Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Article: Twins Payroll Really is Resource Allocation

minnesota twins payroll derek falvey
  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#41 Ebby Calvin Laloosh

Ebby Calvin Laloosh

    Cedar Rapids Kernels

  • Member
  • 67 posts
  • LocationPDX

Posted 18 January 2019 - 02:48 PM

 

It isn’t about dollars, but rather about sense.

 

Great line!


#42 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 02:54 PM

 

I agree with you they can spend to the limit now. Never hurts to add talent and if you get them on short term deals it won't hurt the long term plan.All I was trying to point out is they have a strategy that is in line with what made other teams successful and those teams didn't really spend to the upper limit until they had a solid core.I don't see that the Twins have that just yet so I can see why they might not want to spend to the upper limit just yet.

The issue is that we don't sign big FAs, we don't trade any of our highly rated prospects for established players, and we haven't been successful developing many of our prospects for ages. It makes it challenging to build a solid core when your team isn't doing any of the things that would lead to said solid core. They seem to be operating under the hope that maybe one year all of our prospects will pan out at the exact same time, and also all of our bargain bin deals will work out that same year too. But with all the short term deals and no real established players, even if your team does decently 1 year (see: 2017), then the next year is just another crapshoot. They can talk about the long term plan, but lets be honest, what is the long term plan? To me, it just seems like hoping and praying and not actually doing any of the work to acquire players that would constitute a solid core.

  • SQUIRREL, USAFChief, Mike Sixel and 3 others like this

#43 twinkiesfan11

twinkiesfan11

    Member

  • Member
  • 160 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 03:32 PM

What is so hard to understand? The core sucked ass in 2018 and if they don’t rebound this team is trash and will need to rebuild yet again.

2019 is about determining if this core can rebound and lead the team to contention. Falvine has supplemented the core with bounce back candidates and an established veteran bat on short term contracts. If the core and the new acquisitions all perform as hoped this team will win the central and will likely be supplemented at the deadline as needed. In that case 2019-20 would be the off-season to make a big free agent splash.

If they all repeat 2018 Falvine has a built-in eject button with short term contracts and trade assets. Given the circumstances this is the ideal plan. They need to give this core another chance, but if it doesn’t work out a full on fire sale and tankathon will be called for. Why give aging free agent relievers multi-year contracts if you’re not a clear contender right now?
  • Dman and DocBauer like this

#44 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 31,659 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 03:38 PM

What is so hard to understand? The core sucked ass in 2018 and if they don’t rebound this team is trash and will need to rebuild yet again.

2019 is about determining if this core can rebound and lead the team to contention. Falvine has supplemented the core with bounce back candidates and an established veteran bat on short term contracts. If the core and the new acquisitions all perform as hoped this team will win the central and will likely be supplemented at the deadline as needed. In that case 2019-20 would be the off-season to make a big free agent splash.

If they all repeat 2018 Falvine has a built-in eject button with short term contracts and trade assets. Given the circumstances this is the ideal plan. They need to give this core another chance, but if it doesn’t work out a full on fire sale and tankathon will be called for. Why give aging free agent relievers multi-year contracts if you’re not a clear contender right now?


That might be true. But, in 2017 the core was good. The Twins did very little in terms of adding to the team long term. They did add some short term deals, but no big names at all. So, I hope you are right, but fear you are not.
  • SQUIRREL likes this

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#45 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 03:57 PM

 

What is so hard to understand? The core sucked ass in 2018 and if they don’t rebound this team is trash and will need to rebuild yet again.

You say "rebuild yet again" but when was the last time we did an actual rebuild? The last decade plus has just been various flavors of, "we're going to be competitive in 2-3 years once our prospects get here" and then 2-3 years later, those prospects don't pan out and we hear the same thing. They never actually rebuild.


#46 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Member
  • 1,822 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 04:48 PM

Funny how the masses don't want to rely solely on drafting and player development to jump-start the franchise...

 

...after the better part of two decades of horrible drafting and player development.

  • S. and Vanimal46 like this

#47 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Getting Ready to Show Up to ST in the Best Shape of My Life!

  • Member
  • 13,444 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 18 January 2019 - 04:56 PM

Funny how the masses don't want to rely solely on drafting and player development to jump-start the franchise...

...after the better part of two decades of horrible drafting and player development.


