Saturday Morning Breakfast & Baseball: to non-tender or not to non-tender?
by Jesse on Dec 12, 2009 6:47 AM EST
in News
46 comments
The non-tender deadline is tonight, at 11pm CST.
Over the course of the last couple of months, as we realized of just how large the Twins' 2010 payroll could be, we've speculated as to whether Minnesota would non-tender certain arbitration-eligible players in order to skim a few million off the top. Boof Bonser, who actually rejected a one-year offer from the Twins not too long ago, seemed to be the first casualty during the Winter Meetings.
But now, Bill Smith tells Kelsie Smith (no relation, I'm sure), something very interesting:
"There will be limitations, but our ownership has set out what we think are certainly substantial funds to get our club ready for the start of the season."
I'm reading this in two possible ways.
- Ownership has cleared funds "substantial" enough to ensure guys like Jesse Crain, Brendan Harris and Delmon Young aren't non-tendered.
- Growing your payroll nearly $30 million dollars from Opening Day 2009 to Opening Day 2010 constitutes "substantial" funds.
Now if you want to lean toward option one, which is very intriguing and quite news-worthy if actually the case, then my question is this: just exactly how much more is in the piggy bank? As we've discussed before, keeping these guys in the fold on top of what's already in-house means a roughly $90 million dollar payroll. Is it possible there's still room to add to what's already far-and-away a franchise-record payroll?
But if you want to lean toward option two, which actually might be a little more realistic if you read the rest of Kelsie's article, then for some guys (Crain, Harris and Young in particular) the game is still on. The moves the Twins have already made make for a significant increase in payroll, and it's not like [Bill] Smith is coming out and making the meaning of "substantial funds" clear.
And then there's still the issue of Joe Mauer's extension, which I still believe with 100% certainty will be done before spring training begins. If that scenario follows suit with the standard procedure that most extensions follow, then Joe will be playing for more dollars in 2010 than he's currently slated for. So even if "substantial" means that there is still cash in the kitty, is there enough for money for Mauer on top of those arbitration-eligible players?
The good news is that we won't have to wait long to find out. We'll have all of our answers by 11pm CST tonight.
0 recs |
46 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
My vote was yes...
…and I believe the player that could be gone is Alexi Casilla.
The Twins began last year with a payroll around $65mm. What additional revenue will they have this year? Lets assume they draw 3.0mm fans, an increase of 700,000 or so. Assuming that the average ticket price will be say $35, that is an additinal $24.5mm. Lets also assume that the average ticket will be $5 more than last year, or another $11.5mm on the 2.3mm fans last year…for a total of $36mm. Lets also assume that the Twins earn an additional net $5 per fan from concessions ($3.5mm) and an extra buck a fan versus what they got last year in the dome (+$2.3mm). That is an additional $41.8mm before taking into consideration any of the revenue generated by Target Field versus what they received in the Dome….which was very little. Thus, it is very realistic that the Twins should generate an additional $60mm (perhaps substantially more, even after losing some revenue sharing) in 2010. Assuming they continue to allocate 52% to payroll…that is an extra $31.2mm or $96mm if last year’s $65mm was in line with their budget. So there is adequate dollars for signing Mauer and going out and getting a third baseman in the $5mm range.
And lets not berate the Twins for keeping 48% of these dollars. They appear to be using some of it in draft and international signings. But the Twins also lost money for much of their history, getting a reasonable return on their investment isn’t something for which the Pohlad family should be criticized. Earning $10-$20mm annually isn’t unreasonable!
Just wondering...
are there any tax (state or federal) implications on these earnings? I would assume there are and how would this reduce the amount?
The real way they make money
is through the ultimate value of the team. Sure, they need to make sure the franchise makes money or, at least, doesn’t lose very much, but most of the “profit” is the value of the team. I don’t know what the Pohlad’s bought in at, but, over time the value of the franchise grows at an exponential rate. Part of that is indeed, the fact that the team makes money every year, has a good minor league development system, an excellent brand, etc. But, from what I can tell, the Pohlads are not going to lose money— far from it— over the long term, even if they occasionally outrun their payroll.
by Old Twins Cap on Dec 12, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
Money growing.......
It was my understanding that Uncle Carl constantly borrowed against the value of the team over time, until major league abseball put on cap on what an owner can borrow (call it similar to refinancing your house every couple of years and doing something with that money to build your own business).
With the new stadium under their belt, the Pohlads could, quite frankly, borrow another $150 or so million (yes, you have to pay interest and such) and go on a personal spending spree.
Yes, the true value of a baseball asset is, again, like a house. You pay for it each year, but when you finally sell it off, you pocket a major profit (hummmmm…didn’t that happen with the previous Vikings owner?).
Of coure, if you badly manage your “produce,” you might actually NOT be able to sell it for a SUBSTANTIAL profit.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
The Pohlads bought the
Twins in ’84 for about $44 million. As of last year, the Twins franchise was worth $356 million.
