Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Forums

NBA 2018-19 Thread

Minnesota Timberwolves Talk Today, 02:49 PM
You all probably know I’m a Lakers guy by now. But, I like you guys, so I want to keep talking hoops on TD. This season is going to be F...
Full topic ›

Baseball America's Top Ten Twins Prospects

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 02:42 PM
Looks like Mike Berardino was again in charge of the Twins rankings for Baseball America's Top Prospects. Here are his choices for the to...
Full topic ›

Twins stuff from around the Web (Fangraphs, Twitter, Athl...

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:28 PM
Per request.....new thread! this seems like a really odd post to start with, which makes sense for a thread about the Twins and Internet....
Full topic ›

2019 priorities. Literally, a group wide priority list

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:17 PM
Our current FO has almost, to the day, been on the job, for 2 years now. And we've seen 2 drafts, 2 off season's of work, changes on the...
Full topic ›

Joe Mauer Retirement Press Conference

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 02:12 PM
Joe Mauer's press conference just concluded.    Holy emotional. Was great to see and watch. And it was very cool that so many p...
Full topic ›

Offseason Blueprint: Hey Big Spenders!

As the offseason gets underway, our team at Twins Daily is formulating blueprints that exemplify differing approaches the front office might take this offseason.

Last week Tom presented a trade-heavy changing of course, while Seth envisioned an internally focused rebuild. Today we'll have some fun and draw up a scenario in which the Twins really open up the wallet and push payroll to new (not totally implausible) heights.

Join the fun by downloading your copy of the 2019 Offseason Handbook and creating a blueprint in the forum.
Image courtesy of Matt Kartozian-USA TODAY Sports (Patrick Corbin)
The Minnesota Twins opened the 2018 season with a $129.5 million payroll. It was the highest figure in franchise history, but still ranked just 16th among MLB teams. This tells you all you need to know about where the league currently stands with spending, even after a conspicuously splurge-averse 2017-18 offseason.

The Twins probably won't spend more in 2019 than they did in 2018. But there's not much reason they couldn't. Pushing payroll into the $150 million range would still place Minnesota comfortably among baseball's mid-tier spenders. And if they actually were working under such a cap, they'd have about $80 million in available funds for next year.

How to spend all that money?! I'll see if I can find a way while adhering to the model of sustainable, long-term thinking.

Step 1 | Sign two building-block players to extensions: RHP Jose Berrios (4 years, $45M + two team options) and OF Byron Buxton (5 years, $54M + team option)

Berrios and Buxton are both four years away from free agency. Neither has made big money yet, and each has motivation to lock up long-term financial security. This is the perfect time to strike, and with their financial flexibility, the Twins can offer upfront bonuses to incentivize.

I'm envisioning a Berrios deal similar to the ones signed by Corey Kluber and Carlos Carrasco in Cleveland, with team options on the back end in exchange for guaranteed money now (pitching is a dangerous profession). Meanwhile, Buxton gets locked up for his prime years, reasonably if he's a solid contributor and ultra-reasonably if he's a star. Both can still hit the open market around age 30.

The terms might not exactly align with what I've laid out above, but you get the idea. For the purposes of this blueprint and its payroll calculus, I'm carving out $4 million for each in 2019 (several times what either would otherwise stand to make).

Step 2 | Grab your frontline starter by signing free agent LHP Patrick Corbin (5 years, $120M)

In the Offseason Handbook, we deemed Corbin the best starting pitcher on the free agent market. Last year, the Twins pursued Yu Darvish late into the offseason but ultimately came up short. This time around they get their guy, reeling in the stud southpaw Corbin coming off a career year. He joins Berrios as entrenched rotation cornerstones for the next half-decade.

It's not an investment without risk (we all saw what happened with Darvish), but I feel good about Corbin, who posted stellar numbers in hitter-friendly Arizona and only seems to be hitting his stride at age 29.