There needs to be a balance for sure. TD member gunnarthor took the time to calculate how players were acquired on recent playoff teams, and the Twins. The playoff teams had a pretty even split 33% draft, 33% free agents, 33% IFA/Trades. The Twins rely on draft picks for over 50% of their MLB roster. It's simply not healthy to rely that much on draft and development.
  • Dman and DocBauer like this

#48 S.

S.

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 05:13 PM

 

Funny how the masses don't want to rely solely on drafting and player development to jump-start the franchise...

 

...after the better part of two decades of horrible drafting and player development.

Trust us though, this batch of prospects that are going to be coming up in 2022 are the real deal this time and not like all the other failed prospects of the last 20 years, so start planning the parade!


#49 ashbury

ashbury

    Visalia Oaks

  • Moderator
  • 25,301 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 18 January 2019 - 05:32 PM

Link? I have not seen anything that suggests they wouldn't do this.

You ask a fair question, and a quick bit of web-searching didn't turn up the particular interview I was thinking of. Such articles are sometimes hard to find if you don't remember the exact phrase that would identify it. I was hoping someone else might have spoken up with a link they found, but so far, no luck. Russia, if you are listening, I hope you're able to find the links I am thinking of. Until such a link is found, please amend my previous statement with "I believe" - since I still do. :)

The most important thing in communication is to hear what isn't being said.


#50 twinkiesfan11

twinkiesfan11

    Member

  • Member
  • 160 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 05:48 PM

That might be true. But, in 2017 the core was good. The Twins did very little in terms of adding to the team long term. They did add some short term deals, but no big names at all. So, I hope you are right, but fear you are not.


Sano and Buxton are the keys and both have suffered from injuries and regression since 2017. It would be unwise to assume a return to All-Star level performance for either. 2018 was too much of a disaster.

I for one am going to cross my fingers that they do, but it doesn’t make any sense to invest heavily in multi year contracts until the core prove themselves.

Edited by twinkiesfan11, 18 January 2019 - 06:11 PM.


#51 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Owner
  • 6,239 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:21 PM

 

Sano and Buxton are the keys and both have suffered from injuries and regression since 2017. It would be unwise to assume a return to All-Star level performance for either. 2018 was too much of a disaster.

I for one am going to cross my fingers that they do, but it doesn’t make any sense to invest heavily in multi year contracts until the core prove themselves.

 

But of course, they didn't really need to invest heavily in multi-year contracts. They could have added any number of solid relievers or starting pitchers with a one or two-year commitment. 

 

It may be that they tried and failed, similar to a roto owner realizing he has way too much of his budget leftover and very few desirable players left. I don't know if screwing up is better than being cheap, but a sub-$100M payroll is just embarrassing for a team whose core players are not into their arbitration years. 

 

  • SQUIRREL, diehardtwinsfan, Vanimal46 and 2 others like this

#52 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Member
  • 31,659 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:29 PM

Sano and Buxton are the keys and both have suffered from injuries and regression since 2017. It would be unwise to assume a return to All-Star level performance for either. 2018 was too much of a disaster.

I for one am going to cross my fingers that they do, but it doesn’t make any sense to invest heavily in multi year contracts until the core prove themselves.


My point was, they already proved themselves in 2017. Or do we think they need to be good two years in a row? In which case, they wouldn't try next off season either

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. 


#53 twinkiesfan11

twinkiesfan11

    Member

  • Member
  • 160 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:45 PM

But of course, they didn't really need to invest heavily in multi-year contracts. They could have added any number of solid relievers or starting pitchers with a one or two-year commitment.

It may be that they tried and failed, similar to a roto owner realizing he has way too much of his budget leftover and very few desirable players left. I don't know if screwing up is better than being cheap, but a sub-$100M payroll is just embarrassing for a team whose core players are not into their arbitration years.

They have 4 veteran pitchers, each potentially with some upside left and a slew of young starters worthy of a shot. Corbin wasn’t coming here and no other starters were worth the investment and/or blocking a younger, cheaper option in an evaluation year. Expensive Free Agent Relievers are a bad investment, unless you are a bonafide contender. I for one would rather see them sit back and wait for a Brad Brach type to fall to them on a good deal.

I don’t get the obsession with an arbitrary payroll figure. Would you like to see them spend money just to spend it? Again, they need to see what they have. Why waste roster spots on mediocre veterans when you have young players that need to be evaluated?

