Twins Officially Announce Additions to Team’s Ownership Group

[NYCTK]

5 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

Why am “I” losing Jeffers - Lopez - Ryan

You'll notice I also didn't use "I" or "we" when talking about the Mets. I didn't even mean "you" as in specifically you, yourself. You, an agreeing pronoun in the sentence, as in the hypothetical of if "you" are in charge of running the team. So...nice gotcha bro. 

 

9 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

... they are shaking this year.

Yes they are. And it could go terribly wrong. But I also don't know any Mets fan upset with them trying to make drastic change. If it blows up, Stearns is done. But it's better to get a new voice in there, rather than a decade with some loser like Falvey. 

 

13 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

You jump in and tell everyone here they’re clueless & the Pohlad’s are clueless

Breaking News: Twins fan on Twins message board argues with other Twins fans when he thinks they're wrong about the Twins. Like baseball dunces complaining about a SS being asked to play 2B as if it's some sort of new age crime. 

You don't think I'm polite? That's fine, I really don't care. More prolific posters here are wrong all the time but still somehow even more rude.

 

16 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

...you seemingly don’t give a rat’s ass about the organization...

If I didn't care, I wouldn't be advocating for anything. The fact that I have, ipso facto, I care. 

Just because I refuse to buy up lies and propaganda doesn't make me a bad fan. 

Like I said, maybe you should also adopt an NL team. You might view the Twins more objectively, and therefore harshly at that point. 

 

[bunsen82]

1 hour ago, karcherd said:

It isn't the actual company but one of the founders individually that is investing in the Twins.  Small difference but still different.

Seems to be splitting hairs here.  Would have been better off to state information will come out when it is available.  It seemed to imply the information was completely off - which it was not.  We had several individuals on this site bashing not only the original writer but also one of the writers here who posted an article based off the information.  

[bean5302]

We've all seen how this ownership group operates. Dave St. Peter was fired... but kept his office and is constantly used as a consultant. Joe will be fired, but he'll remain with 99% of his existing role. This ownership group has no concept of accountability. Expecting anything else is probably a whole lot of "nope."

[NYCTK]

1 minute ago, bean5302 said:

We've all seen how this ownership group operates. Dave St. Peter was fired... but kept his office and is constantly used as a consultant. Joe will be fired, but he'll remain with 99% of his existing role. This ownership group has no concept of accountability. Expecting anything else is probably a whole lot of "nope."

Which is oddly commendable from a humanist standpoint. This sort of loyalty and respect for employees is what you'd like to see all other companies show, especially smaller, family owned companies.

But this is a sports league and is the one industry in which it's kind of unacceptable! 

[Woof Bronzer]

1 hour ago, bunsen82 said:

Seems to be splitting hairs here.  Would have been better off to state information will come out when it is available.  It seemed to imply the information was completely off - which it was not.  We had several individuals on this site bashing not only the original writer but also one of the writers here who posted an article based off the information.  

The owner of a company individually investing his/her own money is much different than the company itself.  It would be like saying Berkshire Hathaway is the investor vs. Warren Buffet investing his own money.  So it's a lot more than splitting hairs.  But to be fair I guess Charlie was at least in the ballpark.

[KirbyDome89]

20 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

I just read the Gleeman Article. 

The last paragraph:

“Our revenues don’t support the expenses we have, particularly when you talk about the level of investment we’ve been making over the last couple years in player payroll,” Pohlad said. “We have chosen, for some time now, to continue to invest beyond what the revenues support. People like to say we’re not committed to investing in this team, but $500 million of debt would tell you exactly the opposite. That’s how the debt got to where it is.”

There are many who say the Pohlad's are cheap but... in comparison of their peers... The Twins spent money... not insignificant money in comparison. 

However... this last paragraph... it just brings me back to the question that I can't get out of my mind. 

When Falvey and Lavine were hired and told to get to work. Who told them that the money was going to be there?

Every decision they made matched up with a front office thinking the money was going to be there. The path they chose could not be controlled. It can only be fed more of the same. Payroll gets eaten with each arb raise, the players get more expensive and you have to keep spending to try and sustain it because development at the major league level was not a priority. 

The path chosen was always going to hit a wall that would require more money to get over. We are still signing Josh Bell from that same playbook and still dealing with a wall. Just a wall at a lower payroll level.  

Who told them that the money was going to be there? 

 

I'd love it if they came with the receipts on that one....

What a load of bull****

[KirbyDome89]

9 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

I have to assume they did their due diligence. Anything that is failing today... doesn't have to be failing tomorrow. 

