Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

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


    Peter Labuza

    While the Minnesota Twins' 2024 payroll remains disappointingly low, the team may be doing more than stashing and redirecting the money they'll receive via their one-year deal to return to Ball Sports North. They might also be planning around inflated costs in 2025. 

    Image courtesy of © Jonah Hinebaugh/Naples Daily News/USA Today Network-Florida / USA TODAY NETWORK

    Twins Video

    Following what felt like the dawn of a new era for Twins baseball, many fans have felt that hype shot through the heart with disappointment, as the team has decreased its payroll in response to broadcast woes. However, as President Dave St. Peter made clear to Evan Drellich in The Athletic, the choice to make that change was only partially due to that uncertainty. 

    I am not here to run flack for the organization. However, there are two financial cliffs awaiting the Twins in 2025 that are interesting to look at. The first is that the broadcast nightmare is not over. With a one-year deal with Bally, the Twins will be back on the market next year, with more or less the same set of available partners. Even if Rob Manfred creates an MLB streaming product to fans without blackouts, it will likely fall short of generating the significant cable money the Twins earned in working with Diamond Sports Holdings--barring some kind of miraculous collaboration with several big-market teams, who are not contracted with DSH or Bally and don't have much incentive to join the cabal.

    The other issue is more interesting: The Twins will, by nature, have to run a highly inflated payroll in 2025 due to their current contracts and players entering arbitration. If the Twins simply ran back the exact same team next year, they will be adding $20 to $25 million in payroll over what they currently have. Let’s break down the details

    Free Agent Contracts with Increases: Carlos Correa, Pablo López, Chris Paddack, Randy Dobnak
    Estimated Increase: $23.25 Million

    Although the Twins have scored some of the most team-friendly extensions in the game, they have also designed them in a way where some years pay better than others. Next year is when some real money will be due. Correa’s gargantuan contract hits it peak, with a $4-million increase to $37.5 million. López will finally get to the meaty part of his extension, with a $13.5 million increase to $21.75 million (still a team-friendly deal compared to the open market, where Sonny Gray will be earning $25 million). Paddack signed an extension following his Tommy John surgery that essentially re-designed his arbitration years. Whether or not he becomes a reliable starter, the Twins have him for another year at $7.5 million--a $5-million increase from his 2024 salary. Dobnak’s deal also sees a guaranteed increase of $750,000 next year.

    Arbitration 1 Players: Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Griffin Jax, Jhoan Durán, Royce Lewis, Trevor Larnach
    Estimated Increase: $10 Million

    The Twins have done well building a deep, team-controlled core. But that core is soon to be due real money, as they begin their arbitration years. Although arbitration is based on previous year performance, there are certain bands of money where we can at least put generalized estimates on what might be needed for 2025. If Ryan and Ober turn into mid-rotation starters, they will each see increases of at least $2 million each. The same could be said for a batting phenom like Lewis. Durán and Jax will be more difficult to estimate, but both are likely due an extra million or more. Larnach is the odd man out, and will be fighting both in Spring Training and all season to retain his roster spot.

    Arbitration 2 and 3 Players: Ryan Jeffers, Willi Castro, Josh Staumont, Justin Topa, Steven Okert, Alex Kirilloff
    Estimated Increase: $9 Million

    This group of players have less chance of breaking the bank, though Jeffers is a notable name here. Just this season, Dodgers catcher Will Smith set a new record for Arbitration 2 as a catcher, with $8.55 Million. Jeffers likely won’t match the All-Star, but another good season should net him a few extra million. Castro is set for $3.3 million this season, and will probably only earn a small increase for 2025. All the bullpen arms remain question marks in how much they might see, or whether the Twins might keep them. Like Larnach, Kirilloff will need to prove himself viable on the field before other batters from the minors may come knocking for his spot.

    Option Deals: Kyle Farmer, Jay Jackson, Jorge Alcalá
    Estimated Increase: $2.61 Million

    The Twins also have three options on their various spare parts. In order to avoid a messy arbitration, the organization and Farmer agreed on adding a mutual option for 2025 that would bump his salary a small but notable $200,000. With the arrival of Brooks Lee, the Twins may once again try and find a trade market for the backup infielder. Jackson also arrives in Minnesota with a team option at $3 million for next year. If he turns out to be as good as advertised, the Twins may add the additional $1.7 million to keep a strong arm. Finally, Alcalá and the Twins agreed to a mutual option for $1.5 million. Alcalá will likely break his injury track record to get the Twins to keep that money on the table.