Step 3 | Enlist two free agent relievers: RHP Kelvin Herrera (3 years, $25M) and LHP Jerry Blevins (1 year, $6 million)

Power bullpens are the name of the game. The Addison Reed signing didn't work out, but I'm biting the bullet and spending on Herrera, aiming high but not quite at the Craig Kimbrel/Jeurys Familia tier. Herrera can step in as closer, or as top setup man with Trevor May keeping the ninth; either situation sounds great with Taylor Rogers also around as a proven late-inning arm.

As lefty specialist, I'm enlisting one of the best in Blevins (585 career OPS vs LHB) on a short-term deal.

Step 4 | Add another power relief arm by trading LHP Stephen Gonsalves and OF Jake Cave to Cincinnati for RHP Raisel Iglesias (2 years, $11.4M remaining on contract)

I wasn't kidding about the power bullpen thing. Iglesias is a stud reliever with two years left on his contract, and the Reds are going nowhere at present. Flip them a couple young MLB-ready assets and weaponize Iglesias as a strategic fireman of the new era. Having Iglesias on hand in addition to Herrera, May, Rogers, Reed, Blevins and Trevor Hildenberger would enable Rocco Baldelli to stack relievers behind (or in front of, whatever floats your boat) the starters in the back half of the rotation.

(By the way, the back half of my rotation includes Fernando Romero, because I think he's ready and I had to nontender or trade Jake Odorizzi, whose estimated $10 million via arbitration couldn't be justified in this scenario.)

Step 5 | Alrighty, on to the offense: Sign 3B Josh Donaldson for 1 year, $15 million

That contract estimate would've been unthinkable a couple years ago, but things have changed for the former MVP. He took a step backward in 2017 and stumbled badly in 2018, playing only 52 games amidst recurring calf issues.

Admittedly this contract estimate (via the Handbook) might be a bit low, but it's feasible Donaldson could go for a one-year deal in that vicinity to rebuild value. He'd fit nicely with Minnesota, where there's flexibility to adjust to his new reality. If he can play still play third, great, Sano goes to first. If Donaldson is better off at first, then Sano gets another year to show what he can do at the hot corner.

Granted, each of these sluggers has his question marks, but I'm not committed to either beyond 2019. And the upside of this corner combination... whew.

Step 6 | Sprinkle in some versatility: Sign utilityman Marwin Gonzalez for 3 years, $33 million

The thing about rostering Sano and Donaldson along with Tyler Austin and Robbie Grossman (who I'm bringing back as DH/OF for a reliable dose of OBP) is that there are some major defensive limitations going on. To offset this, we add Gonzalez, who's played all over the field for the Astros while providing a steadily solid switch-hitting bat.

I'm actually plugging him in as the right field starter, with Buxton and Max Kepler rotating until at least one establishes himself as a clearly deserving full-time regular. And if both do (which I'm bullish on), Gonzalez can be used elsewhere. Crucially, he can play third, which helps reduce the risk of our previously stated Sano/Donaldson plan.

Step 7 | Shore up the D: Sign SS Jose Iglesias (2 years, $18 million)

He's not much of a hitter (.666 OPS the past three years), but Iglesias is among the best defensive shortstops in the league, and he's only 28, so I'm happy to pony up for him as my No. 9 hitter. Sliding Jorge Polanco to second while inserting Iglesias at short vastly improves my middle-infield defense, and this commitment is short enough to segue nicely to Royce Lewis in 2021.

ROTATION ($45M)


Jose Berrios (4M)

Patrick Corbin (24M)

Kyle Gibson (8.5M)

Michael Pineda (8M)

Fernando Romero (0.5M)


Attached Image: rotation.png


BULLPEN ($32M)


Kelvin Herrera (8.3M)

Trevor May (1.5M)

Taylor Rogers (1.5M)

Raisel Iglesias (5.7M)

Addison Reed (8.5M)

Jerry Blevins (6M)

Trevor Hildenberger (0.5M)


Attached Image: bullpen.png


LINEUP ($55M)


C: Jason Castro (8M)

1B: Miguel Sano (3M)

2B: Jorge Polanco (0.5M)

SS: Jose Iglesias (9M)

3B: Josh Donaldson (15M)

LF: Eddie Rosario (4M)

CF: Byron Buxton (4M)

RF: Marwin Gonzalez (11M)

DH: Tyler Austin (0.5M)


BENCH ($9.5M)


C: Mitch Garver (0.5M)

MI: Ehire Adrianza (2M)

OF: Max Kepler (3M)

OF: Robbie Grossman (4M)


Attached Image: offense.png


TOTAL: $141.5 million


Okay, granted, when you add in the money still owed to Phil Hughes, and the buyouts for Ervin Santana and Logan Morrison, it's up closer to $150 million. But such a number still would've ranked around the league median in 2018, and that's before the anticipated spending spree poised to take place this winter.