I've never worried to much about this. They can bring on investors... they can sell the team to new owners but in the end... I'm pretty sure that the team is going to spend what the revenue allows them to spend and the revenue is never going to allow them to operate how the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Phillies and Blue Jays operate and in my opinion... the Twins have been trying to operate like the big boys without the money to do it. How ownership is structured won't significantly change the revenue. Whoever is sitting in the chair that Tom now sits in is what I'm interest in. 

Many will argue with me on TD but I absolutely believe Tom Pohlad when he says that they invested when they allowed payroll to near 160 million. They did. That figure was well above what the lower revenue teams spent. They spent it wrong... but they spent.     

Honest question, how have the Twins been attempting to operate like the big boys? The Mets didn't want Bader as a 4th OF but the Twins were more than happy to give him a starting role. Philly sent Clemens packing, welcome to MN buddy. LA paid the Twins to take Margot off their hands. These are just recent team interactions, but the point is the Twins continue to attempt to plug roster holes by signing bounce back type vets. 1B and a true 4th OF spot have been a revolving door. Before that it was a slew of cooked SPs filling out the 4th and 5th spot in the rotation. Teams serious about winning, all those you mentioned above, are constantly plugging holes with replacement types like Josh Bell, hoping to prop up a crumbling "core." 

The Twins have failed to deliver on the development side for sure, but they've compounded that issue by continuing to invest minimal $$ and maximum time into players that have no future with the club. Their only playoff appearance in the last 5 years required a historically bad division (even by AL Central standards) just to reach 87 wins. Now they're looking to run back essentially the same squad that collapsed each of the last 2 seasons. I can't imagine any of the heavy hitters you mentioned above selling that level of complacency. 

Is it the Correa signing? Is that the only outlier here? How many of the big boys are paying a team like Houston to take him? Toronto has sat through some pretty lean (relative to salary) George Springer years. I'm sure there are similar examples for LA, Philly, and both NY squads. 

8 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

I haven't seen the books but I don't assume that every single owner in baseball is just stuffing money in their pockets.

17th is good for the grouping that they should probably be operating in. 

Not that I trust Forbes or any of the valuation services but those folks rank the Twins 22nd in franchise value. 

I assume these valuation models at least attempt to assess revenue since revenue plays an important in valuations. So I assume that the revenue they pull in belongs in a fairly large group of teams in the bottom of half. Amongst that group... 17th is a significant push upward.  

We can make assumptions about 17th ranked payroll. Out of those 16 teams ranked higher. Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Giants, Phillies and Blue Jays make up 7 of them and they are simply at a level above everyone. We can't spend with them so they don't apply to us or the rankings.

There is another group behind them that we don't belong with either. Braves, Astros, Rangers, Angels and the Nationals don't apply to us. If the Nats want to turn it on... they probably could. 

These grouping are obviously subjective... but in my subjective opinion and I really have no information on any of the teams to offer anything worthwhile. 12 teams out of the 16 teams who spent more are teams that we can't financially keep up with no matter how much we spend and shouldn't even try. 

Maybe we should define what the stuffing of pockets entails because I don't for one second believe these owners aren't eating first. 

I'm not going to pretend to know how these valuations are estimated, but if you're attaching half a billion dollars worth of debt to the team I'd imagine that tanks it's value a bit right? 

Toronto isn't a huge revenue team, they're just maxing out a competitive window. They're closer to MN than they are to Atlanta or Houston in your second tier. We can work from the bottom up too. TB, Cleveland, Sacramento, Miami, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee won't spend. You can add teams like the White Sox, KC, Cincy, and Washington too as clubs that, for one reason or another, shouldn't be spending more than MN. That puts the Twins basically where they've sat for the last decade; somewhere from 20th to 17th. 

I guess my bar is higher, but to me that's bare minimum, especially during what was supposed to be a window of contention. I just can't celebrate this club having a below average payroll. Twins fans have been conditioned to accept less. It doesn't have to be this way. 

Same deal with the Forbes valuations, but the Twins revenue was marked at $342M in 2023 and $324M in 2024. Payroll was reported at $162M and $154M respectively. Each season they spent roughly 47.4% of revenue on payroll, which is below their stated "goal," of 50-52%. More importantly though, how are they "investing beyond what revenue can support?" Where is that $170-$180M going annually? I understand there are operations costs, but that'd be an insanely high  What about the additional spending required to run a deficit? Like I said, they're eating first.

