The Twins Have Two Red-Hot, High-Ceiling Prospects Turning the Corner at Fort Myers

[LambchoP]

The Twins minor league pipeline is in as good a place as I have ever seen it. Sure seems like they are doing a much better job of both drafting, and development. Now if we could only figure out how to keep our guys healthy and not have so many serious injuries to our star players, we'd be golden. The one downside to having all this young talent is that management will be hesitant to go out and sign free agents. They'll try and tell us there is no need for outside reinforcements because of all the options in the minors. Problem is, young prospects don't work out all the time. They get hurt, they slump. There needs to be good solid vets mixed in to teach these new guys how to be good ball players. Unfortunately they'll keep cutting payroll and relying on our young guys and hoping for the best...

[bean5302]

2 hours ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Ive done 2 posts,  but ive come to the conclusion,  Bean really doesn't want to see anything positive with this organization,  or team.  I can understand frustration with ownership,  I can even understand questioning decision making by the front office.  However the quality of players in the organization from top to bottom is great.   I really am optimistic,  and hope at some point, ownership begins to open the purse strings again like they did a couple years a go.  I really think he does want to win championships,  so hopefully there is still a glimmer of hope.  I am more concerned about possibly losing Falvey and Lavine at the end of this year.  

I have season tickets which make up a huge portion of my recreation/fun budget for a year, season tickets I've had for about half the years I've lived in Minnesota since Target Field opened and I've owned seasons for the last 3 years. I even upgraded this year. How about you? Did you invest in the Twins only to have ownership say they weren't going to match your financial commitments? My guess is you don't. I'm willing to bet your sole investment into the Twins in any given year is a handful of free to use posts on an internet fan site you don't even support.

I've come to the conclusion you probably don't read my posts.

These were my positions at the beginning of the year & they haven't changed.
Royce Lewis is a legitimate MVP candidate if he stays healthy, but I'm not holding my breath.
Matt Wallner is a potential perennial All Star, and he's going to rake.
Carlos Correa will absolutely be worth his contract.
Jose Miranda is a quality every day player who wasn't given a fair shake out of the gate this year.
Austin Martin was a better choice than Manuel Margot

These were my positions as the season went on.
Zebby Matthews should be called up before David Festa because he's been so unbelievable.
Payton Eeles really looks like a stud and should be in the Twins top 10, just recently.
As of mid June, Rodriguez has absolutely torn up AA and can hopefully provide the plus value backup to Byron Buxton before the end of the year (this has since changed as he's missed too much time)
Andrew Morris is looking like the real deal, and I think he can be a quality back end rotation piece.

I was bullish on Simeon Woods Richardson prior to this year. I was bullish on Josh Winder prior to his injury woes last year thinking he had an upper rotation ceiling and a mid rotation floor. I was impressed with Charlee Soto out of Spring Training and made comments supporting him being a top prospect, and exciting at the time despite not generally caring about pitching prospects in the low minors based on how volatile they are.

Next year will arrive, and the Twins are way over budget already. $10-15MM over what their budget is expected to be (even after dropping Farmer and Margot) as reported here and by other industry analysts. This same Twins franchise has won more than 87 games just once, and has won the division just twice in the past 15 years. Willi Castro is going to be $7-8MM. Lopez is at $21MM. Vazquez is at $10MM. Paddack is at $7.5MM. Buxton has a NTC. Correa has an NTC. Other than Castro, none have much surplus value to trade, even if they could be traded. The roster is not projecting as young next year, but the Twins are going to need to shed payroll, and a lot of payroll if they're going to roll with what they have right now, let alone replace any openings with free agents.

But, if it makes you sleep better at night when you personally attack me for bringing a dissenting voice to the discussion, I can at least tell you that you're in the vast majority of people these days. The desire to invalidate the person and therefore silence them to win all future debates rather than actually debating any position or topic is the default in America because it's highly successful and efficient. You don't even need to know what you're talking about to win.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

I have season tickets which make up a huge portion of my recreation/fun budget for a year, season tickets I've had for about half the years I've lived in Minnesota since Target Field opened and I've owned seasons for the last 3 years. I even upgraded this year. How about you? Did you invest in the Twins only to have ownership say they weren't going to match your financial commitments?

