Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

amjgt

Verified Member
  • Posts

    2,852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Tutorials & Help

Videos

2023 Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Free Agent & Trade Rumors

Guides & Resources

Minnesota Twins Players Project

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by amjgt

  1. This may have been stated but people are typing as fast as I can read this thread, so I skipped ahead... If the trade deadline comes and goes and nothing happens, that's just unacceptable. Ian Kennedy is the reason I'll be mad. We know that if a team offered KC a C-level prospect for Ian Kennedy (with no salary relief) the Royals would jump at it. Basically, all he costs is money. Is Ian Kennedy worth 16M next year? Of course not, but at that point, it would just be about the money and that's not an acceptable excuse for the Twins at this point. Not that I need it to be Ian Kennedy, but I just don't see any other team that is desperate enough to say "yeah, we'll take on that whole salary" so, taking on Ian Kennedy's $22M remaining money is the absolute floor of acceptability. If you're not willing to part with the required prospect capital, then you need to part with actual capital.
  2. People seem to be conflating "replacement level" and "league average" WAR isn't like ERA+ and OPS+ where league average is literally manipulated to 100. As an example Max Kepler was considered below league average offensively the last two years (OPS+ of 95 and 97), but still had a positive oWAR (1.4 and 1.7)
  3. Yeah... Feels about right, assuming the Diamondbacks aren't overly concerned with Graterol's shoulder. Now, assuming both teams would take that deal, would you rather trade that package for 1.5 years of Robbie Ray or 2.5 years of Matthew Boyd
  4. I feel like the "something else" would have to be a little more highly thought of than Gordon as opposed to the way you lay it out which makes me assume you're talking about more of a 16-25 ranked player in our system.
  5. I wonder if we turned back the clock to last November and replaced “Romo” with “Cron” the threads would read almost identically.
  6. This feels like the kind of deal that’s made to get an incremental amount of leverage on other teams you might be dealing with to get relief pitching
  7. Not that it really matters, but it stinks that Kepler gets tagged with a big negative WPA on that Buxton play, when he actually accomplished what we needed him to accomplish.
  8. 32,000 yesterday for a mid-week day game, before the end of the school year. I'd say attendance is picking up.
  9. Also, isn't that why we grabbed Ronald Torreyes? He's having a terrible offensive year at AAA, but isn't his glove well regarded? If Polanco goes down and we want the defense, isn't Torreyes the guy (if Adrianza is gone)?
  10. Yeah, it feels like were playing with house money at this point. Asking most of us early yesterday, one win in Houston would've been acceptable, all things considered. Anything more than that would have been great.
  11. I can't help but think that Toronto might be being pressured by their government. They probably do not get all the benefits of the Antitrust exemption that the other 29 teams get.
  12. Tim Collins... For the sake of argument, let's say someone assumed to make the opening day bullpen goes on the IL (Reed seems like a good candidate). Since he has an April 1 opt out do we think he might make the team over, say Hildenberger?
  13. No too many obvious guys to take off the 40 man, probably Duffey and Reed being the most obvious, but there could be a 60-day IL stint between now and then. How does the 60-day work at the start of the season? Could Sano’s stint be retroactive to the surgery?
  14. I think it's a fair assumption that the Twins wanted to do this since they probably have some payroll room now and are willing to front load the contract because of that. However, it's entirely possible that as part of the negotiations, the Kepler team gave up a little bit in overall guaranteed dollars in exchange for a sharp immediate increase.
  15. As for my original search. Not too much good data, but this image is interesting.... http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2015/0401/sn_fbmap1_576x324.jpg
  16. I was in search of real market size data and stumbled upon this article, on fangraphs, from 2016.... Estimated TV revenue for each team: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/estimated-tv-revenues-for-all-30-mlb-teams/ Two things stood out to me. 1) While we around 20th on the list, we really are not that far from 7th (Phillies - 20M difference). 2) They talk about Ownership stake in the cable network and list the Twins as having ZERO ownership stake in FSN. I thought that was well established at this point.
  17. Not that I think there's any chance the Twins can approach that type of TV deal, but their current deal is more than a few years old, which is probably one of the reasons it's pretty far down in the rankings. Let's look at the market size for a second... SEA-TAC - 3.9M MSP - 3.6M But obviously the games are being broadcast beyond the immediate metro area. Let's look at the regional population, where the "local" games are likely being broadcast Washington + Oregon + Idaho = 13.5M Minnesota + ND + SD = 7.2M There are some parts of Wisconsin and Iowa that are part of the Twins region, but not the very populated parts. At most, it probably adds up to 8.5M
×
×
  • Create New...