[cheeseheadgophfan]

On 12/17/2025 at 2:12 PM, Cap'n Piranha said:

He's owned the Wild for 17 years, and has been out of the first round twice, and both times immediately lost in the next round.  Better than the Twins for the past 17 years sure, but not exactly championship caliber.

Agreed that the results haven't been there, but it's not because of a lack of spending/trying....

Wild signed Parise/Suter and "went for it"....those contracts were record-setting at the time and all of us fans were ecstatic.  It didn't work.

No comparison between he and Pohlad family....

[Riverbrian]

11 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Honest question, how have the Twins been attempting to operate like the big boys?

You basically answered this question yourself in your entire reply. You left off the "without the money to do it". part when you quoted me and then used the money to illustrate why they are not the same... and that is basically my point. 

The difference between signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is money... and obviously talent but it's the same approach. One is done without money and one is done with money. Without the money to do it is the key difference. Signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is the same approach.

One is what the big boys do. The other is telling everybody in the world that you have no money but it's the same super market. 

We have become reliant on players developed by other teams. We just don't get the good ones. 

[Riverbrian]

11 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Maybe we should define what the stuffing of pockets entails because I don't for one second believe these owners aren't eating first. 

I'm not going to pretend to know how these valuations are estimated, but if you're attaching half a billion dollars worth of debt to the team I'd imagine that tanks it's value a bit right? 

Toronto isn't a huge revenue team, they're just maxing out a competitive window. They're closer to MN than they are to Atlanta or Houston in your second tier. We can work from the bottom up too. TB, Cleveland, Sacramento, Miami, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee won't spend. You can add teams like the White Sox, KC, Cincy, and Washington too as clubs that, for one reason or another, shouldn't be spending more than MN. That puts the Twins basically where they've sat for the last decade; somewhere from 20th to 17th. 

I guess my bar is higher, but to me that's bare minimum, especially during what was supposed to be a window of contention. I just can't celebrate this club having a below average payroll. Twins fans have been conditioned to accept less. It doesn't have to be this way. 

Same deal with the Forbes valuations, but the Twins revenue was marked at $342M in 2023 and $324M in 2024. Payroll was reported at $162M and $154M respectively. Each season they spent roughly 47.4% of revenue on payroll, which is below their stated "goal," of 50-52%. More importantly though, how are they "investing beyond what revenue can support?" Where is that $170-$180M going annually? I understand there are operations costs, but that'd be an insanely high  What about the additional spending required to run a deficit? Like I said, they're eating first.

I have no idea on what is coming in and what is going out. I don't know much it costs to fly 50 people Minnesota to Seattle. I don't know how many people travel with the team. 

I can only assume that they are doing just fine. They have added three separate investors and I assume that means that they were willing to invest... and therefore despite the reported debt... they are doing just fine because they found multiple investor groups willing to pay money to get involved in whatever it costs to operate. 

It's a business. They are going to eat. I don't have a problem with that. How much are they eating... I don't know and I don't care anymore. Weather it's a baseball franchise or a convenience store. The margins are thin. You are not going to survive if your gas prices are not competitive and you are not going to survive if you don't fix the toilet in the women's bathroom. 

I have nothing to prove or disprove anything. The Twins have always spent in a range and they are part of a group of clubs that spend in that same range year after year.

I just don't assume that a new owner is going to arrive on a white horse and start writing out checks because the new owner will have the same conditions. 

[rdehring]

Have a question about the investor group.  After reading both articles in this morning's Strib I began to wonder.  In the article posted by two people who are not sports writers (don't know who they are) it appears there are more than three investors.  When they speak about Hicks they refer to the local investors as plural.  And they seem to indicate that doesn't include Leopold who invested separately from the other two groups.  So it appears there are other local investors, who have not been identified, as part of Hicks group.  

Does anyone know if this is true and if it is any idea of who?  And could that include any former players?

[ashbury]

On 12/19/2025 at 4:50 AM, Riverbrian said:

The difference between signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is money... and obviously talent but it's the same approach. One is done without money and one is done with money. Without the money to do it is the key difference. Signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is the same approach.

There is another difference that mostly aligns with what you said but reflects a difference in intent. 

No one expects a given team to routinely develop someone of the caliber of Alonso.  It's a privilege to have him accept your bid and come play for your team, as he improves nearly any roster.

Someone like Ty France at this stage of his career?  It's really a mark of failure to not have someone in-house already, to take that role.  No matter that the price for France last year was a measly $1M.  The team grits its teeth and pays the Failure Tax.

