The Twins Should Be Embarrassed to Be Outspent by the Royals

[gil4]

11 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

Twins moved $10.5M with Polanco deal - & took on $18.25M between ($1M/$12M/$5.25M) Topa/DeSclafani/Santana …….received $8M from Seattle……….essentially a draw and we have 3 players v. Polanco. …….correct?

That sounds about right.  He said between DeSclafani and Santana we had enough to re-sign Gray instead.  I just considered those two players in a vacuum, but yeah, the net salary change between those two deals was a lot closer to zero than to the +$9.5M I allowed. 

So instead of being $15.5M away from signing Gray (plus two additional years at $25M per) we were short the full $75M.  I also didn't mention that even if we had offered 3@$25M per, there's no guarantee he would have accepted it.  His stated willingness to re-sign seemed far more diplomatic and business-like than heartfelt (which is fine.)  We also got the supplemental draft pick, which doesn't do anything for us this year, but is still an asset with some value. 

 

[nicksaviking]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

1. Neither Wacha nor Lugo are Nolasco or Correia level pitchers. Nor are they Desclafani level, for that matter.

2. However, The Twins not spending money at an appropriate level is the issue, not who KC spent on. There's $30-$40m, easy, that can and should have been added to the Twins payroll.  You don't have to limit yourself to Carlos Santana and having San Fran pay for Desclafani. Sign some actual help.

3. I'm not embarrassed, I'm disappointed and a little PO'd. 

 

I'm annoyed, but there were only three free agents I wanted. That was literally it. Otherwise I wanted them to go with the higher ceiling internal guys and trade for the Sonny Gray spot. 

I'm disappointed as well, but at the same time realize that my pickiness about only three of about 100 players available was also probably unreasonable. And to be clear, the players I wanted were not unreasonable, all were affordable. Just my tiny circle compared to the circle of overall free agents in the Venn diagram was too narrow to expect to get what I wanted.

They better do that second part, that being trading for the Sonny Gray replacement. If they don't do that, I'm already writing this season off as a loss. And I'll rag on them all year if they don't.

[Brandon]

1 hour ago, gil4 said:

Not even close - Santana is $5.5M, DeSclafani is $4M ($12M is offset by the $6M the Giants sent to the Mariners, who passed it along to the Twins, plus the additional $2M the Mariners kicked in.) Gray got $25M/yr for three years.  

Santana and descarwhatever are around 10 million with the tv contract we should have the other 15 million in budget.  Yes there are other cheaper aces maybe we could get. 

[tony&rodney]

3 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

Good for them with Witt, but the reason the Royals are spending so much money is because they have been terrible at developing good young players.

There wasn't a free agent they signed that I wanted on this team. Just because the Royals can't build a roster via the farm and have to sign a half dozen bottom barrel free agents doesn't mean I wan the Twins to follow suit just to spend money.

 

I totally agree with you, but Royals fan might very well say the same about the players added to the Twins roster.

[MGX]

3 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

Just like with DeSclafani, I have no interest in that type of free agent pitcher. And at least with DeSclafani, I don't think the Twins have closed the door on getting an arm I actually want. Had they given out those contracts, I'd be sure the door was closed.

Looks an awful lot like the Ricky Nolasco, Phil Hughes, Kevin Correia era for the Twins; surprising paydays for a team not used to giving them out. However, while these arms may make you look more respectable through the regular season, they aren't nearly good enough to make you a contender. Those are treading water moves.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll take anything that will improve our team & either one of those pitchers would immediately be a member of our rotation because they are better than at least one existing option.

[tony&rodney]

Both Cot's and Fangraphs have updated KC payrolls including the new Witt Jr. contract. The Royals are below the Twins in 26 person salary. The amount for Competitive Balance Tax/Estimated Luxury Tax Payroll is meaningless unless the team is over the limits and has to pay into the MLB fund. Disregard those numbers.

MN: around $118 M

KC: around $110 M

Minnesota wins here but the real games begin in Kansas City in late March.

