What Does a “Right-Sized” Payroll Do to the Twins’ Future?

[Go twins_508]

19 hours ago, Beast said:

The Pohlads deserve to see the stadium completely empty this season.  Fans should vote with their pocket books and force these guys out by making this year an absolute financial disaster.  Anyone who attends a game should boo and hiss mercilessly.

I’m out on this crap.  Not spending a dime on this cut-rate franchise.  I’ll take every opportunity to convince any person I come across to do the same.  So tired of hearing this corporate money-grubbing drivel out of their mouths every offseason.

This franchise is a joke.  The 2024 season is already over, and everyone here know it.  But, everyone is so desperate for entertainment and addicted to the crap product they delude themselves into thinking they’re doing what’s best for the franchise.

Settle down, dont follow them,im not happy as well for the lack of spending, but im still ganna root for the team and the players they still have a pretty decent team as is

[tony&rodney]

"What does ..... do to the Twins future?"

If one has followed the Twins for years, it is reasonable to say that the philosophy has not changed and the future is largely unaffected. The Twins have made a few "splash" signings: Puckett, Mauer, Donaldson, Buxton, Correa, and Lopez to name a few. They also moved on from guys like Santana, Hunter, and Polanco. The team has never really seriously entertained signing a free agent pitcher of note, salary-wise. 

The 2025 roster payroll is likely to end up around $135-140 million, depending on factors that play out this season. Falvey will need to determine where the roster needs bolstering through inexpensive moves, trades, and use of the waiver wire - same as it ever was, same as it ever was. Falvey and crew are quietly being evaluated.

The problem with going too far down the road with projections runs into the vagaries of totally unpredictable forces, such as injuries. 

For right now, the Twins look like they have the players in place to be a competitive squad. Despite my disappointments with how the offseason rolled out it looks like some good games will be played this summer. 

[Sparky55]

When the time is right we’ll spend money is what I’ve heard. So what are you waiting for? I am really sick of hearing about the TV deal. You are business men right? Figure out a new/better deal and quit whining!

[Mike Sixel]

One more thought... If the BAM money was one time.... They should not have signed long term deals, but only one year deals last year.. Locking in long term deals with one time money is bad business. 

[Major League Ready]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

One more thought... If the BAM money was one time.... They should not have signed long term deals, but only one year deals last year.. Locking in long term deals with one time money is bad business. 

This is the last thing I thought would come from you Mike.  The only long-term deals they signed last year were Lopez and Paddack.  Would you prefer they had not extended them?  Those salaries are covered by the departure of  Gray/Mahle/Maeda and Pagan.  Not to mention they did spend over half the money on one year deals.  (Gallo/Taylor/Solano).

[Jocko87]

10 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

If they were emulating the Ray's, Kepler would be traded. They aren't really emulating them. They need to pick a lane.

The Rays, but with some targeted luxury purchases.  It would be a new lane, really.

It's also quite a bold strategy, Cotton. 

[Mike Sixel]

16 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

This is the last thing I thought would come from you Mike.  The only long-term deals they signed last year were Lopez and Paddack.  Would you prefer they had not extended them?  Those salaries are covered by the departure of  Gray/Mahle/Maeda and Pagan.  Not to mention they did spend over half the money on one year deals.  (Gallo/Taylor/Solano).

Vazquez for a defense first catcher for ten million. They didn't shed Kepler either. Covering is fine, if you don't plan to sign anyone else, and that doesn't account for next year's increases. 

My preference is irrelevant to what a team with budget constraints should do. 

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Vazquez for a defense first catcher for ten million. They didn't shed Kepler either. Covering is fine, if you don't plan to sign anyone else, and that doesn't account for next year's increases. 

My preference is irrelevant to what a team with budget constraints should do. 

When did they sign CC to the second deal? Wasn't that last year ?

[Major League Ready]

28 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Vazquez for a defense first catcher for ten million. They didn't shed Kepler either. Covering is fine, if you don't plan to sign anyone else, and that doesn't account for next year's increases. 

My preference is irrelevant to what a team with budget constraints should do. 

You are criticizing them for making those signings so it's rather hypocritical if you believe they were in the best interest of the team, especially given the team was shedding more payroll than they were adding with Lopez/Paddack.  It's actually what we would all hope they would get done so it's not fair to say they should not have signed them.

They obviously didn't sign Kepler last year either and retained an option for this year so he was in effect on a one year deal with an option for this year.   IDK why you would even bring him up.  They obviously made a good decision and again you want to criticize them for that good decision.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

This is the last thing I thought would come from you Mike.  The only long-term deals they signed last year were Lopez and Paddack.  Would you prefer they had not extended them?  Those salaries are covered by the departure of  Gray/Mahle/Maeda and Pagan.  Not to mention they did spend over half the money on one year deals.  (Gallo/Taylor/Solano).

Carlos Correa was signed for 6 years and 200 million. Pretty big long-term contract to leave out there. Along with Vazquez for 3 years and 30 mil. You left 43.3 million in annual contracts out.

[Mike Sixel]

16 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

You are criticizing them for making those signings so it's rather hypocritical if you believe they were in the best interest of the team, especially given the team was shedding more payroll than they were adding with Lopez/Paddack.  It's actually what we would all hope they would get done so it's not fair to say they should not have signed them.

They obviously didn't sign Kepler last year either and retained an option for this year so he was in effect on a one year deal with an option for this year.   IDK why you would even bring him up.  They obviously made a good decision and again you want to criticize them for that good decision.

