How Much Would the Twins Have to Spend to Prove They're Serious About 2027?

[Cody Christie]

Image courtesy of Rick Scuteri-Imagn Images

The Minnesota Twins have spent much of the last few years asking fans to believe in the future. Believe in the young players. Believe in the player development system. Believe that the next wave of prospects can eventually form the foundation of a sustainable contender. There is nothing wrong with believing in those things. At some point, though, ownership has to show it believes in them, too. Tom Pohlad has already said the Twins' 2027 payroll will increase. 

"I'm not hoping—it will be higher," Pohlad said. "For us to accomplish the things that we want to accomplish, and be a consistently competitive team in the playoffs, and going deep, we have to make an investment into this team."

That's a meaningful statement. It also creates a very simple question for the Twins heading into the offseason. How much higher?

$30 Million Isn't Aggressive

The easiest way to look at the situation is through the numbers. The Twins entered 2026 with an Opening Day payroll around $105 million, their lowest Opening Day figure since 2017. The trade deadline additions of A.J. Minter, Dean Kremer and Jeff Hoffman pushed the club's estimated payroll commitment to roughly $109 million for the season.

So what happens if Minnesota adds $30 million this winter? The payroll reaches approximately $135 million. That would be meaningful compared to where the Twins are today. But it would not exactly qualify as an aggressive offseason. It would essentially take Minnesota back to where it was in 2025.

The Twins entered that season with an Opening Day payroll estimated around $144.3 million. In other words, $30 million would represent an increase. But it wouldn't represent a major change in organizational spending. It would represent getting back to a level the Twins have already demonstrated they can reach.

What About $60 Million?

Now, we're talking about something different. Adding $60 million to a roughly $105 million baseline would put Minnesota around $165 million. That would bring the Twins back to the neighborhood of their record spending in 2023.

Minnesota carried a payroll around $156 million on Opening Day in 2023 and finished the season around $160 million, depending on the accounting method used. That club won the American League Central and won a postseason series for the first time in over two decades. 

That doesn't mean spending $160 million guarantees anything. It doesn't. But it would send a very different message. A $160 million-plus payroll would tell the fan base that the organization isn't simply replacing departing salaries or filling holes around a young roster. It is actively trying to build a team capable of competing at the highest level.

That would also give Jeremy Zoll considerably more flexibility. The Twins don't need to spend $60 million on one player. In fact, that's probably not the best way to approach the roster. They could spread that money across multiple areas. A starting pitcher. A high-leverage reliever. A legitimate middle-of-the-order bat. A catcher. Bench depth.

Suddenly, a roster with an intriguing young core starts looking much different.

$80 Million Would Be a Statement

Then there's the $80 million question. A $105 million payroll plus $80 million would put Minnesota around $185 million. That would be a franchise-level commitment. It would also put the Twins well above their 2023 spending and into a payroll range they haven't consistently approached.

Would $185 million guarantee a championship? Of course not. Would it guarantee the Twins make the playoffs? No. But there is an important distinction between spending money and spending money intelligently.

The Twins have plenty of young players who should occupy roster spots at relatively low salaries. Walker Jenkins, Emmanuel Rodriguez, Kaelen Culpepper, Brooks Lee, Luke Keaschall and others could give the front office something every team wants: talented players who aren't yet expensive.

That means Minnesota doesn't necessarily need to spend $185 million simply to have an expensive roster. It could use that money to address the areas where the current roster is weakest. That's what aggressive spending should look like. Not spending for the sake of spending. Spending to turn weaknesses into strengths.

The Payroll Can't Be the Excuse Anymore

This is where the conversation becomes bigger than a dollar amount. For years, payroll has been part of the Twins' explanation for why roster construction has to be creative. There have been legitimate reasons for those constraints.

The uncertainty surrounding the local television situation played a role in the organization's payroll decisions. The Twins dropped from their franchise-record spending in 2023, and ownership publicly acknowledged that financial considerations were part of the decision.

But that explanation can't carry the organization forever. The 2026 season provided an interesting case study. The Twins remained competitive deep into the season despite operating with one of baseball's lower payrolls. Then, at the trade deadline, ownership gave Zoll the flexibility to add A.J. Minter, Dean Kremer and Jeff Hoffman while taking on more than $8 million in prorated salary.

That was important. It showed what can happen when the front office has financial flexibility. It also showed that the Twins aren't simply asking whether they can afford to add players. They're capable of making those additions when ownership gives them the room to do it.