[sthpstm]

Let’s not ignore the fact that the Twins have $100M in payroll next year plus an arbitration class that includes Lewis, Duran, Ober, and Ryan. I can’t see them adding a big long term contract right now. But maybe they’ll get an opportunity to offer another pillow contract

[tony&rodney]

3 hours ago, jorgenswest said:

I think there is a lot to appreciate about the Pohlad’s

There is, but it is a corporation and the shareholders must get their pile. It really is something out of our control and thus not worth worrying about. The biggest positive is that Joe Pohlad actually follows baseball. His grandpa did not. Falvey receives way more support than any prior front office member, which is good/encouraging.

Also, Calvin Griffith was a far different cat than anyone who has owned a sports franchise in the last 60 plus years, including Charlie Finley, Al Davis,  and some other salty characters. Calvin's father died of alcoholism and he grew up with  Clark Griffith, eventually inheriting the team in 1955. Baseball was Calvin's life. He poured every penny into the team. He was never really a very rich man and was more or less forced to sell the team. He had a handshake agreement that his brothers would continue to be employed by the Twins. What do you think that handshake was worth? Griffith was gullible. No owner knew more baseball. Yes, Calvin was crude in ways but read what Rod Carew and other Black and Hispanic players had to say about Griffith. He really was a simple guy and time passed him by.  I once ran into him and said hello just to be friendly. He started asking me questions and we visited for 45 minutes. Straight talk on anyone, anything, and a little raw with no limits whatsoever. Calvin really was the last of the dinosaurs. He shouldn't be compared to any other owners because the differences are so incredibly stark. Read the book or at least a bit of his story.

[chpettit19]

42 minutes ago, sthpstm said:

Let’s not ignore the fact that the Twins have $100M in payroll next year plus an arbitration class that includes Lewis, Duran, Ober, and Ryan. I can’t see them adding a big long term contract right now. But maybe they’ll get an opportunity to offer another pillow contract

I see just over 90 mil in payroll for next year (I highly doubt they keep Farmer at another 6 mil clip, and Alcala is holding on by a thread) before pre-arb and arb deals. 37 for Correa, 15 for Buck, 10 for Vazquez, 22 for Lopez, 7.5 for Paddack puts you in the low 90s. The arb raises in the first year for those guys is going to be very minimal. Couple million a piece or so. So then you'd be at 100ish mil including those guys. Correa's money starts going down after that while they also lose Vazquez and Paddack money which allows for the higher arb numbers as those guys hit their 2nd year of arbitration.

The money doesn't really start being a problem until 2027 when those guys will be deep into the arb process. But 2027 is Lopez's last year, and none of the other young guys hit arbitration until 2027/2028 (depending on super 2 status). And 2028 is the last year of guaranteed money for Buxton and Correa. So you have nearly 70 mil coming off the books after 2027/2028. And typically you expect payrolls to keep increasing year over year with inflation and the natural growth of the business. I'd argue the Twins are in great position to add money if they were going to be sticking in that 150+ mil range this year and growing. But they've chosen not to so here we are talking about pillow contracts. But with all the talk of turning over most of the roster to pre-arb players the Twins could/should be in a great spot to sign another big deal through 2027/2028. The pre-arb contracts have them in a great spot.

[Linus]

24 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

There is, but it is a corporation and the shareholders must get their pile. It really is something out of our control and thus not worth worrying about. The biggest positive is that Joe Pohlad actually follows baseball. His grandpa did not. Falvey receives way more support than any prior front office member, which is good/encouraging.

Also, Calvin Griffith was a far different cat than anyone who has owned a sports franchise in the last 60 plus years, including Charlie Finley, Al Davis,  and some other salty characters. Calvin's father died of alcoholism and he grew up with  Clark Griffith, eventually inheriting the team in 1955. Baseball was Calvin's life. He poured every penny into the team. He was never really a very rich man and was more or less forced to sell the team. He had a handshake agreement that his brothers would continue to be employed by the Twins. What do you think that handshake was worth? Griffith was gullible. No owner knew more baseball. Yes, Calvin was crude in ways but read what Rod Carew and other Black and Hispanic players had to say about Griffith. He really was a simple guy and time passed him by.  I once ran into him and said hello just to be friendly. He started asking me questions and we visited for 45 minutes. Straight talk on anyone, anything, and a little raw with no limits whatsoever. Calvin really was the last of the dinosaurs. He shouldn't be compared to any other owners because the differences are so incredibly stark. Read the book or at least a bit of his story.