Twins ownership will commit at least $200M to the operation of the Twins, likely much more.  I think it's funny that you think your "upgraded" season tickets makes you more than a match for the Pohlads dropping (potentially) a quarter Billion dollars in a single calendar year.

[Cap'n Piranha]

6 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

"performances up and down the levels of the organization point to structures and processes that are consistently driving accelerated improvement curves"

It seems that everybody is in agreement that we are now better at developing players.  This assumes that we have always drafted good players but that the previous regime could not develop them like the current one does.  Is this because of better coaches?  More coaching?  Is this because our medical staff provides better instructions for rest?  Are we better at teaching spin rates?  What specifically has changed here?

If a player is getting drafted in the MLB draft, he is very good at baseball--that has been true for decades.  However, professional baseball at the highest level, just like any other sport, is a viciously competitive environment where the tiniest of improvements or declines can turns scrubs to stars (and vice versa).

I think the Twins have always been good at drafting good players (same as every other team), they've just gotten much better at drafting players who can continue to improve, whether through innate room for growth, or ability to develop those improvements through physical or approach improvements.

[Cap'n Piranha]

6 hours ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I don't ever remember a time when the Twins farm system seemed to be in a better place.  Prospects thriving on both the mound and position players.  On the one hand, you could see the Twins parting with one or two guys to get an established player that could help the team NOW this off season.    

On the other hand, you realize that ownership and FO will probably not be adding any sizable payroll in the near future.  It's a good problem to have from a talent standpoint, but you have to admit that the Twins are pretty darn young right now, with guys like Lewis, Lee, Miranda, Julien, Wallner, Larnach, and Kirilloff on the hitters side, and Matthews, Festa, SWR, on the pitching side.  With guys like Emmanuel Rodriguez, Walker Jenkins, Luke Keashall and Winokur pushing hard (and don't sleep on Culpepper) something's gotta give.  They just won't have room for all of these guys.  

In the wide universe of problems, "too many good young players" is at the same level as "my private jet isn't really fuel efficient" and "I can only fit 6 Porsches in my garage".

[Dman]

5 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Minnesota does not have a particularly young team with the average age on the roster at 28.4yrs. They're right smack dab in the middle of MLB.

As far as the talent on the MLB roster, no position player under age 25 is showing promise as a great player right now. Mercifully, Jose Miranda and Matt Wallner won't be arb eligible next year, but Buxton, Correa, Lewis, Castro, Larnach, Kirilloff will all have crossed the arbitration threshold for 2025.

I disagree Emmanuel Rodriguez is knocking at anybody's door. He's missed so much time this year I don't think there's any chance he's up before mid next year at this point because of his unique plate approach/results, and with all the arbitration eligible players coming up, the Twins are going to need to move talent to save cash based on ownership's new cheapskate philosophy. The Twins are in desperate need of their MiLB development system now if they're going to compete against more motivated franchises in the AL Central going forward.

On the pitching side of things, nothing is more volatile than a pitching prospect. I don't think our pitching pipeline is that much better than the pipelines promised a couple years ago which included can't miss starter prospects like Jordan Balazovic, Matt Canterino, Josh Winder, Jhoan Duran, Blayne Enlow and the like. Every single one of those prospects failed as a starter with Duran turning into a good, not great reliever and Winder only showing a little promise in the bullpen.

The fact so many Twins have wedged their way into the top 100 this year is commendable for sure, but there are going to be some graduates before next year. Zebby Matthews will remain on the list next year as he won't eat through his rookie status, and he's impressing the hell out of everybody having started the first 1/3 of the season A+ ball this year... nobody has ever really seen something like what he's doing. Festa's likely going to graduate, but he's holding his own, which is impressive in its own right.

Lopez is expensively locked up for a bit already, but both Ober, and Ryan are hitting arbitration and will start becoming expensive in 2026. Jax, Duran, and Alcala are all reaching or across the arb threshold next year as well. Things are going to get tough.

I'd agree the Twins aren't particularly young, but most everyone is in their prime years right now which is a good place to be.  We'll see how the arb raises go but they will need to trade some of these guys and replace them with younger players so I don't see that number going up much.