That makes 2027 different. There shouldn't be another surprise waiting around the corner. There shouldn't be a sudden need to cut payroll. There shouldn't be a repeat of the organization explaining why it can't pursue a player because the financial parameters are too restrictive.

Pohlad has already told everyone the payroll will increase. Now the organization has to show what that means. A payroll increase that merely makes room for similar veteran scoop-ups as the ones they made last winter while retaining Joe Ryan, Pablo López and Trevor Larnach wouldn't be especially inspiring—though everyone should want those two hurlers to stick around. An increase that meaningfully changes what the team can do this winter is one that would probably, finally, make Pohlad flinch—but that's what needs to happen.

---

How much will the Twins spend this winter? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

View full article

[Czelgert]

KC and Milwaukee had payrolls around $150M this year and likely toward $160M next season.  Those organizations had vastly different results but there’s little reason why the Twins couldn’t spend in the neighborhood of those franchises.  

[Saxophone Joe]

Hilariously appropriate photo of Pablo. 👀 Well done! 

[Patzky]

4 minutes ago, Saxophone Joe said:

Hilariously appropriate photo of Pablo. 👀 Well done! 

He's shocked, SHOCKED I SAY that the team is talking about spending money beyond Pablo Day clothing.

[Twins GFP]

"I'm not hoping—it will be higher," Pohlad said

Color me skeptical.  My (hopefully incorrect) guess is that it will be an increase of 10% or less.

[farmerguychris]

$165M - wasn't that where we were at the last time we had a successful season in 2023?  Need to be at least there or we haven't met expectations.

Jeffers (yes, I know unlikely), a starter, a reliever or 2, and a 1B/DH.

 

[Nashvilletwin]

Not much needs to be spent, besides on Jeffers and maybe a BP arm or two. Why? Because no one should care about ‘27.  The “lockout” shortened season (for all you owner haters out there who complain that technically it’s not a strike but the owners fault for locking out the players) needs to be an investment in our young players year.  

You play Culpepper, Keaschall, Jenkins, ERod, and, when he’s ready in July, Houston as much as possible.  They need innings and ABs. Given the season is destined to be shorter, you don’t need to worry about innings for the young starters - Bradley, Abel, Prielipp, and Matthews should be going every fifth day (certainly if we get rid of one or both of Lopez and Ryan).

Re-sign Jeffers (that’s where we spend some cash). That’s priority #1. Jettison Lewis and Larnach. Rhoden and Gonzalez (and Martin) take their place and we see what potential those young players may have.

Kremer goes to the pen until we trade both Ryan and Lopez (that will save us some money).

If TTT wants to get delusional about winning in the ‘27 stub year, he’ll probably just keep both and let their contracts expire and get zippo for them (I’m having a hard time even imagining how incredibly stupid he and Zoll would have to be to let that happen).  Who knows, that roster may be a winner anyway.

You tell Buxton that he’s primarily a DH going forward.  If he still wants to play in the field for his last two seasons, you give him the option to be traded.

We then head into ‘28 with all the cash in the world to augment the roster via FAs or offer extensions - Jeffers is the only big contact, Buxton and Correa are done at the end of ‘28, and Lopez and Ryan are off the books.

Btw, we all need to get off this “payroll has to be at least ___” thing.  It’s about the players whom we can roster at a reasonable overall cost - whatever that may be.  We are way better off developing our own young players and rounding out the roster with a couple of FAs (like Jeffers, for example) to fill holes.

[thelanges5]

Not enough talent in the 2027 free agent pool to go too nuts. 
 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/available/_/year/2027

[Woof Bronzer]

The Twins should consistently be around league average payroll.  So for 27, if they really want to be serious, they should get back to average.  Somewhere in the range of $180m.  

They won't, and due to the lockout uncertainty, maybe shouldn't.  But it would be hard to argue that a middle-of-MLB market shouldn't be spending at least league average payroll.  

 

[Hubie29]

It's not so much how much money, but are they willing to cut dead weight and replace with MLB caliber talent. This will come with added payroll but adding talent with money being secondary will tell us how serious they are about winning. Also, signing Ryan, Lopez and Jeffers will be an indication they plan on competing. 

