Skip to content

Minnesota Twins Unveil New Uniform Set for 2023

The Twins today unveiled their long-awaited new uniform set. There are lots of moving parts to assess here, so let’s go one element at a time, beginning with…

The New Primary Cap Logo

We pretty much knew this was coming, based on earlier leaks. Obviously, it’s not a massive change, but there’s nothing wrong with making a minor tweak if it improves things, and I think that’s the case here. The new version is sleeker, more streamlined, and the “C” nests into the “T” more naturally. Also, note that they’ve brightened the shade of red. I’m fine with all of this — an upgrade, if only a slight one.

The Home Whites

Can’t say I’m in love with this. It’s not a terrible uniform, but I have lots of quibbles with it. One at a time:

  • I realize the Twins have flip-flopped on their primary team color several times over the years, but I think of them as a navy team with red trim, not the other way around, so I don’t like the chest script being rendered in red.
  • More importantly, the script feels a little thin or spindly to me. Needs a shadow or some outlining.
  • Similarly, not a fan of using red for the back numbers.
  • Also don’t like the red belts.
  • Note that they’re showing some players in navy undershirts (which looks good) and one guy in red (awful). Will that also be the case with the caps? I feel like this may be a Texas Rangers mess in the making, where they’re trying to have it both ways and end up with neither.
  • hate asymmetrical pants striping. Make it red-blue-red, or blue-red-blue, or something, anything, that has symmetry.
  • Not a big fan of the number font. It feels like they removed the serifs from the “T” in the “TC” logo and put them on the numerals.
  • The sleeve patch is nice enough, but it’s a little odd that they marked the Twin Cities region with a hypocycloid — I can’t see that shape without thinking of the Steelers.

———

The Road Greys

I know some people have a problem with pinstripes appearing on road uniforms, but I don’t mind that at all, especially since the Twins have a history of doing it. What I do mind, however, is pants piping (asymmetrical or otherwise) appearing on a pinstriped uniform — there should be a law against that.

The red/blue issues are still a problem here, although at least the chest lettering is in navy. And what about the rear view? Let’s take a look:

So the front and back number colors don’t match on the home jersey but do match on the road jersey. Have I mentioned that I don’t like this number font?

Now let’s take a closer look at that new road cap:

Ah, so now we see that the hypocycloid is supposed to be the North Star. But that trope seems so played out (already used by the Timberwolves, Wild, and, um, North Stars). More importantly, the execution here is completely snoozers. No zing, no pizzazz. I was never a big fan of the Kirby Puckett-era “M,” but I’d certainly take it over this.

And yes, the red swoosh is annoying.

———

The Home Alternates

Very nice — a simple but effective nod to the team’s namesake. The underscore on the script feels Just Right. I’m tempted to ask for a splash of a secondary color, but at least this avoids the red/blue issues (well, until some chucklehead decides to go rogue by wearing red sleeves and/or a red belt). Gotta like that sleeve patch, too:

———

The Navy Alternate Jersey

As you can see in the photos above, this jersey can be worn either at home or on the road. It’s interesting, however, that they’re apparently pairing the road cap with this jersey, even if worn at home (although I suspect they’ll end up mixing and matching as the season progresses, because that’s how things tend to work these days). Anyway: Feels like your standard-issue MLB softball top — not my kinda thing, but every team has to have one.

This is the best rear view I could find. Seems like the red NOBs may be hard to read — could’ve used some outlining:

———

All in all: Can’t say I’m a huge fan of what they’ve done here. Disappointing.

Also, is there some sort of rule that says every single team has to refer to the past and future when releasing a new uniform set? Dig:

Come on, people — we’ve all heard that a jillion times now. Come up with a new marketing shtick already. Also, speaking of being inspired by the past, the single worst thing about this uni set is that there’s no Minnie and Paul!

Want to learn more? There are press releases here and here, and lots of additional photos here.

Okay, that’s it for me for this week. Enjoy Phil’s Saturday and Sunday content, and have a great weekend!

More on Uni Watch
Categories
MLB
Comments (111)

    The M hat looks like the old Marlins hats.

    I agree the Twin Cities jersey is the strongest. The rest are rather soullless.

    I had the same thought about the “M” cap – it looks like the Marlins. And the North Star is barely visible in the small versions of the photos – I wonder how that will translate on the field.

    I don’t mind the pinstripe pants, but the piping on them needs to go – that does look horrendous, and was the first thing I noticed looking at them.

    The “M” hat looks like its trying to make something out of the negative space between the M and the star that’s not there.

    I really don’t love or hate anything here. The home alternates are the best of the bunch, and yet, a little boring. I do dig the sleeve patch, though. Cool in an early-20th century way.

    What’s the point? There is nothing here that was better than what they wore before. These aren’t terrible (other than the number font), but they’re not good either. A big meh.