He’s doing alright so far.
Please, God, an extension well before spring training.
What happened to “by Christmas”?
http://www.realityfish.com
by Robin G on Dec 12, 2009 8:25 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I know
Sign him already!
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?" -Joe Kapp
by less cowbell, more 'neau on Dec 12, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions
No non-tender
I can only see a non-tender if Crain is done. Meaning he’s had injuries he can’t come back from. Second a attitude problem, ie Perkins. Casilla could be the opening day 2bman, Harris 3b, and Delmond left. You don’t cut starters unless injured or you have a clear replacement, which they have not have now.
Casilla can't earn a starting job...
…on his winter team in the Dominican Republic. We used to think the guy has talent, what he may have is the ability to hit a bit for a streak…but the slumps are far longer than any streaks. Was 0-5 this week in the Dominican playing behind a couple marginal major league guys.
not arb eligible
They can wait and see with Casilla, try to work out a trade up until opening day. If that fails, try and slip him through waivers. No reason to cut him now. He is out of options, so he either needs to make the team or pass though waivers.
by Jon Kammerer on Dec 12, 2009 9:25 AM EST up reply actions
why non-tender anyone?
All of these guys have value, and they can be removed from the 40 man at any time if a sudden signing were to take place. I’d imagine the only way someone is getting non-tendered is if there is no possible way that person can be traded an no possible way a person can contribute.
All of these guys are candidates b/c they aren’t necessarily worth what they are being paid, but they would all catch on somewhere…
by diehardtwinsfan on Dec 12, 2009 9:24 AM EST reply actions
For arbitration eligible guys
If we tender them a contract, then we’re on the hook for the result of arbitration. For Crain or Young, that could very well be over $2M. From what I understand, it doesn’t matter if we drop them from the 40 man roster, we’re still on the hook for the contract.
by Adam Peterson on Dec 12, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
Season Tickets
The Twins could have 20,000 season ticket holders by the start of the year.
The ownership has to give Smith the green light to resign guys or the PR team would really have their work cut out for them.
Harris and Crain are the two most likely to be non tendered
First of all, we’re talking about a total of maybe $5M tops if all three of the players you mention are tendered contracts. Nothing to sneeze at, but it’s not like we’re going to suddenly be able to hit the free agent market as a result of non tendering.
Jesse Crain is probably in line to make over $2M this year through arbitration. Considering he’s probably our 4th option as a setup guy, behind Guerrier, Rauch and Mijares, not to mention Neshek, that’s a lot to pay Crain. Problem is, he really pitched well down the stretch last year. Tough decision, I’d probably keep him this year. If he bounces back like I hope he will, then if the minor leaguers are ready later in the year, he’d be an attractive trade option.
Harris, on the other hand, has relatively little value. This is his first year of arbitration, he’s in line for around $1M, give or take. Cheap for a backup infielder, but with Tolbert and Casilla around, not to mention Tolleson and others in the minors, he’s probably expendable. I’m not a huge Matt Tolbert fan, but I could live with Tolbert-Casilla as our backup infielders if we non tender Harris and make a move for a 3B or 3B (Kouzmanoff, Lopez, etc.).
I don’t see any way we non tender Delmon Young. He’s probably going to be in the high range of $1-2M. But we really have no other option in the lineup after trading Gomez, so unless we are secretly planning to sign an OF or DH (moving Kubel to LF), Young will be the LF. It would be an interesting arbitration case though.
As for Casilla, I don’t see any way we non tender him at this point. What’s to gain? Sure, he’s out of options, but he’s not arbitration eligible. We’re on the hook for no more than the MLB minimum. Tender him a minimum contract and continue to try to package him in trades between now and spring training.
No point in keeping Harris
We’ve seen his ceiling (he’s 29) and he can’t hold a starting position. Despite his versatility, he’s not suited to being a bench player, since his hitting is far superior to his defense and he has no speed. I think the Twins should save $1M and non-tender Harris and I think they will.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Dec 12, 2009 10:26 AM EST reply actions
All interesting dilemnas
Young is the only sure thing. Despite his consistent inability to take that next step in the majors, he still has way too much upside.
Crain, I think we should keep becuase he has proven he has the ability to be effective at the major league level – then again we have good, young, cheap replacements waiting.
Harris has the least to offer our team (of the three mentioned), but there just aren’t better options waiting to step right in on opening day. I love me some Valencia, but I think it would be a mistake to bring him up until later in the season. And besides, what do we really save by dumping Harris and moving a minimum salary guy into the 40 man? A half a million? Seriously, there is one position where we could save some serious cash and have adequate replacement …
that’s right, Nick Punto.
by montanatwinsfan on Dec 12, 2009 10:49 AM EST reply actions
Oops, when I said Young is the only sure thing,
I meant he is the only one we have to keep. He is by no means a “sure thing” in any other way that I can think of, other than swinging at the first pitch.
by montanatwinsfan on Dec 12, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
Young and Arbitration
Is he truly up for arbitration? Or didn’t he sign a five-year deal that covered salaries for those years. Like, last season, wasn’t he paid a million or something instead of the $550 thou he probably didn’t deserve?
