Article: A Snapshot of Twins Payroll

[Mike Sixel]

Ah, so my Puckett memory was not completely off, thanks Seth. Thought I was losing my mind.

 

What is "ready", though, that's the question. Ready to be awesome, or ready to come up and be ok/good, and learn here?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Ah, so my Puckett memory was not completely off, thanks Seth. Thought I was losing my mind.

 

What is "ready", though, that's the question. Ready to be awesome, or ready to come up and be ok/good, and learn here?

 

In the case of Sano and Buxton, I feel it's the latter. Personally, I think Sano is going to fly through AAA and hit the majors some time in the second half of the season if he continues to hit like he has thus far.

 

Ryan has shown a recent willingness to promote the kids, maybe to a fault. It worked for Arcia. It didn't work for Hicks. If the Twins have a need and the player looks ready in the minors, I think JR will pull the trigger sooner rather than later.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't get why we are worried about what the payroll's bottom line is. We were right to be bothered by it last year but it was because of the quality of the moves made in light of the payroll. This year, they've made numerous quality moves to add payroll.

 

Rome wasn't built in a day. Pouring money into it for the sake of it won't change that. The key to this offseason wasn't the quantity of money spent, it was the quality it was spent on. And for that the Twins should get a big thumbs up.

[Winston Smith]

It doesn't appear that much payroll at all was added. As it stands now it is about the same as last year.

The major additions were 2 pitchers and bringing Pelfry back. If you like ERA+ or not it is a measure of average pitching. Pelfry 90+, Nolasco 94+ and Hughes 95+. Not exactly top quality.

For years Carl and Jim Pohlad told us they needed a new park to compete and we were promised that they would spend 52% of revenue to make that happen. Now we mostly hear how spending the money promised isn't the answer at all, it's a shortcut or spending just to be spending. Funny how that worked out isn't it.

Of course, that left over money can be used to produce more movies!

[Dantes929]

I suspect that the Twins would be happy to spend $120 million a year to continually field a 2010 quality team. The problem is you can't just throw that money out there and get that quality. Twins aren't the only ones that are inconsistent with their message. Fans complain that we don't spend the big money but constantly criticize the contract of Mauer even though from the metrics I have seen reported on these pages he has produced enough to warrant it.

[TheLeviathan]

Not exactly top quality.

 

The quality was just fine. Certainly vastly better than what they replace. Why can't things be incremental? Why does the payroll have to reach 50% in one year?

 

Last year I was on board trashing the effort because it was non-existent. This year was not the same. Spending isn't a shortcut and it is a necessary thing to do. But spending it all at one isn't necessary, and even moreso, it's just not very smart.

[PopRiveter]

btw, I'm not saying this particual desire of mine is rational......I really am tired of watching a 95 loss team with no real future players on it (or few). I'm ready to watch a 95 loss team with future superstars on it. I get that not everyone feels the same way.

 

I totally get this, Mike. I was more satisfied watching Hicks struggle last year than watching Doumit be sort of okay. There is a hope when watching a younger/higher-ceiling athlete take his lumps.

However, I think they actually are moving guys fast. Gibson sure didn't spend much healthy time developing. Hicks skipped AAA and Arcia barely dipped a toe in AAA before debuting with the Twins.

Rosario was likely to have a shot at making the club this spring if not for his suspension. Sano still may. Buxton is moving fast.

I think they're doing just what you're asking. But not every player will be a Puckett or a Hrbek. Some will be Bobby Kieltys or JT Bruetts.

[Mike Sixel]

popriveter....nice post. We disagree on Gibson, but otherwise everything else I agree with. And let's hope we have more Pucketts than Kieltys......

[Nick Nelson]

T

Last year I was on board trashing the effort because it was non-existent. This year was not the same. Spending isn't a shortcut and it is a necessary thing to do. But spending it all at one isn't necessary, and even moreso, it's just not very smart.

This is the main point I was driving at. Well stated.