I'm not quite willing to say "we want somebody better, a real difference maker" and "we don't have anybody" are meaningfully the same approach.

[Riverbrian]

8 hours ago, ashbury said:

There is another difference that mostly aligns with what you said but reflects a difference in intent. 

No one expects a given team to routinely develop someone of the caliber of Alonso.  It's a privilege to have him accept your bid and come play for your team, as he improves nearly any roster.

Someone like Ty France at this stage of his career?  It's really a mark of failure to not have someone in-house already to take that role.  No matter that the price for France last year was a measly $1M.  The team grits its teeth and pays the Failure Tax.

I'm not quite willing to say "we want somebody better, a real difference maker" and "we don't have anybody" are meaningfully the same approach.

If you ain't making it. You are buying it. Some buy ribeye... some buy ramen noodles but both are buying it. It's the same approach. 

The Twins started 2025 with 8 pre-arb players.  That is a shockingly low number in comparison with their peers. 8 actually changes the peer grouping. The group we belong in started 2025 with double that number. 8 puts us in a group with the Phillies, Yankees, the teams with money... those are the teams in the single digits. That's our peer group... the teams that trade prospects for 16 million a year Ryan McMahon.  

8 is incredibly low. 8 doesn't happen overnight... it is accumulative over time... just like Cleveland having 20 Pre-Arb players is also accumulative over time. 

8 takes neglect over time. It takes years of choosing Gallo over Larnach. Garlick over Rooker. Belisle over Anderson. 

[KirbyDome89]

On 12/19/2025 at 6:50 AM, Riverbrian said:

You basically answered this question yourself in your entire reply. You left off the "without the money to do it". part when you quoted me and then used the money to illustrate why they are not the same... and that is basically my point. 

The difference between signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is money... and obviously talent but it's the same approach. One is done without money and one is done with money. Without the money to do it is the key difference. Signing Ty France and signing Pete Alonso is the same approach.

One is what the big boys do. The other is telling everybody in the world that you have no money but it's the same super market. 

We have become reliant on players developed by other teams. We just don't get the good ones. 

I quoted the whole post and even bolded the "without the money," part. The supermarket analogy is an oversimplification. I can boil a pack of ramen in my kitchen, that doesn't mean I'm attempting to operate like a fine dining establishment even though we're both technically cooking. 

On 12/19/2025 at 7:23 AM, Riverbrian said:

I have no idea on what is coming in and what is going out. I don't know much it costs to fly 50 people Minnesota to Seattle. I don't know how many people travel with the team. 

I can only assume that they are doing just fine. They have added three separate investors and I assume that means that they were willing to invest... and therefore despite the reported debt... they are doing just fine because they found multiple investor groups willing to pay money to get involved in whatever it costs to operate. 

It's a business. They are going to eat. I don't have a problem with that. How much are they eating... I don't know and I don't care anymore. Weather it's a baseball franchise or a convenience store. The margins are thin. You are not going to survive if your gas prices are not competitive and you are not going to survive if you don't fix the toilet in the women's bathroom. 

I have nothing to prove or disprove anything. The Twins have always spent in a range and they are part of a group of clubs that spend in that same range year after year.

I just don't assume that a new owner is going to arrive on a white horse and start writing out checks because the new owner will have the same conditions. 

Eh, I care about how much they're eating if they're going to cry poor and insult the intelligence of this fan base. 

"Thin," is relative. If you own a convenience store, the difference between $50K or $60K annually is huge. The difference between $50M and $60M is far less impactful, especially for billionaires. I just can't listen to an ownership group that's top 3-5 in all of MLB in terms of net worth cry about how they've been too generous with a payroll sitting near the bottom third and continuing to come in below their publicly declared allocation goal. It's pathetic, and that's before we even start to get into the how or why they find themselves in such an allegedly rough revenue situation. 

[Riverbrian]

15 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I quoted the whole post and even bolded the "without the money," part. The supermarket analogy is an oversimplification. I can boil a pack of ramen in my kitchen, that doesn't mean I'm attempting to operate like a fine dining establishment even though we're both technically cooking. 

Eh, I care about how much they're eating if they're going to cry poor and insult the intelligence of this fan base. 

"Thin," is relative. If you own a convenience store, the difference between $50K or $60K annually is huge. The difference between $50M and $60M is far less impactful, especially for billionaires. I just can't listen to an ownership group that's top 3-5 in all of MLB in terms of net worth cry about how they've been too generous with a payroll sitting near the bottom third and continuing to come in below their publicly declared allocation goal. It's pathetic, and that's before we even start to get into the how or why they find themselves in such an allegedly rough revenue situation. 