    Well, at least MLB teams can still have cream-colored uniforms without interfering with digital ads. I really like this set overall but am a bit puzzled at the inconsistent logic with how the colors of the wordmark, NOB and numbers are rendered. The Twin Cities alternate is the gold (north) star in this bunch. The blue alternate jersey is a dime a dozen, as you say.

    It is fine but I would rather see the home hat with TC logo also be the hat on the road and with navy jersey. Can’t say I am a fan of the new road hat.

    Some thoughts:

    – The subtle changes to the TC logo are fine with me. Although instead of tweaking the T, I would have tweaked the C so it didn’t look EXACTLY like the Cincinnati Reds cap logo.
    – I agree that the numbering on the home is annoying that the front is red and back is navy.
    – I appreciate that they kept the underline of “WIN” on the home. I always liked those little uni-quirks.
    – The alternate M hat reminded me instantly of the awful (and thankfully short-lived) Miami Marlins Art Deco hat. It feels too plain. Why not just use the same cap for home and away? It doesn’t add anything to the look so why bother?

    “What I do mind, however, is pants piping (asymmetrical or otherwise) appearing on a pinstriped uniform — there should be a law against that.”

    YES! A thousand times yes. I’ve been saying this about the 86 (and other years’) Mets set that pulled this shit. link

    I’ve never actually asked Paul about this (in re: Mets), so I hope he agrees with me that the Carter/Straw/Keith home unis actually sucked (not *just* for this reason — the pullover with belted pants is another flaw)!

    Second: Can’t wait to read R. Scotty’s screed on these!

    Totally in agreement that pullovers should never be worn with belted pants (Braves were also guilty). The major offense of the ’86 Metropolitans was they were just glomming another team’s uniform; in this case, Philadelphia and Montreal.

    If I’m remembering correctly, I feel like Keith really hates those and has pointed that out frequently on SNY broadcasts. I don’t mind them as a nostalgia item–the Mets were my first favorite team and I still watch them often (despite being a Giants fan first and foremost) so I feel like in some ways that combo sunk its teeth into me.

    I think Miranda (64) is wearing a red compression sleeve. From what i can tell it looks like his right arm is bare.

    The M on the caps is for Mid. Pretty inoffensive set, but not exactly good. I like some elements but overall most of it is a step away from being good. The TC caps are nice enough, the cream uniforms look great even though Twin Cities is a totally annoying Nike thing to have on the jersey (just say Minnesota or Twins and be done with it) the road pins look great until u see the piping. All in all, Meh.

    “Have I mentioned that I don’t like this number font?”

    I hate that that’s Nike’s go-to strategy when redesigning uniforms; they just HAVE to put their stamp on it with some godawful number font

    And it’s going to look like even MORE crap if/when Nike goes to their new template (2024?) and gives us mesh numbers on uniforms…

    To me, the number maternal also looks very flat, as if it’s ironed on, not sewn. Maybe a secondary outline color would have helped.

    I LOVE THESE!! They’re crisp, conspicuously new, and everything has room to breathe. Don’t know about the pinstripes on the greys when the whites are plain (Pittsburgh tried this about 25 yrs ago); maybe stripes make everything darker? No two-color numbers. Doesn’t need them. The new “M” hat is nice. The Twins are one of baseball’s better “hat” teams. Not getting the hate for uniform stripes against pinstriped background, or the asymmetrical arrangement, but hey, you do you. Player names in red against navy blouse is okay, because that is secondary information. I can’t wait to see these in action!

    I’m with you. It’s unmistakably modern but not ridiculous. I also think it’s to easy to write off a new uniform, especially baseball, before seeing them on the field. These are so clean in the press photos but get some dirt and some grass stains on them, see how they look under the lights or on a Sunday afternoon. It’s a completely different vantage point than studio lighting and high-res photography.

    I agree with everything said. I am not quite sure why people are upset with the red script on the home unis or why one would consider the Twins a “navy” team more than a “red” team. From 1972 until 2014 (except for 1 year in 1992) they had red script on their home unis. In fact, red has been their dominant home color on their unis for the longest period of time in their history.

    I think these unis have successfully given a nod to tradition while modernizing the look. There are a few quibbles I might have all of which Paul and ithers brought up. I don’t care for the M hat. I would prefer symmetrical striping. I would drop the striping on the pinstriped road unis.

    All in all, though, I would rank this as a surprisingly good makeover.

    Sounds like Minnie and Paul are staying at Target Field.

