Dead Money and What It Means for the Minnesota Twins

We have no idea what TR would have done. My hope is Bailey and/or Chacin can be dealt for a starting pitching prospect in A ball at some point in time.

I think the Twins signing young players to long term contracts, even though the players still have a few years of team control left, was a big indicator the new FO is moving in a different direction.

It's also a big indicator we are no longer in a full rebuild.

Just 15 more years on Bonilla's Mets contract.  I would make that guy show up to spring training every year, just to make him run sprints, shag flyballs, pitch some BP....

I was gonna ask if the Mets money was still Bonilla's. I don't know who his agent was but I hope Bobby bought him something nice after that contract.

Judging solely on the accompanying picture, I really thought the article was going to be about a Grateful Dead tribute band paying to rent Target Field for a concert or music festival venue or something. I'm not at all disappointed that I was wrong.

Several thoughts on this:

• Bonilla is still being paid $1.2M per year by the Mets, but that is not included in the dead money above (rightfully in my opinion). The Mets total is $9M, which is entirely David Wright. Those details are included in the article linked in the original post.
• Bonilla's amount is deferred compensation, which I do not think should be included as dead money, because deferred compensation is determined in advance and can be directly planned for.
• Again, in my opinion, dead money is not something that should be avoided at all costs. Once signed, player contracts are sunk costs, and management should do all they can to not include future amounts owed as a factor when determining roster composition.

Just 15 more years on Bonilla's Mets contract.  I would make that guy show up to spring training every year, just to make him run sprints, shag flyballs, pitch some BP....

Nope, the Mets were stupid enough to sign this contract, they can live with it. If I were them, I would ask his agent to make a presentation every year to remind them of how foolish they were.

Nope, the Mets were stupid enough to sign this contract, they can live with it. If I were them, I would ask his agent to make a presentation every year to remind them of how foolish they were.

Deferred money is a poor investment for the player, not the team.

That $1.2 million he's getting this year has far less value then it did when he signed the contract, far less.

Investing a huge chunk of money at 0.0 interest is laughably foolish. Or at least I'd think it is, I'm not an economics expert.

Nm

Dead money is only an issue when you have ownership that imposes tight budgets and sets that as top priority. It’s only a bad thing when it’s a hinderance or opportunity cost, if you will. Nobody is excepting an owner to take a loss due to dead money, but realistically, it never gets to that point if you have competent roster management and development personnel.

Dead money isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Cutting unproductive players loose despite their contract isn’t a bad thing (some of the same people applauding the Twins for managing dead money were just ridiculing them for keeping Mauer around not long ago - can’t do that while being intellectually honest). Signing marquee players to significant contract and reaping the benefits early in the contract isn’t a bad thing (we may see it with Donaldson). I’d trade a championship for a bunch of dead money in a heartbeat (the earnings in the championship season more than offset the future loss, anyway, especially when discounted to present value). Trading a highly paid player for high-end prospects and eating some of the contract to facilitate a rebuild isn’t a bad thing.

When actually thinking about dead money, there are actually many more benefits in terms of a teams performance than negatives. As mentioned above, dead money may actually make you more money (negating the term “dead money” when netted against revenues).

As everyone knows, there is no salary cap in this game. The only thing that $0 in dead money is demonstrating is that you don’t award good players big contracts and go after safe profits over championships, which is an awful thing...,and frankly a slap in the face for fans. See Tampa Bay Rays, Oakland Athletics, Minnesota Twins and others who have a couple of nice years occasionally, only to get throttled by big spenders in the playoffs, offset by decade long rebuilds.

This is spun in a very Polad Pocket Protector-esque manor. Nobody, except the Poland’s accountant, should really give a rip about dead money. In fact, fans should welcome it as a sign of aggressive ownership/management that puts high value on winning (in the majority of cases).

That's not the only thing $0 in dead money demonstrates. Also, you're confusing the time between World Championships with rebuilding.

@Mr. Brooks - Bobby Bonilla didn't take a bad deal, he robbed the Mets blind. He had 6 million left on his contract that he deferred at 8% interest. Now they owe him $1.2M until 2035. He didn't give them an interest free loan.

My mistake.

That is indeed a great deal for Bonilla.

Judging solely on the accompanying picture, I really thought the article was going to be about a Grateful Dead tribute band paying to rent Target Field for a concert or music festival venue or something. I'm not at all disappointed that I was wrong.

Deborah Koons is still getting Dead money ;-)

Well Rocco did tweet "inspiration....."b4 opening day last tear from Terrapin Station. Isnt Dyson another piece of dead money from San fran of course.