Plus, look at that beauty. This roster is built to win the division and boasts some staying power. With Chicago, Detroit and KC all rebuilding, and with Cleveland talking about trading away parts to trim payroll, one could argue the time is ripe for full-fledged investment.

I think we can safely say the Twins won't be quite as active and splashy as I've suggested above, but the point to take away here is this: right now we're looking at an almost completely fresh slate, with a wide-open horizon of roster-building opportunity.

You could pick and choose from the ambitious list above and arrive at a more realistic payroll figure while still upgrading with big names in several areas. High-profile free agents like Corbin, Gonzalez, Herrera and Donaldson are very much on the table, and Minnesota's front office should be seeking opportunities to acquire established difference-makers from rebuilding clubs.

If you were calling the shots, what would be your course of action this winter? Download the Offseason Handbook to see all the options at your fingertips.

  • Oldgoat_MN, h2oface, nytwinsfan and 7 others like this

  • Share:
  • submit to reddit
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

83 Comments

I apologize for being too lazy to do the work necessary to even compile one of these hypothetical rosters. I guess when you have been following a team for 60+ years you've seen way to many rosters come and go lol. I just have a basic wish that the powers that be with the Twins actually have a commitment to winning baseball games.

I will say that any roster that has Byron Buxton and Miguel Sano as key components is flawed from the starts. That is definitely wishful thinking if not outright dreaming.

Photo
Nick Nelson
Nov 05 2018 09:51 AM

 

On what do you base the statement "There is not much reason they couldn't push payroll to $150? In the real world any report of this nature that did not validate such an assumption would have zero credibility. You also have a key assumption of that the Twins outbid the Yankees for Corbin who is from NY and the Yankees have $300M in revenue more than the Twins. It's fantasy baseball at best.

Did you miss the entire setup for this piece? The idea here is to show what kind of moves might be possible IF the Twins were to push payroll to the maximum level within reason. They probably won't spend as little as $80M either but we looked at that scenario last week.

 

I'm not sure why you're acting like a ~$140M payroll is some absurd notion; it'd be 53% of the 2017 revenue total you listed, and MN supposedly aims to invest 51% of revenue back into player spending. 

 

What you're calling "assumptions" are really just hypothetical scenarios. It was stated repeatedly in the article that one shouldn't realistically expect quite this high of a total. 

    • Han Joelo, birdwatcher, Mike Sixel and 7 others like this

 

On what do you base the statement "There is not much reason they couldn't push payroll to $150? In the real world any report of this nature that did not validate such an assumption would have zero credibility. You also have a key assumption of that the Twins outbid the Yankees for Corbin who is from NY and the Yankees have $300M in revenue more than the Twins. It's fantasy baseball at best.

 

The revenue reports for 2018 are not out yet. In 2017 the Twins ranked 21st in revenue with $261M. Whre would you expect a team 21st in revenue to rank. 16th looks quite reasonable

 

https://www.statista...-teams-in-2010/

 

If you look on that list, several of the top teams made 80-100M. The Twins made $23M with a payroll of roughly $20M less than 2018 payroll. It would appear they were willing to push payroll to a level that would assure meager profits in 2018. To say there is no reason they could not push to $150M is uninformed or assumes they should operate as a non-profit.

But aren't the Pohlad's renowned for their charity???

I disagree with the contract extensions.It seems like the cost is paying full fare for what would otherwise be team control years in return for what?In Bux's case, one more year under contract?And in Berrios' case two team options?I concur with several posters that BOTH sides might prefer to wait (at least) one year--especially in Bux's (head) case.