    Really thought this rebrand was going to lean hard into them, but I was wrong. ARRRRG

    Overall thoughts:
    -LOVE the red/white/blue piping on the sleeves and pants and the contrasting colors for numbers and wordmarks
    -HATE the number font and the alternate caps
    -The absence of Minnie and Paul is CRIMINAL

    Home jersey:
    -probably the best of the bunch
    -NEEDS a blue outline on the chest wordmark
    -Would be interested to see how it looks with pinstripes

    Away jersey:
    -the only one that might be better than the home
    -Would be interested to see how it looks withOUT pinstripes
    -Would be interested to see how it would look with the chest wordmark slanted up and to the right and underlined like the Twins have done in the past

    Blue alternate:
    -pretty solid as far as softball tops go
    -looks better with the white pants than with the grey pants, although I suspect the pinstripes have a lot to do with that
    -the only one that looks better with red accessories (undershirts, etc) than blue accessories
    -Would have been interested to see a powder blue instead of (or in addition to!) a navy blue

    Cream alternate:
    -my least favorite, feels pretty bland
    -seems like it would work better as a City Connect than as a regular alternate
    -number font is terrible on all jerseys, but it’s the worst here because the modern style font clashes with the retro vibe of the jersey

    Oh and the wordmark on the home uniform is maybe the best part of this whole redesign. It’s the only element where it really feels like a synthesis of old and new, combining the original cursive wordmark with the underline tail and the newer wordmark with just the letters “WIN” from “TWINS” underlined.

    I think a better way to go for a cream alternate would have been to use the TC cap insignia as a chest logo

    Great call- I bet that the red script on the home white would look fantastic over navy pinstripes.

    That said, the Twins were one of the teams with the least need for a refresh. They come away with an overall decent look (but a dumb M cap) that’s still somehow a downgrade. Nothing was broken, but they fixed it anyway.

    I’m a fan of pant striping on baseball uniforms and was glad (at first glance) to see it here as so many teams forgo pant striping in favor of nothing or the single line of piping. Then I realized it was unbalanced. Blue/Red/Blue would’ve been perfect. Hate the road hat. The M looks more like an upside down W. The star looks like a cherry on top of a blah Sundae. The home cap and the alternate sleeve patch are homeruns, but the rest is an infield single at best.

    We’ll, the Twins are the original Washington Senators, who DID have that upside-down-M-as-a-W as their logo. No clue if that’s intentional or not, but now that you said that I can’t I see it.

    Wondering if Minnie & Paul were dropped out of caution, lest there be anyone offended by perceived exclusion, given current cultural/ethnic sensitivities. But in my view, if one of the players shaking hands was depicted as a Latin player (Minnie would make sense, given, say, Mr. Minoso), that would be just fine with me. Cool, in fact. But MLB is more diverse than simply Latin and white, so I guess they chose to avoid such inclusions and dumped the shaking hands patch altogether. More’s the pity. -C.

    He started out that way, but by the end of the comment he was saying, “Well, I guess that’s what they did.” There’s zero basis for that statement.

    The swinging friar is definitely a white guy, and who doesn’t love that guy? Pat patriot is also definitely a white guy, and people were ready to throw their own grandparents in front of a bus to see that guy come back. The Celtic leprechaun is also definitely a white guy. I’m thinking someone with decision making power felt like I did: the Minnie and Paul logo was too crowded and complicated for an effort to simplify the look.

    The asymmetrical stripes don’t bother me. They resemble what the Twins wore from 1973-1986 (which looked like they stole them from the Cardinals).

    It’s like whoever was designing the uniform numerals said “the logo has this nice little serif style, we should make the numbers match” while in the other room whoever was designing the logo said “we need to get rid of this serif”. And in true “Gift of the Magi” fashion, those two people never talked to each other leaving everyone worse off.

    I grew up in the Mauer/Morneau era, so I’ve always thought of the Twins as a red team with blue striping, so a return to red primary doesn’t bother me. I love the new font and the return of the road pinstripes.

    The road hat is the only thing I have a real issue with. Looks like the Marlins, as others have said, but it also looks like the alternate logo of a USL team. Just nothing very Twinsy about it.

    Here here. I get the North Star thing but it doesn’t feel like twins or Twins. Put the flags on the alternate hat.

    Ooof. The “wi” part of the “Twins” script is too compact, I can’t help but read the whole thing as “TuMns”.

    I guess I agree with Paul and everyone else who find these kind of disappointing and meh. But at least they cleaned up the mess they were wearing for the past few years – six uniforms, three separate and pretty much unrelated word marks, and then another jersey with the cap logo. And need I remind everyone of the kasota gold lol.

    Oddly, I have sort of the opposite complaint. If I look at these individually, I see a bunch of good unis that don’t really knock my socks off. If I was a twins fan I’d probably be happy with these (notice I said happy WITH them, not happy ABOUT them). But that’s looking at them independent of each other.

    What I don’t like is that, once again, their design is a total mishmash.

    This looks like the leads said “we’ve got 2 concepts, everyone pick one, go into separate rooms and design one jersey using the concept you chose” then they greenlit 4 different ideas (plus a pants swap, because there’s always a pants swap when they can’t commit to a look).

    There are plenty of good and bad things about this whole set, but overall it feels disjointed to me.

    It was designed by one guy named Wolff who is a big Twins fan by the way. But he should have added outlines to wordmarks and rethink the M hat.