I agree Rodriguez most likely set himself back with the injury this year and won't likely get a shot with the MLB club until mid season next year.  Still if he has a good spring and someone goes down I also wouldn't be surprised if he started with the MLB team next year.  I agree he has warts in his batting profile, but so does Wallner and they made that work.

I also agree arms are very volatile year to year, game to game.  However, I do like the strength of this group better than the one you named.  Canterino  never pitched a full season.  Enlow was barely a top 30 prospect by the time he made AA.  There was always hope he'd find an out pitch, but it never happened. Winder wasn't the same after the neck injury in AA, but he was thought of as a likely 5th starter type.  Jordan I did think was going to be a mid rotation guy for sure, but once the rails came off he never found that magic again. Duran was going to be our ace and he fell to the bullpen so those last two in particular are good call outs.  Anything can happen between AA and the Majors with arms.  Still I think I see about 10 arms in the current system that have pretty high upside if just a few make it we'll be OK and Festa and Mathews look like they might make it already.  SWR seems to have made it this year that's a good bit of success right there to give more hope for future arms.

If the Twins aren't moving off the 130M mark it is going to be really tough to keep this team together.  I agree with your assessment that some tough decisions will likely have to made unless they increase the budget.

[LA Vikes Fan]

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

They need to aggressively shop Vazquez and Paddack this offseason. Some team should be willing to take on one season of each contract. Willi Castro is a much better value at his salary than Christian Vazquez or Chris Paddack.

Agree with one change - I think we have to keep Vasquez. Not because he's worth $10m but because we don't have anyone else ready and I don't want to spend $3-4M on a washed up backup catcher. I don't see us rolling with Camairgo as the #2 catcher next year, so we wind up on the market looking for a 30 year old plus body. Any catcher worth much of anything is $2-3M a year, a decent one $3-5M a year. I like our catching tandem the way it is and would like to keep it going next year. 

Good point on Paddack, though, and on the kind of decisions that are going to have to be made. Unless ownership steps up payroll (unlikely), we can't keep what we have. My view is that the second half this year has shown enough SP depth that I'd be willing to trade Paddack for prospects or Paddack and prospects for a reliable reliever and save $4-5M (Paddack's salary less the salary of the acquired reliever), and put that $$ towards keeping Castro on the team. Losing Kepler saves $10m, Famer $6M, Santana $5m, and Margot $4m. Add in trading Paddack's $7.5M salary and there's enough to handle arbitration and contract raises, sign a good but not great reliever for $3-4M, and keep Castro. I like me some Kepler and Santana, and I understand having to have SP depth,  but I like keeping Castro and Vasquez and rolling with the young guns in the #4 and #5 spots better.  

[DJL44]

43 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Twins ownership will commit at least $200M to the operation of the Twins, likely much more.  

In 2024, Major League Baseball, the North American professional baseball league, reported overall revenue of 11.34 billion U.S. dollars, corresponding to an average revenue of roughly 378 million U.S. dollars per team. - Statista

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

In 2024, Major League Baseball, the North American professional baseball league, reported overall revenue of 11.34 billion U.S. dollars, corresponding to an average revenue of roughly 378 million U.S. dollars per team. - Statista

Average probably isn't a good metric to use when the Yankees and Dodgers exist, but I agree with the point that they're making more money than they're spending. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

17 hours ago, DJL44 said:

In 2024, Major League Baseball, the North American professional baseball league, reported overall revenue of 11.34 billion U.S. dollars, corresponding to an average revenue of roughly 378 million U.S. dollars per team. - Statista

As CCHOF points out, this overly simplistic take is essentially meaningless in terms of trying to determine the Twins revenue.

Further, my point was never that the Twins are losing money.  I think virtually everyone is in agreement that the Twins are at the very worst breaking even, but in all probability are making some manner of profit.  My point was to the OP I was responding to, who was claiming Twins ownership isn’t committed to the Twins, by pointing out the Pohlad’s financial inlay into the team is hardly small.  Regardless of whatever profit they extract, writing checks in excess of $200M a year is still a significant expenditure.