 

The Twins shouldn't feel compelled to spend up to some certain threshold just because they had more salary coming off the books this year, but they SHOULD have felt compelled to SPEND on this rotten rotation, just as they should have last year.

[halfchest]

popriveter....nice post. We disagree on Gibson, but otherwise everything else I agree with. And let's hope we have more Pucketts than Kieltys......

 

Let's also hope the Twins can identify the Kielty's and trade them for the Shannon Stewarts when the time is right.

[cmathewson]

I totally get this, Mike. I was more satisfied watching Hicks struggle last year than watching Doumit be sort of okay. There is a hope when watching a younger/higher-ceiling athlete take his lumps.

However, I think they actually are moving guys fast. Gibson sure didn't spend much healthy time developing. Hicks skipped AAA and Arcia barely dipped a toe in AAA before debuting with the Twins.

Rosario was likely to have a shot at making the club this spring if not for his suspension. Sano still may. Buxton is moving fast.

I think they're doing just what you're asking. But not every player will be a Puckett or a Hrbek. Some will be Bobby Kieltys or JT Bruetts.

 

We don't want to rush people, as we did with Hicks and Arcia last year. But if they're ready, bring them up. I can see both Sano and Meyer up here by mid-year. And Buxton won't be far behind. We just need the infantry to hold the fort until the cavalry comes.

[Kwak]

We don't want to rush people, as we did with Hicks and Arcia last year. But if they're ready, bring them up. I can see both Sano and Meyer up here by mid-year. And Buxton won't be far behind. We just need the infantry to hold the fort until the cavalry comes.

 

This sounds so 20/20 hindsight driven. Teams never know if a guy is ready until he has proven himself at the major league level for years. Success at AAA? Hasn't proven that a guy belongs in the majors--and certainly not with the Twins. There have been a host of failures for the Twins that were big successes at Rochester. Hicks had 4 1/2 years of minor league experience (sort of like a guy attending a 4-year college for baseball players), compare to athletes in other sports who regularly have to prove themselves at age 22/23. I'm not advocating giving-up on Hicks but rather, there is no formula for proper progression to the majors that guarantees success. Blaming his (Hicks') failure with the Twins due to lack of time at Rochester is a lame excuse especially in light of those guys who had substantial success (and time!) in Rochester yet flopped with the Twins.

[Mike Sixel]

How was Arcia rushed? He was mostly good up here, this is a perfect example, imo, of waiting for perfection before calling a player up (if they had waited). I don't get that at all.

 

As for Hicks, I read here all the time, and hear the Twins say, I shouldn't worry about AAA time, players can go from AA to the majors. IMO, Hicks' issue is that he is a slow adjuster, and should not be switch hitting. He might have been rushed, he might have learned just fine staying up in MN and adjusting here. We really don't know. Just because he wasn't ready to be here and be good, does not mean he should not be here and learning, especially in a lost season......

[cmathewson]

How was Arcia rushed? He was mostly good up here, this is a perfect example, imo, of waiting for perfection before calling a player up (if they had waited). I don't get that at all.

 

As for Hicks, I read here all the time, and hear the Twins say, I shouldn't worry about AAA time, players can go from AA to the majors. IMO, Hicks' issue is that he is a slow adjuster, and should not be switch hitting. He might have been rushed, he might have learned just fine staying up in MN and adjusting here. We really don't know. Just because he wasn't ready to be here and be good, does not mean he should not be here and learning, especially in a lost season......

 

I don't think you can apply one model for all players. I agree that they need to learn up here. But not to the point of permanently damaging their confidence or stunting their growth. This is one area where I defer to the coaches and scouts to know better than I do. There are obvious cases, like Bartlett, who had two consecutive years with an OBP over .400 at AAA before even getting a chance. But most of the time, they let the player decide by dominating a level before moving up.

