Don't expect increase in payroll

[gunnarthor]

From mlbtraderumors, "According to club president Dave St. Peter, he does not “see [payroll] going down significantly” and expects it will be “comparable to 2014.” The club opened this year with about $85MM in guarantees, and already owes nearly $60MM for 2015 before accounting for arb raises to several players, including Trevor Plouffe."

 

So, assuming a few guys are picked up and go to arbitration (Plouffe, Milone and Swarzak look to be the big ones) and bring the payroll to about 70ish, the Twins might have room to make one Nolasco sized signing.  They won't (if this report is right) be in the Lester, Scherzer, Shields etc side of the pool.

[ashbury]

 They won't (if this report is right) be in the Lester, Scherzer, Shields etc side of the pool.

Probably not, but more because of the length of contracts to snare these guys, than the annual value.

[diehardtwinsfan]

So much for my plan to get Kemp...

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Yeah, why add payroll when you can just keep all the players you had this year - they won lots of games.

[drock2190]

Lester and Shields didnt look that valuable last night.

 

Just sayin...

[iTwins]

What concerns me is the phrasing used. "Going down significantly" to me that doesn't say "We're spending the same amount" but rather "We're spending less, but not a LOT less". If they planned to spend, one would think St. Peter would say he didn't think payroll would "go up significantly".

 

Over analyzing? Perhaps. Maybe it's just a poor choice of words on St. Peter's part, but his early quotes don't give me much confidence that they're going to attempt another big signing, rather that they'll play things close and conservative....again.

[TheLeviathan]

I think this is why some of us embrace aggressive moves like the Shields trade - I'm so sick of seeing this club shutter the windows when the going gets tough rather than pushing the envelope.

 

They have plenty of cash and no deals that are breaking their backs for a decade - god it'd be nice if they pounced on the opportunity to add serious talent to a team that might be close.

[Winston Smith]

Jim Pohlad said that when the new stadium was built the payroll would be about 52% of revenue. The last Forbes estimate was $240m. 

This year they were about 35%. You don't think Mr Pohlad mislead  us to get his new cash cow, would he do that?

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Maybe this is Dave St. Peter hinting that the Twins will not be picking up Jared Burton's $3.6MM option.

[pierre75275]

That doesnt leave room for a frontline starter or much outfield improvement or upgrades unless through trades. I tey to be positive but this is extrodinarily frustrating news and to me sounds lke the front office is already resigned to mediocre year next year. How sad. Of course they will sell hope on prospects.

[drjim]

I would read it as don't expect a huge signing, not that they won't sign anyone. After initial hope for a run at Shields, I was resigned to this myself.

 

If they signed a Hughes level starter and a stopgap LF/CF and take a few flyers on relievers, which would be a defensible offseason, payroll would go down.

[nicksaviking]

I've always been a "Increase payroll, now you cheapskates" screamer, but I don't want any of the elite pitchers on the market this year if it's going to take more than a five year deal, and surely Scherzer and Lester will demand more.  Shields plummeting K% makes me want to stay away, we've all seen that show before in Minnesota.

 

So I'd be OK if they got creative with a trade to add a youngish player with a healthy salary, but I guess I'm at the point where I just want to see the young guys play instead of mid or low level free agents, and young guys are cheap.  I'm OK with a low payroll next year, heck, if they could magically figure a way to move Nolasco and Pelfrey, I'd be OK with an even lower payroll.

 

Now, we can certainly complain about the fact that the team intentionally put themselves in the position where they are full of young cheap players who would block most free agents to keep payroll down, but now that we're here, I'm ready to see what will happen.

[Mike Sixel]

If you never sign good players, refuse to trade for guys making real money, and your system goes years w/o developing players.....it is a bit of self fulfilling prophecy on payroll, isn't it? I expect it to be down. With them continuing to spend too high a percent on the bullpen, and not enough on they 8 guys that play the field and hit every day......

