jay
Provisional Member
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by jay
-
-
-
Believe it or not, some people get just as much enjoyment out of making a nice donation to the charity of their choice than they do a bottle of wine or some cheap TV. An active league, pride and enjoyment in the game is plenty enough to keep everyone engaged. I care more about finding managers who will stay active than I do about finding someone to fork over $50.
-
-
Haha -- sounds good as long as it is a 501c3
-
Haven't decided yet. We've done it some years and others not. Considering a charity buy in with the winner deciding where it all goes.
-
Looking for one or two more owners to join a highly active, highly competitive league. The average manager made 53 roster moves last season. AL-only, 6x6 with some saber-leaning categories (OBP instead of BA, QS instead of W), 8 or 10 teams. Send me a message for more details.
-
-
-
-
-
I don't really disagree with any of that. I'd add a payroll range below that for rebuilding. The top end of that range is typically going to happen on the back end of a competitive window as a core talent group gets more expensive. Hitting that peak payroll earlier through acquiring an elite FA or 2 is certainly a strategy, although riskier and will inevitably affect the ability to retain at some point. I think those long deals can act to restrict moving into a rebuild phase and we've seen that typically takes too long already (not unique to the Twins). I think the Twins' strategy is to fill in serviceable to above average vets where they need to and rely on their controllable talent to drive success. I wouldn't mind seeing more risks taken, but probably not to the same extreme as some others. IMO, it's commonly a "I want it all" stance.
-
Not you in particular mike... But to be clear, does payroll need to be bigger or is it fine within the ranges it has been? There's no room for multiple positions there.
-
Not a fan. As others have said, lots of red out there already. Would have been more interesting to tap into this new gold color they've added to the color family.
-
I'm seeing some talking out of both sides of the mouth going on here. In some posts, payroll needs to be bigger. In other posts, payroll is fine but they need to allocate it to elite FAs (and a relatively cheap RP).
-
My hope would be that between Terry (via Jack) looking at the marginal cost of a win by acquiring a Bastardo or Sipp and the reality of player choice / preference in FA, the roster ended up where it is.
-
It's not about a percent. It's about spending rank relative to revenue rank. Opening day payroll rank since TF opened (2010-15)... 11, 9, 13, 22, 24 (increased by K Morales), 18. Average = 16. Revenue ranks that I could easily find (per Forbes numbers)... 2012, 16. 2014, 22. Stated to typically be in the 16-20 range by DSP. Sure looks like it lines up just fine to me.
-
I'm equally surprised we didn't see more action to address the bullpen though. Even Paulie said that in a Strib article in the last few days. I'm holding out hope we see something yet, but really the difference between one more vet RP and whoever it ends up being instead is pretty marginal - not to mention the aspect of getting innings for the young RPs. Worst case would be some shaky vet - don't bother.
-
That's all good and fine, but inferring they didn't get that reliever due to being cheap or payroll concerns or hiding revenues is quite the same in the end.
-
It probably is unrealistic given the Twins are doing the exact same thing just about every other owner has done. Doesn't make it right. NFL does it too with their "seat licenses" and what other garbage.
-
If we use just this offseason to assess the "norm", you'd think the Yankees don't ever sign FAs. They're literally the only team that hasn't signed anyone. The Twins revenues since the move to TF will typically keep them in the 15-20 range among MLB teams. Their payroll will typically be in that range as well. Makes perfect sense to me. The data available is too questionable to infer much beyond that anyway. I'll digress a bit here... Ripping TR and the Pohlads here and in most every thread for not signing a reliever or whatever the flavor of the day is quite frequently ignores plenty of other data points. There's room to criticize around how resources are allocated and priorities, but I'd categorize a good share of what I see around here as "unrealistic". If the response to that is simply that our fan demands don't have to be realistic, so be it -- that's just not a world I live in.
-
While I do think that is true, it's not any different than the norm. I think this whole debate boils down to whether or not we expect the ownership to support doing things that aren't the norm -- whether that's payroll levels, stadium funding, financial transparency, you-name-it. The ironic part of that (which has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread) is that if all teams listened to their fanbase and did that, you would no longer have any relative advantage whatsoever as a new norm has been established.
-
Where do either of those numbers fit relative to the Twins revenue position?
-
10+ pages on a mid-priced relief pitcher? For some reason, I've interpreted a lot more than that from this thread.
-
Since we've migrated to logical fallacies, there's a forest somewhere past that "break even" tree.