 

I'd resign Gibson.Even at market rates, he could still be traded in 2020 to a (rich) team needing starting pitching.

 

But, overall, this was a fun exercise.I am curious to see the revenue reports, especially since attendance was below 2 million.

    • Original Whizzinator likes this
Photo
Nick Nelson
Nov 05 2018 09:59 AM

 

I also think it would take more than Cave and Gonsalves to acquire Iglesias. Honestly, I just don't think the Twins have that many desirable trade pieces right now, unless you want to get rid of the recent high draft picks that we have in the lower minors. Best strategy at this juncture would be to fork out some money for a handful of quality free agents.

I went back and forth on whether the Iglesias trade concept was realistic. In a way it does feel light because Raisel is a beast, and I'm sure no one's entirely sold on Gonsalves or Cave.

 

But then again, with supply levels rising, the expected return for even established high-quality closers has clearly dropped. Look at what the Rays got for Alex Colome from Seattle in May, with almost 3 years of team control remaining. 

 

In any case, the concept is more important than the specifics here. Bottom line is that I think the Twins would be very wise to trade away some of their redundant, cheap young talent in exchange for semi-pricey veterans on rebuilding teams.

    • birdwatcher, diehardtwinsfan, Ben Noble and 1 other like this

 

I went back and forth on whether the Iglesias trade concept was realistic. In a way it does feel light because Raisel is a beast, and I'm sure no one's entirely sold on Gonsalves or Cave.

 

But then again, with supply levels rising, the expected return for even established high-quality closers has clearly dropped. Look at what the Rays got for Alex Colome from Seattle in May, with almost 3 years of team control remaining. 

 

In any case, the concept is more important than the specifics here. Bottom line is that I think the Twins would be very wise to trade away some of their redundant, cheap young talent in exchange for semi-pricey veterans on rebuilding teams.

 

Agreed completely on the concept. But not sure if I want to trade too much/too high quality of the redundant talent for relief pitching.

Agreed completely on the concept. But not sure if I want to trade too much/too high quality of the redundant talent for relief pitching.


I would. We've seen every trade deadline bullpen arms are in high demand. If the Twins season goes pear shaped again, they can always trade him for other prospects.
    • birdwatcher and Original Whizzinator like this

Other than the Buxton extension, I am ok with it.Rosario, Polanco, and even Sano should be extended before Buxton

Photo
Nick Nelson
Nov 05 2018 10:19 AM

 

Every year we pretend that this is the year the Pohlads spend money. It never happens. Never. It doesn't matter who the GM is. The Twins have been top half in payroll twice in the last 25 years - 09 and 10, when they fleeced the tax payers into paying for Target Field. Usually they are in the bottom third.

The Twins had a payroll of $129.5m this year and yet it is a "fantasy" to envision a rise over $130m? Ok.

 

To reiterate (again) no one is saying you should expect this payroll. It's merely an exercise to show what might be possible under such flexible constraints. If the Twins land at $115m, as you suggest, they'll still have almost $50m to spend, and could make several of the moves outlined.

 

 

I will say that any roster that has Byron Buxton and Miguel Sano as key components is flawed from the starts. That is definitely wishful thinking if not outright dreaming.

These kinds of comments make me sad. And I think they'll look pretty silly a year from now. What short memories we seem to have...

    • SF Twins Fan and railmarshalljon like this
Photo
birdwatcher
Nov 05 2018 10:52 AM

 

On what do you base the statement "There is not much reason they couldn't push payroll to $150? In the real world any report of this nature that did not validate such an assumption would have zero credibility. You also have a key assumption of that the Twins outbid the Yankees for Corbin who is from NY and the Yankees have $300M in revenue more than the Twins. It's fantasy baseball at best.

 

The revenue reports for 2018 are not out yet. In 2017 the Twins ranked 21st in revenue with $261M. Whre would you expect a team 21st in revenue to rank. 16th looks quite reasonable

 

https://www.statista...-teams-in-2010/

 

If you look on that list, several of the top teams made 80-100M. The Twins made $23M with a payroll of roughly $20M less than 2018 payroll. It would appear they were willing to push payroll to a level that would assure meager profits in 2018. To say there is no reason they could not push to $150M is uninformed or assumes they should operate as a non-profit.