 

Sometimes, need drives it. Last year, need definitely drove the center field decision. You can't say Hicks dominated AA. He certainly earned a one-level promotion between seasons. But not two levels. Yet, with the Mastro injury and his spring training play, they rushed him. He learned a lot. And he's resilient, so I don't think it did permanent damage. But it sure put the team in a hole. All this is hindsight. At the time, I was the biggest proponent of giving him a shot and helping him learn up here. It just didn't work out.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This sounds so 20/20 hindsight driven. Teams never know if a guy is ready until he has proven himself at the major league level for years. Success at AAA? Hasn't proven that a guy belongs in the majors--and certainly not with the Twins. There have been a host of failures for the Twins that were big successes at Rochester. Hicks had 4 1/2 years of minor league experience (sort of like a guy attending a 4-year college for baseball players), compare to athletes in other sports who regularly have to prove themselves at age 22/23. I'm not advocating giving-up on Hicks but rather, there is no formula for proper progression to the majors that guarantees success. Blaming his (Hicks') failure with the Twins due to lack of time at Rochester is a lame excuse especially in light of those guys who had substantial success (and time!) in Rochester yet flopped with the Twins.

 

Many people were vocal about Hicks not starting 2013 in Minnesota. I wavered a bit on the situation because the Twins literally had zero other options at the position.

 

Given Hicks' struggles through each level before adjusting, it wasn't hard to predict him bombing out of MLB quickly. Given the guy's history, the jump from AA to MLB threw up red flags. No hindsight needed.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Hicks was definitely a scholarship player after the trades and might have been rushed but there were no other options. Hey, you take a chance to see if a guy is ready. Hicks and Arcia should be fine this year. This should also be Gibson's year to move forward. We have Nolasco and some other potential pieces to get to 80 wins I'm thinking.

[twinsfan34]

Jack Morris, Chili Davis, Brian Harper, Carl Willis and Mike Pagliarulo beg to differ

 

That's hardly a mircrowave...

 

Harper was signed in '88. Pags was a platoon/utility-esque. Willis strengthened the bullpen. Chili Davis & Jack Morris were contributors, but still only contributed 3.3 and 4.3 bWAR respectively out of 50.9 bWAR for the team overall.

 

The "Core" (Puckett, HrBek, Mack, Gladden, Gagne, Tapani, Aguilera) was already in place and the recent minor league (Knoblauch, Erickson) additions contributed to the lion's share of that team doing well.

[nicksaviking]

I don't think we even have to ask for a rush, at least not in the case of Sano. With Plouffe's propensity for finding Gardy's doghouse, I'd say there's a very strong chance Sano gets called up early whether he's ready or not.

[OldTimeTwinkie]

I agree, the important thing is we are nowhere near where we could be and we are landing in the same spot. MLB recommends 52% of revenue on payroll. Last year the Twins had $216M in revenue and that should go up with the new TV deal and the all-star game. We are at 39% of revenue, $29M short. Keep in mind that many MLB teams go well above this recommendation.

 

http://www.forbes.com/teams/minnesota-twins/

 

A publically financed stadium should have monies either spent to MLB recomendations (52%) or use the difference between their payroll and recommended 52% to pay down debt on stadium instead of pocketing it.

[johnnydakota]

Baseball was a very different game in the early 80s. Outside of monster talent like Trout or Cabrera, guys simply don't make it to MLB before age 21-22 in today's game. Ryan isn't doing anything wrong with Sano and Buxton. He's taking them steadily through the system as they show the org they're ready to move.

 

Besides, what's the rush? Every month of "postponement" of seeing Sano/Buxton comes closer to getting an entire extra year of control over them into their mid to late 20s (aka. their peak seasons). Sano is going to see MLB as a 21 year old and Buxton might see MLB as a 20 year old. I think it's a bit odd to grouse about not seeing them in MLB as teenagers.

 

So if we get an extra year of team controll does that mean we wont trade them till 2018 or 2019?

[johnnydakota]

I don't get why we are worried about what the payroll's bottom line is. We were right to be bothered by it last year but it was because of the quality of the moves made in light of the payroll. This year, they've made numerous quality moves to add payroll.