[gunnarthor]

I'm not completely against another mid-80s payroll as I think May, Meyer and Gibson need innings at the ML level and outside of LF they seem to have young guys coming up or holding steady.  But I do think they have the room to try and add talent that will grow with the Buxton/Sano future and should do so.  Hughes was a great signing in that regard - still young and in his prime.  Of this years FA list, I think the Twins should really go after the 24 year old Cuban OF Tomas (IIRC).  And Rasmus is young enough to be a Hughes-like signing.

 

A 8/200 deal for Scherzer would probably end up being a bad long term signing.  

[USAFChief]

Jim Pohlad said that when the new stadium was built the payroll would be about 52% of revenue. The last Forbes estimate was $240m. 

This year they were about 35%. You don't think Mr Pohlad mislead  us to get his new cash cow, would he do that?

I've posted this before, and continue to believe it: the Twins did not, are not and will not put a penny of their own money into Target Field. They borrowed the money, and are paying that off from TF revenues...using the old "other people's money" real estate ploy.

 

That's where the extra money is going. They are taking their yearly profit, AND paying off their note. Probably on a loan they made from banks they own, so they are making money in interest on that as well.

 

They end up with a new stadium, at zero out of pocket cost.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

I've posted this before, and continue to believe it: the Twins did not, are not and will not put a penny of their own money into Target Field. They borrowed the money, and are paying that off from TF revenues...using the old "other people's money" real estate ploy.

 

That's where the extra money is going. They are taking their yearly profit, AND paying off their note. Probably on a loan they made from banks they own, so they are making money in interest on that as well.

 

They end up with a new stadium, at zero out of pocket cost.

 

I won't "like" that post, but that really does sum it up, yes?

[tobi0040]

I've posted this before, and continue to believe it: the Twins did not, are not and will not put a penny of their own money into Target Field. They borrowed the money, and are paying that off from TF revenues...using the old "other people's money" real estate ploy.

 

That's where the extra money is going. They are taking their yearly profit, AND paying off their note. Probably on a loan they made from banks they own, so they are making money in interest on that as well.

 

They end up with a new stadium, at zero out of pocket cost.

 

Like father, like sons.

 

The season ended a few days ago.  We don't really have a great idea of the free agent market given options and who will not be offered arbitratn.  No idea what guys are demanding. The winter meetings are off in the distance.  We don't know who will be available via trade.  We could soon have seven new coaches with established networks that may recommend guys, and St. Peter already knows the payroll for next year.   That is truly disturbing.

 

For all the threads, comments, etc. about who we should go after.  A Kemp trade, a Hamels trade, "we need one of the top pitchers"......it ain't happening.  It has already been decided upon.

 

Truly one of the worst ownership groups in sports.

[gunnarthor]

 

Truly one of the worst ownership groups in sports.

But, since they've taken over, only the Yankees and Red Sox have won more championships.  

 

 

 

Man, I was going to try and add a sarcasm emoticon but can't find them.

[bird]

Yeah, why add payroll when you can just keep all the players you had this year - they won lots of games.

Well, let's not tar and feather anyone just yet...especially on the basis of a comment like this.

[tobi0040]

Well, let's not tar and feather anyone just yet...especially on the basis of a comment like this.

 

 

What is the upside of making this comment? 

 

They come out and say Terry has no limit every year. Yet he basically let it slip that he does already have a limit and clearly discussions have already happened.  We have ruled out several things already before all the uncertainty of the market, who is available via trade, etc. 

 

A comment like "it is way too early for us to have any clarity about next years payroll, our focus is identifying the next coach and we will go from there" would suffice for October first.

 

This guy is totally inept.  I would not hire him to market a lemonade stand for my daughters.

[dougkoebernick]

It could be part of a strategy to not show their hand.

[USAFChief]

Well, let's not tar and feather anyone just yet...especially on the basis of a comment like this.

That's fair. For 2015.

 

We do, though, have history from which to judge. Also fair?

[Mike Sixel]

It could be part of a strategy to not show their hand.

 

right, because the Yankees or Red Sox will totally bid lower on FAs now.....

 

I agree, in general with birdwatcher on this, we can't rip someone for a future that hasn't happened yet. Though, I predict there will be plenty of opportunity in March to do so, it is a bit early right now.

