bean5302

Obviously a pie in the sky first offer, but there are dangers in insulting people out of the gate. I mean... it's an insane ask, but maybe? MLB makes about $10B in revenue. $167k per team after 50% cut. Having a salary floor at $150k could work with a 100% revenue sharing model. That model would also come with a hard cap. It would have to come with a hard cap for long term viability.

When logged into DiamondCentric in Firefox (not private and no adblocker) attempting to travel from DiamondCentric to Twins Daily via article link.

I'm getting this error for Twins Daily using Firefox and Chrome (not using adblockers or private browsing modes)

I wouldn't be surprised if authorities have asked MLB to not make any official moves until after the criminal cases are finished. From MLB's perspective, this is just a formality. They've undoubtedly already made their decision. Clase and Ortiz are almost certainly done for life.

One thing I love about baseball is the craziness. Even with a 162 game season, there are crazy suprises every year. Teams that defy all logic in the standings, players who dominate out of nowhere for seemingly no reason. One time superstars who totally collapse. Personally, I love the addition of a Colorado Rockies website. The Rockies stink every year, but the games are packed as it's a great stadium destination for road fans, and Coors Field is a great ball park.

The hypocrisy is trashing people for being wrong, then trashing them again when they change their position.

Such vindictiveness in America. There was no moral ground ceded by coming to the conclusion "lifetime" is until after a person is dead. That's by definition lifetime. I can't wrap my brain around such vitriol as advocating for the equivalent of desecrating a corpse because somebody gambled. The real message I get from this is gambling is evil and the people who dare to gamble are also evil.

Are you basing the players value on whether or not a team "parted ways?" The Padres also parted ways with some apparent cast-offs when they acquired Mason Miller from the Athletics last year. Rooker was part of 2 trades. No team released him. Rooker never cleared waivers. The Royals tried to get him through and purposely timed their DFA in an attempt to sneak Rooker through, but Rooker was immediately claimed. But please, also see my comment about being branded. The Twins braded Rooker as trash after 5 years in a non-competitive team's system. That kind of brand sticks with a player.

Can a late bloomer theoretically exist? Sure. Brent Rookers of the world don't exist because the Twins are the only team stupid enough to overlook a player of Rooker's production with nary a chance at the MLB level, and once a player is cast off, their chances of getting another real opportunity is virtually nil. The cast offs are branded. They're viewed as damaged goods because if the team who developed them cast them off or was willing to part ways for peanuts, there must be a good reason. Aside from that, Both Rooker and O'Hearn did enough to get their chance by age 25. Rooker in 3 years, O'Hearn taking a leisurely 5yrs at age 24. Prior to last year, O'Hearn was basically a good enough every day 1B/DH, and then he had his only truly noteworthy season in baseball landing himself a modest 2yr $29MM contract. His chance with Baltimore came after over 1,000 plate appearances of mostly unplayable results. Teams aren't going to tank 2-3 seasons hoping their trash transforms into treasure so this story isn't going to play out. Rooker is on record basically saying he made no changes to his game, he just needed an opportunity and after KC tried to get cute and sneak him through waivers, the miserable Oakland Athletics had nothing to lose and were rewarded. Of course, it helps Rooker's peripherals with Minnesota suggested there was plenty of MLB caliber talent there. That said, there are always going to be talented up and coming players higher on the depth chart than prospects entering their mid/late 20s who've struggled to produce. The 1,000:1 odds a team hits the jackpot will change nothing. If anything, Rooker's tale is more of a caution against taking a chance on the late bloomers. After all, the Twins coveted journeyman Kyle Garlick over Rooker, and it cost Minnesota the most successful player Derek Falvey has ever drafted.

I wonder what the underlying cause for this is?

Wrote up this piece a while back. How Deferrals REALLY Work with example. Because most sources are useless. - Other Baseball - Twins Daily TWINSDAILY.COM Alrighty! So this has been brought up a lot of times. The Dodgers are ruining baseball, teams are mortgaging their futures, these players will stop signing their contracts when the first team... First, deferrals must be fully funded by the end of the player's employment. Second, unless the player specifically allows it, the deferrals must be held in escrow outside the team. Third, there is some substantial risk to teams if the investment they use to indirectly fund the benefit (deferred payment) has a poor return. It means a team might have to come up with shortfall payments every year, and those shortfalls could be pretty brutal. Honestly, the biggest issue I see with deferrals is the shortfall in funding followed by the way it could cripple a team if the CBA ever adds a salary cap. I don't think unlimited deferrals are good for MLB because there's too much risk of a shortfall or a franchise going overboard and crippling themselves directly or indirectly through a CBA change.

On Twins Daily, this issue is back again.

I looked into the haves/have nots scenario in terms of payroll from 2017+ (Falvey's start with the Twins) and while there is strong competition at the playoff level especially given the expansion, the teams who did not spend in the upper 1/2 of MLB found themselves quickly eliminated. That said, in terms of overall competitiveness, MLB is just as competitive if not more than the NFL, NBA or NHL at the end of the day. There's more turn over at the World Series, championship series, and playoffs than the other sports already. I think the biggest rift in MLB right now is between groups of owners, rather than even the owners vs. the MLBPA. There is a group of owners who simply do not care about fan engagement or product quality. Rays, Pirates, Marlins, etc. These franchises run on the assumption of revenue sharing. They're virtually guaranteed to turn a profit because of the $105MM of revenue sharing which they receive no matter how low the payroll is. They're feeding off the efforts of teams who do try to engage with fans and bring in revenue at the gates. It has publicly spilled over from time to time. There is a cascading set of issues at play to get the owners on the same page. I think the Twins ownership falls into a middle tier. Owners who rely on the "check-down receiver" version of revenue sharing. There's no urgency to improve their experience and product. Strong owners are not going to accept full revenue sharing until there is a way to ensure the cheapskates make an effort, and that's more than just a salary floor IMHO. Full revenue sharing and a salary floor is absolutely required before a salary cap. I think revenue sharing should be tied to attendance. Minimal attendance and percentage of capacity factors. Teams which don't draw fans don't get full revenue sharing. The MLBPA couldn't care less about the fans, the game day experience... any of it. They're solely concerned with maximizing player salaries.

I largely agree with this. Probably $1-2MM in annual savings per team in travel costs, though. I'm sure that's the biggest part of "wear and tear" owners are concerned about. That said, I believe the rivalry and fan traveling improves substantially keeping things regional as well. The Twins being in the same division as the Brewers would definitely improve attendance at Target Field. Not sure how the breakdown would end up. I'll assume Salt Lake City and Nashville are the expansions cities. American League Coastal Baltimore Boston Miami New York Mets New York Yankees Philadelphia Tampa Bay Washington Central Atlanta Chicago Cubs Cincinatti Cleveland Detroit Nashville Pittsburgh Toronto National League Central Chicago White Sox Colorado Houston Kansas City Milwaukee Minnesota St Louis Texas Coastal Arizona Los Angeles Angels Los Angeles Dodgers Las Vegas San Diego Seattle San Francisco Salt Lake City

I actually immediately thought of this. I felt a little bad about thinking about it, too. In the grand scheme of things going on, it seems a little shallow to think about baseball. Even then, it's worth considering what MLB means to Venezuelan boys and men looking to get what would be a completely life altering opportunity through a signing. It's a complicated issue even though it seems like it shouldn't be. I would think MLB teams have local scouts with feet on the ground. There is already a do not travel advisory for Venezuela in place since March 2019. I don't think MLB teams will be heavily impacted in a direct way.