    On the “Twin Cities” jersey, I can’t believe the shirt breaks the last upright of the ‘n’. Seems like a very slight alteration would have made a big difference.

    The new script without an outline looks like an old NBA Christmas Day special, and I don’t mean that as a compliment

    Not a fan…of the Twins or their new uniforms.
    I would have liked to see then revive the red cap/navy bill combo from the ’70-’80s.
    Couldn’t just go with 1 cap for home and road…so it goes.
    Not bothered by the number font. But why not just eliminate the digits on the front? While they’ve been there for what seems like forever they weren’t always there, so, historically speaking, it’s not such a big departure.
    Yes, they are ‘Minnesota’, but I’d rather the Twin Cities script be used on the road uniforms tops (love the pinstripes, hate the pants piping) and the cream alts not exist.
    The navy (I Still Call Them Batting Practice) tops are blah.
    Could have been worse…sould have been so much better!

    Thanks for the swift and thoughtful coverage, Paul! Big day for a Twins fan like me who’s absolutely hated almost everything the team has done, uniform-wise, for about a generation now.

    The custom font’s serifs seem derived from the 2010 home jersey script’s lettering, which itself was in part inspired by the old T serifs. Makes me long for the 2010 script, which remains my all-time favorite Twins jersey mark. The new script is really quite good, much better than I’d feared, but it’s no 2010. I like this custom font, as custom uniform fonts go, but it seems out of place alongside the new cap logos and scripts. Simple Dodgers/Royals style block would be much more suitable to my eye.

    I’m pleased with the simplicity of the on-jersey lettering. Twins script/number/NOB outlines have always created a purplish halo for me, so it’s terrific that the team was bold enough to eschew that unnecessary clutter. Everything on the shirts except the alt NOB works just fine and has excellent legibility without an outline. If you can not have outlines, then don’t have outlines.

    As to number color not matching front to back, if that’s actually a problem, then we’d have to regard Dodgers home jerseys as deeply flawed failures of design. In the front, team name should be the most prominent feature; on the back, the number plays that role. So it’s entirely appropriate to have the number on front contrast with the team name, and thereby not match the color of the number on back. That said, the home uniforms in particular do seem to be veering toward Rangers territory. Which is fine in theory for the Rangers, who have deliberately embraced a blue-and-red-balanced aesthetic. Given the state flag, that can work for them. It doesn’t work for the Twins. At their best, historically the Twins have been a navy team with bold red highlights. The home uniform in particular needs more anchoring in navy. As Paul suggests, blue belts would go a long way, as would strictly only-blue undershirts. In the past, navy pinstripes have served this purpose, which is why I’d much much rather the Twins return to pinstripes. And while I don’t mind the “asymmetry” of the sleeve/pants striping, I do mind the equal billing given to the red in this element. As such, I’m not a fan of the new striping, which also seems to me to cut against the cleanliness of the no-outline script/numbers/NOB look.

    (Asymmetry in pull quotes because the pants striping is only asymmetrical if one views each pants leg in isolation from the other. When considered from the point of view of the whole garment, they’re quite symmetrical. Symmetry, as with most things, is relative to the observer’s frame of reference, and although I have a huge mental tic bordering on a disabling phobia of asymmetry, these stripes don’t bother me on that score.)

    As to the North Star M, it seems a stretch to argue that hypocycloid is “played out” in local sports. One team used it before today out of five top-league teams. Now two teams use it. It’s a meh logo, but for me that has more to do with traditional local symbolism that often places a “north star” star off-center to the upper left in a composition. I don’t see the hypocycloid as a north star, I see it as a four-pointed glint hovering somewhat randomly over an M, almost like a halo. The M cap is a place where, shudder, asymmetry is perhaps called for. As it is, the centering makes the M too low and squat on the cap, and the star is too low-contrast, like the C in the old TC logo. I don’t hate the new road caps, I just don’t love them. That’s a C, C-minus element among uniforms that mostly range around B-plus, A-minus for me.

    Bottom line, I’d previously regarded the Twins as among the worst-dressed teams in MLB, alongside the Marlins in D-minus territory. Many of the leaks over the last few weeks left me fearing the new uniforms would not amount to much of an improvement. I thought the best case outcome would be that the Twins would jump from ugliest team in the AL Central to a tie for fourth place alongside Cleveland. The end result beats my middling expectations, and I’d rank these uniforms slightly ahead of the Guardians for sole possession of fourth place in a pretty well-dressed division. A few outstanding elements, just a couple of clunkers, this is a B-plus uniform set for me. I had feared low C or C-minus was the more likely outcome, so this has been a good day for this Twins fan.

    Been staring at this picture all afternoon trying to figure out if those are custom shoes and who makes them. Any idea? link

    Lifelong Twins fan weighing in….

    I also think of the twins as a red scripted team (they were from 1972-2015) so it always made sense to me to return to it unless using the 1960’s pinstripe throwbacks.