If your point is that the Pohlads are cheap and therefore not comparable to the Phillies in any form or fashion and you therefore reject all attempts of comparison in any form or fashion. because the Pohlads are cheap. 

All I can say is that I've come to grips a long time ago that the Twins will never spend like the Phillies or Mets or Yankees. 

Never... no matter who owns the team. They are going to have to find a different way to compete. 

The Phillies use free agency to acquire Bryce Harper and play him every day. The Twins use free agency to acquire Ty France and play him every day. 

Milwaukee, Cleveland and Tampa don't acquire Harper or France. They load up on players making the minimum. 

The Twins need to be more like Milwaukee and less like Philadelphia. 

 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

6 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

If your point is that the Pohlads are cheap and therefore not comparable to the Phillies in any form or fashion and you therefore reject all attempts of comparison in any form or fashion. because the Pohlads are cheap. 

All I can say is that I've come to grips a long time ago that the Twins will never spend like the Phillies or Mets or Yankees. 

Never... no matter who owns the team. They are going to have to find a different way to compete. 

The Phillies use free agency to acquire Bryce Harper and play him every day. The Twins use free agency to acquire Ty France and play him every day. 

Milwaukee, Cleveland and Tampa don't acquire Harper or France. They load up on players making the minimum. 

The Twins need to be more like Milwaukee and less like Philadelphia. 

 

 

 

Who is asking this team to spend like NY? I'm tired of these strawman arguments every time payroll comes up. We all understand that this club won't be a perennial top tier payroll. Yeah, they can't follow the LA or NY blueprint to success.

My point is that they haven't been attempting to do so. In fact, the Twins haven't done much of anything. They've basically sat on their hands for 3 years now and their only real bout of activity was to do a partial tear down. That's not how the "big boys," operate. NY, LA, Philly, ect aren't making insignificant moves at the fringes and trotting out a failing core year after year. They aren't sitting out entire trade deadlines while in contention. They aren't waiting around entire offseasons just to sign Jay Jackson types. They aren't overly reliant on a poor development system. They aren't attempting to build an entire bullpen while convincing themselves they can contend in a bad division. The Twins have been stagnant, and when they have moved, it's been mostly half measure type transactions. 

Harper is an interesting example. Philly signed him as a corner OF, and he moved to 1B. The Twins roster would be better off if Larnach or Wallner were able/allowed to do the same thing. Instead, we'll watch Kody Clemens and (hopefully not much of) Josh Bell play 1B. Are the Twins settling for crumbs at 1B because as the downtrodden proletariat they're resigned to that fate, or did poor development, poor roster construction, and a delusional belief in production coming elsewhere lead them to think they could get away with that duo (or Ty France) at 1B? Harper vs. whomever sits at 1B for MN isn't apples to apples. We all know the Twins aren't going to go out and get Bryce Harper, but Ty France (or Josh Bell) aren't the Teemu version of the same thing. They're a symptom of the above issues. 

Josh Bell was literally Cleveland's prize offseason signing just a few years ago, so yeah, Idk. I don't really want to be Milwaukee; constantly trying to maximize the trade value of good players. The Twins don't have to do that. 

[Riverbrian]

4 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Who is asking this team to spend like NY? I'm tired of these strawman arguments every time payroll comes up. We all understand that this club won't be a perennial top tier payroll. Yeah, they can't follow the LA or NY blueprint to success.

My point is that they haven't been attempting to do so. In fact, the Twins haven't done much of anything. They've basically sat on their hands for 3 years now and their only real bout of activity was to do a partial tear down. That's not how the "big boys," operate. NY, LA, Philly, ect aren't making insignificant moves at the fringes and trotting out a failing core year after year. They aren't sitting out entire trade deadlines while in contention. They aren't waiting around entire offseasons just to sign Jay Jackson types. They aren't overly reliant on a poor development system. They aren't attempting to build an entire bullpen while convincing themselves they can contend in a bad division. The Twins have been stagnant, and when they have moved, it's been mostly half measure type transactions. 

