Projecting Twins payroll: MLBtraderumors

[Mike Sixel]

 

Agreed, if they aren't willing to push in now with 3 potential 90 loss teams in their own division then there won't ever be a time. 

 

I think the Sox could be better than teh Twins next year, if the Sox are aggressive and the Twins are not and Buxton/Sano bomb again. Even if one of them is good, and the Twins aren't aggressive. That Sox farm system is flush, and they seem more likely to be aggressive than this FO......

[KirbyDome89]

 

I think the Sox could be better than teh Twins next year, if the Sox are aggressive and the Twins are not and Buxton/Sano bomb again. Even if one of them is good, and the Twins aren't aggressive. That Sox farm system is flush, and they seem more likely to be aggressive than this FO......

There's a path where I can see that happening. I wouldn't say it's very likely but it's a great point over the next few years. As cheap as Cleveland is they still have 2 studs to build around in Lindor and Ramirez. Chicago and Detroit aren't going to be down forever either. The Twins can't exactly "wait it out," because the division is only going to get tougher. 

[Mr. Brooks]

Simple math. $129 million (opening day 2018), minus 50% of Bamtech money ($25 million), equals $104 million.

[Vanimal46]

Simple math. $129 million (opening day 2018), minus 50% of Bamtech money ($25 million), equals $104 million.

Plus $10 million from their recent deal with streaming platform DAZN. Plus they're still getting money from BAMTECH, national TV contracts, revenue sharing, etc.

 

The point is, we as fans have no idea what a baseball team's revenue is. It was a big deal when the Braves' ownership gave a slight indication what their books look like.

[Doomtints]

 

Simple math. $129 million (opening day 2018), minus 50% of Bamtech money ($25 million), equals $104 million.

 

That's insane so it's probably true.

[Riverbrian]

If Buxton and Sano have years that we all hope they have. The front office will regret not having complimentary players surrounding them because it will be a missed timing of opportunity.

 

If they wait for Buxton and Sano before investing in complimentary pieces. The core will be one year older and more expensive leaving less money to compliment Buxton and Sano with no guarantee that Buxton and Sano will be healthy or repeat.

 

Bottom Line: Staff the roster to compete right now in case Sano and Buxton decide to join the party this year.

[yarnivek1972]

So here’s a question that is somewhat relevant to arbitration decisions. What do people consider a “bust” for Sano and Buxton?

 

IMO, that would be Buxton almost never getting more than 300 at bats a season and posting a career OPS+ something like 75-80.

 

For Sano that would be frequent DL stints, sporadic playing time with teasing results. Maybe a career OPS + of 100 to 105.

[Mr. Brooks]

Plus $10 million from their recent deal with streaming platform DAZN. Plus they're still getting money from BAMTECH, national TV contracts, revenue sharing, etc.

 

The point is, we as fans have no idea what a baseball team's revenue is. It was a big deal when the Braves' ownership gave a slight indication what their books look like.

I stand by my math. Time will tell.

[Major League Ready]

 

Plus $10 million from their recent deal with streaming platform DAZN. Plus they're still getting money from BAMTECH, national TV contracts, revenue sharing, etc.

The point is, we as fans have no idea what a baseball team's revenue is. It was a big deal when the Braves' ownership gave a slight indication what their books look like.

 

Forbes and Statistica publish revenue estimates every year. Do you really think organizations with this level of credibility would publish something without having reasonable validation? I am not saving they have audited financial statements but I don't think it's reasonable to assume they have "no idea".

 

99% of fans simply never make an attempt to dig up the financial info the way they would player stats. Most fans also dismiss all of the normal core concepts of running a business. For example, most posters here ignore financial risk. That's simply not a realistic expectation of any business. Most here look at this season and find a reason for the Twins to go all-in financially and some even suggest leveraging our future by trading top prospects.Fans look at this year and see.

 

Let's say an executive was presenting a scenario similar to Twins to their creditors or board to get funding. If not presented, they would ask about the solidity (odds) of the "future state" scenario being presented. In other words, what has to happen and what are the odds of it happening. A parallel situation would be sales leadership for our fictitious company getting up and saying we have two clients (Buxton / Sano) that have done a little work with us and we are counting on them coming on big for us. Then, another executive says we have a division (the BP) that we are going to basically totally rebuild but we have one reliable guy (Rogers). Next executive gets up and says we also have a couple holes in our manufacturing department (1B / 2B and another SP) but we have an agency working on it or we will recruit them from another company. 

