaps - but see above. 
 

4. Just saying things have changed and I agree that we now have problems (and some attractions as well) once considered more indigenous to larger cities. It’s just an observation. 

[Major League Ready]

8 hours ago, cHawk said:

I disagree. I think they are as much of a factor as the money. There are specific examples of this. Charlie Morton is one of them.

And Wheeler and Bumgarner and plenty of others.  I had this conversation on the golf course with a GM.  He was an NBA GM but I doubt it's much different.  To paraphrase what he said .... They know where they want to go and their agent works the system to get them the max money and the location they want to play,  Obviously, the player can't always get both and you see a Bumgarner type deal.

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, Dman said:

Haven't there been multiple examples of players taking less money to be closer to family or their destination of choice?  I am thinking Wheeler and MadBum as the first two to come to mind.  Even Ryan Pressley said a big reason he re-upped with Houston was that family is close.  Those are just a few examples of players that didn't go for the biggest deal so money isn't everything to every player.  Also if players don't care about destinations why do they even have no trade lists?  If money is all that matters then there would be no such need.  It obviously matters quite a bit from what I see.

Your argument is the equivalent of stating that oceans are deathtraps full of man eating sharks just waiting for some human sucker to venture in on the basis of 1 shark bite a year.  

Exceptions are called exceptions for a reason.  They aren't how things normally operate.  Money talks in FA.  The Twins themselves have acknowledged this in the past.

Also, fun fact, EVERY market plays this silly game to some degree or another.  It might be weather, ownership, media, facilities.....they pick something to make the "oh...woe is us....nobody likes us" as this weird, unnecessary explanation. The answer is simple: We didn't pay enough.

[Dman]

3 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Your argument is the equivalent of stating that oceans are deathtraps full of man eating sharks just waiting for some human sucker to venture in on the basis of 1 shark bite a year.  

Exceptions are called exceptions for a reason.  They aren't how things normally operate.  Money talks in FA.  The Twins themselves have acknowledged this in the past.

Also, fun fact, EVERY market plays this silly game to some degree or another.  It might be weather, ownership, media, facilities.....they pick something to make the "oh...woe is us....nobody likes us" as this weird, unnecessary explanation. The answer is simple: We didn't pay enough.

If I had the time and the inclination I probably could dig up at least hundreds of examples and if privy to team player negotiations probably thousands.  Just to keep going here is another one on Jordan Zimmerman signing with Detroit because he wanted to be close to home.  To name another one that is more recent Byron Buxton signed his contract with the stipulation that the Twins cannot trade him.  Why do that if only money matters?  If location has no bearing what so ever? It must mean quite a bit or else he wouldn't have that in the contract.  Same for all the no trade clauses.  If only money matters and location has no impact why put that in?

If a guys family is on the west coast why sign with an east coast team if the money isn't all that different?  Personally I think Chpetit is right that it likely factors in more often than we realize or know about.  

Sure some guys don't care to be close to their families or it matters less.  Sure for some guys it is all about money but I don't think you can make such a blanket statement when there are so many counter examples especially when you consider no or limited trade clauses.

[Ryan_K]

I don't think it's attractive. A winning team plays April through October here. April till Mid May are not fun and mid September on is cold by evening. It has high taxes. While the summers are nice most weeks they are playing night games 6 days a weeks, so not a ton of time to enjoy a lake.

 

I think the organization is fine to good, a big focus is on culture, but if you can get good culture, plus warm weather and low taxes it's an easy choice.

My prediction within 5 years Miami will be a FA destination given the money moving into Florida

[TheLeviathan]

1 hour ago, Dman said:

If I had the time and the inclination I probably could dig up at least hundreds of examples and if privy to team player negotiations probably thousands. 

It would seem to me that if you can provide hundreds or thousands of examples of this, that so far in this discussion you are still several hundreds or thousands short of that.  Let me suggest that there may be a reason for that you're ignoring on the basis of your bias.

Allow me to quote Dave St. Peter: "It's dollars and years"

[bean5302]

The difference in Wheeler's contract was negligible. Reported as less than 2%. As was pointed out, at equal dollars or insignificant differences, destination factors in.

Had Minnesota offered Wheeler 5 years and $130MM, he'd have been in a Twins uniform, guaranteed. Probably any team apart from the Pirates or Marlins get Wheeler with that offer.

Speaking of... those are two places I'd say nobody wants to play.

[cHawk]

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

The difference in Wheeler's contract was negligible. Reported as less than 2%. As was pointed out, at equal dollars or insignificant differences, destination factors in.

Had Minnesota offered Wheeler 5 years and $130MM, he'd have been in a Twins uniform, guaranteed. Probably any team apart from the Pirates or Marlins get Wheeler with that offer.

Speaking of... those are two places I'd say nobody wants to play.

Didn’t he want to go to Philly, though? I can’t remember the reason exactly but I do remember he had Philly in mind.

[dxpavelka]

On 2/7/2022 at 12:28 PM, baul0010 said:

When our own residents are trying to escape from December to March...I'd say, ummmmm no.  We are not an attractive destination.

That's the great thing about baseball.  You can play here and never set foot here from December thru March.

[Major League Ready]

The Twins can spend $2.8M/WAR assuming a $140M budget if they want to build a 50 WAR team.  The Yankees and Dodgers can Spend twice that amount.  If the Twins have a $140M budget, spending 25% of that budget on a single player that costs $8M per WAR makes it very difficult to piece together the rest of the team.  That’s why teams with their level of revenue very rarely sign free agents in the $25M/year or more category.   If the Twins spend $55M on two players (Donaldson + ?) that produce 1 WAR per $8M, they have $1.98M per WAR available for the remaining 24 players.  Add Buxton and they have over half of their budget in 3 players. 

When the Twins sign a $35M player their budget per player on the remaining 25 players drops from $2.8M per WAR to $2.33M.  Assuming the Yankees or Dodgers could spend $280M when they sign a $35M player their Yankees spend the same on two players on the remaining 25 players drops to $5.44M per player.  If they spend $55M on two players that produce 1 WAR per $8M, they have $5.23M per WAR available for the remaining 24 players.

Lower revenue teams get outbid because they can’t afford to pay the same amount per win as larger markets and still put together a contender.  It’s that simple.  If the Twins can put together a homegrown rotation their ability to splurge on a big free agent or extend our own players is greatly enhanced.  That’s why we are seeing the current year strategy unfold with an emphasis on developing from within.
 

[Major League Ready]

26 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

That's the great thing about baseball.  You can play here and never set foot here from December thru March.

A lot of them have kids by the time they reach free agency.  How would your wife feel about moving the kids during the school year every year.  Do you suppose they would prefer to buy and live in a single home for the term of their contract or move every year during the term of their contract.  Of course, they could buy two homes but they still have to move a fair amount of stuff and uproot their kids.

[baul0010]

1 hour ago, dxpavelka said:

That's the great thing about baseball.  You can play here and never set foot here from December thru March.

What's the draw then?  The below market rate deals we love handing out?