Harper is an interesting example. Philly signed him as a corner OF, and he moved to 1B. The Twins roster would be better off if Larnach or Wallner were able/allowed to do the same thing. Instead, we'll watch Kody Clemens and (hopefully not much of) Josh Bell play 1B. Are the Twins settling for crumbs at 1B because as the downtrodden proletariat they're resigned to that fate, or did poor development, poor roster construction, and a delusional belief in production coming elsewhere lead them to think they could get away with that duo (or Ty France) at 1B? Harper vs. whomever sits at 1B for MN isn't apples to apples. We all know the Twins aren't going to go out and get Bryce Harper, but Ty France (or Josh Bell) aren't the Teemu version of the same thing. They're a symptom of the above issues. 

Josh Bell was literally Cleveland's prize offseason signing just a few years ago, so yeah, Idk. I don't really want to be Milwaukee; constantly trying to maximize the trade value of good players. The Twins don't have to do that. 

I'll let you discuss the stagnancy. You'll get no argument from me. If you think the budget should be higher... Fine... I don't know where the budget should be. I only know where it's been and it's not the point. 

The Twins are filling holes with free agents. The Big Boys are filling holes with free agents. 

It's the same blueprint to success. The Big Boys have money to do this. The Twins don't and it is creating that stagnancy. The Big Boys are not signing Jay Jackson. The Twins are because it's what they can afford. 

I can't simplify it any more than that.

The Phillies and Dodgers started 2025 with 8 Pre-Arb Players on the Roster. The Twins started with 8 pre-arb players on the roster. It pushed payroll up to 150 plus million and then the roof caved in. 

Milwaukee and Cleveland started with 18 pre-arb players on the roster. They are not signing Jay Jackson either. 

This is why I'm saying that the Twins are trying to do what the Phillies are doing. 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

20 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

I'll let you discuss the stagnancy. You'll get no argument from me. If you think the budget should be higher... Fine... I don't know where the budget should be. I only know where it's been and it's not the point. 

The Twins are filling holes with free agents. The Big Boys are filling holes with free agents. 

It's the same blueprint to success. The Big Boys have money to do this. The Twins don't and it is creating that stagnancy. The Big Boys are not signing Jay Jackson. The Twins are because it's what they can afford. 

I can't simplify it any more than that.

The Phillies and Dodgers started 2025 with 8 Pre-Arb Players on the Roster. The Twins started with 8 pre-arb players on the roster. It pushed payroll up to 150 plus million and then the roof caved in. 

Milwaukee and Cleveland started with 18 pre-arb players on the roster. They are not signing Jay Jackson either. 

This is why I'm saying that the Twins are trying to do what the Phillies are doing. 

 

 

Eh, I just disagree that the lack of FA success drove the club to stagnation. Vice versa I'd say. 

I'm not fixated on the number of pre arb players. Guys like Lee, Wallner, or even Lewis might not make it through arbitration, not because the Twins can't afford them, but because they might not be deemed worthy of even their modest salaries a la Larnach. Inexperience or youth doesn't necessarily correlate with production or actual talent. 

Agree to disagree at this point. 

[Riverbrian]

On 12/24/2025 at 5:02 PM, KirbyDome89 said:

Eh, I just disagree that the lack of FA success drove the club to stagnation. Vice versa I'd say. 

I'm not fixated on the number of pre arb players. Guys like Lee, Wallner, or even Lewis might not make it through arbitration, not because the Twins can't afford them, but because they might not be deemed worthy of even their modest salaries a la Larnach. Inexperience or youth doesn't necessarily correlate with production or actual talent. 

Agree to disagree at this point. 

Disagreement is Cool. I certainly can't say who is right and who is wrong. 

I'll just say this: If you believe that the Twins can and should spend more. The number of Pre-Arb players matters less. 

If you believe that they have a budget. Counting the number of pre-arb players is critical.

I believe they have a budget and am therefore fixated on the pre-arb numbers and I will always be until the CBA changes drastically. 

Payroll was $153,713,740 in 2023. For simplification. Divide that by 26 and it comes to 5.912 Million per player. Carlos Correa took 33,333,333 out of that total. Minus Correa and divide it by 25 and you see that Correa alone drops that average down a million dollars by himself. 4.815 Million per player is the new number.

Then you add in Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez to Correa. The 5 of them cost $81.976,190. Minus that out of 153,713,740 and you get 71,737,550 and you still need 21 players.

The Twins had about 10 players who were pre-arb making the minimum in 2023. That's 7.2 Million or so. This leaves you 64,537,550 and you need 11 players. This is about 5.87 per player. The Pre-arb players paid for Carlos Correa. 

The 10 players you need at 5.87 per. That's Arbitration money. That gives you a Kepler, Mahle, Pagan, Polanco. It buys you a Farmer. Taylor. 