 

The bank/board would ask what are the odds of the 1st scenario (Buxton / Sano) .... Not very good

How about the odds of rebuilding that division to the level of a contender ..... Not very good

How about the new hires? What are the odds they all produce as need .... Not very good

What if any of our key employees become ill (injured)? Would this impact the plan ... Yes it would

Do all of these things have to come together to make a profit (contend) with this plan ... Yes

 

The bank says no and the board fires some executives. Through the eyes of a baseball fan, it's always time to go all-in. It's interesting that fans accept it's a business for the players and they will act accordingly. If we were willing to accept this is a business for the owners, we would not expect unbridled spending and no aversion to financial risk.

 

[Riverbrian]

 

Forbes and Statistica publish revenue estimates every year. Do you really think organizations with this level of credibility would publish something without having reasonable validation? I am not saving they have audited financial statements but I don't think it's reasonable to assume they have "no idea".

 

99% of fans simply never make an attempt to dig up the financial info the way they would player stats. Most fans also dismiss all of the normal core concepts of running a business. For example, most posters here ignore financial risk. That's simply not a realistic expectation of any business. Most here look at this season and find a reason for the Twins to go all-in financially and some even suggest leveraging our future by trading top prospects.Fans look at this year and see.

 

Let's say an executive was presenting a scenario similar to Twins to their creditors or board to get funding. If not presented, they would ask about the solidity (odds) of the "future state" scenario being presented. In other words, what has to happen and what are the odds of it happening. A parallel situation would be sales leadership for our fictitious company getting up and saying we have two clients (Buxton / Sano) that have done a little work with us and we are counting on them coming on big for us. Then, another executive says we have a division (the BP) that we are going to basically totally rebuild but we have one reliable guy (Rogers). Next executive gets up and says we also have a couple holes in our manufacturing department (1B / 2B and another SP) but we have an agency working on it or we will recruit them from another company. 

 

The bank/board would ask what are the odds of the 1st scenario (Buxton / Sano) .... Not very good

How about the odds of rebuilding that division to the level of a contender ..... Not very good

How about the new hires? What are the odds they all produce as need .... Not very good

What if any of our key employees become ill (injured)? Would this impact the plan ... Yes it would

Do all of these things have to come together to make a profit (contend) with this plan ... Yes

 

The bank says no and the board fires some executives. Through the eyes of a baseball fan, it's always time to go all-in. It's interesting that fans accept it's a business for the players and they will act accordingly. If we were willing to accept this is a business for the owners, we would not expect unbridled spending and no aversion to financial risk.

 

You gotta find a different bank and your board is big ole' speed bump. 

 

Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Berrios, Rosario is still capable of becoming "the core" and quickly. 

 

Your bank... your board. They will be the problem in your scenerio and they can fire all the executives they want before looking in the mirror. 

 

Agreed though... we shouldn't be going all in. 

 

But we need to go in... just in case the core starts looking like a core. 

 

 

[Major League Ready]

 

You gotta find a different bank and your board is big ole' speed bump. 

 

Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Berrios, Rosario is still capable of becoming "the core" and quickly. 

 

Your bank... your board. They will be the problem in your scenerio and they can fire all the executives they want before looking in the mirror. 

 

Agreed though... we shouldn't be going all in. 

 

But we need to go in... just in case the core starts looking like a core. 

 

I agree. Just trying to provide some perspective that might help with the angst here. It just does not make sense to be mad because a business acts like a business but more importantly from a fan perspective these principals do suggest the best way to build a winner is a measured approach as you suggest.

[cmoss84]

 

You gotta find a different bank and your board is big ole' speed bump. 

 

Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Berrios, Rosario is still capable of becoming "the core" and quickly. 

 

Your bank... your board. They will be the problem in your scenerio and they can fire all the executives they want before looking in the mirror. 

 

Agreed though... we shouldn't be going all in. 

 

But we need to go in... just in case the core starts looking like a core. 

If you don't go ALL IN now, when do you? Or do you never go all in?

This seems like the perfect storm. Just sayin. 

[Riverbrian]

 

If you don't go ALL IN now, when do you? Or do you never go all in?

This seems like the perfect storm. Just sayin. 

 

I usually avoid talking about prospects until I see them and form my own opinions on them. However... If Royce Lewis going to be the next Lindor... You got to have these guys in the bank for down the road. 

 

Going all in is trading Lewis for one year of Bumgarner. GM's need to keep the future in mind. 

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't trade prospects but the special ones need to be kept. 

 

Money? I don't care how much they spend... but they got to watch contract length because it will hamstring them in the future. Going all in is saying... I want Machado and I'll pay him 400 million for the next 10 years to make it happen when you have multiple holes to fill. 

