Article: How The Twins Could Lose Another 100 Games

[drivlikejehu]

 

But sports' labor expense isn't a typical labor expense. It's closer to a materials expense.

In no other industry does a person go from a $500k expense to a $35m expense in 6-7 years. And in few other industries is the labor the actual product.

Sports don't work in pure business terms. There's a lot of overlap but they're not the same.

 

The numbers are unusual at the individual player-employee level, but the overall labor expense is not that unusual because teams follow annual budgets . . . there is variation year over year, but that's true in other businesses as well.

 

The players are paid to provide services. The costs are not like a materials expense - that would be associated with a product-oriented business that deducts inputs as cost of goods sold. Nor is it true that labor is synonymous with product in sports; at least in MLB, guaranteed contracts mean that players are sometimes paid when they aren't even on the team anymore.

 

Compare a baseball team to a law firm (with multiple attorneys). In both cases, the biggest expense is compensation, whether in the form of salary or partnership distributions. The law firm provides legal services through the employment of some number of individuals, who each provide part of that overall service.

 

Baseball teams provide entertainment, and each of the employees provide some part of that entertainment, directly or indirectly. Dramatic variances in compensation, role, etc. exist in both circumstances.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The numbers are unusual at the individual player-employee level, but the overall labor expense is not that unusual because teams follow annual budgets . . . there is variation year over year, but that's true in other businesses as well.

 

The players are paid to provide services. The costs are not like a materials expense - that would be associated with a product-oriented business that deducts inputs as cost of goods sold. Nor is it true that labor is synonymous with product in sports; at least in MLB, guaranteed contracts mean that players are sometimes paid when they aren't even on the team anymore.

 

Compare a baseball team to a law firm (with multiple attorneys). In both cases, the biggest expense is compensation, whether in the form of salary or partnership distributions. The law firm provides legal services through the employment of some number of individuals, who each provide part of that overall service.

 

Baseball teams provide entertainment, and each of the employees provide some part of that entertainment, directly or indirectly. Dramatic variances in compensation, role, etc. exist in both circumstances.

Oh, I understand all that, I was just pointing out the massive discrepancies in salary for the same person that exist in sports but few other professions. A top-of-the-class attorney may start out at $150k but it's not like they'll jump to $20m in a few years.

 

My example of material cost was a bad one (was on my phone at the time). My general point is that sports don't have to be run exactly like a typical business because of the fluidity of sports. In typical business, there are few examples of a company saying "screw it, let's be really bad at our jobs for awhile!" or "I don't care what it costs, I want to beat the competition, even if we lose money doing it."

 

No sports teams can run like that indefinitely but unlike many other businesses, they can take that attitude over the short- or even mid-term.

 

If your industry allows you to occasionally be irrational with your allocation of funds, it makes sense to maximize that irrationality to achieve your goal more easily.

[drivlikejehu]

 

...In typical business, there are few examples of a company saying "screw it, let's be really bad at our jobs for awhile!" or "I don't care what it costs, I want to beat the competition, even if we lose money doing it."

 

No sports teams can run like that indefinitely but unlike many other businesses, they can take that attitude over the short- or even mid-term.

 

If your industry allows you to occasionally be irrational with your allocation of funds, it makes sense to maximize that irrationality to achieve your goal more easily.

 

My practice group does that all the time, in a manner of speaking - we take a "loss" (by internal firm metric standards, not actual economic reality) on phase I of an engagement so that we can make a ton on phase II. The difference is that the newspapers aren't talking about how the firm is struggling, incompetent, etc. during the phase I stage. 

 

So in that sense, it's actually harder to sacrifice in the short-term as a sports franchise, because success or failure is very public. But they still have to do it, because the only thing worse than failing in the short-term is failing in the long-term.

