Jump to content

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

Article: Offseason Blueprint: Hey Big Spenders!

byron buxton jose berrios
  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#21 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,735 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 08:41 AM

I like it, but I wouldn't trade for another reliever. There are two dozen quality arms available on the free agent market. If we're spending money might as well save the prospects. I'd shoot for higher than Blevins as well.

 

Also, I asked this in a prior thread but I don't know if anyone has had an answer. Are we as a baseball society over the fear of slider over-use? Conventional wisdom used to be that pitchers who throw it too often are bound for surgery. Corbin threw it over 40% of the time last year, which sounds obscene for a starter. Don't get me wrong, the slider is my favorite pitch so if sports science has debunked the reasons to fear the slider I'm all aboard the Corbin train.

  • Hosken Bombo Disco and tarheeltwinsfan like this

#22 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,617 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:10 AM

 

On the basis there isnt much reason they couldn't push payroll to $150m.

 

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.

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 05 November 2018 - 09:11 AM.

  • TheLeviathan, RaymondLuxuryYacht, Minny505 and 1 other like this

#23 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Joe's Shades™

  • Members
  • 2,850 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:22 AM

There were some pretty angry people this season when the Twins sold at the trade deadline because we raised our expectations. Let's try to not get upset when they don't spend $140-$150M!


#24 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,692 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:33 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 don't think anyone expects this blueprint to happen. Is it okay with you for some of us to dream in one thread?
  • Carole Keller, Mike Sixel, Twins33 and 6 others like this

#25 jtkoupal

jtkoupal

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 261 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:38 AM

I love the optimism, but I think this may be a bit aggressive. I like your ideas, but I must caution you.

 

1- I still have faith in Max Kepler, and, presumably, so do the Twins

2- Do you really lock up Buxton after his injury plagued season? And would Buxton even want to sign right now? I believe Buxton and his agent would want to wait and hope he reaches his full potential, then cash in bigger. Furthermore, is that relationship really stable enough for an extension at the moment?

3- Is Cave and Gonsalves going to fetch Rasiel Iglesias?

4- Are you sure you want to sign Jose Iglesias when Nick Gordon is waiting in the wings? 


#26 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,223 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:46 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 are already at about 71m in payroll, assuming they re-sign most arb guys. They were at about 130m in payroll at start of the season last year although it was pro-rated to about 115 by the end of the season due to trades and insurance. The Twins are still on the hook for Molitor's salary as well as some of Hughes. Those two are nearly 10m combined. The Twins underachieved last year and attendance fell below 2m so revenue is going to be down in comparison. I think it's a fantasy to expect payroll to increase over 130 and would expect payroll to go down. I'd bet it's closer to 115 than 130 on April 1st. 

 

The Twins will do what they always do. Sign a few middle tier guys and hope that they get an overachiever like Santana. They'll throw some money into reliever arms and hope something sticks. If the Twins are going to be good, they'll need the core of Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Berrios to make major strides forward. They can also look into trades, since they have a few tradeable assets (and maybe another comp pick they can trade?). 

  • TheLeviathan and Doomtints like this

#27 Number3

Number3

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:46 AM

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.


#28 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 3,530 posts

Posted 05 November 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

#29 caninatl04

caninatl04

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 575 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:52 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.

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


#30 caninatl04

caninatl04

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 575 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 09:57 AM

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

#31 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 3,530 posts

Posted 05 November 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

#32 Ben Noble

Ben Noble

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 168 posts
  • LocationPowderhorn Park

Posted 05 November 2018 - 10:04 AM

 

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.


#33 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,692 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 05 November 2018 - 10:09 AM

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

#34 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Twins World Champions in 2019

  • Members
  • 9,712 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 05 November 2018 - 10:18 AM

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

-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#35 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 3,530 posts

Posted 05 November 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

#36 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,554 posts

Posted 05 November 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

#37 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,554 posts

Posted 05 November 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.

Edited by birdwatcher, 05 November 2018 - 11:12 AM.

  • Original Whizzinator likes this

#38 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,617 posts

Posted 05 November 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.

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 05 November 2018 - 11:25 AM.


#39 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,617 posts

Posted 05 November 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.

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 05 November 2018 - 11:36 AM.


#40 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,554 posts

Posted 05 November 2018 - 11:38 AM

 

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

 

 

Certainly not in these parts.

  • caninatl04 likes this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: byron buxton, jose berrios