 

I'm want them simply "In". I want them to fill every hole they got but I want my GM to be extremely reasoned in approach. 

[cmoss84]

 

I usually avoid talking about prospects until I see them and form my own opinions on them. However... If Royce Lewis going to be the next Lindor... You got to have these guys in the bank for down the road. 

 

Going all in is trading Lewis for one year of Bumgarner. GM's need to keep the future in mind. 

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't trade prospects but the special ones need to be kept. 

 

Money? I don't care how much they spend... but they got to watch contract length because it will hamstring them in the future. Going all in is saying... I want Machado and I'll pay him 400 million for the next 10 years to make it happen when you have multiple holes to fill. 

 

I'm want them simply "In". I want them to fill every hole they got but I want my GM to be extremely reasoned in approach. 

Fair enough and good take-thanks for the response.

 

To me, going all in doesn't have to include making hamstringing decisions. It simply means when opportunities rise, take advantage of them to your fullest ability. This might mean taking on an ugly 3 year contract or trading away a top 3 prospect to get three years of an ace. It might mean going over budget for a few years.

I think you can go all in without killing your future...but like you said, the GM has to be reasoned in approach.

 

(and for the record, I would not trade Royce for Bumgarner either. But for Noah, yes)

[lukeduke1980]

 

I think the Sox could be better than teh Twins next year, if the Sox are aggressive and the Twins are not and Buxton/Sano bomb again. Even if one of them is good, and the Twins aren't aggressive. That Sox farm system is flush, and they seem more likely to be aggressive than this FO......

I agree that 2019's Buxton and Sano results will dictate the 2020 payroll; as for 2019 I don't see it going too high because they're waiting to see where in the world Buxton and Sano can perform

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Forbes and Statistica publish revenue estimates every year. Do you really think organizations with this level of credibility would publish something without having reasonable validation? I am not saving they have audited financial statements but I don't think it's reasonable to assume they have "no idea".

 

99% of fans simply never make an attempt to dig up the financial info the way they would player stats. Most fans also dismiss all of the normal core concepts of running a business. For example, most posters here ignore financial risk. That's simply not a realistic expectation of any business. Most here look at this season and find a reason for the Twins to go all-in financially and some even suggest leveraging our future by trading top prospects.Fans look at this year and see.

 

Let's say an executive was presenting a scenario similar to Twins to their creditors or board to get funding. If not presented, they would ask about the solidity (odds) of the "future state" scenario being presented. In other words, what has to happen and what are the odds of it happening. A parallel situation would be sales leadership for our fictitious company getting up and saying we have two clients (Buxton / Sano) that have done a little work with us and we are counting on them coming on big for us. Then, another executive says we have a division (the BP) that we are going to basically totally rebuild but we have one reliable guy (Rogers). Next executive gets up and says we also have a couple holes in our manufacturing department (1B / 2B and another SP) but we have an agency working on it or we will recruit them from another company.

 

The bank/board would ask what are the odds of the 1st scenario (Buxton / Sano) .... Not very good

How about the odds of rebuilding that division to the level of a contender ..... Not very good

How about the new hires? What are the odds they all produce as need .... Not very good

What if any of our key employees become ill (injured)? Would this impact the plan ... Yes it would

Do all of these things have to come together to make a profit (contend) with this plan ... Yes

 

The bank says no and the board fires some executives. Through the eyes of a baseball fan, it's always time to go all-in. It's interesting that fans accept it's a business for the players and they will act accordingly. If we were willing to accept this is a business for the owners, we would not expect unbridled spending and no aversion to financial risk.

the teams are private, there’s no way to verify those estimates. I’m sure they are reasonable but understated revenue and overstated costs. Probably directionally accurate within the league in rank order.

 

I don’t expect the Twins to go bat-poop crazy with the checkbook, but they can afford a 140-150 mil payroll and still be net-profitable.

[Major League Ready]

 

the teams are private, there’s no way to verify those estimates. I’m sure they are reasonable but understated revenue and overstated costs. Probably directionally accurate within the league in rank order.

I don’t expect the Twins to go bat-poop crazy with the checkbook, but they can afford a 140-150 mil payroll and still be net-profitable.

 

No doubt ... it's an estimate. The context of my post was that someone suggested we have "no idea" and I don't thinks Forbes and Statistica publish without reasonably valid data. They estimated Twins 2017 net profit at $23M with a $109M payroll on $261M in revenue which would suggest other operating expenses were $129M. If this is accurate (big if) they would need to generate $300M in revenue to support a $150M payroll with a $21M profit.