It’s a LLC and the only shareholders are the Pohlad family. It’s amazing to me that people want to give the Pohlad family cover for this off season. I’m not speaking directly to you Tony but I’m just dumbfounded by how easily we are accepting the Pohlads handling of this off season. The amount of money required to invest in this team which could be really good is peanuts in the landscape of MLB. Not to mention less than peanuts in terms of the value they have received in the team and their own family fortunes. I also want to note that I have never criticized the Pohlads handling of payroll in prior years. I have not been a Pohlads are cheap guy but this year is a completely different story. They should be embarrassed. Or as Sid used to say they could screw up a two car funeral. 

[arby58]

6 hours ago, weneedneshek said:

A lot of people (even myself for a little bit) gave the team every benefit of the doubt when it came to the TV contract/payroll slash excuse. If payroll still ends up with an almost $40M cut by opening day despite the new contract (which seems like a $10M cut at most??) we should all be rightfully angry. Our competitive window is now, there are no more excuses

I won't be angry if they spend less and win more games.  The three teams with the biggest payrolls last year all missed the play-offs. Baseball is littered with long term free agent deals that didn't amount to anything in the standings - paging Albert Pujols, Anthony Rendon, Pablo Sandoval, Josh Hamilton, etc.

[Joe A. Preusser]

Props to the Royaĺs for being very relevant for a while several years ago.  

That said, full rebuilds are buIIshit, and I will be jealous of the Royals when they are worthy of.carrying our jockstraps again.  

[DJL44]

---

Be prepared for this to happen all over again next offseason because the TV deal is only one season.

[arby58]

35 minutes ago, Linus said:

It’s a LLC and the only shareholders are the Pohlad family. It’s amazing to me that people want to give the Pohlad family cover for this off season. I’m not speaking directly to you Tony but I’m just dumbfounded by how easily we are accepting the Pohlads handling of this off season. The amount of money required to invest in this team which could be really good is peanuts in the landscape of MLB. Not to mention less than peanuts in terms of the value they have received in the team and their own family fortunes. I also want to note that I have never criticized the Pohlads handling of payroll in prior years. I have not been a Pohlads are cheap guy but this year is a completely different story. They should be embarrassed. Or as Sid used to say they could screw up a two car funeral. 

The Bally TV money was not chump change. Yes, I will give them cover for that. You run businesses based on free cash flow - of course increases in valuation are helpful, but that is, like gains in the stock market, mark to market and not spendable cash. I also suspect that much of the Pohlad fortune is tied up in various assets and investments that are not readily spendable cash. Hence the need to actually, sort of, really, run the baseball operation like a normal business. Having been the budget director of a multi-billion dollar operation, nothing they have done strikes me as worthy of embarrassment on their part.

[harmony55]

13 minutes ago, Joe A. Preusser said:

Props to the Royaĺs for being very relevant for a while several years ago.  

That said, full rebuilds are buIIshit, and I will be jealous of the Royals when they are worthy of.carrying our jockstraps again.  

The Royals, who finished ahead of the Twins as recently as 2021, should be embarrassed for finishing 31 games behind last year's division champs who posted just the seventh-best record in the league..

 

[arby58]

6 hours ago, MMMordabito said:

What a terrible, whiny article.

They signed a franchise cornerstone to the biggest deal in club history and sit $7 mill ahead of the Twins on 2/5/2024.

Right - this is super superficial. The fact that they are paying Witt a lot more this year than they would have to (based on his years of service) should have absolutely nothing to do with comparing payroll. That is them making a long-term decision, not a next year decision on their payroll. That is the problem with just making straight payroll comparisons - it doesn't take into account the players who are just getting started and have low dollar value contracts but may have a lot of impact. 