[bird]

I think this is why some of us embrace aggressive moves like the Shields trade - I'm so sick of seeing this club shutter the windows when the going gets tough rather than pushing the envelope.

 

They have plenty of cash and no deals that are breaking their backs for a decade - god it'd be nice if they pounced on the opportunity to add serious talent to a team that might be close.

 I couldn't agree more with your last two sentences. The timing is finally right, the cash is in the bank account, there are at least SOME trade chips, and even incremental moves ( a two-way corner OF, a #2-3 starter a la Hughes, maybe a young MLB-ready catcher) could make the difference between winning and losing. And no mortgaging of the future is required.

 

I wouldn't even label these as "aggressive" moves. I won't fault him for passing on the bidding wars for Shields and Lester, but if Ryan doesn't at least deliver on his stated priority regarding "rotation depth" in an immediately impactful way, I'm coming over to the dark side.

[bird]

That's fair. For 2015.

 

We do, though, have history from which to judge. Also fair?

Absolutely, Chief.

[drjim]

I've posted this before, and continue to believe it: the Twins did not, are not and will not put a penny of their own money into Target Field. They borrowed the money, and are paying that off from TF revenues...using the old "other people's money" real estate ploy.

 

That's where the extra money is going. They are taking their yearly profit, AND paying off their note. Probably on a loan they made from banks they own, so they are making money in interest on that as well.

 

They end up with a new stadium, at zero out of pocket cost.

 

Isn't this how every single business pays off capital investment? They finance through a low interest loan, write off the yearly amortization, and pay off the loan through future profits with the hope of even bigger profits.

 

There is much to criticize, but slamming generally accepted business practices seems like a bizarre place to start.

 

From a state level it would have been nice if they paid a higher percentage of the total cost, but it wouldn't have changed a bit the underlying business practice you mentioned.

[Mike Sixel]

The difference, drjim, is that the Pohlads keep saying "see, we spent this much more on the stadium than we said we would"......when in fact, they kind of haven't (not to mention, they are still spending a lower percent than other teams).

[DocBauer]

First off, the Twins season is over, but only by days, the ML season still has a few weeks to go, stoves are not even warm yet, much less hot, and the Twins don't even have a new manager or coaching staff yet. Shame on the. What's it been, 72 hours already?

 

Secondly, the comments by St. Peter truly mean nothing at this point in the context of point #1. In fact, when compared to previous off season comments that spoke of payroll "not rising significantly" compared to this new comment regarding payroll not expecting to drop, it's almost an optimistic complete about face.

 

Third, despite the busy off season last year through FA, and the final payroll figures, the Twins STILL made some attempt at E Santana and a big push for Garza in order to improve the club and ADD additional payroll. They also brought on Morales in an attempt to help the club, FURTHER ADDING payroll. The fact is the payroll will be dropping, leaving room for signings. Using those finances, plus some more, would indeed raise payroll, though perhaps "not significantly" based on final total numbers, whatever those final total numbers turn out to be. I don't see a rebuilding, getting younger, milb rich team pumping $40M in to the FA pool.

 

Fourth, can we please stop taking innocuous statements by any member of the FO, manager or coaching staff, or members of the team, and immediately take them as something subversive? Speculation is one thing. But implicating under the bus comments or suggesting conspiracy with every tweet or quote is getting a bit out of hand.

[Mike Sixel]

Well, last year Bill Smith said that we shouldn't worry about the last 2 guys on the bench, and that was their actual strategy, not to worry about filling those spots, so his comments aren't innocuous. He is the president of the company, and one of the guys in charge of finances and hiring the new manager.....so his comments, assuming they are honest, do carry meaning.

 

Or, when he says the budget won't rise, we should think he's lying?

[drjim]

The difference, drjim, is that the Pohlads keep saying "see, we spent this much more on the stadium than we said we would"......when in fact, they kind of haven't (not to mention, they are still spending a lower percent than other teams).

 

But they have spent the money. If they didn't, it would be even more profit to a smaller annual payment to repay the loan.

 

But your parenthetical statement is absolutely 100% correct and is the actual scandal and worthwhile to criticize, both for the Pohlads and for the Hennepin County commissioners who passed it.