    I’m not too concerned by the lack of a blue outline or the front numbers and back numbers being different on the home (works for the Dodgers?) I think both the home and home alternate are upgrades

    Also not bothered by the asymmetrical piping as there is precedent for that as well and i liked the 1970’s home jerseys

    Big fan of going back to grey pinstripes on the road, but the new M logo is an absolute dumpster fire

    I didnt necessarily think they needed to go back to the metrodome M, but the one they rolled out is so ugly! and looks like the failed marlins logos, Yuck, why?

    Would have liked the powder blues (with 1970’s script) to stick around. (as a road not home alternate) Also really like it when they have a red alternate cap but didnt need to see a red jersey

    Terrified for the city connect look :-( hopeful we can get a throwback in the mix at some point, also hopeful the players realize they may need to scrap the red accessories (i dont think they make any of the uniforms look better)

    These uniforms feel very anemic. I agree with all who said the names on the chest need outlines or a background behind it.

    I don’t like the M hats. They don’t feel Minnesota to me. They should have brought back the M hats they had in the 90s. I love how old school that hat feels, but it doesn’t feel like the Twins are the right franchise for it. They should have TC hat for all the uniforms and the M hat only for the “Twin Cities” uniform.

    I think it would have been better if they took the existing uniform set, kept the white home, gray away, and navy blue alternate with some small tweaks and added in the Twin Cities set with the “M” hat as a 4th uniform.

    The uniforms are not “bad,” but they don’t feel like an improvement over what they had.

    One minor dislike on the sleeve patch.

    The M is a serif font that isn’t used anywhere else in their uniform set. The STP is a sans serif font, also not used anywhere else.

    They “M” could have used their new font, or could have used their old underlined-M logo. The STP ABSOLUTELY SHOULD have used the St. Paul Saints STP logo.

    link

    Mike not sure of their accuracy but they are meant to be a Minneapolis Millers and Retro St. Paul Saints logos a la the ones Minnie and Paul wear

    Another shot at the Texas Rangers so-called red/blue confusion. I usually chime and state there is no confusion and remind everyone this was the intent from the beginning in 1972. I won’t do my tedious list of the LARGE number of teams with both red and blue, but I’ll leave it at: Are the Red Sox and Braves (two long-time, classic teams) “confused” over red/blue? Final thought: Way too many teams use navy or dark blue.

    My rule especially if what you have basically worn it for a long time and it looks pretty good if you change it it has to be a hit. This wasn’t even a bunt.

    I still think M shouldn’t be a cap letter for the Twins without equal time for an StP cap.

    I desperately hope that the M and TC hats are interchangeable. I’m not digging the thought of seeing those every road contest.

    Since everyone else has been expounding on the new unis, I’ll keep it brief.

    Likes: the tweaked logo and the home alternates. “Twin Cities” in clean blue script on cream? Yes, please.

    Dislikes: the M and the number typefaces. Ugh. The M doesn’t feel like Minnesota or the Twins. At all. The numbering typeface looks like it borrowed from a baseball diamond drawing (not the curves and corners), but it feels like it’s trying way to hard and ends up feeling like, well, another in a long line of Nike thoughtlessly designed crap.

    The red Twins script is right. It’s ALWAYS been a red logo, starting with the inaugural 1961 season. Paul, as much as I agree with a lot of your takes, thinking it should be anything else is flat-out wrong.

    I agree with most that a thin, contrasting outline would help a lot of the elements in this set…script, numbers, NOBs. Not bad as-is, but I think that would help.

    I guess I’m in the minority, but I rather like the new font. I much prefer custom fonts to boring, standard block, as long as they’re legible. These seem perfectly legible, though again, an outline would probably help that aspect even more. Serifs are maybe a touch exaggerated?

    Both scripts on the home and alternate are nice. The red script on the home uniform especially reminds me of ’50s advertising…not sure why.

    Pinstripes on road grays are an underrated look, IMHO. I like it. The road hat seems like they forgot to finish it or something…feels like it’s incomplete.

    Overall, not bad, but could be better with some slight tweaks.

    More of Matthew Wolff’s Minimalist crap. I will complement him on the tweaked TC and how it works on the cap (which I believe is the keystone of a baseball uniform; get it right and you should be home free). Everything else is dull, boring, and forgettable.

    The home Twins script looks like a knockoff. The road cap looks like the 2013ish Marlins cap and the Steelers had a baby.

    “already used by the Timberwolves, Wild, and, um, North Stars”

    I understand that everyone has an opinion but this rings like particularly hollow criticism… I think it’s great to have a shared iconography across a city/states professional teams. Don’t we all love that the Pittsburgh teams share a color scheme?

    Not really an apples:apples comparison, John. The Pittsburgh teams have shared the same color scheme for decades. How has the north star been used by Minnesota teams? Let’s see:

    1967: North Stars are born.

    2000: Wild are born. The “eye” of their logo animal is the North Star, referencing the state’s previous NHL team.

