ewen21

The average major league salary is a shade over 4 million a year. By the rationale (or lack of it) provided through FanGraphs' valuation system Max is worth roughly five times more than the average player if he were to step into the FA market. In reality, I don't think there is a team in the league that would have handed Max the deal the Twins gave him. It isn't an astronomical amount of money, but I cannot envision some other team handing him a 7 year deal. This is comes with him being a known commodity and generally well-liked within the organization. They are betting on Max, and that is a good thing for Max. He knows how to "play the game" and be a good soldier so he gets his deal. As far as FanGraphs money goes, it is like the defunct Italian Lira to me. I had a few friends go to Germany/Italy for several weeks in the fall of 1984. They drank some towns dry in Italy and spend like $10 American dollars in the process. It was too hard to believe, but that was how the currency was valued.

It was precisely this kind of thought process that generated the notion last winter that Machado and Harper could be signing $400 million dollar contracts. The kind of thinking that has Machado and Harper both believing they shouldn't take anything less than $300 in guaranteed money.

That is just the thing. FanGraphs disgustingly overrates player value, in my opinion. If you check Brian Dozier as an example he was "according to FanGraphs" worth $40 million and $46 million in 2016 and 2017 (if he were a FA in the open market). How does this jibe with reality? The player valuations based off WAR seems completely arbitrary to me. While WAR is an indicator I like to see it is not infallible and should not be viewed as a singular confirmation of how much a player is worth. What exactly is the logic here? It starts to become far too removed from any kind of common sense and more about numbers. Seems to me in this valuation they assume "average player" has a WAR of 1.0 so that should be in proportion to the average salary. They set that at 7 million and for every WAR point they score you multiply by 7 million? Whatever they do to value Dozier over $40 million in two different seasons says all you need to know about it. I appreciate everything else about FanGraphs, however, this valuation system is utterly absurd. Maddening actually.

Mariano Rivera in the 1996 WS to Joe Torre: "Mr. Torre, I am sorry. I am too young to close these games" I don't like those kinds of silly statements. Don't say exactly how you feel, but at least be somewhat genuine. To feed me a line that insults my intelligence (not that I am Bertrand Russel or anything). I remember Matt Garza being interviewed after a game he'd pitched in KC late during the 2007 season, not long after that horrible trade deadline. I think he went 7 innings, gave up a run, maybe 2 or 3 hits, threw 100 pitches or so and was taken out. He later in front of the mic said, "I didn't do enough to help the team win the game" Excuse me? We lost 1-0 so how in the world can anyone believe a statement like that? Sounds strange, but I actually did not appreciate the comment because there was no way in the world he felt that way. This was more about him doing some image control and it was totally not genuine. This isn't either, but whatever.

As far as Sano and Buxton go with extensions, it just is not in their best interest do it now. It just isn't unless they won't bet on themselves and in that case that is a red flag. Both seem hungry right now. It's all over but the shouting. Now they have to DO IT. Period.

Fangraphs is brilliant in many ways, but the least brilliant thing about it is their valuation system in regards to dollar value based off the player's WAR. They had Dozier at and above 40 million. In what fictional world can that be justified? Completely absurd What is important is that Kepler is making significantly more than Polanco in his deal and I just don't get that

In all honesty, I lost track. The long and short of it is I believe the Twins brass are in a holding pattern this year because of the developments last year with the purported "young core" An article was published today in the Star Tribune where Falvey said: "“We have talked about this young core. We still believe in it and we think it is a group that can propel us forward. Having those guys under control for longer than what they presently are would be a good thing, in our minds.”" They believe in them, but I think last year completely upended them. I have no problem with the deals they made this year because they are not in a position of strength in the market. Had Buxton hit somewhere near Andrew Beinentendi and Sano hit 250-36-105 (or some facsimilie thereof) we'd have better footing in the market for bigger names. Not sure how this can be dismissed as poppycock. If they are doing this I certainly understand it.

I asked you what kind of terms you would offer Machado. I will attempt to answer your question if you answer mine, Thanks

He was absolutely dreadful last year, he was grossly overpaid and he turns 33 in August. It was an atrocious deal, in my opinion.