    Money Coming Off the Books: Max Kepler, Carlos Santana, Anthony DeSclafani, Caleb Thielbar
    Estimated Decrease: $22.25 Million

    Of course, players reaching free agency means the Twins will shed some payroll, as well. Kepler’s money remains the most significant, as the team will get out from under his team-friendly $10 million contract. The others are quite small, but add up in the aggregate. However, this all remains an issue for the Twins: they will be losing a right fielder, a first baseman, a starting pitcher, and a solid left-handed reliever. The team will almost certainly spend all season evaluating their prospects, to see if any of them can act as legitimate replacements. But if there are holes, they will certainly have to take some of this money and convert it into new spending to remain competitive.

    Although things could shake out in several ways, it is almost certain that the Twins will see an additional $20 million added to their payroll next season, and that's before making any external additions. That's why, despite their unexpectedly non-calamitous short-term TV deal, they've been reluctant to commit to a free agent who could end up being on the books for another $20 million in 2025. It hardly excuses the team for pocketing the money, but the Twins will need to think creatively as this young team ages into big money--whether they like it or not.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    Just now, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

    So that the replies could completely ignore what I wrote in favor of slinging mud? That's not my kind of kink. 

    I'm not slinging mud. Nor am I the one on a pulpit. Preach

    This article describes the process of managing a payroll that every single team is faced with.   There's nothing unusual about the Twins situation, so let's hold off on the sympathy for having to do their job.

    For reference, an extra $45mil to the Pohlads is the equivalent of $523 to the average American net worth.  

    Those poor, poor, Pohlads.  

    1 hour ago, roger said:

    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.

    I do not see (a Big Fan of Kyle) Farmer back with the Team in ‘25………….Lee & Martin & maybe Prato (or like) bump him off the roster at $770K. That’s a $7M reduction to the estimated $140M.

    If the Twins were at a major league (based on market size) commensurate Payroll of 17th in ‘23, why is a budget of $133M scary 2 years later??????? Not personal question - question to the group. There will be TV money at a minimum, to match this year’s revenue…..no excuse there.

    Wallner is in RF in ‘25. DeSclafani is gone by then, if not prior. Santana - Farmer - 

    1 hour ago, IndianaTwin said:

    In terms of comments...

    1. Some will continue to name dumping Vazquez as a way of saving money. I'm not so sure. Either he plays well and the Twins want to retain him at $10M or he plays poorly and the Twins would have to cover a part of his salary to trade him. 
    2. Farmer and Alcala are both on mutual options. These rarely get taken. Either the player plays poorly and the team declines it or the player plays well and wants to test the market. 
    3. From a roster management standpoint, it's hard not to see Larnach and some of the guys in the Arb 2/Arb 3 category as non-tender candidates. We can't guess which ones at this point, but probably one or two. If they all play well and worth tendering, that's a great problem to have! 

    IMO - if Alcala is healthy, he’ll perform. His cost next year might be $2.5M or so ……he’s a maybe. Farmer is gone due to push from younger options and his cost.

    17 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

    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.  

    Were you around during Calvin's years? I was and I'll take the Pohlads over that all day long.

    1 hour 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?

    They are currently around $121M - that’s what I’ve seen……….assuming they will release or sign & trade Farmer in ‘25……$7M more off the total. So, $15M added to this year’s total - end up at $136M…………at that point they are $18M under ‘23’s total of $154M.

    In ‘23 they were 17th in payroll and it fit with their history and their market size.

    Gotta get back to $155M next year at a minimum!

    28 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

    that said, I 100% think this is why payroll is what it is this year.

    I also think they believe (rightly?) in the SP in AA and AAA and don't think they need to sign a FA SP to a 2+ year deal. 

    I think this is 100% accurate. I think they are going with DeSclafani and youth. Varland, and he should get every oppurtunity. Not that I personally wouldn't want Montgomery if the price was right, I would. I long advocated for Ryu but he has now went back to Korea. Let's hope we see the 2021 DeSclafani version.

    1 hour ago, Nashvilletwin said:

    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 

    Smart move for Cohen would have been buy the Twins (if available)  instead of the Mets.  Twins would have been cheaper and come with a better overall organization.  Having the Twins running his payroll instead of the chronically dysfunctional Met organization might have bought him something.