[bjorks]

If the rumors are true the proposed floor is $171M+ that would give Zoll $65M or so just to get to the floor. My guess is there would be a build up to $171M, but regardless some of these cheapskate owners will be forced to spend. The real question will be how many go beyond a floor or will there be 1/2 of MLB teams all sitting around the floor?

[PDX Twin]

If there's floor, then half the league is going to be looking to spend money on FAs. What happens next? Demand is up and supply is stationary, which means that FA prices are going through the roof! They will probably be permanently higher, but unless they phase in the floor slowly, the first year is going to be brutal. The worst year ever to shop ...

[Woof Bronzer]

40 minutes ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Btw, we all need to get off this “payroll has to be at least ___” thing.  It’s about the players whom we can roster at a reasonable overall cost - whatever that may be.  We are way better off developing our own young players and rounding out the roster with a couple of FAs (like Jeffers, for example) to fill holes.

There's a lot of logic to your post, even if I'd probably take a different approach.  But I do disagree with this last bit to a degree.  There is a correlation between payroll and winning, that's just factual.  Since the Twins' last WS only 1 team in the bottom 1/3 of payroll won a world series.  While spending does not guarantee you a WS, not spending enough pretty much guarantees you won't win one. 

The Brewers do the exact thing you describe.  They started 2 position player rookies and got 70 starts out of 2 other rookies and rounded out their roster with complimentary pieces.  So, they were more willing to play young (and cheap) guys than the Twins.  Yet their payroll was about $40m higher than the Twins.  

Smart roster management and development matter, of course.  For teams like the Twins, Rays, Guards, Brewers, that should entail not trying to outbid the Dodgers for FA talent, but rather locking up their own internally developed players early before they hit FA.  And that is going to take money.  For example, if Jenkins continues his trajectory they should sign him to a long term deal as early as next year (normal lockout caveat applies).  

The fact is in order to win in MLB there's a bare minimum you're going to need to spend.  And to me league average is an extremely fair bar to set for the Twins.  

[StiltedGopher]

Wouldn’t cost them Jack sh&t to play their prospects right now.  I don’t care if a lefty is pitching, Jenkins should be in the line up.  

[Cris E]

To prove what to who?  There are plenty of voices around here that'll never accept Zoll or Pohlad and the money isn't the point. "Should have spent more" will become "Wasted $36m on that guy."  They are never going to spend their way into the hearts of fans any more than Arte Moreno ever did.  They need to win to prove they're serious.

[Cris E]

22 minutes ago, PDX Twin said:

If there's floor, then half the league is going to be looking to spend money on FAs. What happens next? Demand is up and supply is stationary, which means that FA prices are going through the roof! They will probably be permanently higher, but unless they phase in the floor slowly, the first year is going to be brutal. The worst year ever to shop ...

This is so very true. Just as any potential cap on contract length or deferred dollars sucks for the tip top free agents, a provision that creates any sort of floor is a windfall for any decent to above average free agent. If ten teams need to spend more by 2030 then your Ty France and Michael King contracts are going to go through the roof. The Rays may never spend $400m on a Skenes, but they could easily write a 4/$130m on a King. 

One of the big problems the huge spenders like the Mets discover is that deciding to be a winner isn't just a matter of money. There have to be players available to sign, and writing big checks in a down year for free agents just gives you an average team that's expensive.  As a bunch of teams face increases in budget there's going to be some availability trouble in the coming couple years, and extensions might be the best way to spend some of this cash.

[shimrod]

So Pohlad says "increase" and TD discusses $30, $60, and $80 million dollar increments. 

I expect you could write a much more accurate article if you examine the $5, $10, and $12.5 million dollar options. 

 

[Mike Sixel]

The FA class is awful. Just sign Houston, Jenkins, Culpepper, Bradley, Keascell and Lee to big deals. 

The only other option is trading for an expensive guy, but the only position I'd do that for is first base or SP. And there won't be a 1B available that will have 3+ years of control that a team will trade.......

[PuckettPond]

Payroll should be based on attendance since Twins attendance is the lowest in 20 years you have your answer. Fans get the team they deserve. Sorry if the truth hurts.

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, Hubie29 said:

It's not so much how much money, but are they willing to cut dead weight and replace with MLB caliber talent. This will come with added payroll but adding talent with money being secondary will tell us how serious they are about winning. Also, signing Ryan, Lopez and Jeffers will be an indication they plan on competing. 

