Mackey: Twins don't feel payroll is a problem

Twins' president: 'We're not just going to sign players just to spend' | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) | Sportswire: Minnesota Twins

Quote:

---

"It doesn't go to reach a number. We don't say, 'This is the number you've got to reach -- go out and find a $7 million player, go to the store and find a $7 million player.' It doesn't work that way. (Ryan) tells us what he thinks he can add and how much it might cost, and we go, 'OK.'"
Do the Twins have any payroll restrictions this offseason compared to last year?
"No," Pohlad said. "There are no payroll restrictions. I mean, within reason."

---

From the article: "Certainly Terry in his heart is an evaluator, so he evaluates a player and then equates a dollar number that he thinks that player is," president Dave St. Peter said. "And he's very disciplined with that approach, as is the balance of our baseball staff. And I think that's one of the reasons we've been able to be successful with far less payroll (in the past). Terry understands that he has some flexibility, and I can tell you, organizationally, I think we're very comfortable with where we're at in terms of that process."

This seems like it's pretty much in line with the "not overpaying" based on Ryan's value determination of a player. Now he just needs to update the value chart he's been working off of since 1997.

Wow that was a depressing read.

Payroll is one of Mackey's personal missions to hammer into the ground as not being an issue and how fans are idiots.

Much of his arguments are true and make sense, but he never mentions the biggest elephant in the room with cutting the payroll back to Metrodome numbers 3 years into the new ballpark: If you don't want to spend, even if the reason is not to save costs but rather why acquire more mediocre talent - then where does that extra unspent money go? It's not like they save it away and accrue interest to use in 2014, and go back to over 100 million + the 20 not spent this year + the interest gained. St. Peter will give vague answers like the extra money will go back into the ballpark, but I haven't read anything about a 20-40 million Target Field upgrade. Tickets aren't going down in prices. Tangible freebies aren't being offered.

The only real perk I've seen is Season Ticket Holders getting a 10% off card at -some- concession stands.

I'd rather see us take a gamble on a mediocre players than have it go into a Pohald void, but I guess that makes me an idiot by Mackey's thinking.

my favorite part: 'If the 2013 season started today, the payroll would sit right around $80 million -- still much higher than any single-season payroll the Twins had at the Metrodome, but significantly lower than in previous years at Target Field.'

'Much higher', as if there's no such thing as inflation.

then there's: ' Since moving into Target Field prior to the 2010 season, the Twins have had payrolls of approximately $97 million. $113 million and $100 million.'

Wasn't payroll 94M last year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

my favorite part: 'If the 2013 season started today, the payroll would sit right around $80 million -- still much higher than any single-season payroll the Twins had at the Metrodome, but significantly lower than in previous years at Target Field.'

'Much higher', as if there's no such thing as inflation.

then there's: ' Since moving into Target Field prior to the 2010 season, the Twins have had payrolls of approximately $97 million. $113 million and $100 million.'

Wasn't payroll 94M last year?

---

Thats a media major rounding up

The last line from Seth's sampled quote was the most telling:

Do the Twins have any payroll restrictions this offseason compared to last year?
"No," Pohlad said. "There are no payroll restrictions. I mean, within reason."

Well isn't that arbitrary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

The last line from Seth's sampled quote was the most telling:

Do the Twins have any payroll restrictions this offseason compared to last year?
"No," Pohlad said. "There are no payroll restrictions. I mean, within reason."

Well isn't that arbitrary.

---

Wouldn't it be nice for an owner to say, 'I told my GM he has a ceiling of X amount of money to spend, and I'm gonna let him do what he needs to do with that much. If he spends it all or not, that's as high as we'll go. '?

it's a pipe dream, we'll never hear any owner say that, or anything close, but man honesty like that would go a long way.

Quote:

---

It doesn't go to reach a number. We don't say, 'This is the number you've got to reach -- go out and find a $7 million player, go to the store and find a $7 million player.' It doesn't work that way. (Ryan) tells us what he thinks he can add and how much it might cost, and we go, 'OK.'"

