Behind the Minnesota Twins’ Low 2024 Payroll is a Big 2025 Increase

It would make sense to do some long-term deals with arb eligible players that pulls future earnings into this season.

Excellent review of what the Twins are facing going forward.

I expect the payroll was more than they wanted in 2023.  2024 will be under what they could absorb, now that a tv deal is in place.  And 2025 looks like it is going to be a big problem.  Sure makes sense to me that they would conserve their spending this year.

Also makes it almost 100% certain that Max is gone next year.  Not real certain who they have for right field that I can get excited about.  I guess the best case would be Wallner with either ERod or the wonderboy, Jenkins, shocks the heck out of everyone and takes that left field spot.  

Expect the only other player who could give them real dollars would be to revisit trading Vazquez.  You are showing an increase of around $22.61M.  Without any other adds, that would put them around $140+M.  We don't know what the tv revenue will be and whether or not that works.  Unfortunately, neither do the Twins.  Hopefully, they are having meaningful discussions with the league about how their streaming service would work and the dollars the Twins could expect from it.

So it puts them back to where their were last year. They are 20th out of 30 in payroll right now. Their current payroll relative to the league is the lowest since they were in the Metrodome. I guess the Pohlads just can’t afford to own a team that wants to compete. Perhaps they should sell and pocket the nearly $2 billion increase in the value of the franchise. I’m sure the Pohlads thank you for your concern over their finances. 

I think this scenario is toally accurate.  The best scenario for this season is to sign someone to a one year deal with team options.  And although I have a lot of confidence in Varland, I think the best way to spend on a one-year contract is to sign Bauer.  High reward - low risk.  He is willing to sign a major league minimum deal to prove himself.  If there is a problem with attitude or behavior or a lack of performance he can be DFA'd at a minimal cost.  I think he deserves a chance.  And with the great attitudes of guys like Correa, Lopez, Lewis, Farmer and Vasquez, who knows, he may really like a manager like Rocco.  I realize I am in the minority here but it almost seems like a no-brainer to me.  This could really improve the strength of our starting staff.  And the key here is the low risk factor.

Thank you for laying this all out.  So next year costs go up and expected revenues go down. Some things might change around the edges, of course.  But the directional gist is correct.

Do my fellow TDers really think that our owners have some sort of civic duty to run the team at a cash loss year in and year out? Should they just be satisfied with capital appreciation and forget operating earnings/cash flow? Are we as fans not receiving a fairly consistent high level of baseball entertainment from our supposedly parsimonious owners?

Sure, we don’t have Stevie Cohen as our owner or the revenues of the Dodgers or Yankees.  But overall we are a pretty well run franchise that does most things the right way.  I’ll take our level of entertainment and success over a lot of the rest of the league, including some bigger market teams.   

No worries, the roster budget will only be about $5-10 million higher and fit the players the team needs.

Would be nice to see a bump up to $150 million+ but we can wait to worry about that. A number of players listed will no longer be on the roster, options will be bought, players move on, and Julien still has a year to go before arb 1.

$130-135 for 2025 does it. No worries.

11 minutes ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Do my fellow TDers really think that our owners have some sort of civic duty to run the team at a cash loss year in and year out?

I don't believe they have ever run at a cash loss with the possible exception of the pandemic year.

The better the team on the field is, the more revenue they will see from ticket sales and novelty sales.  Sometimes you gotta spend a little to make a little more.  This was an excellent layout for how next year could develop.  There will certainly be other player moves that will affect what will ultimately be the outcome.  

2 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I don't believe they have ever run at a cash loss with the possible exception of the pandemic year.

Yea the idea that a franchise purchased for $32 million increased in value to almost $2 billion but doesnt make a profit on an annual basis is pretty far fetched 

So doing the math, there is a net increase on the books of $22M next year. That would still put us over $20M under LAST years salary. What is the purpose of this article?

20 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I don't believe they have ever run at a cash loss with the possible exception of the pandemic year.

Exactly my point - they shouldn’t have to. Ever.  Thank you.

I don't think your projection is what is going to happen. I'm expecting $ to come off the books for Farmer and Jackson to the tune of $7 million. I don't expect all of the arb 1 and 2 players to be on the team (Larnach and some of the relief pitchers). Lots of things will change by the end of the season.

36 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I don't believe they have ever run at a cash loss with the possible exception of the pandemic year.

32 minutes ago, Linus said:

Yea the idea that a franchise purchased for $32 million increased in value to almost $2 billion but doesnt make a profit on an annual basis is pretty far fetched 

No one is saying the Twins don't make an annual profit.  People are saying that the Twins operate the way they do to ensure they turn an annual profit.  Nashville was specifically asking if the expectation from some posters (the ones expressing disappointment in the Pohlads not spending more) is that the Twins will lose money if it serves the purpose of having a higher payroll.

25 minutes ago, weneedneshek said:

So doing the math, there is a net increase on the books of $22M next year. That would still put us over $20M under LAST years salary. What is the purpose of this article?

To outline the fact that the Twins have uncertain revenue outlooks for next year, and due to the combination of that and a near guarantee of increased payroll, the historically conservative Twins are operating conservatively.

39 minutes ago, TopGunn#22 said:

The better the team on the field is, the more revenue they will see from ticket sales and novelty sales.  Sometimes you gotta spend a little to make a little more.  This was an excellent layout for how next year could develop.  There will certainly be other player moves that will affect what will ultimately be the outcome.  

Sometimes you spend a lot more, and make a lot less.  Go look at what's happening in San Diego.  There are multiple ways to improve on the field, and handing out free agent contracts is not universally the best option.  There's maybe 3 teams that could truly attempt to buy a championship; the Mets tried (and failed spectacularly) last year, the Dodgers are trying this year.

This is an asinine defense.

Every team in every season of history faces arbitration.

They almost certainly will not carry all of those players listed into 2025.

A $20M increase in payroll from where it is now is peanuts, and still way too low.

We need new ownership and less propaganda.

52 minutes ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Exactly my point - they shouldn’t have to. Ever.  Thank you.

I guess not, but I'd like the team more if they were willing to do it occasionally in order to take a shot at the World Series.

58 minutes ago, weneedneshek said:

So doing the math, there is a net increase on the books of $22M next year. That would still put us over $20M under LAST years salary. What is the purpose of this article?

I think the purpose of the article was. If you think the Twins didn't do much this offseason. Pretty much stood pat. You ain't seen nothing yet. Wait till next year. It'll make this year seem busy. The Twins org. is reinventing the wheel. How to do more with less

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

It's literally an article about payroll....what id you expect?

IMO, it is because some only see the home town team through rose-tinted glasses and see those that try to be objective or realistic as just whining.

1 hour ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Do my fellow TDers really think that our owners have some sort of civic duty to run the team at a cash loss year in and year out? 

Hahahha the Twins propaganda machine has brainwashed you into oblivion if you think any MLB owner takes a loss, ever.  The value of the franchise has grown by a billion dollars since they bought it, and the team received a half billion dollar subsidy from fans.  Yes, the people of the state of MN have helped make the Pohlads even more wildy wealthy than they were, and yes, I think that means the Pohlads have a civic duty to spend appropriately.  Professional sports franchises are NOT "just another business".  Every business does not receive welfare to the tune of $500mil, so why would we treat the Twins as such?

I continue to be blown away by the number of fans who blindly do the Pohlads propaganda work for them in order to...what?  I don't know.  I really don't.  

If either Correa or Buxton have good healthy seasons, should they be considered on the block?