[DJL44]

8 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

the Pohlad’s financial inlay into the team is hardly small.  Regardless of whatever profit they extract, writing checks in excess of $200M a year is still a significant expenditure.

They are spending about $60M more than Oakland, so they're doing more than the bare minimum, but Oakland isn't trying to win right now.

[bean5302]

20 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Twins ownership will commit at least $200M to the operation of the Twins, likely much more.  I think it's funny that you think your "upgraded" season tickets makes you more than a match for the Pohlads dropping (potentially) a quarter Billion dollars in a single calendar year.

I paid for what I expected to be Product A and got Product C instead. I paid a lot for product A. I was told I was getting a different version of the product than expected months after my purchase. I was hoping that would be Product B, but what I actually got was Product C.

Plenty of fans had Comca$t. They paid for Product A, but only got that product for a short period of time before getting nothing at all. Luckily, on August 1st, they started getting service again, which amounts to Product B.

These are simple concepts. Had ownership told season ticket holders in August last year they'd be cutting 20%-30% of the budget for 2024, and they wouldn't be willing to spend at the trade deadline even if they were in the playoff race, I wouldn't have a complaint.

[bean5302]

20 hours ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

Agree with one change - I think we have to keep Vasquez. Not because he's worth $10m but because we don't have anyone else ready and I don't want to spend $3-4M on a washed up backup catcher. I don't see us rolling with Camairgo as the #2 catcher next year, so we wind up on the market looking for a 30 year old plus body. Any catcher worth much of anything is $2-3M a year, a decent one $3-5M a year. I like our catching tandem the way it is and would like to keep it going next year. 

Good point on Paddack, though, and on the kind of decisions that are going to have to be made. Unless ownership steps up payroll (unlikely), we can't keep what we have. My view is that the second half this year has shown enough SP depth that I'd be willing to trade Paddack for prospects or Paddack and prospects for a reliable reliever and save $4-5M (Paddack's salary less the salary of the acquired reliever), and put that $$ towards keeping Castro on the team. Losing Kepler saves $10m, Famer $6M, Santana $5m, and Margot $4m. Add in trading Paddack's $7.5M salary and there's enough to handle arbitration and contract raises, sign a good but not great reliever for $3-4M, and keep Castro. I like me some Kepler and Santana, and I understand having to have SP depth,  but I like keeping Castro and Vasquez and rolling with the young guns in the #4 and #5 spots better.  

@DJL44 I agree with @LA VIkes Fan. Jair Camargo has really struggled at the plate this year wRC+ 65. Williams is 28, and his bat is adequate as a ceiling, but he's no defensive wizard. Winkel hasn't hit or been passable defensively. Kyle Teel sure would look good in the Twins' system since we were in desperate need of catching depth.

Any money the Twins save moving Vazquez is going to have to be picked back up in free agency or the team will have to shed prospects to acquire a high end catching prospect, and that's going to be expensive. Wonder if we could swap Jenkins for Teel straight up?

[DJL44]

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

The team will have to shed prospects to acquire a high end catching prospect, and that's going to be expensive. Wonder if we could swap Jenkins for Teel straight up?

A prospects-for-prospects trade for catching would be a good idea even if they keep Vazquez for his last season.

[SotaSports in NM]

I think it's going to be very interesting with potentially Buehler and Rodriguez heading to AFL this year and maybe giving a glimpse of if Kep will be back for next year, payroll constraints considered. Of course that would be wildly quick for Bue, but maybe not so much for Rodriguez...

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

On 8/23/2024 at 1:56 PM, bean5302 said:

I have season tickets which make up a huge portion of my recreation/fun budget for a year, season tickets I've had for about half the years I've lived in Minnesota since Target Field opened and I've owned seasons for the last 3 years. I even upgraded this year. How about you? Did you invest in the Twins only to have ownership say they weren't going to match your financial commitments? My guess is you don't. I'm willing to bet your sole investment into the Twins in any given year is a handful of free to use posts on an internet fan site you don't even support.

But, if it makes you sleep better at night when you personally attack me for bringing a dissenting voice to the discussion, I can at least tell you that you're in the vast majority of people these days. The desire to invalidate the person and therefore silence them to win all future debates rather than actually debating any position or topic is the default in America because it's highly successful and efficient. You don't even need to know what you're talking about to win.

