Search the Community

It’s been a slow couple of weeks with Major League Baseball effectively shut down. A few minor league transactions have trickled in, and a handful of stories regarding guys signing overseas have accumulated, but the lockout has drawn things to a halt. Recent reports don’t suggest a reprieve soon. Earlier this week, The Athletic’s Evan Drellich reported that while a handful of topics are to be discussed regarding a new CBA, core economic won’t be on the agenda until January. Since the lockout occurred on December 2nd, Major League Baseball appears comfortable taking their time; there have been no formal proposals. As discussed in this space previously, the league itself loses nothing until games and revenue go away. A small group reportedly met for an in-person meeting on Thursday. Still, the context of that meeting is unknown, and wasn’t expected to include anything financially driven. Right now, there’s uncertainty as to which side will make the next move. Rob Manfred suggested, before the lockout, that the league had made a proposal, and the union had it on their plate to hammer out an agreement. That feeling wasn’t reciprocated from the union side, and now we have a stalemate. Looking at the offseason calendar, that’s where we can find the best indication of how things are progressing. Neither side has much desire to meet or move on any critical issues. It’s not just economics that needs to be hammered out, but they undoubtedly are among the chief concerns. Baseball’s next event was a trade of arbitration figures on January 14. It’s in February that teams report to Spring Training. Both sides seem content waiting through the turn of the year until making any more advancements. That’s a fine stance, and one the union likely needs to create leverage as their greatest asset is the on-field product, but that also leaves a significant amount of work to be done in just a month. How this all gets hammered out, especially with two sides doing virtually nothing to take steps forward presently, will be something to behold. MORE FROM TWINS DAILY — Latest Twins coverage from our writers — Recent Twins discussion in our forums — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook, or email View full article

This post is inspired by the comment sections of both the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the St Paul Pioneer Press. I enjoy spending my time scrolling through these sections to see how the small amount of internet trolls are getting people worked up. After reading through these newspaper sections, it is a relief to come over to Twins Daily and read from well-informed and realistic fan base. With that being said - no matter who is making the baseball personnel decisions; Thad Levine or Derek Falvey, they work for one individual...Jim Pohlad. Must we all forget this? Levine and Falvey work within the constraints that Pohlad gives to these decision makers. Because we don't see and hear the owner, like a Jerry Jones or George Steinbrenner (Thank the lord), I believe some people forget he doesn't have influence within the organization. But his influence is strictly financial. Side note, wonder what influence he has on the new story about Mr Sano that was released yesterday. This transitions into my next thought. My favorite comment via the newspaper sports section comes to the sound of "If us fans don't show up to the stadium, that will show the Pohland family we aren't happy with the product on the field and then they will have to change/listen to us." (This was definitely prevalent between 2011 and 2014 when we were averaging less that 70 wins a season) It is a good theory but as other organizations show us, this theory has no legs to it. Look at Tampa Bay, Oakland and Miami. Beyond the now departed Stanton, what specific players drive fans to the ballpark? These teams are basically playing with Quad A players. This is funny since I literally wrote about the Twins and their "Moneyball" strategy not just a few days ago. One single player, for the majority, doesn't bring fans to the game - unless there is a record being chased/broken (Sosa, McGwire, Bonds). The true purpose of this post - is to ask that question: How could the fans truly affect change with an ownership group? Some seasons/decades can be pretty tough to endure and watch (Sorry Seattle, the franchise who hasn't been to the playoffs since their AL record 116 win season in 2001). Pretty tough question to toss out there but the answer is, we can't. The average fan cannot affect change with an ownership group that owns a major league baseball team. I believe Derek Jeter and the Miami Marlins showed their cards into why the average fan has no real voice. Do some research and see who Derek Jeter invited to his Town Hall Style Meeting. They were handpicked, high level season ticket holders. They are the movers and shakers, the money people, the top 1%. These are the sponsorship owners that contribute more capital to an organization than the average fan could ever imagine. The best customer is a repeat customer - continue to get sponsorship's and season tickets holders to renew annually and the franchise will continue to move forward, season after season. Once renewals stop being renewed, then change can begin. Ownership and FO will have to begin looking at the reasoning behind these non-renewals. I believe this is an interesting post - I hope it inspires discussion and conversations, especially for points that I have missed and or may been way off on. To the average fan - continue to go to the ballpark and enjoy this great game - win or lose.