 

There have been a number of years past in which the organization underspent significantly, thereby padding its retained earnings column. And even when the profit margin has been less than ideal, they reaped a return on investment in the form of "unrecognized" capital gains, i.e. an increase in franchise value. So I think it's fair for fans to hope the organization takes a longer view backwards and forwards when these investment decisions are made, and I very much believe they do.

 

They have aggressively spent over the past two years, but on infrastructure and non-player talent. OMO, this has been both prudent and foresighted. But now it's time to invest in specific (MLB) player talent. I don't know the details, but have observed enough of the Pohlad Companies operating philosophies and strategies in their other businesses to believe that they continue to adhere to certain disciplines and business guidelines, and given the publicly-disclosed revenue numbers, it doesn't seem like a $150M number is unrealistic, ESPECIALLY because it's not merely an expense but an investment that can be expected to generate immediate revenues.

 

And therefore, I'm birdwatcher, and I approve this message.

    • Carole Keller, Nick Nelson, Mike Sixel and 5 others like this
Photo
birdwatcher
Nov 05 2018 11:10 AM

 

Yes, this is how businesses are run. The board or ownership asks what is the impact on the bottom line or what will profits be as a result of this plan and the person in a position similar to a MLB GM says "oh is that a concern" I did not see a problem with operating as a non-profit or losing money."

 

Last day on the job. This line of thinking is bury you head in the sand logic / fanaticism because most people with no management experience understand $150M budgets need to be validated. I would hope any of us working for an organization that managed profitability in this fashion would be looking for a new job because any such company has a very short life expectancy.

 

 

I'd remind you that many of us have in fact worked for or currently work for companies that "manage profitability" and lots of us have probably been involved, maybe even been responsible for those decisions. So while I see where you're coming from and agree that a call for spending can be, um, fanatical, my experience on TD is that a ton of thought goes behind all of this stuff. 

 

If someone has a good argument that it would be imprudent to invest that much, great.

 

I can see the logic in calling for restraint in going from one extreme of payroll flexibility to the other extreme. Or for cautioning against specific contracts. For me, I guess the more cringeworthy risks are those involving desperation trades that set the baseball operation back a season or two. Say howdy to Wilson Ramos and Aaron Hicks for example.

    • Original Whizzinator likes this
Photo
Major Leauge Ready
Nov 05 2018 11:19 AM

 

Did you miss the entire setup for this piece? The idea here is to show what kind of moves might be possible IF the Twins were to push payroll to the maximum level within reason. They probably won't spend as little as $80M either but we looked at that scenario last week.

 

I'm not sure why you're acting like a ~$140M payroll is some absurd notion; it'd be 53% of the 2017 revenue total you listed, and MN supposedly aims to invest 51% of revenue back into player spending. 

 

What you're calling "assumptions" are really just hypothetical scenarios. It was stated repeatedly in the article that one shouldn't realistically expect quite this high of a total. 

 

I specifically used $150M. $140M might be viable but who knows because there is no attempt to validate the financial viability. The financial part of these discussion do not come remotely close to how these things are actually done in practice. It's fanatical rambling. Go ahead and dream but to put it into a plan in this manner suggests it's reality. If not, it's a bunch of adult spending a lot of time on fantasy.

 

Why is Cleveland pulling back on spending when they are not at the $150M level?

 

Doe sit not make much more sense for Tampa to employ this plan? There payroll is under $100M. These teams are businesses. Nobody blinks when Kershaw is not satisfied with his $300M contract and asks forore but the teams should operate as a non-profit. ! would be fine with dreaming but it always turns into the problem is the Twins ownership is cheap and what really bugs me is there are many well presented ideas with of statistical support for player performance. When it comes to financial discussion most fall back to to "cheap ownership" with making no effort to actually inform themselves. What we get is "there is no good reason" when the fact is the reason is either not understood or worse yet no attempt has been made to understand.

Photo
Major Leauge Ready
Nov 05 2018 11:35 AM

 

But aren't the Pohlad's renowned for their charity???