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
The contract covered
years he was in the minors as well, which means that even though he was under contract, he wasn’t accumulating service time. That’s why he didn’t become a free agent.
Punto's contract is guaranteed
so there’s no way we can save cash this year, unless we trade him.
I agree, there’s probably little cash savings by non tendering Harris, but it’s savings nonetheless, and it would have to mean we’re serious about addressing 3B or 2B. My fear is that we do nothing more than sign Crede at this point.
by Adam Peterson on Dec 12, 2009 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
I might non-tender Harris
if it were my decision, especially if I felt confident that I was going to acquire another infielder, which they probably have a good sense of. However, I voted no. I think they will tender everyone.
What is more interesting to me is who other teams set free.
by Eric in Madison on Dec 12, 2009 10:57 AM EST reply actions
I believe
Harris and Crain will be the only two non tendered by tonight. Young has far too much potential and unless the twins are entertaining ideas of trading for Dejesus, then we have no “LF” to begin the season. Look for Crain and Harris to be non tendered.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
I'm thinking Harris
When they acquire either Kouz or DeRosa and Quinlan, Harris has no spot on this roster.
I don’t think they’ll non-tender Crain.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
FYI
The Rockies are non-tendering Garrett Atkins. I’m not really interested in him, but he’s certainly been a name that has come up around here at various times the last few years.
by Eric in Madison on Dec 12, 2009 1:16 PM EST reply actions
I hope we stay away from Atkins
"So [Kouzmanoff]’s going to make decent monkey, but he’d be affordable." - Jesse
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Dec 12, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions
+10
Never a good defender, he couldn’t hit better than a 60 OPS+ in Coors Field.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
I agree about non-tendering Harris, but
Wouldn’t they have DFA’d him instead of Boof? Does Boston have to offer Boof arbitration?
Gotta tender Young...
For all the frustrations he’s bought us, the guy is still just 24, and currently is our starting LF… can’t give up on a 24 year-old who is inconsistent, but shown some promise.
The other two I think you could go either way… they don’t bring enough to the table in terms of special skills or potential to make you need to keep them. Only Harris I would possibly keep if the other options are a Tolbert/Casilla backup INF’s… those two are more similar players, and Harris gives you a least a chance of some power of the bench.
by San Diego Viking on Dec 12, 2009 2:14 PM EST reply actions
the horrible horrible memories
my floor is looking pretty dirty... BETTER GET OUT THE BROOM!!!
by natetheskate on Dec 12, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
Chien-Ming Wang
and Kelly Johnson two more among the non-tendered.
Johnson is interesting.
by Eric in Madison on Dec 12, 2009 2:57 PM EST reply actions
so is Wang
look back a few posts into the Winter Meetings and you see that we have discussed him already.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
Kelly Johnson is definitely worth looking into
I don’t know what to expect from Chien-Ming Wang
"So [Kouzmanoff]’s going to make decent monkey, but he’d be affordable." - Jesse
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Dec 12, 2009 6:48 PM EST up reply actions
Why non-tender anyone...
…who has trade value. They don’t pay them until opening day. That gives us lots of time to trade any of these guys…Harris, Crain, etc. They can certainly get something for each of them, thus, it wouldn’t be prudent to non-tender them.
Well, presumably,
if they know they don’t want to retain a guy like this, they already tried to trade him. It’s possible nobody wants some of these players at their arb determined rates.
That seems unlikely for Crain, but Harris is the type of guy who nobody may want to pay.
by Eric in Madison on Dec 12, 2009 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
agreed
I have to think someone would take a trade for Crain after his late season numbers. Harris, not so much.
"So [Kouzmanoff]’s going to make decent monkey, but he’d be affordable." - Jesse
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Dec 12, 2009 6:44 PM EST up reply actions
For the Twins guys
the risk isn’t too great, around $2M at most. For others such as Atkins and Wang, they could easily make $5M+ in arbitration. For the Rockies and Yankees, I guess they figured the risk of being on the hook for a large salary outweighed any trade value.
by Adam Peterson on Dec 13, 2009 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
Kelly Johnson & Garrett Atkins
Anyone else out there think these 2 would round out the Twins roster nicely? I know they both struggled last year but they’d upgrade our team at 2nd and 3rd base.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Twinkie Town
Related FanShots on Twinkie Town
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- John Lindsey couldn't have come any closer to his first at-bat
- The Juice: Swisher ends Orioles sweep dreams with timely homer
- Create-a-Caption: Dusty Baker wants YOU to buy playoff tickets
- Padres' Heath Bell wistful about Trevor Hoffman's 600th save
- Want your first career home run? Face a pitcher from Chicago
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
