Sure, that's fair.
BUT, I think a few folks are overstating the importance of historical trends and existing evidence in this discussion, while ignoring some pretty obviously relevant factors. Namely, this:
Before last offseason, what reason was there to think we were gonna see an all-time high payroll in franchise history in 2018? Falvey and Levine have essentially had one full offseason at the helm, and it resulted in more spending than we've ever seen before from the organization.
And while $150 million might seem like a huge number through the lens of Twins fans, it's really not that outrageous in the scope of today's MLB. It just isn't.
Nick, I think its also fair and perhaps calming to keep in mind your main point, which is that the opportunity exists to make a splash in the FA market. Going the "spend big" route, whatever that looks like, is a fun thought and not all that unrealistic.
We don't know if the Pohlad boys would sign off on $125M, let alone $150M. But I'm also of the opinion that past history tells us a little less than we might think on the subject, because the context never quite remains the same. The organization is dealing with a set of conditions and factors that differ enough from the past to call for us to temper our convictions on this touchy subject.
I don't need to have a perfect grasp on this past year's P&L to be confident that a solid business case could be made to spend $150M now on the 2019 MLB payroll. If the revenues lag behind forecast, something tells me the business can withstand that short-term issue.
The critical things are there IMO: enough talent at MLB to think bolstering it aggressively could move the needle; adequate cash resources; more than nominal player assets with trade value, a division that's inviting the team to think opportunistically, viable difference-making FA options, even if Corbin isn't one of them.
I'm just going to stay giddily optimistic for now.