---

If thats how it works, then no, payroll isnt't the problem. The problem is the GM who looked at all the talent in this year's FA class and said "Jim, can I have Kevin Correia, Mike Pelfrey, Rich Harden, and Joe Saunders?"

LOVE the strawman that they should spend just to spend. Love it.

And the fans don't need to spend money on tickets just to buy them, either.

Yeah....this. Anyone who still had hopes about Ryan being more loose with a larger budget should be feeling dashed after this. Ugh.

No where do we read specifics about planning or peformance. Even the dryest Annual Reports contain future projections and how they would be attained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

LOVE the strawman that they should spend just to spend. Love it.

---

Strawman? There are PLENTY of examples of players that could make this team better. Why is it only necessary to spend money if the team has a shot at the world series? Why is it blasphemy to overpay a little for a guy that will improve the roster for the next few years, even if that guy isn't in the long term plans? This approach doesn't work. I'm not suggesting they "spend just to spend." I'm suggesting they spend to make the team better and easier to watch. This isn't the NFL with draft picks. Even a mediocre pick like number 25 can give you Mike Trout, so why not give the fans something to come and watch? I haven't seen a single game in Target Field because the team isn't worth driving 4 hours to watch play ****ty baseball.

The arguments on the Twins side have to be wearing thin. These excuses will not be tolerated by fans too much longer. At some point the Twins will be getting hit pretty hard and answering tough questions about poor decisions (already starting to happen). Minnesota gives people the benefit of the doubt... only for so long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badsmerf

Strawman? There are PLENTY of examples of players that could make this team better.

---

I think you misunderstood his point. Not to speak on Mike's behalf but I'm pretty sure he's saying the notion that the Twins should "spend just to spend" is the strawman. No one is saying that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnydakota

Thats a media major rounding up

---

The $100M payroll was NOT a media major rounding up. Go to Cots Baseball Contracts on Baseball Prospectus for the actual totals.

Minnesota Twins | Cot's Baseball Contracts.

The media will sometimes only site the payroll obligations of players on the major league roster, not those who have been cut loose but who are owed guaranteed money. This year's payroll obligation is currently sitting at around $72M which includes Nick Blackburn's $5.5M salary. He's not on the major league roster and some media outlets will site the lower $67M figure. Once all of the kids are signed the payroll, and assuming no other major league player is added, the payroll will be around $78M-80M including Nick Blackburn's salary.

Correct, Nick. Most people asking for a higher payroll are asking them to sign legit free agents, not to sign just any player at random. But plenty of people saying payroll somehow does not matter insist that people are arguing they should just spend money to spend money, when no one is doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knotholemike

The $100M payroll was NOT a media major rounding up. Go to Cots Baseball Contracts on Baseball Prospectus for the actual totals.

Minnesota Twins | Cot's Baseball Contracts.

The media will sometimes only site the payroll obligations of players on the major league roster, not those who have been cut loose but who are owed guaranteed money. This year's payroll obligation is currently sitting at around $72M which includes Nick Blackburn's $5.5M salary. He's not on the major league roster and some media outlets will site the lower $67M figure. Once all of the kids are signed the payroll, and assuming no other major league player is added, the payroll will be around $78M-80M including Nick Blackburn's salary.

---

2012 MLB Salaries by Team - USATODAY.com

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries

http://espn.go.com/mlb/team/salaries...innesota-twins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

2012 MLB Salaries by Team - USATODAY.com

MLB Salaries - CBSSports.comMinnesota Twins 2012 Player Salaries and Team Payroll - ESPN

---

Those are the Opening Day Roster, which was correct at $94M. Cot's $100M includes prorated signing bonuses and changes that happened during the season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetOne69

Those are the Opening Day Roster, which was correct at $94M. Cot's $100M includes prorated signing bonuses and changes that happened during the season.

---

That's good to know. Thanks