    2017: The Timberwolves, 27 years into their existence, add North Star iconography to their logo.

    2022: The Twins, 62 years into their existence, add North Star iconography to their uniforms.

    The Wild doing it made sense — it was a shout-out to Minnesota’s hockey heritage. By the time the T-Wolves did it, it seemed a bit rote. And for the Twins, it feels more like checking a box, at least to me.

    “The “eye” of their logo animal is the North Star, referencing the state’s previous NHL team.”

    Minnesota is “The North Star State”. link -> “Minnesota’s official motto, L’Étoile du Nord, is the only state motto in French; meaning “The Star of the North”, it was adopted shortly after statehood and reflects both the state’s early French explorers and its position as the northernmost state in the contiguous U.S.”

    So I would argue that a North Star in every sports logo is apropos.

    I am aware of the state’s nickname — that’s why the North Stars were called the North Stars to begin with. But if it’s so apropos, why did the T-Wolves and Twins wait so long to get on board with it? Feels like the usual Nike tourism-board approach to City (or, in this case, state) “storytelling.” When every team does it, it seems less “apropos” than just formulaic, at least to me.

    So thoroughly bland and uninspiring.
    If you want to honor the past, keep what you had. It was the old “TC” monogram on the hats, and the old script “Twins” wordmark. They even had the powder blues and red caps!
    This tries to meld and borrow from every era in Twins history and mix it into something new but not new.
    The numbers and wordmarks are single-color, which looks unfinished. But then they dress it all up with a bespoke font full of gimmicky serifs. Nike 101.
    The cream alternate has a thin white stripe as soutache on the sleeves. Why? It looks wrong. Go cream or go white but not together.
    The road set borrows a little from the 1987-1991 set but not really. Road pinstripes and all-caps print team name.
    I thought the “M” cap was a Marlins cap, repurposed here. I liked the old “m” cap (I am biased but I had a tryout with the Twins in 1994, and I still have the hat) but I prefer the “TC” cap.
    This could have been better. Sad.

    Don’t like the all-white lettered TC cap. If they use the white/red version with the alts that will add at least a small splash of color. I’ll tak what I can get.

    Agreed with others that the M cap is too reminiscent of the Marlins. A more obviously seriffed M could have worked here.

    All in all the uni set feels like a safe choice rather than a bold one which isn’t the worst thing in the world I suppose.

    I like the trim with the pinstripes for some reason. They copied this from the Padres rebrand. The pinstripes are light. It’s too busy for some but it works for me somehow. Mets old racing stripes were too thick. Asymmetrical stripes don’t bother me. Though the sleeves are navy white red and pants are red white navy. Not very streamlined. I’m ok with the other changes, but I can’t get over how bad that M logo looks. Almost reminds me of those awful all-star hats.

    Part of the project when it was on the drawing board seems to have been “We want the home uniform of the Rod Carew years and the road set of the Kirby Puckett era. If I have a reservation, it’s that the hat “M” looks like the M in “Mariners”.

    The lettering and numbers look unfinished, and kind of generic, like the sort of thing a player might wear in a commercial that didn’t have the rights to use an MLB uniform.

    As for the uniform itself and the striping. I think someone was watching Major League and fell in love with Indians’ unis, just flipped the stripe order on the pants.

    The home uni’s should be the (signature look) pinstripe ones they wore during the World Series winning years. Period.

    I immediately thought the new alternative cap looks way too much like the old Marlins cap. Everything else is fine, it’s not an upgrade from their last set.

    Someone tweeted this at us today: link

    The new road cap logo looks just like the logo of former third-party presidential candidate Evan McMullin.

    The red script with no navy blue outline feels like they are just hopping on the minimalist fad.

    The alts with navy only do not look like the Twins at all.

    I like the Home Alternate, except for the “TC” on the hat only in white. I’d pair this with their new “TC” hat that has red and white. Sure there’s really no other red, but this little splash of red lets people know this isn’t a navy and white team.

    So I’ve had a few hours to digest these now and formulate a more nuanced reaction to the set. I think the overall design is well executed, and very clean with good balance across the text and number fonts to offer a rather modern take on both the classic 80s-90s home whites and the road greys of the same era. I’d prefer if they’d kept the pinstripes on the whites, they look great on the greys and that would be more consistent. Although “opposite of the Yankees” in terms of home/road pins isn’t a bad place to be I suppose. The contrasting numbers on the front are a good use of the Dodgers classic setup that really works. The solid alternate is a little boring but fine I suppose. I suspect that one will be swapped out after a couple of years (maybe go back to a red?) as the alternates often are. The Twin Cities Alternate is clean and sharp but lacks some color or contrast to really pop.