I don’t mean to be argumentative but there seems to be this strange outrage this week out of Twins fans and bloggers over payroll and the timing seems to relate to Ottavino and Allen signing elsewhere. Neither of those two is going to move the needle this year.

Edited by twinkiesfan11, 18 January 2019 - 07:01 PM.

  • Dman likes this

#54 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Moderator
  • 12,243 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:48 PM

 

Link? I have not seen anything that suggests they wouldn't do this. 

also, radio :) 

He measured the achievements of others by what they had accomplished, asking of them that they measure him by what he envisaged or planned.
- J. L. Borges

#55 twinkiesfan11

twinkiesfan11

    Member

  • Member
  • 160 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:50 PM

My point was, they already proved themselves in 2017. Or do we think they need to be good two years in a row? In which case, they wouldn't try next off season either


How about one full, healthy, productive season out of either one of them. Neither has accomplished that yet.

#56 Major League Ready

Major League Ready

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 2,182 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 06:57 PM

 

There needs to be a balance for sure. TD member gunnarthor took the time to calculate how players were acquired on recent playoff teams, and the Twins. The playoff teams had a pretty even split 33% draft, 33% free agents, 33% IFA/Trades. The Twins rely on draft picks for over 50% of their MLB roster. It's simply not healthy to rely that much on draft and development.

 

Is it relevant how the most productive players were acquired vs the lower performers on the roster. What counts is the difference makers right? It would be far more meaningful if the acquisition method for the top 10 most valuable players was measured or all of the players with a given level of WAR.

 

It also makes no sense to lump all trades together. Were they acquired as minor league players or before they were established ML players or were they established ML players. One strategy is the antithesis or the other. 

 

I posted an analysis of the players from the mid market teams who made the playoffs last year. The vast majority of their WAR was from players who were drafted or acquired before becoming established MLB players. 


#57 Rigby

Rigby

    Cedar Rapids Kernels

  • Member
  • 171 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 18 January 2019 - 07:19 PM

 

Funny how the masses don't want to rely solely on drafting and player development to jump-start the franchise...

 

...after the better part of two decades of horrible drafting and player development.

 That's why the FO's first call last week should have been to Brian Bridges and Roy Clark.


#58 Regular Sized Rudy

Regular Sized Rudy

    Elizabethton Twins

  • Member
  • 16 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 07:41 PM

 

They have 4 veteran pitchers, each potentially with some upside left and a slew of young starters worthy of a shot. Corbin wasn’t coming here and no other starters were worth the investment and/or blocking a younger, cheaper option in an evaluation year. Expensive Free Agent Relievers are a bad investment, unless you are a bonafide contender. I for one would rather see them sit back and wait for a Brad Brach type to fall to them on a good deal.

I don’t get the obsession with an arbitrary payroll figure. Would you like to see them spend money just to spend it? Again, they need to see what they have. Why waste roster spots on mediocre veterans when you have young players that need to be evaluated?

I don’t mean to be argumentative but there seems to be this strange outrage this week out of Twins fans and bloggers over payroll and the timing seems to relate to Ottavino and Allen signing elsewhere. Neither of those two is going to move the needle this year.

But.... the thing is, adding an Ottavino-type reliever or two would have moved the needle. Every single one of the middle- to upper-tier relievers that were available this offseason have track records and/or recent performances better than most of the Twins' current relievers. And none of those relievers ended up signing contracts that would prove to be a bad investment for the Twins with the incredibly flexible payroll situation they find themselves in. Obviously, though, there is still some offseason left for them to make some moves.

  • SQUIRREL, TheLeviathan and Dman like this

#59 ahart10

ahart10

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • 277 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 07:57 PM

Wondering how many teams outside the top 1/3 of payroll have won the WS in recent years. Off the top of my head; Royals, White Sox?, Marlins, Angels? Not many. Payroll isn’t the end all be all money can’t buy happiness, but it sure is a good down payment.

#60 scottz

scottz

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 751 posts

Posted 18 January 2019 - 11:36 PM


....
 
Setting a target budget based on percentage of revenue is good business. It's the refusal to use the money saved by coming under budget I find infuriating. It's an arbitrary rule that handicaps the team's ability to compete. 
 
Normal people don't budget that way.
 
...


Not to be argumentative, but most “normal people” in the U.S. carry large amounts of burdensome debt. I’d guess that the Pohlads and others who do not spend beyond their budgets only carry debts that are advantageous to their overall financial picture.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: minnesota twins, payroll, derek falvey