For the record I was dead set against it, so when you say "fans" I am not one of those. Same with a lot of others because I was not the only one

THat isn't the only other choice, Mike. Signing Machado would be a horrible mistake. People were screaming about Darvish last winter and how did that turn out? I don't like Machado's style of play or the things he has said and that counts for something. Maybe he isn't signed for that reason. You'd be best served to move on from Machado. There was never a chance we'd sign him. What kind of terms do you think gets it done? Play GM and you tell me.

I don't understand why people suddenly the Twins to spend like a top 10 team. These are two analytics guys. The whole premise behind bringing them in was to build a competitive cost-effective club. They are not going to take costly risks by definition. About the only time they might is if this team has a more stable core. Not sure why so many are challenged by this notion

Again. If not a single person said a thing about his performance he would still have to dig himself of the hole he has dug.

Not sure what you mean by that. He had a .544 OPS in 382 at Rochester last year. There have been concerns about his glove and how he can hold up to a long season. I had a much more positive view of him before the his callup to Rochester, but after that performance I am not so sure how can take a glass half full view of him at this point in time. If not a single person said BOO about him he would still need to dig himself of this hole that he is in now.

Fair enough, but I guess my expectations were tempered going into this season. Number3 hit the nail on the head. For better or worse, they are in a holding pattern right now mostly because of Sano and Buxton.

And there you have it. Whether anyone agrees or not this is what they are doing because they cannot yet figure out if these guys will be cornerstone players. I have a hard time thinking about the FAs that make sense for this team because guys like Polanco, Kepler, Sano and (most of all) Buxton basically kicked us in the nuts last year. I am far more frustrated with Sano and Buxton than I am our two-headed GM. I also think I may have overrated Kepler. Love the kid, want him to do well....but I feel like I have to walk back expectations. Polanco is a strong hitter, but he really REALLY disappointed with the steroid junk. YOu are right. A lot of this is on Buxton and Sano. They took a huge step back last year and it really makes it difficult to figure out the mission with these two as bad as they were.

I am surprised you made it through the Terry Ryan years without going utterly bonkers if this offseason has you seething.

Well, that is your opinion. They have generated so much money because they have expanded the product and priced it out nearly to it's limit. Now a correction in salaries is happening. Do you feel that is unfair to these players?

And everyone was saying BUY REAL ESTATE in 2004. How did that workout. This endless bounty of risning salaries is ending. And it needs to.

Athletes and entertainers make way WAY too much. They do not solve problems and we can stand to divorce ourselves from the lunacy if they cannot accept a period of austerity. Every other field has faced it and if they want to cry about it then that is not a good look

Because no entertainer, athlete deserves to make the money these guys now make. Do you realize how much salaries have increased over the last 25 years? Do we continue to endorse this insanity or is it time for a reality check? I think this correction was inevitable and these dudes really need a reality check. As far as the owners go, I do not support their side BUT they are the ones incurring the risk owning the franchise. Same with any privately owned business. They ultimately decide how much their employees should earn. These guys make enough. I ask again.....are you OK with the next 25 years being like the last 25? Consider how jacked up cable bills have gotten, how much it costs for a family to attend a game, etc....Name me a union that is more powerful from the MLPA. Name me a union that gives that kind of protection to their constituents. This is the second time you hit me with this. If you want to demonize the owners and absolve players from all responsibility in this salary ridiculousness then we will never agree so I will read your response and consider whether or not I should respond. Not interested in an acrimonious exchange since I do respect your baseball knowledge. I just don't like the way you absolve the MLPA. Them and the agents can kick and scream about this and even go on strike. See where that lands them this time. It is a different world and they need to wake up

I hope Harper is sitting on the sidelines during ST and is forced to sign a contract significantly less than what Washington offered him

First base! Jim! Holt! My brother and I used to get a kick out of the way Casey announced him. I had a bunch of him in that '74 set

In 1975 I think I got ten freakin Vic Albury cards. Grrrr!