    That brings me to my main criticism: the M hats? No! It’s the blue; it’s gone! The Twins have always been a fundamentally 33/33/33 Red/White/Navy team because of their origin as the Washington Sens, ala the National Flag, and DC. The mix of colors is still spot on in terms of ratios and weights and has the right mix of emphasis on the three primary colors. The sleeve and pants stripes do a great job with this in particular. But…the Navy has been made significantly darker, to the point where I can’t see it as anything but solid black in any of the shown views. If there’s blue in there it’s very midnight not even really navy at this point and I think that’s wrong. The impressions given then are more of a red & black team rather than a red & blue team, which is a big departure, and not a good one. The Twin Cities jersey in particular looks like it was rendered in monochrome and that doesn’t work well. Personally, I would have done a couple of shades lighter instead, and there was plenty of room to do that without coming anywhere near the territory of the Royals or Dodgers. Imagine the whole well-designed set with a brighter shade of navy, kind of the Seahawks/Patriots/Titans navy from the NFL and I think you can see a slightly better set there. More on the color scheme: Lukas doesn’t get the Twins clearly when he says he doesn’t know if they are a red or blue team. As I said above, take a look at the U.S. flag to understand the color balance of the team for the last 120 years (even the simple Washington unis used typically red W’s on a blue cap and so on). Not red or blue, red AND blue. Does this mean Lukas doesn’t like the U.S. flag? is it for the same reason he likes the red star? Is “Paul Lukas” in fact a nom de guerre ala “Vladimir Lenin” or “Josef Stalin”? Can we conclude that he may, in fact, be a mono-color-promoting mole with the nefarious intent to convert North American Sports to a RED POWER ideological brainwashing template?*

    That doesn’t mean I love the M, it is quite plain and doesn’t have much to distinguish it…and why the odd 4-pointed star? The Wild, the old North Stars, everyone they’re trying to sync with uses an actual star for this north star mark, and they should have done that, too. I kept thinking the M itself looked familiar though, and it finally came to me. Look up an old Washington Senators hat. Now flip that W over. Ha! I think that might be the real origin of the M, and that actually makes me better with it. The clean old-school Sens logo was this team’s brand first and foremost so it should have a place here too, and that’s pretty cool.

    *Since this is the internet I shall point out that the sentences at the end of this paragraph are satire. Be advised.

    I’ve always been a closeted Twins fan from afar, and I’ve loved many of their looks over the years. These don’t do it for me. The home alts – yeah, pure class. The rest are meh, or “soulless” as described above. I just wish teams would lean into their history more instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, but I get it – it’s about marketing.

    Overalll I am underwhelmed. I expected a slightly more classic and timeless look, especially with the road font. And, yes, the “M” cap looks like the Marlins’ old one.

    I wonder how much the design was influenced by having to shoehorn elements into the new Nike template? I am mostly thinking about the piping on the road jersey pants.

    “Couldn’t they find someone with better handwriting?” That’s what my brain has never stopped asking itself since I was a kid when I’d see the Twins on TV.

    Overall, I liked the Twins look well enough over the years. But that original “Twins” script always felt a bit sloppy. At least that part is better now.

    BUT WHAT COLOR IS THE SQUATCHEE?!? The Twinkies had a red squatchee on their navy cap for so long, it was distinctive (although personally I disliked it).

    The death of Kasota Gold needs more hype, too, major improvement.

    Which is a shame. Everybody wants to look like the Yankees or Tigers apparently from a hat point of view.

    Can’t help but wonder if the “simple” look will be Nike’s aestetic going forward. In the NBA, the Nike removed outlining from so many teams logos and uniforms. It saves a few bucks to not have the outline and it makes for a nicer easier replica jersey to sell. Also, you can get more intense color combinations. I think we will see a lot more baseball uniforms follow. Clippers, Wolves, Rockets, Suns, Cavs, Warriors, Nets, Jazz, Grizzlies, Hornets, Raptors. Blazers, and Celtics(although they have been doing it forever) all have no outline. It is just the design era we are in. Baseball will follow.

    Exactly. The practice uniform aesthetic. We want to show off that we do so much hard work that there is no time or need to look refined or distinguished. Bring on the reversibles, splattered with advertisers!

    Having the piping on the road pinstripes makes the pinstriping too subtle from distance yet somehow too busy from up close. Woukd have loved to see a baby blue road alt to play off the new red shade. New logo comes off like prep school or some ream from a commercial.

    Yay! They got rid of the gold highlights!!
    Aaaand no more red jersey lookin’ like the Braves or Red Sox on a Sunday afternoon…we’re back to Navy w/ Crimson trim.
    Or thought we were…Red now. Why? We are Navy & Crimson.
    Caps: M= Marlins but it does look like the Wash Sens “W” upside down.
    TC = shoulda left it alone as it was fine, no need to change it.

    Pinstripes: good to return. Pant stripe with pinstripes= Agree should be illegal.
    Asymmetry= like it; red, white, blue- Go USA!
    Font:
    Serifs = distracting.
    NOB= agree disappears
    Twins= agree spindly
    Twin Cities= dumb. We really hafta spell it out for folks!?!