 

Rome wasn't built in a day. Pouring money into it for the sake of it won't change that. The key to this offseason wasn't the quantity of money spent, it was the quality it was spent on. And for that the Twins should get a big thumbs up.

 

um as we sit (without Kubel) we are the same as last years opening day? how is that adding payroll?switching out contract to create an illusion of adding payroll is what the front office does best ....

[johnnydakota]

The quality was just fine. Certainly vastly better than what they replace. Why can't things be incremental? Why does the payroll have to reach 50% in one year?

 

Last year I was on board trashing the effort because it was non-existent. This year was not the same. Spending isn't a shortcut and it is a necessary thing to do. But spending it all at one isn't necessary, and even moreso, it's just not very smart.

 

I would agree if the extra money was banked for the future, but a team whos owners are in banking, find it to confusing to stash money away for the future.

So if it comes down to spend it or give to ownership ...I say spend it, buy a couple of good free agents, then trade them come july to add to your minor leaque system,that way Ownership gets to keep half the money and we get some good young players,for the future

[TheLeviathan]

um as we sit (without Kubel) we are the same as last years opening day? how is that adding payroll?switching out contract to create an illusion of adding payroll is what the front office does best ....

 

They switched out contracts of players with no future on the team and who weren't helping them for players who can. Would you have slept better at night if they handed Blackburn 20M for next year just so you could say the payroll increased?

 

find it to confusing to stash money away for the future.

 

It's foolish to judge the success or failure of an offseason by some subjective threshold of total payroll. The idea you can pluck up multiple players and trade them requires there to be several factors go perfectly. There are two spots the Twins could upgrade in FA and there are a myriad of factors beyond their pricetag that would be a reasonable basis for the Twins to avoid that route.

[twinsfan34]

And "build from within" has never worked, in the history of Major League Baseball.

 

It hasnt even been tried. Find me an example of a team that has been built entirely from within, much less done so and won.

 

Teams have always supplemented their minor league talent on other ways.

 

There is room to both wait for the minor leagues to provide the Twins with some of the talent needed to win a World Series and go get some of that talent in other ways.

 

Wasn't EVERY season, before free agency, a 'built from within' type of setup?

 

Where scouting and signing ballplayers was pretty much it.

[Guest USAFChief]

Wasn't EVERY season, before free agency, a 'built from within' type of setup?

 

Where scouting and signing ballplayers was pretty much it.

there has always been free agents, and there has always been trades.

[johnnydakota]

They switched out contracts of players with no future on the team and who weren't helping them for players who can. Would you have slept better at night if they handed Blackburn 20M for next year just so you could say the payroll increased?

 

I was talking about 2012 ,but if you want to talk about 2013 ,fine lets talk about the 3 starters we added....Nolasco a # 4 type starter on a good team , he was the safest free agent avalible , in this off season , next we signed Hope(hughes)

we Hope he can maintain his splits away from Yankee stadium, but what if it isnt the stadium , but home field? then what? Next we sign a Pitcher with a very hitable 97mph fastball who has a career ERA of what? 4.48, now several here say oooh wow 2 big contracts what a change in way we are doing business....

wrong answer, all we did was trade out a couple hitters salaries and Blackburns for 1 decent pitchers and some HOPE, but ,as we sit now we are almost the same dollar amount as last year when we finishged with 96 losses.

 

now I know your gonna say look at the Rays and the A s , but guess what our leadership aint as good, and never will be , We dont draft and develope as good ,We dont manage as good,we dont trade as good.So our only chance is to sign quality ...not quanity

[TheLeviathan]

I was talking about 2012

 

Why would you do that in a thread about right now? Anyone defending the FO last year had no ground to stand on, but this year was different.

 

All FAs have warts. The Twins didn't sign world beaters but they were aggressive (very early signings) to address needs. (pitching) There also isn't anything close to a world beater left. Save some of those bullets for the next go at things.

[johnnydakota]

Why would you do that in a thread about right now? Anyone defending the FO last year had no ground to stand on, but this year was different.

