Ranking the Top 5 Teams by Percentage of MLB Payroll Dropped for 2024

[TwinsDr2021]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

Sorry,  I just fail to see how any of this supports your original point that bringing up players later would result in keeping payroll lower?  The initial 6+ years are going to cost roughly the same.  Obviously, the extension would cost more if a player has more prime years but they have exactly one player that fits this description in Buxton.   I doubt his AAV would have changed had he been up a year earlier.  The greatest influence by far on our payroll was a premium free agent (Correa).   They were able to fit Correa into the budget because of the number of young/inexpensive players on the roster.  Had those young players been held back, it likely would have made it more difficult to fit Correa into the budget because we would have had more Vazquez / MAT or even Gallo type players on the roster.

Buxton was up at 21 and it was extend him or lose him in his prime, Kepler was up earlier and they extended him, Polanco was up earlier and they extended him, Kepler was up earlier and they extended him. Same with Sano, Berrios was up earlier and they traded him (ended up paying him around 7 million total)  Lopez was brought up at 22 and thus required a extension prior to his prime years and cost more.

The current group of players were all up later and the Twins have them locked up at below market value for their prime years. If they can hold off Lee another year and a couple of months same thing. They can/could have their core players during their prime at below market value, it is a great way to keep payroll low, that is my point. Atlanta on the other hand is paying much more for its core players though their prime than MN.

So yes if you are never paying your prospects close to market value, it allows teams to sign a player like Correa who was brought up very early and got expensive during his prime years.