 

On 8/24/2024 at 11:55 AM, bean5302 said:

I paid for what I expected to be Product A and got Product C instead. I paid a lot for product A. I was told I was getting a different version of the product than expected months after my purchase. I was hoping that would be Product B, but what I actually got was Product C.

Plenty of fans had Comca$t. They paid for Product A, but only got that product for a short period of time before getting nothing at all. Luckily, on August 1st, they started getting service again, which amounts to Product B.

These are simple concepts. Had ownership told season ticket holders in August last year they'd be cutting 20%-30% of the budget for 2024, and they wouldn't be willing to spend at the trade deadline even if they were in the playoff race, I wouldn't have a complaint.

Bean again, your issue primarily appears to be with ownership,  their decision with comcast and their decision to cut the payroll.  Again I have told you before and in this post if you want to have frustration with ownership be my guest.  

Secondly we are all fans.  Attacking one's fandom appears to be a pointless attack.  You having season tickets has no extra bearing on the situation.  I live 5 hours a way in state that has blackouts,  in some aspects that I continue to be a fan despite the hurdles is a feat in itself.  Whether making mini vacations,  watching them in Kansas City,  or this year I took my son to a Saints game in Des Moines,  and watched Lee, Wallner, Dobnak and Julien; we continue to be active in supporting the Twins.    Your purchase of tickets does not validate your opinion over anyone else's, it is a sunk cost.   

Lastly,  you may have had some positive posts in threads I have not seen.  The threads I have seen there has been an overly negative tone.  Earlier this year,  I told you I thought the front office was a top 5 team in drafting.  I was laughed at a bit in the thread, but I also stated,  give this a couple months and they will likely be viewed much much better.  At this point,  they have a strong farm system, with what currently appears to be a decent pitching pipe line(I can understand you wanting to see it come to fruition),  and several young players in the organization.  That is effectively what this thread is about.  So you can have a dissenting opinion,  but if the opinion is to trash players that are viewed favorably in baseball circles and on this website,  yes I think you will see several that are questioning your dissenting opinion and its validity.  

Me and Chpettit have had some fun threads in the past,  where we both went a little too hard.  Neither one of us was going to change the others opinion.  Here I do not expect to change your opinion, but I do hope you stop invalidating the opinions of others based on whether they can or cannot purchase tickets.  Take care.  

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 8/24/2024 at 7:43 AM, DJL44 said:

They are spending about $60M more than Oakland, so they're doing more than the bare minimum, but Oakland isn't trying to win right now.

$60M more on payroll.  How much more are they spending on everything else?  For example, front office staffers, stadium upgrades, training table, etc.  Do you also think that the Twins accrue $60M+ more in revenue than Oakland?

[Cap'n Piranha]

On 8/24/2024 at 9:55 AM, bean5302 said:

I paid for what I expected to be Product A and got Product C instead. I paid a lot for product A. I was told I was getting a different version of the product than expected months after my purchase. I was hoping that would be Product B, but what I actually got was Product C.

Plenty of fans had Comca$t. They paid for Product A, but only got that product for a short period of time before getting nothing at all. Luckily, on August 1st, they started getting service again, which amounts to Product B.

These are simple concepts. Had ownership told season ticket holders in August last year they'd be cutting 20%-30% of the budget for 2024, and they wouldn't be willing to spend at the trade deadline even if they were in the playoff race, I wouldn't have a complaint.

Everyone who was paying attention knew the Twins were going to cut payroll this offseason--you've made almost 4k posts on this site and claim to own season tickets which cost you a significant portion of your disposable income, so you're clearly far more than a casual fan--you really didn't bother to look at the multi-year payroll situation while being fully aware of the chaotic local TV situation, since club spending is so important to you?

It's also worth mentioning that while the Pohalds didn't announce they would cut 2024 payroll in August 2023, nor did they announce they would maintain or increase 2024 payroll either.  So in reality, you made an assumption on club spending--one that any fan paying more than casual interest should have known to be an unlikely one--and now you're mad that the Pohlads didn't live up to the erroneous assumption you made.