Now imagine... you are Milwaukee or Cleveland. Still winning baseball games with 18 pre-arb players making the minimum. That will cost around 13 million in total. 

Subtracting that 13 million for 18 pre-arb players from the 71,737,550 left over after buying, Correa, Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez. This will leave you with 58,737,550 to spend. 

You can now take that 58.7 million and spend it on how many players? 18 are pre-arb and 5 are Correa, Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez. 18 + 5 is 23 out of 26 roster spots accounted for.

So 3 players needed to fill out the 26 with 58.7 million to work with.

That's 19.5 million Per Player. That's a higher class free agent. That's no longer shopping for Manuel Margot or Ty France because of the budget. 

Counting Pre-arb numbers is critical. Although not as critical if you believe that the Twins will just keeping adding on to that 153 million. 

Royce Lewis, Trevor Larnach, Ryan Jeffers, Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Duran, Jax were 7 of those 10 in 2023.

They all graduated into Arbitration. No longer the minimum. Players become more expensive as they reach levels. The players making the minimum will need to be replenished as they graduate. 

In 2025 we were down to 8 Pre-Arb. Same territory as the bog boys. 

Anyway... Agree to disagree... but that is why I fixate on Pre-Arb. 

 

[Riverbrian]

It's the same approach but a slightly different way to look at the value of Pre-Arb players. 

There isn't a magic number of how many pre-arb players you should have to be smaller market functional.

For example... Boston is a big budget team that made the playoffs with 15 pre-arb players on the roster last year. Almost double of what the Twins started the season at. A high number of Pre-Arb players doesn't necessarily kill a teams chances. 

For example purposes... Let's say the Twins had 16 Pre-Arb. That eats 12 million out of the budget... whatever that budget is and you have 10 roster spots to fill. 

The Current Twins lineup projects to have 7 players making arbitration. Those 7 players are estimated to make 27.8 in Arbitration this year. 

This takes about 40 million out of your budget whatever it is with Arb and Pre-Arb salary level players and you have accounted for 23 out of 26 roster spots. 

If your Budget is 100 million like the Twins are looking like they will spend this year. That's leaves them 60 million for 3 players. If it's 153 million it's 113 million to spend for 3 players. That's 3 Pete Alonso type free agents at 30 per and you still have 23 million left over at 153.    

We know that Buxton and Lopez will take up 42.5 of that and two roster spots and you can subtract the 10.5 million in Dead Money due to Correa and 53 million is spent of it is spent on two plus the dead money.

So one Pete Alonso instead of one Josh Bell takes your payroll to around 123 Million. Still 30 million less than the 153.    

If the Twins could simply fill holes with Pre-Arb instead of Josh Bell. It creates the budget space on a limited budget for extensions, for a better class free agent. 

I'm just plain tired of being against a payroll wall taking 20 million and spreading it over 4 or 5 spots. 

The Twins have catching up to do with Milwaukee and Cleveland in this regard. 2026 would be the perfect year to recalibrate... catch up to them as quickly as possible. They just need to FLOOD the system with pre-arb players... stop with the Josh Bells and let's see which pre-arb players will help win games and let them fill as many spaces as they can so we can roll into 2027 with less holes clearly identified through performance and have the CASH in our pocket available to properly fill those holes. 

 

     

 

 

[Major League Ready]

On 12/18/2025 at 7:39 PM, KirbyDome89 said:

Same deal with the Forbes valuations, but the Twins revenue was marked at $342M in 2023 and $324M in 2024. Payroll was reported at $162M and $154M respectively. Each season they spent roughly 47.4% of revenue on payroll, which is below their stated "goal," of 50-52%. More importantly though, how are they "investing beyond what revenue can support?" Where is that $170-$180M going annually? I understand there are operations costs, but that'd be an insanely high  What about the additional spending required to run a deficit? Like I said, they're eating first.

Draft bonuses and player benefits are around $40M.  If they have an operating profit of $30M which is modest, that leaves around $100M for operating expenses.    I would estimate personnel cost of roughly $70-75M which leaves $25-30M for all other operating expenses.  Seems about right.

[KirbyDome89]

4 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Draft bonuses and player benefits are around $40M.  If they have an operating profit of $30M which is modest, that leaves around $100M for operating expenses.    I would estimate personnel cost of roughly $70-75M which leaves $25-30M for all other operating expenses.  Seems about right.

Which massively contradicts the claim that the debt is a result of baseball operations (despite ownership insisting that's the case) and the notion that payroll at that level can't be supported. 