 

Your $140-150 seems about right but they are going to need to be established contenders before they have any shot at generating $300M

[Dr. Evil]

I have zero faith in Sano and Buxton blossoming or even staying healthy. Let alone accomplishing both. I would be planning for the season as if they are not core players. It seems a bit irresponsible to plan around them at this juncture.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

No doubt ... it's an estimate. The context of my post was that someone suggested we have "no idea" and I don't thinks Forbes and Statistica publish without reasonably valid data. They estimated Twins 2017 net profit at $23M with a $109M payroll on $261M in revenue which would suggest other operating expenses were $129M. If this is accurate (big if) they would need to generate $300M in revenue to support a $150M payroll with a $21M profit.

 

Your $140-150 seems about right but they are going to need to be established contenders before they have any shot at generating $300M

in 18 the league signed a new streaming contract sharing additional revenue annually. There was the one time sum of 50 mil last year plus ongoing payments. It’s my assumption with new ad revenues they already are close to if not over 300. Ticket and merch sales in season are icing on top of the already profitable cake.

[Vanimal46]

No doubt ... it's an estimate. The context of my post was that someone suggested we have "no idea" and I don't thinks Forbes and Statistica publish without reasonably valid data. They estimated Twins 2017 net profit at $23M with a $109M payroll on $261M in revenue which would suggest other operating expenses were $129M. If this is accurate (big if) they would need to generate $300M in revenue to support a $150M payroll with a $21M profit.

 

Your $140-150 seems about right but they are going to need to be established contenders before they have any shot at generating $300M

We have no idea what is 'reasonably valid data'. And that was my point. Is that data off by $1 million or $50 million or $100 million. Taking those estimates as gospel is silly. Even their billionaire lists are silly. You think those people disclose exactly how much they make? It's all just for entertainment.

[yarnivek1972]

in 18 the league signed a new streaming contract sharing additional revenue annually. There was the one time sum of 50 mil last year plus ongoing payments. It’s my assumption with new ad revenues they already are close to if not over 300. Ticket and merch sales in season are icing on top of the already profitable cake.

I think you are pulling numbers out of your assumption. Do you have ANY information to suggest revenue shot up $40 mil in the last year? Ticket sales are down. So that certainly isn’t helping.

[Major League Ready]

 

We have no idea what is 'reasonably valid data'. And that was my point. Is that data off by $1 million or $50 million or $100 million. Taking those estimates as gospel is silly. Even their billionaire lists are silly. You think those people disclose exactly how much they make? It's all just for entertainment.

 

You failed to quote where I started with "it is no doubt an estimate" and the part where  I used "big if" in parenthesis to not only highlight it was an estimate when laying out the calculation if we use their estimates. It would be silly to take these estimates as gospel. I am not sure what to call the suggestion I am taking these numbers as gospel when I emphasized (twice) that such an estimate was just just that, an estimate.  

 

BTW ... A billionaire list in some rag is hardly the same thing as something published by Forbes.  

[Major League Ready]

 

in 18 the league signed a new streaming contract sharing additional revenue annually. There was the one time sum of 50 mil last year plus ongoing payments. It’s my assumption with new ad revenues they already are close to if not over 300. Ticket and merch sales in season are icing on top of the already profitable cake.

 

Good call, I forgot about the additional revenue share. Any idea what the annul will be? 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I think you are pulling numbers out of your assumption. Do you have ANY information to suggest revenue shot up $40 mil in the last year? Ticket sales are down. So that certainly isn’t helping.

mlb sold bamtech to Disney every team got 30 two years ago plus 50 mil last year for the sale (total $2.6 bil) plus whatever their share of the streaming contract is that comes in the form of additional revenue sharing. The theory is, it’ll get packaged into the Disney streaming service.

 

https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2017/08/09/disney-to-give-mlb-another-1-58-billion-for-bamtech-the-players-will-see-none-of-it/

[old nurse]

 

 

 

BTW ... A billionaire list in some rag is hardly the same thing as something published by Forbes.  

https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/

 

[Mr. Brooks]

the teams are private, there’s no way to verify those estimates. I’m sure they are reasonable but understated revenue and overstated costs. Probably directionally accurate within the league in rank order.

 

I don’t expect the Twins to go bat-poop crazy with the checkbook, but they can afford a 140-150 mil payroll and still be net-profitable.

Maybe but nearly every business' goal is to maximize profit, not simply come out ahead.

They might make a profit at $140 million, but they probably make a bigger profit at $110 million.

 

It might have been back in the day that it was more of a hobby for some owners, but that was before there was the massive media money in sports that there is now. Owning a sports franchise is a business just like any other big business now, whether we like it or not.