BP article on the Twins

[markos]

 

Not sure I'm understanding this Baseball America report for 2014. Maybe I'm wrong, but the 2014 allotment is for international players signed between July 2, 2014 and July 1, 2015. I'm aware that a vast majority of bonuses are handed out to prospects immediately following the initial July 2 signing date, but not all. 

 

And even if the number is accurate, help me with the math please. So, IF in fact the Twins spent the entire allocation, meaning an extra $450k, would they then have ranked as the 5th most prolific spender? Or are we crediting the cheaters for having screwed the compliant teams by breaking the agreed-upon rules and over-spending their allocations? I won't accept an argument that we should have joined the cheaters.

 

If some critics want to use this "5th in budget, 10th in spending" fact without any caveat, I'm sure they will. But I'll view that as a form of dishonesty personally.

 

Right now, unless someone clarifies it, I'm questioning the spending number for starters and will remain very skeptical about this 5th in budget 10th in spending thing.

 

Also, can someone confirm that Australian prospect signings are included in these numbers? If not, the $1M spent on Barrie and Thorpe would not be counted.

You are correct that this isn't a perfect apples-to-apples comparison, as the 2014 number reported by BA is covers the end of the 2013 bonus pool as well as beginning of the 2014 bonus pool. However, the vast majority of spending occurs in the first few months after July 2nd, so the comparison should not be that far off. But it is possible that a late signing could swing things one way or the other.

 

Also, I am "crediting the cheaters", though personally I would not label those teams at cheaters. They are not breaking any rules; they are following the rules. I just consider that paying the taxes and suffering the signing restrictions for going over their bonus pool are just part of the rules. MLB could have made the rule state that as soon as a team goes over they no longer have the rights to any more players, but they didn't. They just added some taxes and penalties to try to discourage teams from going over. 

 

For another data point, only 5 teams have a larger amount of unused bonus pool money than the Twins do right now. The only teams with more are Oakland, Baltimore, Miami, San Diego and the Cubs (who were on probation from going over their pool in the previous year). 

[clone52]

 

there are lots of moments of joy, but for some reason I'm not enjoying the journey like I did when they rebuilt the last two times. I think it is that then, they called up guys and let them struggle (and sometimes sent them back down).....this time doesn't feel that fun. That might be that I'm 51 (almost, next week), and watch less sports and enjoy them less in general. 

 

Did you really enjoy the first 4 years of the last Twins rebuild, 1993 through 1997?  Those rosters were filled with aging veterens and you guys who never ended up amounting to much.  The only guys on those rosters who were actually part of the turnaround were Brad Radke, Matt Lawton and Eddie Guardado.

 

If you really want it to mimic the 90's rebuild, we've got 4 more years to make it feel as fun as the last time.

[Rosterman]

They drafted well. Aaron Hicks! Alex Wimmers! Levi Michael and Travis Harrison! Oh, wait, they did that strange Ben Revere signing. And Matt Garza, too. Brought some fine players back in trade for them. Wait, that was the other guy, not Terry!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Also, can someone confirm that Australian prospect signings are included in these numbers? If not, the $1M spent on Barrie and Thorpe would not be counted.

Just noticed this -- yes, those are included in these numbers.  It's all international amateur spending.  The only international spending not included would be that for international "professionals" -- i.e. Cubans (over a certain age now, I think), Japanese guys, etc.