[KirbyDome89]

On 12/26/2025 at 7:21 AM, Riverbrian said:

Disagreement is Cool. I certainly can't say who is right and who is wrong. 

I'll just say this: If you believe that the Twins can and should spend more. The number of Pre-Arb players matters less. 

If you believe that they have a budget. Counting the number of pre-arb players is critical.

I believe they have a budget and am therefore fixated on the pre-arb numbers and I will always be until the CBA changes drastically. 

Payroll was $153,713,740 in 2023. For simplification. Divide that by 26 and it comes to 5.912 Million per player. Carlos Correa took 33,333,333 out of that total. Minus Correa and divide it by 25 and you see that Correa alone drops that average down a million dollars by himself. 4.815 Million per player is the new number.

Then you add in Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez to Correa. The 5 of them cost $81.976,190. Minus that out of 153,713,740 and you get 71,737,550 and you still need 21 players.

The Twins had about 10 players who were pre-arb making the minimum in 2023. That's 7.2 Million or so. This leaves you 64,537,550 and you need 11 players. This is about 5.87 per player. The Pre-arb players paid for Carlos Correa. 

The 10 players you need at 5.87 per. That's Arbitration money. That gives you a Kepler, Mahle, Pagan, Polanco. It buys you a Farmer. Taylor. 

Now imagine... you are Milwaukee or Cleveland. Still winning baseball games with 18 pre-arb players making the minimum. That will cost around 13 million in total. 

Subtracting that 13 million for 18 pre-arb players from the 71,737,550 left over after buying, Correa, Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez. This will leave you with 58,737,550 to spend. 

You can now take that 58.7 million and spend it on how many players? 18 are pre-arb and 5 are Correa, Buxton, Gray, Gallo and Vazquez. 18 + 5 is 23 out of 26 roster spots accounted for.

So 3 players needed to fill out the 26 with 58.7 million to work with.

That's 19.5 million Per Player. That's a higher class free agent. That's no longer shopping for Manuel Margot or Ty France because of the budget. 

Counting Pre-arb numbers is critical. Although not as critical if you believe that the Twins will just keeping adding on to that 153 million. 

Royce Lewis, Trevor Larnach, Ryan Jeffers, Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Duran, Jax were 7 of those 10 in 2023.

They all graduated into Arbitration. No longer the minimum. Players become more expensive as they reach levels. The players making the minimum will need to be replenished as they graduate. 

In 2025 we were down to 8 Pre-Arb. Same territory as the bog boys. 

Anyway... Agree to disagree... but that is why I fixate on Pre-Arb. 

 

Yeah, I believe this team can and should spend more than the 2026 payroll they're tracking towards. Also, yes, spending should be trending upwards just to stay in that 17-20th range. A sub $100M payroll a la Cleveland or TB is embarrassing, and the notion that this ownership group can't support a below average payroll is total bull****.

Trevor Larnach at $4M isn't a problem. Trevor Larnach, the plodding defender who is best situated to be a DH but lacks a consistent enough bat to use him at DH is a problem.

The arb status of Lewis, Lee, Wallner, Miranda, Julien, Martin, ect isn't nearly as concerning as their regression or outright failure to produce. To me that's the difference between 2023 and last season, not 7 vs 10 pre arb players. 

[Riverbrian]

2 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Yeah, I believe this team can and should spend more than the 2026 payroll they're tracking towards. Also, yes, spending should be trending upwards just to stay in that 17-20th range. A sub $100M payroll a la Cleveland or TB is embarrassing, and the notion that this ownership group can't support a below average payroll is total bull****.

Trevor Larnach at $4M isn't a problem. Trevor Larnach, the plodding defender who is best situated to be a DH but lacks a consistent enough bat to use him at DH is a problem.

The arb status of Lewis, Lee, Wallner, Miranda, Julien, Martin, ect isn't nearly as concerning as their regression or outright failure to produce. To me that's the difference between 2023 and last season, not 7 vs 10 pre arb players. 

It's a question of better players. Different answers to how. 

 

[KirbyDome89]

3 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

It's a question of better players. Different answers to how. 

 

Chicken or the egg I suppose. 

I'm happy to cede that if Falvey continues to insist on wasting what FA dollars he has on quantity over quality I'll start rooting for high pre arb numbers too

[mnfireman]

https://www.minnesotasportsfan.com/minnesota-twins/craig-leipold-next-mn-twins-majority-owner-rumors/