 

Just a guess but I think they probably feel homeless shelters or medical research or battered women's shelters are a better use of their charitable donations as compared to another $20M to get 3 more wins in a season.

Photo
birdwatcher
Nov 05 2018 11:38 AM

 

But aren't the Pohlad's renowned for their charity???

 

 

Certainly not in these parts.

    • caninatl04 likes this
Photo
Major Leauge Ready
Nov 05 2018 11:42 AM

 

I'd remind you that many of us have in fact worked for or currently work for companies that "manage profitability" and lots of us have probably been involved, maybe even been responsible for those decisions. So while I see where you're coming from and agree that a call for spending can be, um, fanatical, my experience on TD is that a ton of thought goes behind all of this stuff. 

 

If someone has a good argument that it would be imprudent to invest that much, great.

 

I can see the logic in calling for restraint in going from one extreme of payroll flexibility to the other extreme. Or for cautioning against specific contracts. For me, I guess the more cringeworthy risks are those involving desperation trades that set the baseball operation back a season or two. Say howdy to Wilson Ramos and Aaron Hicks for example.

 

There was documentation of financial viability. NONE. The validations was a quote there is no good reason the Twins could not spend $150. If you have had experience, and especially if you have actually been responsible for a $250M P&L you know this would not come close to flying. I have only had 4 positions with full P&L responsibility of $250M or more so that's a small sample but I believe had I presented to the board in this manner, I would have been relieved of my duties within a few days.  

Photo
Carole Keller
Nov 05 2018 11:49 AM
Back on topic. If you want to express that Nick’s blueprint isn’t financially viable, fine, you’ve done so. What I’d like to see from you is YOUR off-season plan. If you think Nick’s here is too ‘pie In the sky’ then tell us specifically what and how you would do things differently and stop the lectures about how you know more than the rest of us on running multi-million dollar businesses. Put your money where your mouth is and give us specifics of who, what and how much, if you were GM. And if you had bothered to read through all the ones posted, by the owners and writers here and other posters, you’d see a wide range of ideas with plenty of fiscal conservativism, and much more to discuss than how we don’t know how to run a big business. This is a message board, not a board room. It’s for sharing and debating ideas. Telling us all we don’t know what we are doing is neither.

Yes, this a moderator warning.
    • Nick Nelson, Han Joelo, birdwatcher and 6 others like this

It's not a super realistic plan, but then IT WAS CLEAR in the intro that it was meant as a FUN exercise......

 

I'd not sign Grossman under this plan (any plan), thereby making the budget total somewhat more realistic........he just doesn't offer much to this roster. Teams with bad OBP up and down the roster do not benefit from adding one good OB player, they benefit more from adding more power.....plus, he just isn't all that good at much of anything other than hitting a few singles and walking.

 

I'd replace him with Astudillo, who can catch or play 1B or DH about like Grossman. 

 

The following year, one or more of Gibson and Pineda is replaced by a $.5 MM player, making the following year more realistic also, if anyone is actually worried about that in a thread that is about dreaming for fun. Oh, and the 3B needs to be replaced.

 

IF Marwin can legit play 3B, you maybe put him there, and not spend on a 1 year deal....and put Kepler or Wade or Kiriloff in RF (yes, you can actually promote players from AA, but I'd think he is possibly ready by June.....)

    • Carole Keller, birdwatcher, nicksaviking and 3 others like this

Fun!I absolutely love this!Sure would return some fan(nies) in the seats!. . .and NOT out of the realm of doable!

 

    • birdwatcher, Vanimal46, caninatl04 and 1 other like this
Photo
Winston Smith
Nov 05 2018 12:42 PM

As an unwritten rule I'd stay away from NL starting pitchers.

    • TheLeviathan, Danchat, Tomj14 and 1 other like this

 

I'm not sure why you're acting like a ~$140M payroll is some absurd notion; it'd be 53% of the 2017 revenue total you listed, and MN supposedly aims to invest 51% of revenue back into player spending.

 

I feel like the 51% thing was said ten years ago and when Big Pohlad was still running the team. Has this been said since then?