    As businessmen  I'm sure the owners were well aware of this. They also knew that there'd be a new negotiated TV deal coming after last season. Fans may not always agree with how they do things meaning ownership. But as long as it seems as if they're trying to put a good product out there. Fans will be more engaged. I don't know what their plan is but I'm ready to roll with the flow. Some might not be so happy with what may seem like ownership doesnt care. That's fine too. Both sides will watch so one or the other can say. "See, I told you"

    6 minutes ago, Karbo said:

    Were you around during Calvin's years? I was and I'll take the Pohlads over that all day long.

    I was around for Calvin too. He didn't have mega millions backing him up. He couldn't afford to lose 5 million on a season. I get it, most didn't like Calvin. I neither like or dislike him. But lets also be fair.The situation each owner faced is not the same.

    1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

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

    They dont have to open the books so except for the Twins no one knows the real numbers.

    13 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

    They are currently around $121M - that’s what I’ve seen……….assuming they will release or sign & trade Farmer in ‘25……$7M more off the total. So, $15M added to this year’s total - end up at $136M…………at that point they are $18M under ‘23’s total of $154M.

    In ‘23 they were 17th in payroll and it fit with their history and their market size.

    Gotta get back to $155M next year at a minimum!

    Not sure where your numbers are coming from but here are the Spotrac ones. We are currently at $112M this year and were at $159M last year. We are currently at 19th in the MLB

    image.png.d351a3d72d196d040d3c66c4bd725550.png

    2024 twins payroll.PNG

    23 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

    ....IMO - if Alcala is healthy, he’ll perform. His cost next year might be $2.5M or so ……he’s a maybe. Farmer is gone due to push from younger options and his cost.

    I only quoted part that responded to my post. I agree with your take on both of these. Though I noted that mutual options are rarely taken, Alcala's is the kind that might. 

    EDIT to add: It made me wonder why they would have put in a mutual option with Alcala, since he's still Arb eligible. If I'm reading this right, according to https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/minnesota-twins/jorge-alcala-32837/, it's actually a team option, which makes more sense. In his case, they have essentially locked in their Arb 3 agreement for 2025 if they want it, in exchange for giving Alcala what amounts to a $55k parting gift if they choose to non-tender him.   

    39 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

    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.  

    lol.  Propagandist for the Pohlads.   Hilarious. Trust me, I have no desire to carry any water for the Pohlad family.  

    Were those deals not done at arms length?  Do you not believe that the Twins have brought value to the Twins Cities/Minneapolis? Do you really think the Twins have bad owners?

    Again, the expectation from some is that owners should be blindly willing to spend in order to satisfy their egos and/or deliver a championship to their city.  Sure, both those factors can be relevant, but it’s just not the same for an every owner. The Pohlads on the whole have been solid owners.  The product they deliver has been overall good. The franchise is well run for the most part.

    Have the Mets done that much better? How about the Angels?  Which AL Central team’s ownership would you swap for the Pohlads? How about the AL West, other than Texas?

    I have no idea what the annual cash flow or the operating margins of the Twins are - I’d wager that they are mostly positive but very lean.  And they are lean for precisely the reasons you point out - they want to win and, yes, they want to deliver a championship to the Twins Cities. However, there should be no expectation that they, or anyone, should run a business at a annual loss - regardless of capital appreciation, 

     

     

    50 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

    Very disappointing to see so many people's takeaway from this article is to sling more "pocket protector" mud when the author states many times that the payroll drop is negative.

    The unrelenting desire to be negative has ruined the comments of an article I guarantee none of you had previously thought about, in a way that attributes some kind of billionaire defense that doesn't exist.

    I swear some people are physically incapable of discussing the Twins without devolving into a whine-fest about the payroll. Yes, it's sheisty how they run the team like a greedy greedy business but does every comment section need to be a black void of people shouting into the ether about the payroll? My god, it's so tiresome. 

    It's an article about the payroll so it's pretty reasonable to expect some opinions that are going to be negative. Especially when there's some pretty disputable numbers. An increase of 2.61 for Farmer, Jackson, and Alcala? I'll take the under on that. By at least 9 million. Duran and Jax each getting an extra million in arb 1? Josh Hader didn't even get that. I'll take that arb 1 group for an extra 8 instead of 10. Arb 2 and 3 players? Jeffers will be back for an extra 2.5-3.5, and Kirlloff is a decent bet for an extra mil or 2. The other 4 are prime non-tender guys as a league average hitter utility guy and middle relievers. So I'll take that group for an extra 5-6 instead of 9.