 

I agree in theory with your original point though, and a limited amount of front loading naturally occurs with early extensions, because players almost always get a bump in control years x through 6 compared to what they would have received otherwise. The tricky part is if and when to pull the trigger on a deal like that.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

All you have to do is look at the pitching staff to say they have a chance to lose 90+ games again.

yep, really hard to frame balls that skip the plate and roll to the backstop

[twinssporto]

I just read this article and all the comments...Looks like I chose the wrong week to quit drinking.

[Linus]

I am usually a glass half full guy.....but I think there is a realistic chance that the Sano Buxton era gets wasted. The Twins simply have poor starting pitching and virtually nothing in the farm system. Considering that they aren't going to outbid teams in free agency and they don't have a surplus to trade (other than Dozier theoretically) I don't see a path where their pitching is above average during Sano Buxton controllable years.

[drivlikejehu]

 

I am usually a glass half full guy.....but I think there is a realistic chance that the Sano Buxton era gets wasted. The Twins simply have poor starting pitching and virtually nothing in the farm system. Considering that they aren't going to outbid teams in free agency and they don't have a surplus to trade (other than Dozier theoretically) I don't see a path where their pitching is above average during Sano Buxton controllable years.

 

There are paths, just not necessarily probable ones. 

 

Example - Berrios finds his command and becomes a #2, May moves back to the rotation and stays healthy, two out of Romero/Gonsalves/Jay turn into solid starters, Mejia eats up innings as 5th starter. That would be above average, despite the lack of a clear #1 guy.

 

In reality, guys get hurt, prospects fail quite frequently, etc., but it's not hard to see the everything-goes-well path of relative success.

[Willihammer]

I'm strangely hopeful about the rotation personally. Berrios still throws 97, has two wipeout offspeed pitches. He'll have a new catcher, he's got the raw material to be an ace. 

 

Santiago, Mejia, and Rogers give the Twins a trio of lefties out the gate. Santiago and Rogers are sure-fire big leaguers in my mind. Mejia looks like he could fill out a rotation or be good AAA insurance at worst.

 

Gonsalves is one of the more interesting pitchers to come along in a long time. Typically I trash the soft tossers but there's no denying that every so often a guy dominates with 88 and guile. Weaver, Buehrle, etc. The minor league numbers are definitely encouraging.

 

Then in 2018 you're looking at Romero and Jay, who might have more upside than anyone.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I am usually a glass half full guy.....but I think there is a realistic chance that the Sano Buxton era gets wasted. The Twins simply have poor starting pitching and virtually nothing in the farm system. Considering that they aren't going to outbid teams in free agency and they don't have a surplus to trade (other than Dozier theoretically) I don't see a path where their pitching is above average during Sano Buxton controllable years.

It's certainly a risk. Sano is entering his third season.

 

But there are arms on the way: Stewart, Jay, Romero, Thorpe, Gonsalves. The problem is that most of them aren't terribly exciting arms.

[Circus Boy]

 

I think you missed one more thing.  The Twins don't really have a clubhouse leader - that Michael Cuddyer/Tori Hunter kind of player that keeps it loose in the dugout but at the same time plays with intensity.  That is needed for a team to be successful.  Without that, you lose 100+games.  Unless Castro is that guy, we still don't really have a clubhouse leader.

 

I nominate gocgo to be clubhouse leader.

[tobi0040]

I think the Twins need to see more of Buxton before they throw 50, 80, 100 million at him. The last month was great, but he has looked completely lost in about 90 percent of his MLB stint thus far.

 

I say that and I am usually in the sign the young guys early camp.

[operation mindcrime]

The upside is the high draft picks which can in theory if done properly bring in premium talent.

 

like when we drafted Andrew Benintendi.

[Linus]

It's certainly a risk. Sano is entering his third season.

 

But there are arms on the way: Stewart, Jay, Romero, Thorpe, Gonsalves. The problem is that most of them aren't terribly exciting arms.

Certainly it's possible that it turns out OK I just don't see where it's probable. We have a few prospects none with ace potential and all have to realize their potential for the rotation to be average. I don't like those odds.