The Twins Chose This Payroll Path

The articles suggest that the payroll production is purely a product of the TV deal.  Is the writer uninformed or did he just elect to omit the $30M revenue the Twins received from BAM last year?

The total for their six inexpensive veterans ($3.5M) is listed but the fact that our top 5 players will receive $100M next year is not detailed.  Nor is the logical conclusion that we would have $125M+ invested in six players next year had we signed one of the top free agents.

Articles like this should come with a disclaimer letting the reader know they have a biased point of view and the facts will be presented accordingly.

I get fans being upset with reduced payroll, but in part payroll was going to be reduced by transitioning to younger guys.  Payroll will need to go up as more players get to arb years in coming seasons, and unless we get 1 or 2 year deals on vets now then it would help prevent singing down the road.  Also, signing some vets to even a 1 or 2 year deal now, could cause us to lose the younger guy because of 40 man roster moves.  There is so much that goes into building a team.  If you look just at one season it can hurt you down the road. 

On 2/11/2024 at 8:05 AM, rv78 said:

Questions for you to consider..... instead of the Twins spending the dollars on older veterans to provide depth, they would spend it on 1 or 2 really good players in their prime, difference makers. Wouldn't they be a better team? Wouldn't those dollars be put to better use? Instead of investing in pitchers with injuries, like Mahle, Paddack, now DeSclafani, rewarding an always and forever injured Buxton with a $15M per year extension and so on.... Do you really think this organization does a good job allocating their payroll dollars? I think they could do a lot better, a whole lot better. This FO takes a lot of chances on injured players. Too many to my liking. How many times does that decision have to fail before they change their ways. Or won't they ever? Sure there are injuries to players all the time, but when you continually invest in players that are that way, you are only asking for failure. 

So wait, fewer better guys, but no one that gets injured? Got it. Just staple that list to the end of the thread and we'll come back and see how it looks in a few years. BTW, no contracts over $350m, so that locks out a lot of the guys you think are somehow available to a flyover team like MN.

This is going to sound condescending, but it's meant well: just about everyone gets hurt.  Who do you think will sign some huge deal and then stay healthy for the length of it? Specifically, what names? It doesn't happen or they cost everything and the contract clauses all run in the player's favor. All pitchers will miss time in any four year window, and frequently it's substantial time.  Fielders are less often on the major stuff but very often on the little stuff that diminishes performance but lets them limp through a year like Kepler's busted toe in 2022 or Correa's foot or Pujols' plantar fascitis or Trout's back or Judge's whatever (I'm working from memory) or Otani's elbow or WS hero Cory Seagar who is already hurt before this season starts or Cody Bellinger's random sucking or Altuve's broken arm or Bryce Harper's arm and the list rolls on, year after year.  By the time you know a guy is reliable and excellent he's either locked up by his first team or getting older and breaking down.  They want the most money just as they enter the time when their parts aren't young anymore, and for the few Soto guys the contract IS the sort that hampers team options.

I think the Twins do OK with injured players when they know they are fragile.  Have you read the Buxton deal?  They are paying him something like half of what he'd make if he could be counted on for 140 games a year. Correa is getting more money, but after the fifth year (age 33) he has to perform to lock in those (diminishing) dollars at the back end, and he has to do it every year.  If he doesn't have a  starter's number of plate appearances (eg 575 in 2029) or finish in the top 5 for major awards then he's out on the market at age 34-37 coming off a bad year. We can sign him for less or be done with him, but he's only here past age 33 if we want to play him 500+ PAs a year, so not necessarily a burden.  That's how to write a contract for an injured guy. They've also done a couple of recovery year contracts for Tommy John pitchers (Pineda, Paddack, maybe others) where they sign him for nominal money for the recovery year and get the first year back at a discount.

These unicorns that make top dollar and perform to that level and don't get hurt, they don't change teams in their 20s very often. It's why the Soto deal was so large, why trading Betts was so bizarre for a wealthy team like BOS, and why teams with money write such absurd deals to get these guys. How many of those Freddie Freeman $162m contracts to 32 year olds (a guy who missed real time when he was 25 and 27 BTW) were you clamoring for? I would have signed that one in a minute, but he wouldn't have come to MN for that money, he wants to win.

So keep in mind that this is harder than you think, that players who aren't "that way" are rare and expensive and not often available. The next time you wave your arms around like this be certain to include a few names and contract values with the rant.  It'll slow you down and make you appreciate the challenge in putting a roster together.

20 hours ago, Cris E said:

So wait, fewer better guys, but no one that gets injured? Got it. Just staple that list to the end of the thread and we'll come back and see how it looks in a few years. BTW, no contracts over $350m, so that locks out a lot of the guys you think are somehow available to a flyover team like MN.

