Unwinder

All of these factors are stats that are pretty easy to measure and plug into an equation that'll tell you the most advantageous choice. What you're describing here is more analytics, not less.

Looks pretty interesting. As promised in the new CBA, the Twins play every other team (including NL teams) at least once, and there are fewer games with division rivals. Seems pretty front-loaded with lots of Yankees, Astros and Dodgers in April and May, and Rays, Jays and Braves in June. Looks quite a bit softer from July onward.

He needs some time to sit back and go to the state fair.

OK, yes, I've found it just as difficult when I have to lock down a specific date and time.

It's not actually that hard to get people to go to ballgames. I don't think of myself as an "influencer," but I posted some comic strips on Twitter where a guy goes to a St Paul Saints game, and some people went and checked out their own local MiLB teams because of it.

We're pretty obviously using two very different definitions of parity here. 1. The worst teams have win percentages that are relatively close to those of the best teams. Even in the most lopsided matchups, it's not uncommon for the underdog to win a game. If you go to a game, even in an off-year, there's a reasonable chance that you'll get to see your team win. 2. Season-to-season, the standings change dramatically. Even the worst teams can be relevant within a year or two if they make the right moves. If your team sucks, there's still a reasonable chance that when you tune in next year, they'll be great. There's also a good chance that the dominant rival team you hate will be bad. Baseball has pretty good parity under definition 1. Even if your team is very bad, they'll still beat good teams frequently enough to be entertaining. There's enough random chance in the game that you genuinely need a marathon season for the best teams to emerge. Baseball's parity is frustrating under definition 2. And it's always going to feel that way as long as major-league teams are supported by multi-tiered minor-league systems and players are developed for years before joining the roster. It takes a long time for a bad team to rebuild. It's especially hard to take when rich teams are able to gobble up free agents and seem to stay competitive forever. I have no idea which is better or more important. I certainly appreciate that baseball is pretty good under definition 1 though.

This is why I'm leaving the solution to "some genius."

I sometimes think that the only way major league baseball could be fixed would be if another totally different league with rules that support better parity blew up and overtook MLB (which is pretty impossible!). Any improvement that's good for the fans is bad for either the players or the owners (at least in the short term, which is all that the owners take into account).

In the CBA negotiations this offseason it became clear to me that players' idea of "fair competition" is that teams can compete for their services without artificial caps or luxury taxes. Some genius needs to figure out a way to somehow increase parity without players being the ones that pay for it.

Sano will have plenty of suitors who think they're buying low and that they can fix him. And they might be right, everyone is more open to advice when they start a new job with a new boss. He'll have to settle for less than he was going to make here, but his MLB career isn't over until another team or two has had a crack at unlocking him.

Man it's a downer to see Sano go out with a whimper, would have loved to see him go out in style with some fireworks before ceding the Twins Slugger throne to Jose Miranda.

love to see one of the most exciting trade candidates of the season end up with the most predictable team possible. When the dust clears I hope the Yankees system is so gutted that their top prospect is Joe Shlabotnik.

In all seriousness, I think that the silence from the Twins thus far means almost nothing, aside from a few pitchers coming off the table who were always a long shot for the Twins to get. Trades have been pretty quiet so far.

Me checking out a new Twins headline on MLB Trade Rumors only to see that it's just a few guys going on and off the paternity list.

I would take pretty much any of Sano's previous seasons with all the ups and downs if I knew for sure that's what we were getting, but there's no way to tell if the next slump is just another temporary slump, or if he's truly cooked this time.

This is just the sort of out-of-nowhere trade that makes me wonder why I even bother trying to predict the trade deadline.

I really like Winder as a starter, but it's really starting to look like health-wise he's destined for the bullpen. I hope they figure out how to avoid future injury issues with him.

I've said this before in probably these exact words, but Twins fans are so beaten down by so many years of playoff failure that when they finally land a star free agent, all they can think of is what they can get for him. They're scared to even make a playoff run until the team is completely unbeatable.

I believe I saw an article somewhere on the Athletic that said the White Sox have the trade deadline advantage of more glaring weak points that can be upgraded for cheap, while the Twins' weak points are more mediocre than bad, and are in areas that are more expensive to upgrade (they see starting pitching as a big one). So I think the trade deadline outcome is a huge factor in how the rest of the season plays out for the ALC.

New idea: Let's trade the Rays a dime.

Small sample size against a bad team so it probably means nothing, but it looks like the all-star break recharged some pitchers who needed it. It's a relief to see Ryan and Gray come back strong, not to mention a good inning from Smith. Also: it's almost hilarious to see Kepler get injured just when Sano needs a spot. These roster decisions really have a way of taking care of themselves.

I hadn't thought about this complication before. Obviously it's rough for the Twins to have stiffer competition for trades, but if expanded playoffs mean more contenders, and more contenders mean more buyers, and more buyers mean that the sellers get a better haul, then bad teams that sell at the deadline get stronger sooner. Could it be that expanded playoffs are (gulp) good for baseball??? (for the record, I hate expanded playoffs)

Hey, anything can happen. He is raking in St Paul. Usually when he sucks he's just as bad in the minors.

Yeah, it's teams' job to be competitive, and it's the leagues job to ensure that entertaining baseball is the most competitive choice. The only exception is if you're totally unable to be competitive, in which case you should try for entertaining instead. But this is almost never the case in MLB because even when you're out of the running, the competitive move is to develop young players for the future.