[DJL44]

51 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Do you also think that the Twins accrue $60M+ more in revenue than Oakland?

I hope so. The Twins attendance is about 1M higher.

[twinstalker]

Oh, the future stars that can be found from 15-game samples at low A!

[Cap'n Piranha]

23 hours ago, DJL44 said:

I hope so. The Twins attendance is about 1M higher.

And you think the average spend for a fan at a Twins game is $60+?  The extra attendance also equals extra cost--you need more staff to handle 14.5k more people per game.

[DJL44]

13 minutes ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

And you think the average spend for a fan at a Twins game is $60+?  The extra attendance also equals extra cost--you need more staff to handle 14.5k more people per game.

Average cost of attending MLB game increased in 2021 - Yahoo Sports

Quote

It costs an average of $253 for a group of four people to attend an MLB game in 2021.

That's $62 per person. They have to share half that revenue with the league but the Twins should easily clear $30M more than the Athletics for in-stadium revenue.

Statista estimates the Twins will generate $100M more revenue than the Athletics in 2024. Total is $342M.

MLB revenue by team 2024 | Statista

That's less than the average $378M but way more than the $130M payroll. Payroll is <40% of revenue.

The Cardinals are generating $372M with a smaller market than the Twins.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

Average cost of attending MLB game increased in 2021 - Yahoo Sports

That's $62 per person. They have to share half that revenue with the league but the Twins should easily clear $30M more than the Athletics for in-stadium revenue.

Statista estimates the Twins will generate $100M more revenue than the Athletics in 2024. Total is $342M.

MLB revenue by team 2024 | Statista

That's less than the average $378M but way more than the $130M payroll. Payroll is <40% of revenue.

The Cardinals are generating $372M with a smaller market than the Twins.

It's actually $64 ☺️.  Also, I couldn't see the article as I'm at work, and yahoo is blocked on my computer, but based on the title, I assume the figure you showed is for ALL MLB teams rolled together--perhaps the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Cubs skew that?  A quick google search showed that in 2024 bookies.com calculated the average cost at $180 (or $45 per person) for the Twins specifically.  Applying that number to total attendance is also fallacious, as that number doesn't take into account any discounts on tickets obtained through special programs, or fans that don't park in a Twins-affiliated lot, or buy anything at the ballpark.  It's entirely possible the actual number is more like $150-$160 per person.

If the Twins payroll is $60M more than the A's, and they only get $30M more in excess stadium revenue, where is the other $30M from?

The Statista link you sent is behind a paywall for me--does it say what they're expecting the Twins to generate in revenue, as well a a breakdown of all their revenue streams?

The Cardinals are in a smaller market, but are much more popular in that market, and don't have to compete with an NBA team, an NFL team, or a major D1 University.  I bet the Twins would become instantly more popular, and receive a lot more revenue if the Vikings moved to San Antonio, the TWolves to Seattle, and the U decided to emulate former Big 10 member University of Chicago and drop sports.

Payroll is going to go down as a percent of revenue, based on the increasing cost of running an MLB organization.  Here is the Twin's current FO--it includes by my count 277 names, not including former players as special assistants, bullpen catchers, or medical staff outside of the training department.  If it costs the Twins $50k to employ each of those people (which means those people are paid less than $50k, since the Twins have to pay payroll taxes, and presumably are providing some form of health insurance and retirement perk), that's still almost $14M.  My guess is that the average cost/employee is at lt least 3-4x that, given the number of people with some variant of director, executive, or manager in their title, meaning just to operate the FO, the Twins are paying $45M-$55M right there. 

Add in about $20M for new player acquisition (draft/IFA), $4M for MiLB payroll, and we're already at $70M-$80M before paying a single MLB player.  Add in another $19M in player non-pay (according to fangraphs, $17M in player benefits, and $1.7M to the bonus pool).  Now take into account the cost of travel--the Twins will need a team charter 38 times by my count--if that costs $100k each time (not unreasonable given that Delta charges $13k/hour for a large jet), that's $3.8M.  Assume 90 nights in hotels, and 50 rooms needed, and keep in mind these aren't Motel 6s--say $300/room/night, and adding in the $117 per diem, and it's $1.5M.