That's exactly where I'm at. I don't really care to hit a certain payroll number. We will have pre-arb players filling out most of the OF to keep the overall payroll number lower. I care about adding MLB talent where we have holes... Money shouldn't be a reason holding us back from improving pitching, C, 1B, and 2B. 

[TheLeviathan]

Well....8M was enough for some of you to be totally bought off as "no more half measures" at the deadline.  Seems like TD is happy right about there.

2027 isn't about payroll.  It's about building for 2028.  The payroll question is coming in 2-3 years if we can develop the talented core we're potentially working with.  And we'll likely need to supplement because we actively chose not to supplement them when we had the chance to put aside delusions and sell when the selling was good.

[MapleGroveTwinsFan]

Spending money next year is short sited since there is very little to spend on.

If would be foolish to spend money on the outfield, play the young guys (Jenkins, Erod, Keashall) and Buxton. 3B would be OK if they planned on moving Lee to second, but who? Short stop would be foolish, Maybe 2nd if they plan on Keashall/Clemens at first, First, nobody there really worth it. That leaves catcher (really only Jeffers) and pitching. 

As for payroll I more worried about what they spend in 28 after Lopez and Ryan's current contracts end. If they want to show the fans something, lock up Jenkins, Culpepper, Bradley, Keashall to longer term contracts. Figure out who between Lopez and Ryan brings back the most trade and trade them, sign King and Bieber, 

 

[MapleGroveTwinsFan]

10 minutes ago, PuckettPond said:

Payroll should be based on attendance since Twins attendance is the lowest in 20 years you have your answer. Fans get the team they deserve. Sorry if the truth hurts.

They basically drew 2.2 to 3 million between from 2005 until 2019, minus 2016 (1.9) when they won 59 games, Covid happened and since 2000, they have finished 5,3,1 (1.9),4(1.9),4, (3rd or 4th) and it is the fans fault? Maybe the worst post I have seen on this site, and there have been some bad ones.

[DataNerd]

2 hours ago, farmerguychris said:

$165M - wasn't that where we were at the last time we had a successful season in 2023?  Need to be at least there or we haven't met expectations.

Jeffers (yes, I know unlikely), a starter, a reliever or 2, and a 1B/DH.

 

It was 156, not 165.

[DataNerd]

I don't have any $ target, but I'll gauge it more off what type of players we are getting to fill in the holes.  We currently need a C (probably not a splash since Lackey is the future), 2 between 1B/2B/DH, and 2 RP.  If we are getting average or better starters for those roles I'll be happy, but it we are signing 5 bargain bin guys it will just be the same old.

Also, no spending on OF/SP.  We already have too much depth at those positions and should be trading some of it away to improve elsewhere.

[killercarewoliva]

2 hours ago, Czelgert said:

KC and Milwaukee had payrolls around $150M this year and likely toward $160M next season.  Those organizations had vastly different results but there’s little reason why the Twins couldn’t spend in the neighborhood of those franchises.  

I'm thinking how to say this. all the major sports are about spending money to put a winning team on the field of play. with baseball it used to be how well you can evaluate your draft picks and how well you can determine what you think. a player is going to be like next year by trading for him. no sport is harder to do with that than baseball. but now it's become more about how much personnel to put on the field you can buy instead of using your brain as a general manager to decide who to trade for who to pick in the draft. most of the time money will make a difference, but don't ask the New York Mets that. this all started with the New York Yankees. George steinbrunner was willing to put out whatever he had to to win baseball games. I don't think he even thought about with the farm system was like let's just buy a championship. personally, I don't think winning that way. is any fun at all but today if you depend on your draft picks and your trades with $100 million team salary to get over the hump, it's not going to happen. so you have to go out there and put out these millions and millions of dollars. we need a salary cap like the NFL has in every baseball. player wants to run to the hills and not play next year. if there's a salary cap well it's not going to put you in the $95,000 a year range for income. the salary cap is still going to pay you crazy money just like the NFL does but it might put a few more people in the stands cuz maybe the $300 single game seat could be $150. players don't think about your greed so much as the people that come to see you. you're still going to make tons of money. yes, I want to see the Minnesota twins win a championship since I've been filing them since 1965. it's been a long time. but my two vehicles used to have twins on their license plate here in Virginia. I have removed that I don't have any interest in wearing twins clothing to a ball game anymore because of the greed. seeing grown men dress up like they do at a football game. I think the players are laughing at them all the way to the bank. this isn't high school. please fans understand that that wear that stuff. okay, when I try to read replies they pop up there. if I read one reply any other replies or not located can't locate them. but thank you for your replies irregardless of whether you agree with me or not, but it was really nice paying $4.50 for a box seat at RFK stadium when I was 17. I don't know for sure but I think that amount of money today would probably be maybe $100? The rate of inflation does not apply to Major League sports and we need to boycott unfortunately but we're not going to do that