    It's an article based on "worst case" scenario for spending. If Farmer is on this team next year it means a bunch of guys most fans are counting on in 2024 failed. If a 37 year old Jay Jackson is on this team in 2025 it means things have gone terribly with their pitching prospects. I just took a pretty straight forward 14 to 15 mil off his projection. Now it's an increase of 5 million. So, yeah, there's going to be some pushback on every article, and when it's about the payroll and it's easy to combat the numbers provided there's going to be pushback about "pocket protecting." 

    6 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

    It's an article about the payroll so it's pretty reasonable to expect some opinions that are going to be negative. Especially when there's some pretty disputable numbers. An increase of 2.61 for Farmer, Jackson, and Alcala? I'll take the under on that. By at least 9 million. Duran and Jax each getting an extra million in arb 1? Josh Hader didn't even get that. I'll take that arb 1 group for an extra 8 instead of 10. Arb 2 and 3 players? Jeffers will be back for an extra 2.5-3.5, and Kirlloff is a decent bet for an extra mil or 2. The other 4 are prime non-tender guys as a league average hitter utility guy and middle relievers. So I'll take that group for an extra 5-6 instead of 9.

    It's an article based on "worst case" scenario for spending. If Farmer is on this team next year it means a bunch of guys most fans are counting on in 2024 failed. If a 37 year old Jay Jackson is on this team in 2025 it means things have gone terribly with their pitching prospects. I just took a pretty straight forward 14 to 15 mil off his projection. Now it's an increase of 5 million. So, yeah, there's going to be some pushback on every article, and when it's about the payroll and it's easy to combat the numbers provided there's going to be pushback about "pocket protecting." 

    Thank you for discussing why you actually disagree with the article without immediately devolving into name calling!

    56 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

    that said, I 100% think this is why payroll is what it is this year.

    I also think they believe (rightly?) in the SP in AA and AAA and don't think they need to sign a FA SP to a 2+ year deal. 

    I concur on both statements, particularly the second. After a lot of folks spent last year saying, "Play the kids," maybe that's what they are expecting to do on the SP side. I'm not smart enough to guess whether they will be right, but it's encouraging if they are indeed that high on them.

    I think you also make a crucial distinction between signing a 1 vs. 2+ year deal. At most, I could see a 1 + option for someone like Thor. I was intrigued with the thought of Ryu, but it looks like he's headed back home. 

    2 hours 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 

    Agreed, with one minor sticking point.

    Carl Pohlad bought 94% of Minnesota Twins stock in 1984 for ~$43.5M, not $32M.

    Calvin Griffith got $32M for his 52% share of the franchise, a group of Tampa Bay investors got roughly $11.5M for their 42% stake. 

     

    13 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

    It's an article about the payroll so it's pretty reasonable to expect some opinions that are going to be negative. Especially when there's some pretty disputable numbers. An increase of 2.61 for Farmer, Jackson, and Alcala? I'll take the under on that. By at least 9 million. Duran and Jax each getting an extra million in arb 1? Josh Hader didn't even get that. I'll take that arb 1 group for an extra 8 instead of 10. Arb 2 and 3 players? Jeffers will be back for an extra 2.5-3.5, and Kirlloff is a decent bet for an extra mil or 2. The other 4 are prime non-tender guys as a league average hitter utility guy and middle relievers. So I'll take that group for an extra 5-6 instead of 9.

    It's an article based on "worst case" scenario for spending. If Farmer is on this team next year it means a bunch of guys most fans are counting on in 2024 failed. If a 37 year old Jay Jackson is on this team in 2025 it means things have gone terribly with their pitching prospects. I just took a pretty straight forward 14 to 15 mil off his projection. Now it's an increase of 5 million. So, yeah, there's going to be some pushback on every article, and when it's about the payroll and it's easy to combat the numbers provided there's going to be pushback about "pocket protecting." 

    Agree that we "hope" Farmer's option doesn't get picked up (and that he gets traded instead?), because Lee, et al., proved him to be redundant.

    Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it looks like Hader did get a sizable jump in Arb 1. If this is accurate, $1 million may be significantly underselling Duran's raise. (Let me know if I've misread, and I'll cut this part.)

    image.png.003ea67ef26ef53a234bdbc5c5959c3d.png

    1 hour ago, Cap'n Piranha said:

    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.