Now the big one--how much does it cost to operate Target Field every year, between security, stadium staff, concessions staff, janitorial, technical staff; electricity, waste collection, Wi-Fi, sewer; food, beverages, merch; property taxes, sales taxes, general upkeep.  I don't think it's crazy to think that could be $35M or more every year (in 2010, MPR pegged the total cost to operate at $20M/year, which would be $28.4M today.), separate from any upgrades the Twins do.  I think $140M is a completely realistic number for what the Pohlads spend every year before they spend a dime on MLB players or on-field staff, putting the total cost of operating the Twins around $270M.

This article estimates that each team gets $110M from the 48% split of shared local revenues, and another $90M from shared National revenues--this would put the Twins at $200M.  That means the Twins would need the 52% of local revenue they keep to be worth $70M, just to break even with zero profit, or $134M total.  Take out the $40M they get from DSG this year, and they need $94M in total revenue.  Assume they get $20M from radio and sponsorships (probably high, but let's go with it).  That means their revenue at Target Field needs to be $74M--at an estimate 2M fans, each fan needs to spend $37/game, right in line with the number I hypothesized above.  I think it is entirely plausible the Pohlads are realizing about a 1-3% profit margin (before taxes) on the Twins.

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Cap&#x27;n Piranha said:

The Cardinals are in a smaller market, but are much more popular in that market, and don't have to compete with an NBA team, an NFL team, or a major D1 University.  I bet the Twins would become instantly more popular, and receive a lot more revenue if the Vikings moved to San Antonio, the TWolves to Seattle, and the U decided to emulate former Big 10 member University of Chicago and drop sports.

It would probably help if the Twins won 9 more World Series including 2 in the past 25 years. The Cardinals do well with attendance because they do well on the field.

[Cap'n Piranha]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

It would probably help if the Twins won 9 more World Series including 2 in the past 25 years. The Cardinals do well with attendance because they do well on the field.

Or perhaps they do well on the field because they do well in attendance--it could go either way.  I think you are grossly discounting the impact of 6 A-List sports teams (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers FB, Gophers BB) vs 2 (Cardinals and Blues); this also leaves out Gophers hockey and the Lynx.

Also, for what it's worth, the St Louis metro area is 2.8M people v 3.6M for the Twins Cities--that's a meaningful difference, but not a massive one.

Care to respond to any of the other points I made in my post?  Or is the relevance of the Cardinals franchise the only thing you disagree with?

[DJL44]

3 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Or perhaps they do well on the field because they do well in attendance--it could go either way.  I think you are grossly discounting the impact of 6 A-List sports teams (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers FB, Gophers BB) vs 2 (Cardinals and Blues); this also leaves out Gophers hockey and the Lynx.

Billikens >> Gopher basketball

 

3 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

Care to respond to any of the other points I made in my post?  Or is the relevance of the Cardinals franchise the only thing you disagree with?

Why is it they only "right sized" the MLB payroll but not the front office staff?

[Major League Ready]

23 hours ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

It's actually $64 ☺️.  Also, I couldn't see the article as I'm at work, and yahoo is blocked on my computer, but based on the title, I assume the figure you showed is for ALL MLB teams rolled together--perhaps the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Cubs skew that?  A quick google search showed that in 2024 bookies.com calculated the average cost at $180 (or $45 per person) for the Twins specifically.  Applying that number to total attendance is also fallacious, as that number doesn't take into account any discounts on tickets obtained through special programs, or fans that don't park in a Twins-affiliated lot, or buy anything at the ballpark.  It's entirely possible the actual number is more like $150-$160 per person.

If the Twins payroll is $60M more than the A's, and they only get $30M more in excess stadium revenue, where is the other $30M from?

The Statista link you sent is behind a paywall for me--does it say what they're expecting the Twins to generate in revenue, as well a a breakdown of all their revenue streams?

The Cardinals are in a smaller market, but are much more popular in that market, and don't have to compete with an NBA team, an NFL team, or a major D1 University.  I bet the Twins would become instantly more popular, and receive a lot more revenue if the Vikings moved to San Antonio, the TWolves to Seattle, and the U decided to emulate former Big 10 member University of Chicago and drop sports.