Meanwhile, the FO has to be cognizant of what those players mean to future payroll. It's not like you go out and spend a ton on players with long-term contracts when you know you will have to pay up for younger players coming off those contract restrictions. 

[arby58]

6 hours ago, GKuehl said:

I'm not particularly fazed by the Royals spending money, especially because the owner is incentivized to spend to drum up community support to build a new stadium.

But if the Twins end up signing a TV deal in the range of $40 million for 2024, it's unfathomable that we didn't at least pursue someone like Jordan Montgomery or Blake Snell to be our #2 SP. Even with a roughly $15 million drop in payroll, there should have been room to sign either of those pitchers to a 1-year, $30 million or a 3-year, $75 million contract. 

They aren't signing one year deals - I doubt they would even sniff at the 3 year deal you mention. It takes two to tango.

[Linus]

40 minutes ago, arby58 said:

The Bally TV money was not chump change. Yes, I will give them cover for that. You run businesses based on free cash flow - of course increases in valuation are helpful, but that is, like gains in the stock market, mark to market and not spendable cash. I also suspect that much of the Pohlad fortune is tied up in various assets and investments that are not readily spendable cash. Hence the need to actually, sort of, really, run the baseball operation like a normal business. Having been the budget director of a multi-billion dollar operation, nothing they have done strikes me as worthy of embarrassment on their part.

If you think the Pohlads couldnt  cash flow $10 -20 million dollars you are crazy. And if we want to throw out occupations as credentials I was the CEO of a large financial conglomerate. The TV money is chump change in their world. They chose not to do it. That’s their choice - doesn’t mean they should be immune from criticism. 

[arby58]

13 minutes ago, Linus said:

If you think the Pohlads couldnt  cash flow $10 -20 million dollars you are crazy. And if we want to throw out occupations as credentials I was the CEO of a large financial conglomerate. The TV money is chump change in their world. They chose not to do it. That’s their choice - doesn’t mean they should be immune from criticism. 

Other people's money is easy to spend. I happen to work closely on 501c3 charitable work with a billionaire, and if you think $50 million a year is chump change, then I seriously doubt you hang out with them. Maybe the Pohlads could 'cashflow' it, but that isn't how businesses operate. It isn't can they do it, but can the business support it. You're thinking like a fan, not a fiduciary. 

[Linus]

7 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Other people's money is easy to spend. Maybe they could 'cashflow' it, but that isn't how businesses operate. It isn't can they do it, but can the business support it. You're thinking like a fan, not a fiduciary. My guess is this LLC's shareholders expect it to not drain their existing cash flow.

I understand exactly how businesses work. TheLLC is the Pohlad family. They can do whatever they want. They made their choice which is their right. Why people want to give them cover for it is beyond me. Put all this aside and ponder what a short term decision this is when your team is coming off their first playoff win and generating some positive momentum. I assume you understand this with all your business acumen. 

[arby58]

2 minutes ago, Linus said:

I understand exactly how businesses work. TheLLC is the Pohlad family. They can do whatever they want. They made their choice which is their right. Why people want to give them cover for it is beyond me. Put all this aside and ponder what a short term decision this is when your team is coming off their first playoff win and generating some positive momentum. I assume you understand this with all your business acumen. 

The LLC is the Pohlad family, which means multiple shareholders. You act as if they are a behemoth, and they are not. It is entirely possible that there are differing perspectives as to how much they wish to crimp their individual cashflows to support the baseball operation. From Forbes: "EBITDA for the entire sector was $505.7 million on $10.3 billion in sales in 2022. That results in a profit margin of 4.9%." That's hardly a stellar rate of return, and my guess is the Twins, given their market place, were not doing better than that. So if I'm a Pohlad member of the LLC, I'm asking if it really makes sense to make this my loss leader. I assume you understand this with all your business acumen.