    I don't think their revenues are very uncertain at all actually. They will be getting a VERY large sum of money for broadcast rights next year. We literally just went through their spin on this over the past 3 months and you're still giving them that talking point?

    We are in agreement on the twins being cheap, I'm just going to argue against it instead of defend it. Until they open their books (never, because then we'd all know the ride they are taking us on) they should not get an ounce of defense in spending money.

    3 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

    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.   

    That is an interesting take.  I guess we just have differing opinions of overall success of a well run franchise.  Since 2011 we have had 1 59 win season, 3 60-69 win seasons, 4 70-79 win seasons, 3 80-89 win seasons, an equivalent to a 90+ win season (2020) and 1 100+ win season.  That is 8 below .500 seasons and 5 above .500 season, while scraping out only 3 division titles in 13 years.  

    I think this article is spot on.... BUT, while some businesses would simply take the extra cash we're soon to get from our 1-year Bally deal and stash it away for increased payroll next year - does baseball operate that way?  OR, will they simply absorb it into their profits and then next year the fans will need to worry if we are going to be able to field a competitive team?  If they were to put it aside so that when next year arrives they can pay out these raises - I'm happy, but if the other option prevails - then we're back to where we started this year except with a higher on-the-books payroll than we started this offseason with.... and still no idea on tv revenues.

    1 hour ago, IndianaTwin said:

    Agree that we "hope" Farmer's option doesn't get picked up (and that he gets traded instead?), because Lee, et al., proved him to be redundant.

    Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it looks like Hader did get a sizable jump in Arb 1. If this is accurate, $1 million may be significantly underselling Duran's raise. (Let me know if I've misread, and I'll cut this part.)

    image.png.003ea67ef26ef53a234bdbc5c5959c3d.png

    Interesting. Spotrac is showing very different numbers. I take back my stance on Duran/Jax if your numbers are correct. Probably a prorated thing for that being the 2020 season that I didn't take into account.

    image.png.4e928354b4196cbb1fda2e95400843a1.png

    1 hour ago, IndianaTwin said:

    Agree that we "hope" Farmer's option doesn't get picked up (and that he gets traded instead?), because Lee, et al., proved him to be redundant.

    Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it looks like Hader did get a sizable jump in Arb 1. If this is accurate, $1 million may be significantly underselling Duran's raise. (Let me know if I've misread, and I'll cut this part.)

    image.png.003ea67ef26ef53a234bdbc5c5959c3d.png

    Oh nice find. I was looking at recent relievers across the league but didn't check any top closers.  He also apparently famously got screwed in Arb (he asked for over $6 million and the Brewers famously cited his lack of saves, which is why he starter to refuse doing anything but close). I think probably between that group you can still estimate around $10 million unless everyone out performs this year.

    1 hour ago, JD-TWINS said:

    They are currently around $121M - that’s what I’ve seen……….assuming they will release or sign & trade Farmer in ‘25……$7M more off the total. So, $15M added to this year’s total - end up at $136M…………at that point they are $18M under ‘23’s total of $154M.

    In ‘23 they were 17th in payroll and it fit with their history and their market size.

    Gotta get back to $155M next year at a minimum!

    Do you understand they had a windfall of $30M last year?  I am going to keep saying it as long as people keep ignoring.  Not one person has acknowledged they had $30M windfall last year that they are not getting again.  It astonishes me that people continue to pretend the BAM money did not lead to record spending.  We are pretending the revenue loss is only associated with TV revenue.  If you received a $30,000 bonus this year and opted to give your 3 children 10,000 each, what would you say if they insisted upon getting $10,000 this year and every year going forward?

    2 hours ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

    I think this is 100% accurate. I think they are going with DeSclafani and youth. Varland, and he should get every oppurtunity. Not that I personally wouldn't want Montgomery if the price was right, I would. I long advocated for Ryu but he has now went back to Korea. Let's hope we see the 2021 DeSclafani version.

    DeSclafani/Varland/Festa/SWR!!!

    SWR apparently had a solid entire 2nd half in ‘23. ……..I saw some footage of Festa at the Future’s Game - good stuff! Gotta be able to get 8-10 starts or 45-55 innings out of these two in strategic spots through the season.

    DeSclafani & Varland for 90 innings each at a probable minimum.

    Everyone’s fresh for September/October.

    Would also love Montgomery for 4-5 years but not very likely.




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...