    Sleeve patches:
    Flags= Love ’em, especially now the Saints are AAA affiliate.
    State= I get the North Star vibe but no outlines has it getting lost & looks like a stain as a whole from afar. Minnie & Paul are better.
    Sponsor:
    Swoosh= gotta be discrete. But thankful no corporate ads (yet) like MLS or NBA sellouts.

    Overall a coupla steps in right direction. Yes appears they’re bringing in simplicity from the Sens’ era. But the Twins ID was either script font of Klatt, Oliva & K’brew crew or Puckett Pajamas.

    Twins caps have long had a TC logo, even though the letter C doesn’t exist anywhere in the team name. Do any other pro teams have this quirk?

    It’s because “Twins” was the nickname given to the team in the Twin Cities (TC). The original owner wanted the name to be Twin Cities Twins, but (thankfully) they agreed on Minnesota Twins, so the TC on the hat is that nod to the Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul).

    Those “Twin Cities” alts are straight outta Kansas City. That new M cap stinks. Putting a little red butthole on top of it doesn’t help.

    I think the Twins got it right in 1961. Beautiful uniforms and a great cap logo and shoulder patch.

    Why alter the TC after all these years? It had reached classic status, no? I don’t hate the alteration, but why?

    The home whites are nice, but that Twins script (which looks good) needs to be blue with red trim. I like the font on the road greys. The 2 new sleeve patches are swell.

    And while a different road cap is not needed, I actually like this M cap with the star. It’s simple yet distinctive and a little odd, which I find appealing (much like the TC logo is odd and appealing). Makes one look twice. I would wear that.

    Long time reader, first time commenter.

    Normally agree with you on a lot of your takes Paul but woof, this article as a whole is a really bad take in my opinion that lacks any semblance of understanding of Twins uniform history.

    1) The Twins have had a primarily red script on the front of their jerseys for like 75% of their existence. To think of them as a navy team and call the script a “miss” purely because of that is the real miss.

    2) The script is a MASSIVE improvement to the uneven, hand drawn mess they’ve been using since the 60s. It still has its nod to the past with its curvature and underlining “win”, but feels a lot cleaner than before.

    3) That red “undershirt” is just a compression sleeve. We’ll see how that plays out for games I guess.

    4) I don’t understand the pinstripe symmetry complaint personally. The colors aren’t a perfect A-B-A scheme, but they’re all even with it going dark-light-dark so it doesn’t bother me at all given it’s an obvious nod to theirs 70s and 80s jerseys (but thankfully thinner than those thick chunks on the old jerseys haha)

    5) I don’t understand the “generic” complaint on the number font. They clearly mimicked the serifs on the previous Twins mark as a subtle nod to their logo history and is a ton better than the garbage block fonts most teams use given it has personality directly tied to Twins history.

    6) Don’t love the execution, but the “hypocloid” on the sleeve is an obvious North Star so I get the symbolism. I don’t understand the criticism either with other teams already using it, I think it’s a really weak argument as they worked to bring in some local significance in lesser ways than other teams have used. The Twins were one of the last major sports team in Minnesota not to have it, so I like them adding it (Wild, Timberwolves, MN United, etc. all use it).

    7) Calling this set of jerseys “disappointing” is the disappointing take from you. The previous set of Twins jerseys was an ugly cacophony from like four different eras all mixed together where the jersey from one game to the next didnt look like they came from the same set. They finally have a clean set working together that have nods back to previous eras (home white to the 70s and 80s, road grays to the 80s and 90s, navy’s to the 80s and 90s, and then the new inclusion of the Twin Cities alt that beckons back to the creams of the original 60s era teams). I agree with you that that M logo is a big miss and the navy’s are lackluster, but as a whole, this is a big improvement over the set they’ve had and IMO your critique is one that, while pointing out some important pieces and flaws of the set, shows a lack of understanding of the nods and references they’ve made in the jersey set that make them uniquely Minnesotan and not “bland” or “soulless” like you’ve claimed.

    If this comment section had upvotes, I would be upvoting you for stating what I feel/think so clearly and lucidly! But since there are no upvotes, this supportive comment will have to do.

    No outlines, no Minnie and Paul, no powder blue, pants striping with pinstripes (a no no indeed), ugly numbers and the semi-Marlins hat with almost invisible North Star are really too bad, Twins!
    Because I do like the TC adjustment, I do like the Twin Cities uniform and hat plus the pinstripes on the away set. But it is all too minimalistic for my taste. I keep repeating the current taste for oversimplified practice uniforms in all sports with no additional colors and no team details, just black and white and very sparse graphic details. If these were reversible they would become the most popular MLB uniforms.

    Is nobody pointing out that the trio of hypocycloids on the Steelers’ helmet is a symbol of the steel industry, with the red representing iron ore — which is famously mined in Minnesota?

    I’m not a fan of much of this discombobulated rebrand, but that particular detail actually seems to be the product of some consideration (even if it doesn’t land particularly well).

Comments are closed.