Souhan: Postseason rewards brains over bucks

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

One could make a pretty good case that's exactly what the Twins do...

I think the problem here is that it's not at the magnitude you'd like.

 

The Twins' own statements DO say that. If it's objectivity you're after, I'd ask for that in both directions... which would be great since I'm usually the one stuck making that case. It also wouldn't include an overly simplistic revenue to payroll model.

 

Though I am guessing guys like Pelfrey, Kubel and Bartlett do not meet anyone's definition of 'magnitude'…

[jay]

I'm not sure what this even means. The Twins themselves have said, over and over and over, what they will spend. There's nothing terribly complicated to over simplify.

 

From the recent STrib article:

 

"Team President Dave St. Peter said last week that the Twins will stick to their longtime policy of devoting roughly half of the team’s gross revenues to player payroll"

Chief, I know the quotes.

 

You consistently advocate that the Twins need to sign more free agents to add talent to the MLB roster, time now. That costs money, which inevitably leads to bigger payrolls than they've had.

 

If you subscribe to those quotes, is it that a) you think they are consistently lying and don't actually spend that much, or is it that you simply think they should be spending more than that? I suppose we could add c) both.

[jay]

Lol... that smiley is supposed to be a b )

 

Damn you, smiley autocorrect.

[USAFChief]

Chief, I know the quotes.

You consistently advocate that the Twins need to sign more free agents to add talent to the MLB roster, time now. That costs money, which inevitably leads to bigger payrolls than they've had.

If you subscribe to those quotes, is it that a) you think they are consistently lying and don't actually spend that much, or is it that you simply think they should be spending more than that? I suppose we could add c) both.

I think I've been fairly consistent in my position the Twins are not living up to their own self imposed salary cap.

 

I have stated, and believe, they are using TF revenues to pay for their portion of the cost of building TF, rather than putting in their own money. Thus, payroll is a much more limiting factor than it should be.

 

As a fan, I'm not ok with that.

[jay]

"not living up" and "self-imposed" sound like option c.

 

If you don't believe what they are saying, then why use their quotes to support your beliefs here?

[ashbury]

I'm no FO apologist, but I think there could be misunderstanding rather than failing to live up, and I wish DSP or others could define their terms.  

• Does "gross revenue" mean what normal people think it means, e.g. the numbers we see in the Forbes reports on MLB, or are they using some standard accepted accounting practice, e.g. major things like repayment of the TF loans comes off the top and "gross" is smaller?
• Does "player payroll" include only the major league totals we see in the neighborhood of $85M lately, or does it include other things such as minor leaguers, meal money, and other expenses?
• We've heard "roughly half" defined more like 52%, but do they consider 40% to be "roughly"?

Someone interviewing a FO member sometime might ask for a quick Accounting 101 course, to clarify these principles that I believe they take for granted are clear already.