 

All FAs have warts. The Twins didn't sign world beaters but they were aggressive (very early signings) to address needs. (pitching) There also isn't anything close to a world beater left. Save some of those bullets for the next go at things.

 

To me you keep shooting till your empty, then reload....we started out great

Nolasco signed , and you can read what I had to say (good signing Terry)

then Hughes, and it was( ok this guy has had a couple of pretty darn good years and his splits are good)...next it was Pelfrey and ,correct me if I am wrong , most here just were not happy about this 1...then Terry stopped, we had reached our payroll of last year and its time to put away the checkbook and wait and see.

 

to me you keep spending, maybe you dont keep all your free agents for the entire year, you use them to make some trades come june and july, for young arms and prospect to fill the holes we have in our system. Or you sign a Garza to say a 3 year 51 million dollar contract and front load it 20, 20 and 11 million

now in the 2nd season we can trade him during the season or in that winter when he is owed only 11 million , there are ways to use the money thats avalible and not block prospects but actually add to your system,and still have bullets for the future

[Brock Beauchamp]

To me you keep shooting till your empty, then reload...

 

What happens if you run out of bullets? What happens if the Twins need a left fielder and shortstop in 2015 but only have $14m to spend? You're not going to fill all those holes, particularly if the holes are unexpected (say, if Arcia gets injured or falls on his face in 2014).

 

to me you keep spending, maybe you dont keep all your free agents for the entire year, you use them to make some trades come june and july, for young arms and prospect to fill the holes we have in our system. Or you sign a Garza to say a 3 year 51 million dollar contract and front load it 20, 20 and 11 million now in the 2nd season we can trade him during the season or in that winter when he is owed only 11 million , there are ways to use the money thats avalible and not block prospects but actually add to your system,and still have bullets for the future

 

Which is a fine strategy on paper... Except that trades don't happen on paper. For a myriad of reasons, it's very difficult to trade a large free agent contract just one year into the player's multi-year deal. Maybe the player gets injured. Maybe his performance is flat and teams aren't willing to take on the money. Maybe the teams that need him don't have the prospects to make the deal happen. Maybe a GM balks at a team trading a good free agent for apparently no reason and won't offer anything of value. Maybe your team gets a reputation for flipping free agents and after a season or two, every free agent you try to sign demands a no-trade clause or they sign with another team.

 

Can you trade a free agent after a year in theory? Sure you can. But can you guarantee that you'll be able to move that player after a season? Absolutely not. It's an incredibly risky strategy and one that could burn a team badly if it fails.

 

There's a reason why no team uses this strategy consistently. Not one.

 

You sign the players you want on your team for the length of years you want them. Don't try to get cute with complex machinations based on multiple variables.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

there has always been free agents, and there has always been trades.

 

Until 1975, the rights of a player remained with the team, even after his contract expired. Marvin Miller worked with the Major League Players Association to challenge what is known as "the reserve clause." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_clause

 

So, to say that "there have (sic) always have been free agents..." is only partially true. The "freedom" of a free agent was retained by the parent club until 1975. The collusion of the owners depressed the market for free agents. The rise of player agents in the late 70's and 80's further strengthened the bargaining power of labor--the players.

 

Indeed, the "build from within" model was much more in force before 1975. I would suspect that there were some teams that were built entirely from within--especially before 1975, but I have neither the energy nor desire to do that research.

 

(Postscript, Chief: In post #30, above, you contend that I want the Twins to build entirely from within, and then sign free agents and trade for players. I never said that. Your quote: "If you are asking the team to wait until they are in contention before they make a trade, and/or add free agents, then that is precisely what you are saying: build a contender entirely from within, and then​ add to it. " Your analysis lacks precision. I agreed, earlier in the same post, that the Twins made the right strategic decision by aggressively signing two free agent pitchers in the earliest phases of this past offseason. It was a good move, a regrettably necessary move, only because the Twins have failed to develop and retain quality starting pitchers, from within the organization.)