Payroll is going to go down as a percent of revenue, based on the increasing cost of running an MLB organization.  Here is the Twin's current FO--it includes by my count 277 names, not including former players as special assistants, bullpen catchers, or medical staff outside of the training department.  If it costs the Twins $50k to employ each of those people (which means those people are paid less than $50k, since the Twins have to pay payroll taxes, and presumably are providing some form of health insurance and retirement perk), that's still almost $14M.  My guess is that the average cost/employee is at lt least 3-4x that, given the number of people with some variant of director, executive, or manager in their title, meaning just to operate the FO, the Twins are paying $45M-$55M right there. 

Add in about $20M for new player acquisition (draft/IFA), $4M for MiLB payroll, and we're already at $70M-$80M before paying a single MLB player.  Add in another $19M in player non-pay (according to fangraphs, $17M in player benefits, and $1.7M to the bonus pool).  Now take into account the cost of travel--the Twins will need a team charter 38 times by my count--if that costs $100k each time (not unreasonable given that Delta charges $13k/hour for a large jet), that's $3.8M.  Assume 90 nights in hotels, and 50 rooms needed, and keep in mind these aren't Motel 6s--say $300/room/night, and adding in the $117 per diem, and it's $1.5M.

Now the big one--how much does it cost to operate Target Field every year, between security, stadium staff, concessions staff, janitorial, technical staff; electricity, waste collection, Wi-Fi, sewer; food, beverages, merch; property taxes, sales taxes, general upkeep.  I don't think it's crazy to think that could be $35M or more every year (in 2010, MPR pegged the total cost to operate at $20M/year, which would be $28.4M today.), separate from any upgrades the Twins do.  I think $140M is a completely realistic number for what the Pohlads spend every year before they spend a dime on MLB players or on-field staff, putting the total cost of operating the Twins around $270M.

This article estimates that each team gets $110M from the 48% split of shared local revenues, and another $90M from shared National revenues--this would put the Twins at $200M.  That means the Twins would need the 52% of local revenue they keep to be worth $70M, just to break even with zero profit, or $134M total.  Take out the $40M they get from DSG this year, and they need $94M in total revenue.  Assume they get $20M from radio and sponsorships (probably high, but let's go with it).  That means their revenue at Target Field needs to be $74M--at an estimate 2M fans, each fan needs to spend $37/game, right in line with the number I hypothesized above.  I think it is entirely plausible the Pohlads are realizing about a 1-3% profit margin (before taxes) on the Twins.

Someone arguing about finances that actually understands finance.  What a concept!  Thanks for making the effort to actually illustrate the expense structure.   I have put the numbers in a spreadsheet a couple different years trying to estimate their operating costs.  Most years the net profit looks to be 5-10%.

It sure would be great if one of the TD writers would compare the Twins spending vs revenue to the rest of the league.  I have done it for a few years so I have a reasonable idea but it would be great to see if the cheap Pohlad reputation is accurate or a product of being uninformed.

[ashbury]

On 8/28/2024 at 1:40 PM, DJL44 said:

It would probably help if the Twins won 9 more World Series including 2 in the past 25 years.

Folks in Saint Looie today buy tickets to the ballgame because the Gas House Gang won it all back in the 1930s?  I'd need to see some market research to believe that this is any kind of factor for spending hard-earned cash.

[DJL44]

11 hours ago, ashbury said:

Folks in Saint Looie today buy tickets to the ballgame because the Gas House Gang won it all back in the 1930s?  I'd need to see some market research to believe that this is any kind of factor for spending hard-earned cash.

People don't buy Yankees tickets because of "27 Championships"? The Cardinals are the most successful franchise in the National League. Baseball fandom is handed down from generation to generation. 

Quote

Applying that number to total attendance is also fallacious, as that number doesn't take into account any discounts on tickets obtained through special programs, or fans that don't park in a Twins-affiliated lot, or buy anything at the ballpark

Actually applying the "average" spending number to total attendance is exactly what you should do. The average spend should absolutely take into account all of those things you mentioned and also account for the big spenders in the luxury boxes. Total spend / attendance = average spend therefore average spend * attendance = total spend.