This is going to sound condescending, but it's meant well: just about everyone gets hurt.  Who do you think will sign some huge deal and then stay healthy for the length of it? Specifically, what names? It doesn't happen or they cost everything and the contract clauses all run in the player's favor. All pitchers will miss time in any four year window, and frequently it's substantial time.  Fielders are less often on the major stuff but very often on the little stuff that diminishes performance but lets them limp through a year like Kepler's busted toe in 2022 or Correa's foot or Pujols' plantar fascitis or Trout's back or Judge's whatever (I'm working from memory) or Otani's elbow or WS hero Cory Seagar who is already hurt before this season starts or Cody Bellinger's random sucking or Altuve's broken arm or Bryce Harper's arm and the list rolls on, year after year.  By the time you know a guy is reliable and excellent he's either locked up by his first team or getting older and breaking down.  They want the most money just as they enter the time when their parts aren't young anymore, and for the few Soto guys the contract IS the sort that hampers team options.

I think the Twins do OK with injured players when they know they are fragile.  Have you read the Buxton deal?  They are paying him something like half of what he'd make if he could be counted on for 140 games a year. Correa is getting more money, but after the fifth year (age 33) he has to perform to lock in those (diminishing) dollars at the back end, and he has to do it every year.  If he doesn't have a  starter's number of plate appearances (eg 575 in 2029) or finish in the top 5 for major awards then he's out on the market at age 34-37 coming off a bad year. We can sign him for less or be done with him, but he's only here past age 33 if we want to play him 500+ PAs a year, so not necessarily a burden.  That's how to write a contract for an injured guy. They've also done a couple of recovery year contracts for Tommy John pitchers (Pineda, Paddack, maybe others) where they sign him for nominal money for the recovery year and get the first year back at a discount.

These unicorns that make top dollar and perform to that level and don't get hurt, they don't change teams in their 20s very often. It's why the Soto deal was so large, why trading Betts was so bizarre for a wealthy team like BOS, and why teams with money write such absurd deals to get these guys. How many of those Freddie Freeman $162m contracts to 32 year olds (a guy who missed real time when he was 25 and 27 BTW) were you clamoring for? I would have signed that one in a minute, but he wouldn't have come to MN for that money, he wants to win.

So keep in mind that this is harder than you think, that players who aren't "that way" are rare and expensive and not often available. The next time you wave your arms around like this be certain to include a few names and contract values with the rant.  It'll slow you down and make you appreciate the challenge in putting a roster together.

I will admit there is some truth in what you say, such as "but he wouldn't have come to MN for that money, he wants to win."   If you are going to pay 2 players superstar money even if it is part-time superstar money because Buxton only plays part-time, ($15M for a player that plays about half the time equates into $30M full-time) they need to perform when they are on the field. You can look at any of the players you mention and compare them to Correa and Buxton, dollar wise and performance/production wise, also look at how many All-Star games they have been named to, or times they were in consideration/vote for the MVP. Big difference. How many seasons has Correa and Buxton even hit .300? Compare that to the guys you named. Big Difference. Unfortunately C4 and Buck only compare in the dollar catagory, nothing else. I'd gladly live with a player being injured once or twice if they performed like the guys you mentioned. Throw in the injury issue and it makes expensive contracts to highly paid players even more expensive. I realize Buxton is an extreme example but having to have a full-time backup player for a starter is bad, but it is even worse when it is every year. It isn't just the cost of the extra salary but it also takes up a roster spot. Tell me how many times "depth" has won a Championship and how many times "performance" has won it? It's obvious which way this FO is trying to make the team better and it isn't with good talented players that perform. I wonder how willing Correa would have been to sign that $200M contract, knowing the Twins were not going to go "all in" when they finally end their playoff fiasco. Maybe that's why guys like Freeman "don't want to come here", they want to win. They want to play for a team that is committed. A team that looks for players that aren't injured and actually perform when they play. A team that doesn't have to trade away a batting Champion for a good pitcher. Wouldn't signing a good free agent pitcher and keeping your best hitter be a better plan? Why not strengthen your team instead of sacrificing one thing to gain another. That's the type of move you make because you are failing at the thing you need or are too stubborn to admit your approach is wrong and change it. Would it kill this organization to sign a top Free Agent pitcher just once and keep their good players instead of trading away one to get another? At the start of the off-season we were told they are cutting payroll yet there is plenty of money to sign washed up veterans and depth type players but little to no money to sign really good players that can make a difference. Maybe it is only because those players don't want to come here. Why? I'll tell you why... no commitment to winning. That first statement from the FO at the start of the off-season proves it just as much as the type of players they bring in.