[Cris E]

15 minutes ago, killercarewoliva said:

I'm thinking how to say this. all the major sports are about spending money to put a winning team on the field of play. with baseball it used to be how well you can evaluate your draft picks and how well you can determine what you think. a player is going to be like next year by trading for him. no sport is harder to do with that than baseball. but now it's become more about how much personnel to put on the field you can buy instead of using your brain as a general manager to decide who to trade for who to pick in the draft. most of the time money will make a difference, but don't ask the New York Mets that. this all started with the New York Yankees. George steinbrunner was willing to put out whatever he had to to win baseball games. I don't think he even thought about with the farm system was like let's just buy a championship. personally, I don't think winning that way. is any fun at all but today if you depend on your draft picks and your trades with $100 million team salary to get over the hump, it's not going to happen. so you have to go out there and put out these millions and millions of dollars. we need a salary cap like the NFL has in every baseball. player wants to run to the hills and not play next year. if there's a salary cap well it's not going to put you in the $95,000 a year range for income. the salary cap is still going to pay you crazy money just like the NFL does but it might put a few more people in the stands cuz maybe the $300 single game seat could be $150. players don't think about your greed so much as the people that come to see you. you're still going to make tons of money. yes, I want to see the Minnesota twins win a championship since I've been filing them since 1965. it's been a long time. but my two vehicles used to have twins on their license plate here in Virginia. I have removed that I don't have any interest in wearing twins clothing to a ball game anymore because of the greed. seeing grown men dress up like they do at a football game. I think the players are laughing at them all the way to the bank. this isn't high school. please fans understand that that wear that stuff. okay, when I try to read replies they pop up there. if I read one reply any other replies or not located can't locate them. but thank you for your replies irregardless of whether you agree with me or not, but it was really nice paying $4.50 for a box seat at RFK stadium when I was 17. I don't know for sure but I think that amount of money today would probably be maybe $100? The rate of inflation does not apply to Major League sports and we need to boycott unfortunately but we're not going to do that

This might have been insightful commentary or rancid hate speech, but I'll never know because I can't read that much unpunctuated text in a solid block. 

[Linus]

To me the dollar amount isn’t that important. The free agent class is horrible so it doesn’t make any sense to spend money on players that don’t raise the ceiling. Jefferson would be a good target along with a couple good relievers. I would absolutely back up the Brinks truck if there was a power hitting first baseman but alas France doesn’t do it for me. 

[Woof Bronzer]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

2027 isn't about payroll.  It's about building for 2028.  The payroll question is coming in 2-3 years if we can develop the talented core we're potentially working with.  And we'll likely need to supplement because we actively chose not to supplement them when we had the chance to put aside delusions and sell when the selling was good.

Payroll should absolutely be a topic in 2027, but there are different ways of spending payroll than on big ticket FAs.  The Twins need to start acting more like successful middle revenue teams like the Brewers, Rays, Guards, etc and sign their future stars to extensions early.  Sure the FA class may be terrible, but if so it's a great opportunity to sign Jenkins and/or Culpepper, ERod, Priellip, Houston, Lackey to long term deals.  It's going to take some payroll to do that though.  

[Cory Engelhardt]

3 hours ago, thelanges5 said:

Not enough talent in the 2027 free agent pool to go too nuts. 
 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/available/_/year/2027

Agreed on this.

I don't care what the actual number is. I really don't. I just want to be pointed in the right direction. My hope is a number of extensions are done for the younger core, and I'd love to extend Pablo and even Ryan if possible along with Bradley. But really, if they lose Jeffers, I don't know what that means between opening day and whenever Lackey is ready to take over for the catcher position. I also don't really know that Royce is a full time 1B, and I don't think Clemens should be the starting 2B (I think Clemens should be a utility guy) but to actually raise the payroll, they almost have to bring Jeffers back along with at least a couple of legit bullpen contracts and probably a lot of extensions. 

But yeah, the free agent market is more meh than anything, so maybe this is done via trade? Who knows.