[Linus]

46 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Other people's money is easy to spend. I happen to work closely on 501c3 charitable work with a billionaire, and if you think $50 million a year is chump change, then I seriously doubt you hang out with them. Maybe the Pohlads could 'cashflow' it, but that isn't how businesses operate. It isn't can they do it, but can the business support it. You're thinking like a fan, not a fiduciary. 

The loss of income is in the neighborhood of $15million based o recent reporting. They knew they were getting money from a tv deal eventually. That’s like 3-5% of overall revenue. If they can’t absorb that without slashing payroll they should sell the Twins and run the Montgomery Biscuits. I’m thinking like a fiduciary and you are thinking like a Pohlad apologist. 

[nicksaviking]

3 hours ago, MGX said:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll take anything that will improve our team & either one of those pitchers would immediately be a member of our rotation because they are better than at least one existing option.

How do they improve the team? They're the same as Ryan/Ober/Paddack but on the backside of their careers instead of being still in their mid-to-late 20s. I want a top end pitcher to go with Lopez then the back three in the rotation. Signing either of those Royals pitchers pretty much closes the book on that.

[tony&rodney]

2 hours ago, Linus said:

It’s a LLC and the only shareholders are the Pohlad family. It’s amazing to me that people want to give the Pohlad family cover for this off season. I’m not speaking directly to you Tony but I’m just dumbfounded by how easily we are accepting the Pohlads handling of this off season. The amount of money required to invest in this team which could be really good is peanuts in the landscape of MLB. Not to mention less than peanuts in terms of the value they have received in the team and their own family fortunes. I also want to note that I have never criticized the Pohlads handling of payroll in prior years. I have not been a Pohlads are cheap guy but this year is a completely different story. They should be embarrassed. Or as Sid used to say they could screw up a two car funeral. 

I was being a bit sarcastic. Sorry. I don't see the commitment I want but find it pointless, just for me, to spend energy on the Pohlads. I'm a baseball fan and realize that the MLB game is a toy for Manfred, the owners, and corporate heads. The players are well-paid pawns, thanks to Curt Flood, Miller, and the MLBPA. Fans come last. 

[Jocko87]

If you guys were thinking like fiduciaries you would be championing them for putting out a damn good product at a lower cost than all their competitors.  You would also be championing them for not making bad deals just because some loud activist investors are yelling or other businesses are making bad purchases.

Course, that would be if you were actually thinking like fiduciaries.  In the meantime, be fans, responsible fans.

Stock goes up!

[Parfigliano]

10 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

If you guys were thinking like fiduciaries you would be championing them for putting out a damn good product at a lower cost than all their competitors.  You would also be championing them for not making bad deals just because some loud activist investors are yelling or other businesses are making bad purchases.

Course, that would be if you were actually thinking like fiduciaries.  In the meantime, be fans, responsible fans.

Stock goes up!

Not Radio Shack stock

[Jocko87]

12 minutes ago, Parfigliano said:

Not Radio Shack stock

It's an interesting way to think about it though.  What teams in MLB would you rather own stock in?

I'll give you the Braves, Dodgers, Orioles and Rangers.  I initially thought D-backs but they are a lot older than you think and getting expensive.  They have pitching though so maybe.  Lots of fun variables to discuss, just like stocks.

I'm not buying Royals stock, to stay on topic, for darn sure.

[weitz41]

It has been a disappointing off season.

There is a big difference between spending because your team (the Royals) has been so bad a developing their own talent and the Twins filling a hole or two with a free agent,

The Royals have Bobby Witt and well that's about it for young upcoming players. You kind of have to spend to be completive at that point.

[UK Twin]

Witt is a special talent. They've made him face of the franchise for a very good reason. Royce Lewis could be that guy for the Twins. But injuries have delayed his progress so extension talks would have been premature before now. But now the TV rights issue has been sorted, it surely is worth exploring an extension with him. 

I certainly don't find it embarrassing that the Royals have outspent us this offseason. It's not as if they went out and signed one of the top free agents - they just agreed to a huge extension with a top, top talent which is happening more often these days.

[Fatbat]

I doubt the Pohlads are embarrassed to be called cheap and that other owners decide to invest into their team.