I don't know what the operational costs for the team are, but the Twins organization has a LOT of employees. Only the Twins could say if 51% is sustainable for them.

 

But ... employee wages are 100% tax deductible ... what is the tax burden for professional sports teams? I'm sure the Twins are smart enough to pay at least what their tax burden is in wages. If not...ugh.

 

The younger Pohlad complained a bit about being harassed by the IRS after his father's death. One thing to note is that if you pay very low wages, the IRS will harass you! I worked at a company where the owner was taking in 88% profit (insane!) and we kept getting letters from the IRS wanting to prove we were paying such low wages to our workers. The wage audits came in every quarter, the IRS was never satisfied. They were clearly wanting to change the owner's behavior (he sold the company instead). The audits weren't a burden on him anyway, it was other people who had to do them....

Photo
Major Leauge Ready
Nov 05 2018 01:14 PM

 

There have been a number of years past in which the organization underspent significantly, thereby padding its retained earnings column. And even when the profit margin has been less than ideal, they reaped a return on investment in the form of "unrecognized" capital gains, i.e. an increase in franchise value. So I think it's fair for fans to hope the organization takes a longer view backwards and forwards when these investment decisions are made, and I very much believe they do.

 

They have aggressively spent over the past two years, but on infrastructure and non-player talent. OMO, this has been both prudent and foresighted. But now it's time to invest in specific (MLB) player talent. I don't know the details, but have observed enough of the Pohlad Companies operating philosophies and strategies in their other businesses to believe that they continue to adhere to certain disciplines and business guidelines, and given the publicly-disclosed revenue numbers, it doesn't seem like a $150M number is unrealistic, ESPECIALLY because it's not merely an expense but an investment that can be expected to generate immediate revenues.

 

And therefore, I'm birdwatcher, and I approve this message.

 

You have provided absolutely no evidence of what level of profit would be produced with $150M payroll for the 25 man roster yet you offer an opinion on viability. All of the data is readily available but you have produced no facts, instead uninformed speculation. Don't try this in the real world. Also, try going into your CEOs office and telling them they should give everybody raises this year to the point of the company being at B/E because they had good profits last year.

 

Let's look at a different way. If a large portion of your income was bonus based would you work for free the year following a great year? 

 

Having said this ... if you actually take the time to look through MLB revenue and profit estimates, it does appear teams spend all the way to B/E levels when they truly have a good shot at going deep in the playoffs but within reason. Houston, was the most team in the league when they absolutely sucked. As I recall, their total payroll was under $40M one year. According the report I listed previously, several teams made between 80-100M. Yet, you don't see these teams increasing their payroll by $75M, do we?

Houston Payroll
2018 - $160.04M
2017 - $124,343,900
2016 - $69,064,200
2015 - $70,910,100
2014 - $44,544,174
2013 - $22,062,600

    • birdwatcher, Doomtints and caninatl04 like this
Photo
diehardtwinsfan
Nov 05 2018 01:39 PM

Extending Buxton... that's a bit of a risk. I think you're right though in that we need to lock up some of the core guys. Rosario should be on the list. After this season, I'm not sure what to think of Buxton and Sano. Guess you have to be a big believer in them both to do it. Not sure I'm there yet.

 

Love the plan.

    • caninatl04 and Original Whizzinator like this

 

Houston Payroll
2018 - $160.04M
2017 - $124,343,900
2016 - $69,064,200
2015 - $70,910,100
2014 - $44,544,174
2013 - $22,062,600

Houston is a huge market with ownership that is willing to spend. That isn't the Twins.

 

Houston Payroll
2018 - $160.04M
2017 - $124,343,900
2016 - $69,064,200
2015 - $70,910,100
2014 - $44,544,174
2013 - $22,062,600

And although Houston is a big city ... baseball actually considers Houston to be a "small market" team!


Similar Articles


by Nick Nelson , 09 Nov 2018
Photo


by Tom Froemming , 03 Nov 2018
Photo


by Seth Stohs , 01 Nov 2018
Photo


by Nick Nelson , 25 Oct 2018
Photo


by Ted Schwerzler , 25 Oct 2018
Photo