I'm not criticizing anyone. I'm pointing out that if you have a budget, and get one time money, it's bad strategy to commit past one year. How is that debatable?

[Woof Bronzer]

 

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

This is the last thing I thought would come from you Mike.  The only long-term deals they signed last year were Lopez and Paddack.  

For a guy who constantly excoriates people about "facts" you sure have a tenuous grasp on them. You somehow forgot the largest FA contract in Twins history.  And $30 mil for a backup catcher.  So yeah, other than the $230 mil you missed, good comment!  

[Major League Ready]

7 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'm not criticizing anyone. I'm pointing out that if you have a budget, and get one time money, it's bad strategy to commit past one year. How is that debatable?

Because you are making an assumption that their payroll could not accommodate any long-term contracts and that was obviously not the case.  Before signing Correa and Vasquez, they only had one significant long-term contract that was not coming off the books after 2023 and that was Buxton.  They had options on both Kepler and Polanco.  Had they not signed Correa and Vasquez, they would be at $71M right now even while keeping Kepler so to say they could not afford a long-term contract is silly.   

[Woof Bronzer]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'm not criticizing anyone. I'm pointing out that if you have a budget, and get one time money, it's bad strategy to commit past one year. How is that debatable?

If anyone can debate it, Mr. Ready will! 

[Major League Ready]

Just now, Woof Bronzer said:

 

For a guy who constantly excoriates people about "facts" you sure have a tenuous grasp on them. You somehow forgot the largest FA contract in Twins history.  And $30 mil for a backup catcher.  So yeah, other than the $230 mil you missed, good comment!  

Yes, I did. I make mistakes too and I was thinking that was 2022 and of course he needed to be resigned.

[Woof Bronzer]

1 minute ago, Major League Ready said:

Because you are making an assumption that their payroll could not accommodate any long-term contracts and that was obviously not the case.  Before signing Correa and Vasquez, they only had one significant long-term contract that was not coming off the books after 2023 and that was Buxton.  They had options on both Kepler and Polanco.  Had they not signed Correa and Vasquez, they would be at $71M right now even while keeping Kepler so to say they could not afford a long-term contract is silly.   

Can you answer the question:  if you have a budget, and you get one-time revenue, is it smart to budget for that revenue in future years?  

[Major League Ready]

3 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Can you answer the question:  if you have a budget, and you get one-time revenue, is it smart to budget for that revenue in future years?  

Can you answer a question?  How is this relevant to anything I have said?

[purplesoldier4u]

On 2/21/2024 at 3:49 PM, Major League Ready said:

That information came from Statista and Forbes.  The Teams are not handing out that information.   

I wonder if either is aware of the most recent CBA wherein "Article XXIV - The Revenue Sharing Plan" was implemented in 2022?

https://www.mlbplayers.com/_files/ugd/4d23dc_d6dfc2344d2042de973e37de62484da5.pdf

[Werbellik]

On 2/21/2024 at 1:56 PM, farmerguychris said:

This reminds me of a poll I brought up here a few months back and didn't get much feedback on.  My question was something like ' Do the owners care if they ever win another championship, or only if they make money".  

Yes, its a business.  We know that.  However, it makes it harder to be a fan when they so obviously demonstrate this is literally just another business to them - the fans don't matter.  If we win, we win, if we don't....well, at least we got richer.  

Got the 20 year monkey off our back, so back to my original question - Do they (the owners) care if we ever win another championship, or do they only care if they make money every year?

 

Easy one to answer.  Make money every year.

[Werbellik]

On 2/21/2024 at 3:02 PM, Nashvilletwin said:

The world is full of these hypocrisies.  Everywhere you look.  But the sad truth is that there is a market for MLB franchises from municipalities.  Can’t escape that.  Too bad it’s not different. 
 

What did our late, great Happy Warrior, Hubert Humphrey, say? I think it was if the Twin Cities lost the Twins and Vikings, “we’d be a cold Omaha”.  

It was Sid Hartman that always used that line. If it was originally used by the Late Great Happy Warrior well kudos to Hubert. Hubert and Sid. Unreplaceable. I hope Reusse lasts a while yet.

[Werbellik]

On 2/21/2024 at 3:29 PM, chpettit19 said:

Bit of a chicken and egg situation here. Who's supposed to spend first? The team or the fans?

The team. That was easy.

[Major League Ready]

On 2/22/2024 at 10:50 AM, Mike Sixel said:

I'm not criticizing anyone. I'm pointing out that if you have a budget, and get one time money, it's bad strategy to commit past one year. How is that debatable?

It's not remotely debatable if it's a good idea to spend money that won't be available in the future.  The problem with you point is that they didn't spend money that was not going to be viable this year.   They are below the threshold we spent with the long-term deals in question accounted for.   We also know with certainty, they have $16M coming off next year to cover the increases to Lopez and Paddack and that Paddack and Vasquez come off the following year.   Cmon Mike, you are a generally a really reasonable guy and this is not a reasonable criticism.

[farmerguychris]

On 2/21/2024 at 3:54 PM, sweetmusicviola16 said:

They have shown that the bottom line of making a profit is at the top of their list of priorities. Winning a WS is secondary. I honestly could care less how much money they do or don't make. But their talk and actions show what they are most serious about. That is what has dictated how serious I have been about my fandom.

I agree with you completely - Their actions show what is really their priority and winning is not it.