Late in the off-season…time for high-end, discount shopping?

[tony&rodney]

59 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

We'll see if they pull another rabbit out of their hats.

Falvey seems to alternate on his rabbits from year to year. Gray, Mahle, Lopez, DeScalfani ..... next year could be good.

[terrydactyls]

The Twins' current payroll is roughly $36M lower than in 2023.  The new TV contract should bring them an additional $46M (85% of last year's $56M).  Because the payroll will have a significant increase in 2025, now would be an ideal time to offer Montgomery a huge one-year deal.  And the leftover $$$ could be used on Duval, Pham, or whomever to solve the RH outfielder problem.

[Major League Ready]

6 minutes ago, terrydactyls said:

The Twins' current payroll is roughly $36M lower than in 2023.  The new TV contract should bring them an additional $46M (85% of last year's $56M).  Because the payroll will have a significant increase in 2025, now would be an ideal time to offer Montgomery a huge one-year deal.  And the leftover $$$ could be used on Duval, Pham, or whomever to solve the RH outfielder problem.

A) There is no way in hell Montgomery is taking a one year deal.

B) We don't know the net reduction in the TV deal given there is a court order expressly forbidding the publication of contract details.  We know revenue went down my $30M (BAM) plus some portion of the TV contract.  Best guess is a net reduction of $45-50M.  

[Jocko87]

6 hours ago, AlwaysinModeration said:

What if the Twins offered either one of them the same sort of 3/105, opt-out-after-every-year deal that they gave Correa? 

I've been thinking the same thing, there has to be some sort of bargain they can take advantage of.  I just don't think they will spend 30m a year for anyone, the range feels more like 10-15m which might put them in the Soler mix.

I don't think the pitchers will be interested in anything like that.  They will be setting themselves up for the same mess next year with the TV deal kicked down the road.  Next year looks pretty loaded with free agent pitching.  Their payday is this year.

[stringer bell]

1 hour ago, terrydactyls said:

The Twins' current payroll is roughly $36M lower than in 2023.  The new TV contract should bring them an additional $46M (85% of last year's $56M).  Because the payroll will have a significant increase in 2025, now would be an ideal time to offer Montgomery a huge one-year deal.  And the leftover $$$ could be used on Duval, Pham, or whomever to solve the RH outfielder problem.

In listening to Gleeman and the Geek, the Twins' formula is something like 50% of revenue goes toward salary. If the $46M is the actual number, then they would have about $23M to spend. 

The actual revenue from Diamond/Bally hasn't been disclosed and I wonder if it might not have been less than the 85% that the teams under contract with Diamond/Bally received. The contract was over, there was no obligation for Bally at all. I'm sure we'll find out eventually.

[AlwaysinModeration]

On 2/12/2024 at 5:40 AM, AlwaysinModeration said:

Two weeks later, and the only thing that has changed (aside from it getting really late)  is that the Twins now have some extra cash in their accounts after the tv streaming deal was settled.  All of these top free agents are still available, with Bellinger and Montgomery in particular seem to be good roster fits for team—Bellinger could spell Buxton in CF and Kiriloff against lefties, and Montgomery would be the best LHP for their rotation.

Bellinger was projected to get $22mm per year, Montgomery $25mm per year.

What if the Twins offered either one of them the same sort of 3/105, opt-out-after-every-year deal that they gave Correa? 

Welp, Cubs just signed Bellinger for a one year, $30mm deal.  Actually it’s 3/80 (30/30/20) but it has the same Correa opt outs. Bad year for the Twins to cut their payroll by $30mm, or they very well could have signed Bellinger.

[AlwaysinModeration]

On 2/1/2024 at 3:04 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

There are serious questions about Bellinger. I wouldn't want my team to sign him for more than four years and it's almost certainly going to take more than that.

Not even close to needing more than four years!

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, AlwaysinModeration said:

Not even close to needing more than four years!

He opted for a Correa-style deal, which is something of a surprise. Kudos to the Cubs for holding firm on their ceiling.

Bellinger landed exactly where everyone thought he would land. The Twins never had a shot at him.

[AlwaysinModeration]

52 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The Twins never had a shot at him.

That may be true, but it’s also possible that was a self-imposed limitation.  While he may have wanted to return to the Cubs, I highly doubt he had limited his free agency option to one team.

[USAFChief]

3 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Bellinger... The Twins never took a shot at him.

FTFY

[Brock Beauchamp]

21 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

FTFY

Eh, also true but mostly irrelevant. The Cubs have more money and more need, they were ultimately going to land Bellinger. No one was strongly linked to him other than the North Siders for about four months.

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 hours ago, AlwaysinModeration said:

That may be true, but it’s also possible that was a self-imposed limitation.  While he may have wanted to return to the Cubs, I highly doubt he had limited his free agency option to one team.

Oh, the Twins could have bid on Bellinger but in the end, the Cubs would have just bid more. And if you get to the point where you've outbid the Cubs on Bellinger, you've probably really screwed up.