Mr. Brooks

Not sure I've ever seen any evidence that pitchers pitch better with a lead. Do you have any theories on why that'd be the case?

Correct. And that's likely one of the reasons why less teams are interested in him.

It wouldn't necessarily be reflected league wide, as most teams accounted that money as capital and not revenue. I believe the Pohlad's told the FO that they would throw them a bone, and let them spend 50% of that money, even though it was technically capital and not revenue. I applaud them for doing that, however it doesn't disprove my argument. We have 10 years of payroll data since the kids took over for Carl. You point to one season of higher spending to make your argument. What about the other 9 years? Last year was the first time the FO ever considered that there might be benefits of spending more money? You don't know that is the reason payroll increased by $25 million. You are theorizing, just like I am.

I read somewhere that most teams were accounting the BamTec money as capital, not revenue (a sneaky good try by them, though I doubt that'll get past the players come CBA time), so it won't have affected listed revenues.

$115 is more realistic. It's only $6 million more than my estimated "cap". So, if that's what you're going with, I'm not sure what we are debating. I think confusion might have come from your posting of the league average payrolls along with your statement that they have plenty of money to spend. That led me (and I think at least one other poster) to believe you were theorizing that they'd continue to spend league average, as they did last year.

Words are often hollow. What has actual spending looked like in the 10 years since that quote? Maybe they were being deceptive, maybe they changed their mind, maybe they begged the FO to spend more money and the FO refused (bizarre and unlikely, but maybe), maybe Forbes revenue estimates are way off. I don't know the reason that the actual data is not consistent with their statement, I just know that it's not.

It's not any less substantiated than your theory that last year is the start of a new trend, and they are going to continue to spend that much on payroll. I just posted several years of data. Are you asking me to believe that Ryan had 25 million more available to spend every year, and chose not to utilize that? Even as poor records (that could presumably be improved by spending more money) threatened, and ultimately cost him his job? That makes no sense. The simplest, and most direct answer is usually the right one. The simplest answer that follows the data we have is this: The team has continually been capped, by ownership, and have spent what they were budgeted. Last year, the ownership threw them a one time bonus, half of the money from BamTec. Here are the facts that fit that theory: 1) Several years of historical data that I posted before, showing payroll being very consistently about 25 million below league average, only exception being last year. 2) The team has said that payroll is roughly 50% of revenue. Last year they received $50 million from BamTec. Half of that is $25 million. Are you suggesting it's purely a coincidence that payroll just happened to increase by exactly half of the BamTec payment? It's possible, but that is quite the coincidence. 3) Most of our increased spending last year were one year deals. Again, pure coincidence? Possible, but any good detective is skeptical of multiple coincidences being needed to fit an explanation. If we start the season in the $106-$109 million range, as I've said we will for a year, what will your response be? Will you acknowledge I might be right, or will you say they just chose not to spend the remaining $25 million? Just like a year ago, when I responded to an article you posted, by opining that it was nonsense for both you and the team to suggest that Ervin Santana would be ready by May 1st. You ripped me a new one saying the team wouldn't be dishonest. You then refused to answer later when I tried to revisit it. EDIT: This post originated while I was under the impression you were suggesting they'd spend to league average. Please see future post regarding that point along with this.

Cruz, Parker, Schoop, that's at least 3 free agents the Twins have signed.

What does average payroll have to do with what the Twins will spend? Aside from last year, with $50 million BamTec payment, how have they compared historically to average payroll? 2014: 30 million under league average. 2015: 17 million under league average. 2016: 25 million under league average. 2017: 28 million under league average. That's an average of 25 million under league average over the period you referenced, which would likely cap payroll at around 110 million this year, as I've been saying for close to a year now.

I don't understand why the staff writers here continue to ignore the fact that $25 million of last year's payroll was due to BamTec money. There likely isn't nearly as much payroll flexibility remaining as many people here seem to think.

We're only paying him half if he's terrible enough to be cut, in which case no amount of money is a good value. He was projected to make 3.1 in arbitration, we're paying him 3.2 if he's on the roster all year. I hope he's good, and I defer to the FO, they are professionals, I'm an amateur. But still, I can't help but wonder why the Angels wouldn't keep him around for that price if he can still be valuable. They know him better than anyone.

He might be, but we don't know that. I'm hesitant about a guy that the Angels decided wasn't even good enough to keep around.

You are the one claiming to know what he would have gotten in arbitration. The fact he settled, alone, is hardly some kind of evidence that they threw him an olive branch. 90% of the cases in baseball will settle before going to arbitration. Neither one of us know what he would have received. Nor do MLB trade rumors. They are guessing, just like us.

I don't believe it even reached the stage yet where they'd submitted numbers. Can you link where these submissions were published?

These were predictions by Seth, not numbers actually submitted.

You have no way of knowing what he would have gotten in arbitration.

They are the Twins, sorry.

Why would Rosario sign that? He's practically guaranteed more that that through the next 2 years of arbitration.

How do you figure they have $30 million more to spend? Last year was inflated from one time BamTec payment. They have about $9 million left to spend, by my accounting.

The Twins don't have payroll room to front load that deal. No BamTech money this year, max payroll mandate is likely $103-106. You can say there is no salary cap, but we have to deal in reality, not "coulds" or "shoulds". The FO has a hard payroll budget, whether we like it or not.

Astudillo has a minor league option remaining (I believe), so other teams will not be allowed to grab him.

They received $50 million from the sale of BamTech last year. They spend roughly 50% on payroll, so $25 million. They will open somewhere around $25 million less than last year.

Rosario is a FA after 2021. And, I'm not sure why you'd put Larnach in the outfield, with Rosario at DH.

Both Gordon and Gonsalves are outside of the top 100 now though. Even with Verlander's full no trade clause, they were still able to get a top 60 prospect. I can't imagine getting a legit front of the rotation starter for a package that doesn't have someone that high at a minimum.

His best tool (run) would be wasted at third base. If he can't stick at SS, he's a center fielder.