@rv78 Going "all in" and "commitment to winning" is simply a call for increased spending. There are Mets fans out there decrying Cohen for not going all in after he just got done spending like Brewster and got nothing for it. All In is just chucking the old shiny thing when it tarnishes and reaching for the next one.   You sound like you should be a Yankees or Dodgers fan. Give it some consideration, you'll probably be happier out there. On the other hand you might not, because money really doesn't buy WS wins. Here's a list of the teams in the last ten WS and where their payrolls ranked.

Quote

YR    Win  Pay#  Lose  Pay#

23    TEX   9    ARI    19
22    PHI    4    HOU    11
21    ATL   13    HOU    7
20   LAD   2    TAM    27
19    WAS  7    HOU    8
18    BOS    1    LAD 3
17    HOU   18    LAD 1    
16    CHC   16    CLE    24
15    KCR   16    NYM    21
14    SFG    7    KCR    19

(The formatting is just not going work here. Sorry.)

So money does not buy trophies because in the end the hot hand beats the rich hand. Look at that list: the top payroll only appears twice. You need guys who have won, who can win again, you need talent and you need health, and you need some guys to get hot and you need a little luck. There's some potato - potahto around your "performance" question, but there's no doubt whatsoever that depth wins a lot of playoff games. 

Last year the Rangers had ten guys get multiple ABs in the Series. In order of WS PAs we see that Semien played 162 regular season games, Carter played 23, Seager played 119, Jung played 122, Garver played 87, Heim played 131, Lowe had 161, Taveras had 143, Garcia played 148 and Jankowski 107.  So that's four guys who played 140+ and that's a majority of guys who did not. 2023 ARI had five guys play 140+, 2022 HOU had five and 2022 PHI only had three. In 2021 ATL had six and HOU had five, which is higher than usual.  (I'm skipping 2020 because the extra rest during that season reduced the importance of depth after a long season.) 2019 had WAS and HOU with four apiece.

The Twins had no one last year with 140 games.  That's a big deal, because it's really hard to reach the post-season without a lot of good players playing for six months. But in the right division in the right year it does happen. In the 1995 WS there were only three guys total with 140+ (Albert Belle, Fred McGriff and Chipper Jones) and those mid-90s ATL and CLE rosters were front-loaded with stars (and back-loaded with callow Mark Lemke and superannuated Tony Pena types.) But both went to the big dance because of depth.

This year Altuve missed 50 games due to a broken arm (same as Buxton 2021 HBP) and Yordan Alvarez slammed his hand in a door and missed two months and Corey Seager is Byron Buxton and has only ever played 140 games three times in his nine years. Yet those teams won because they had backups ready to play and didn't have to roll out unripe rookies or well past sell-by veterans. Pitching matters of course, but pitchers always get hurt and depth there is a given. Last year alone MIL lost Woodruff, ATL lost Fried, Max Scherzer and Jacob DeGrom only threw 75 innings between them for TEX. The ultra-rich Dodgers didn't have anyone start 25 games and Kershaw led the staff with 131.1 inning, but they had depth to get to 100 wins. Depth.

I'll add that the Twins should have guys playing more in 2024 than last year (even if they don't reach 140 games) because Lewis won't miss the first month. gimpy Polanco was swapped out for a full year of Julien, left field could be more settled than last year, and finally Buxton and Correa both look healthier than in 2023. OTOH we were lucky at catcher in 2023, 1B is still murky and Wallner is standing right where Miranda was a year ago, so we'll have to see how things play out. 

That said, I don't think this org puts much stock in the 140 game threshold, as Rocco is still thinking of how injuries shortened his career every time he fills out a lineup card.  The FO thinks depth is cheaper and more reliable than ceiling and that's how they're moving.  So is a lot of the league, so it's hardly a novel thought.

On 2/10/2024 at 5:36 PM, Seth Stohs said:

I'm not sure how to take that, but... HA! 

If that's the number, and I'm sure it's somewhere around that, they're down about $15M in revenue, so about $7.5 million in payroll... But until Friday, they didn't know what that number would be. If it had been like $20 million, that would have been like $20 million drop in payroll. 

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Twins make 2-3 moves yet over the next 3-5 days. 

Not dogging the site, Seth, but I may have read it on ESPN or a Brewers site. I don't think the Twins own RSN income affects them as much as the collective downturn in many teams' RSN dollars. That said, I believe the CBA is a year behind, i.e. this season's numbers would be reflective of 2022, but who know.